Part 1.
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Chapter 290.
PUBLIC DRINKING WATER
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (agency or commission)
proposes amendments to §§290.38, 290.39, 290.41-290.47, 290.104,
290.106, 290.107, 290.111, 290.117, 290.121, and 290.122.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED RULES
The commission proposes the amendments primarily to implement state rules
that conform with the requirements of certain federal regulations. The regulations
include the federal National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term
1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule published by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) in the January 14, 2002 issue of the
Federal Register
(67 FR 1812), codified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Parts 9, 141, and 142; and the federal National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Filter Backwash Recycling Rule published by the EPA in the June
8, 2001 issue of the
Federal Register
(66
FR 31086), codified in 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142. The commission also proposes
to make technical corrections to the state rules that are analogous to minor
revisions made by the EPA to the federal National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
for Lead and Copper, also known as the federal Lead and Copper Rule Minor
Revisions, published by the EPA in the January 12, 2000 issue of the
SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION
Subchapter D, Rules and Regulations for Public
Water Systems
Section 290.38, Definitions
The commission proposes to amend the definition of "Drinking water standards"
in §290.38(17) to correct the reference to Subchapter F by deleting the
word "Supply" from its title. Minor typographical revisions are proposed for
the definition of "Licensed professional engineer" in paragraph (27) to replace
the upper-case letters in "Professional Engineer" with lower-case letters,
and the definition of "Milligrams per liter (mg/L)" in paragraph (30) to delete
the unnecessary acronym designation "(ppm)." Proposed §290.38(45), the
definition of "Public drinking water program," contains the correction of
the agency's name. Under proposed paragraph (46), within the definition of
"Public health engineering practices," and throughout the proposal, the ambiguous
phrase "these sections" would be replaced by the phrase "this subchapter,"
or "the requirements in this subchapter."
Section 290.39, General Provisions
The commission proposes to amend §290.39(a) to correct minor grammatical
errors and incorporate the acronym for the Texas Health and Safety Code.
Proposed §290.39(d)(3)(C) would update the name of the agency and
replace the word "should" with "shall." Similar corrections are made throughout
the proposal. The commission proposes revised §290.39(e)(4) to conform
to proposed §290.41(c)(1)(F). Proposed §290.39(e)(4) would require
submission of a copy of each fully executed sanitary control easement and
any other documentation demonstrating compliance with §290.41(c)(1)(F).
The proposal also contains streamlined language involving acronyms in §290.39(f)(10),
(g)(2) and (4), and (n). Additional proposed revisions to §290.39(n)
would group several existing requirements related to financial assurance in
subsection (n)(2) and replace subsection (n)(3) with a new requirement regarding
as-built planning materials. The last two sentences in existing subsection
(n)(2) are proposed to be relocated to subsection (n)(2)(A) and (B), respectively,
and the existing subsection (n)(3) requirement would be moved to subsection
(n)(2)(C). Subsection (n)(3) is proposed to be replaced with a provision that
requires systems that constructed facilities without prior approval to submit
as-built engineering drawings and specifications so that the executive director
can more effectively determine if the facilities meet minimum design requirements.
Section 290.41, Water Sources
The commission proposes to amend §290.41(a) to correct an error in
the reference to Subchapter F. The commission proposes reformatted and amended §290.41(c)(1)(F),
to allow public water systems to submit a substitute for the requirement to
obtain a sanitary control easement or sanitary control easements. In this
regard, the proposed amendment would require the public water system to submit
a copy of the sanitary control easement(s) covering land within 150 feet of
the well, or obtain executive director approval for either of three substitutes.
The three substitutes are specified in proposed new clause (iv)(I) - (III),
as follows: (I) a copy of the recorded deed and map demonstrating that the
public water system owns all real property within 150 feet of the well; (II)
a copy of the recorded deed and map demonstrating that the public water system
owns a portion of real property within 150 feet of the well, and a copy of
the recorded sanitary control easement(s) that the public water system has
obtained, recorded, and submitted to the executive director applicable to
the remaining portion of real property within 150 feet of the well not owned
by the public water system; or (III) for a political subdivision, a copy of
an ordinance or land use restriction adopted and enforced by the political
subdivision which provides an equivalent or higher level of sanitary protection
to the well as a sanitary control easement. Proposed new clause (v) would
provide that if the executive director approves a sanitary control easement
substitute identified in proposed clause (iv)(I) or (II) for a public water
system and the system conveys the property it owns within 150 feet of the
well to another person or persons, the public water system must at that time
obtain, record, and submit to the executive director a copy of the recorded
sanitary control easement(s) applicable to the portion of the conveyed property
within 150 feet of the well, unless the executive director approves a substitute
identified in proposed clause (iv)(III).
The commission proposes a typographical error correction in subsection
(c)(2)(A), to change "mg/l" to "milligrams per liter (mg/L)." The commission
proposes to amend subsection (c)(3)(A) to require, as part of the well completion
data, a legible copy of the recorded deed or deeds for all real property within
150 feet of the well, a legible copy of the sanitary control easement(s) or
other documentation demonstrating compliance with paragraph (1)(F), and a
map demonstrating the well location in relation to surrounding property boundaries.
Subsection (c)(3)(C) is proposed to be amended to add "and" to the third sentence,
and subsection (c)(3)(D) is proposed to be amended to replace "mg/l" with
"mg/L."
The commission proposes to amend subsection (c)(3)(A) to require, as part
of the well completion data, a legible copy of the recorded deed or deeds
for all real property within 150 feet of the well, a legible copy of the sanitary
control easement(s) or other documentation demonstrating compliance with paragraph
(1)(F), and a map demonstrating the well location in relation to surrounding
property boundaries. Subsection (c)(3)(C) is proposed to be amended to add
"and" to the third sentence, and subsection (c)(3)(D) is proposed to be amended
to replace "mg/l" with "mg/L."
The commission proposes to amend subsection (c)(4) regarding the construction
standards for pitless units. The commission proposes to amend subsection (c)(4)(D)
to require that, with the exception of the fact that the well is constructed
with a pitless unit, the well must meet all of the other design requirements
for public water system wells. With this proposed revision, the last sentences
of subsection (c)(4)(A) and (E) would be redundant, and thus proposed to be
deleted.
The commission proposes an amendment to §290.41(d)(4) to modify the
design requirement for springs and other similar sources. The proposed amendment
would apply several requirements currently applicable only to public water
systems utilizing groundwater sources to public water systems utilizing springs
and other similar water sources. These requirements include: 1) discharge
from a well blow-off line, if provided, shall terminate in a downward direction
and at a point which will not be submerged by flood waters; 2) an air release
device, if provided on the discharge piping, shall be installed in such a
manner as to preclude the possibility of submergence or possible entrance
of contaminants; and 3) all openings to the atmosphere shall be covered with
16-mesh or finer corrosion- resistant screening material or an acceptable
equivalent. This proposed amendment is intended to reduce the potential for
contamination that might result from an improperly designed blow-off valve
or air release valve in a public water system utilizing water from springs
or other similar water sources. The proposed amendment would help assure the
sanitary integrity of water as it is transported from the spring catchment
basin to the treatment facilities. The proposed amendment would also create
consistency between the commission's §290.41(c) design requirements applicable
to "Groundwater sources and development" and the commission's §290.41(d)
design criteria applicable to "Springs and other water sources." This aspect
of the proposal involves "state-only" requirements, so the commission seeks
comment on this proposed amendment. The proposed revision changes the reference
in §290.41(d)(4) from "subsection (c)(3)(M) - (P)" to "subsection (c)(3)(L)
- (Q)."
The commission proposes to add §290.41(e)(2)(G) to require that the
500-foot separation distance between water treatment plants and wastewater
treatment plants also applies to the water treatment plant intake structure.
The proposed language states that intakes shall not be located within 500
feet of a sewage treatment plant or lands irrigated with sewage effluent.
The proposed revisions to subsection (e)(3) would delete and relocate several
provisions that apply to the water treatment plant rather than the intake
location. The proposal would also revise the existing requirement that pumping
units shall be located in well-drained areas not subject to flooding to a
requirement that the raw water pump station shall be located in a well-drained
area and shall be designed to remain in operation during flood events. This
aspect of the proposal involves "state-only" requirements, so the commission
seeks comment on this proposed amendment. The commission proposes to relocate
the requirements applicable to surface water treatment plants currently contained
in subsection (e)(3)(A) and (B) to the section covering all water treatment
plants under §290.42(a)(2)(A) and (B) and to relocate the requirements
currently contained in subsection (e)(3)(C) to §290.42(m). The commission
also proposes to amend subsection (e)(3)(C) and (D) so that it applies to
the raw water pump station, and not to the water treatment plant, and to renumber
the amended requirements as subsection (e)(4) and (5).
Section 290.42, Water Treatment
The commission proposes to amend §290.42 to make the provisions of
the section consistent with federal regulatory requirements and to relocate
requirements pertaining to plant location from the section on water sources
to the section on water treatment.
The proposed amendment to §290.42(a) would relocate the siting requirements
for surface water treatment plants from §290.41(e) to §290.42(a),
as previously discussed. The commission proposes to rename subsection (a)
as "Capacity and location" to meet Texas Register formatting requirements
and to extend the requirements to all water treatment plants. The current
technical requirement contained in subsection (a) is proposed to be renumbered
as subsection (a)(1). Proposed subsection (a)(2) and (3) correspond to existing
requirements under §290.41(e)(3), (e)(3)(A), (B), and (D), which are
proposed to be relocated. The commission proposes to extend its siting requirements
to all water treatment plants in order to improve the reliability and sanitary
integrity of all plants where potable water is treated. The commission finds
that the surface and subsurface contaminant sources that pose threats to the
treated water produced by surface water treatment plants also pose threats
to the treated water produced by other treatment plants. Such other treatment
plants include those that treat groundwater or groundwater that is under the
direct influence of surface water and those that retreat potable water purchased
from other public water systems. Furthermore, the commission finds that the
need to properly dispose of treatment plant wastes is not limited to surface
water treatment plants and that all treatment plants need to be accessible
during periods of inclement weather in order to assure its customers a continuous
supply of potable water. Finally, the commission believes that the proposal
to extend the siting requirements to all water treatment plants is consistent
with historical and current industry design and construction practices as
well as with the policies and procedures of the commission.
The commission proposes §290.42(b)(7) to reduce the risk of treated
water contamination that could occur through an improperly designed air relief
device. The proposed language would require air release devices to be installed
in such a manner as to preclude submergence or entrance of contaminants. In
this respect, the proposal would require that all openings to the atmosphere
be covered with 16-mesh or finer, corrosion-resistant screening material or
an equivalent acceptable to the executive director. The proposed changes are
consistent with existing requirements for air release devices that are located
on treated water lines in the distribution system. The proposed amendments
will help assure that untreated water, insects, and debris do not contaminate
treated water before it leaves the plant and is piped directly to consumers.
The commission proposes to amend §290.42(c)(1) to remove references
to dates that have already passed which served to phase in certain treatment
requirements and to eliminate redundant terminology. Subsection (c)(6), regarding
the return of decant water and sludge to the treatment process at plants that
are treating water from springs and similar sources, is proposed to assure
that the design of recycling facilities at these systems meets the same requirements
as those that apply to surface water treatment plants, which is a requirement
that is needed to maintain consistency with the federal Filter Backwash Recycling
Rule. Proposed subsection (c)(7) would reduce the risk of treated water contamination
that could occur through an improperly designed air relief device. The proposed
language would require air release devices on treated waterlines to be installed
in such a manner as to preclude submergence or entrance of contaminants. In
this respect, the proposal would require that all openings to the atmosphere
be covered with 16-mesh or finer, corrosion-resistant screening material or
an equivalent acceptable to the executive director. As previously mentioned,
the proposed changes are consistent with existing requirements for air release
devices that are located on treated water lines in the distribution system.
The proposed amendments will also help assure that untreated water, insects,
and debris do not contaminate treated water before it leaves the plant and
is piped directly to consumers.
The proposed amendment to §290.42(d)(1) would remove references to
dates that have already passed which served to phase in certain treatment
requirements and to eliminate redundant terminology. Proposed subsection (d)(2)(F)
would reduce the risk of contamination that could occur through an improperly
designed air relief device, as previously described.
The commission proposes to amend subsection (d)(3) to incorporate design
and operational mandates contained in the federal Filter Backwash Recycling
Rule, and certain related requirements. The commission proposes to relocate
the last sentence of existing subsection (d)(3) to proposed subsection (i)
and to streamline the rule references.
Proposed subsection (d)(3)(A) regarding the recycling of decant water addresses
a federal Filter Backwash Recycling Rule requirement. The proposal would require
the liquids from sludge settling lagoons, spent backwash water tanks, dewatering
facilities, and similar facilities to be returned to the raw waterline upstream
of the raw water sample tap and coagulant feed point, unless the executive
director has approved an alternate recycling location. The blended recycled
liquids would then be required to pass through all of the major unit processes
at the plant. Returning recycled liquids to a location upstream of the raw
water sample tap eliminates the need for operators to collect and composite
multiple water samples in order to run jar tests and other process control
analyses and eliminates potential compositing errors. Furthermore, returning
recycled liquids upstream of the coagulant feed point assures that the raw
water and recycled water are mixed before the treatment process begins and
facilitates proper plant operation. This proposal is different from the federal
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule, so the commission seeks comment on this proposed
requirement.
The commission proposes subsection (d)(3)(B) to require flow equalization
basins, variable speed pumps, or other facilities to minimize the impact of
the recycling process on treatment plant performance. One of the major goals
of the federal Filter Backwash Recycling Rule is to minimize the potential
for excessive hydraulic surges occurring when a treatment plant recycles the
liquid. The federal rule is different from the requirement in subsection (d)(3)(B).
Consequently, the commission seeks public comment on alternative methods to
prevent hydraulic surges during a recycling event.
The commission proposes subsection (d)(3)(C) to prevent water systems from
recycling the solids produced by dewatering facilities without the prior approval
of the executive director because the commission asserts that these solids
harbor elevated pathogen levels and such a prohibition should not adversely
impact plant performance. The commission also solicits public comment on this
"state-only" requirement, particularly from any public water system that is
currently recycling or plans to recycle solids produced by dewatering facilities.
The amendment to subsection (d)(6) and (7) is proposed to facilitate the
adoption of standardized design criteria for chemical storage and feed facilities.
Currently, subsection (d)(6) contains the design criteria for chemical storage
facilities and subsection (d)(7) contains the design criteria for chemical
feed facilities. The commission proposes to relocate all of these design requirements
to a new subsection (f). Therefore, proposed subsection (d)(6) states that
chemical storage facilities shall comply with the applicable requirements
in §290.42(f)(1), and proposed subsection (d)(7) states that chemical
feed facilities shall comply with the applicable requirements in §290.42(f)(2).
The commission proposes to amend subsection (d)(11)(E) to facilitate compliance
with the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. The commission
proposes to amend subsection (d)(11)(E)(ii) to require systems serving fewer
than 10,000 people to install an on-line turbidimeter and recorder on each
filter at their surface water treatment plants by January 1, 2005. Currently,
subsection (d)(11)(E)(ii) requires all filters with a capacity of 1.0 million
gallons per day or more to be equipped with an on-line turbidimeter. The proposed
amendment differs from the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule, in that it does not allow the option for systems serving fewer than
10,000 people with only two filters to install the turbidimeter and recorder
on the combined filter effluent line without installing an additional turbidimeter
and recorder on each individual filter.
The commission is proposing a rule which would require the devices on each
filter because they enable the water treatment plant to quickly identify a
malfunctioning filter and take corrective action before the public health
and welfare is compromised. The commission asserts that there is a correlation
between filtered water turbidity levels and the rate that pathogenic organisms,
such as
Cryptosporidium
oocysts, can pass
through a filter. Since pathogenic organisms can cause disease after only
short-term exposure to low concentrations, it is important to be able to detect
filter malfunctions before elevated pathogen levels begin to enter the drinking
water. Unless the performance of each filter is monitored at plants with more
than two filters, a serious malfunction in a single filter might go undetected
because of the dilution that occurs when water is blended with that produced
by the other filters. At plants with only two filters, it is easier to detect
a serious filter malfunction in the blended water because less dilution occurs
than at plant with more than two filters. However, reduced dilution can allow
less serious malfunctions at plants with only two filters to result in an
increased health threat.
In addition to avoiding the increased health threats posed by minor to
moderate filter malfunctions at plants with only two filters, another benefit
to individual filter turbidity monitoring is the ability to identify which
of the two filters is malfunctioning and reduce a plant's operating costs.
The federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule requires a surface
water treatment plant to investigate elevated turbidity levels and, unless
the plant can identify which of the individual filters is malfunctioning,
to complete an extensive, time-consuming evaluation of each filter that is
not individually monitored. Furthermore, since a single malfunctioning filter
in a plant with only two filters can result in a treatment violation that
requires public notice, the ability to identify and correct an individual
malfunctioning filter before a treatment violation occurs can save a public
water system the cost of issuing public notices and responding to the resulting
customer complaints and inquiries.
Although there would be numerous public health and operational benefits
and long-term cost reductions of the proposed amendment to subsection (d)(11)(E)(ii),
the proposal would increase the initial compliance cost for a few plants that
serve fewer than 10,000 people and have only two filters by approximately
$1,200 to $3,600. Consequently, the commission is seeking public comment on
the proposal and on alternative methods to achieve these public health and
operational goals.
The commission proposes to amend subsection (d)(11)(E)(iii) to require
that systems serving at least 10,000 people be equipped with an on-line turbidimeter
and recorder that will allow the operator to measure and record the turbidity
of the water from each filter at 15-minute intervals. Currently, the rule
indicates that the operator must be able to determine the turbidity of the
water and does not adequately indicate that the recorder must be used to create
a record of the data. In addition, the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule requires results of the individual turbidity readings
to be maintained for a period of at least three years (existing §290.46(f)(3)(B)(iv)
implements this federal requirement).
The commission proposes revisions under subsection (d)(11)(E)(v) to recognize
that filters which are equipped with on-line turbidimeters and recorders can
establish a filter backwash criteria that is based on turbidity breakthrough
rather than the accumulated loss of head. Because turbidity breakthrough usually
occurs before terminal headloss is reached, the commission is proposing to
allow filters with on-line turbidimeters and recorders to forego the installation
of loss-of-head devices. This amendment would help offset the additional capital
cost of the on-line turbidity instrumentation and help reduce operational
and maintenance costs.
The commission proposes to amend subsection (d)(15)(A) and (B) to reflect
that the statutory responsibility for the certifying laboratories that conduct
microbiological analysis for public water systems has been transferred from
the Texas Department of Health to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
The commission proposes to amend subsection (d)(15)(G) to provide minimum
criteria for laboratories at surface water treatment plants and to relocate
a requirement for surface water treatment plants currently contained in subsection
(d)(15)(G) to proposed subsection (d)(16). This aspect of the proposal involves
"state-only" requirements, so the commission seeks comment on this proposed
amendment. The proposed subsection (d)(16) will also eliminate a reference
to a past compliance date that currently exists in subsection (d)(15)(G).
As discussed previously in this preamble, the commission proposes to relocate
the design requirements for chemical storage and chemical feed systems from
subsection (d)(6) and (7) to proposed subsection (f). Consequently, the commission
proposes to reletter existing subsections (f) (k) as subsections (g) (l),
respectively.
With the exception of proposed §290.42(f)(1)(A), the language contained
in proposed subsection (f)(1) is identical to that currently contained in
existing subsection (d)(6). In subsection (f)(1)(A), the commission proposes
minor modifications to the language currently contained in subsection (d)(6)(A).
One proposed revision is needed to provide that this requirement will apply
only to bulk storage facilities that are needed to comply with a treatment
technique requirement or maximum contaminant level (MCL). Also, the proposed
amendment includes a requirement that the capacity of these bulk storage facilities
shall be based on the design capacity of the treatment plant. As previously
noted, the language in proposed subsection (f)(1)(B) - (G) is identical to
the language currently contained in existing subsection (d)(6)(B) - (G).
With the exception of proposed subsection (f)(2)(A), the language contained
in proposed subsection (f)(2) is identical to that currently contained in
subsection (d)(7). In subsection (f)(2)(A), the commission proposes a minor
modification to the language currently contained in subsection (d)(7)(A).
The proposed modification is needed to provide that this requirement will
apply only to feed facilities that are needed to comply with a treatment technique
requirement or MCL. As previously noted, the language in proposed subsection
(f)(2)(B) - (I) is identical to the language currently contained in subsection
(d)(7)(B) - (I).
The commission proposes subsection (g) to correct an error in the references
to §290.39(l) and Subchapter F. Proposed §290.42(i) would add the
last sentence that is contained in existing subsection (d)(3), and streamline
the rule references. The commission proposes to relocate the requirement for
proper disposal of plant wastes to subsection (i) because, at its current
location under subsection (d)(3), the requirement applies only to surface
water treatment plants while the provision should apply to the waste disposal
practices at all public water systems. Proposed §290.42(k) would correct
an error in the reference to "Texas Hazard Communications Act" by correcting
the name of the Act and revising "Title 5" to "Title 6." The provision concerning
the "plant operations manual" is renumbered as §290.42(l) to accommodate
previously described proposed amendments, and to acknowledge that the manual
can also serve as a mechanism to guide operators during natural or man-made
events which could cause adverse impacts to a water system. The commission
proposes new §290.42(m) in order to relocate the regulatory requirement
currently contained in §290.41(e)(3)(C). The commission is proposing
to include the minimum security requirement for water treatment plants in
this new subsection because the existing requirement applies only to surface
water treatment plants, while the provision should apply to the security requirements
at all water treatment plants. This aspect of the proposal involves "state-only"
requirements, so the commission seeks comment on this proposed amendment.
Section 290.43, Water Storage
The commission proposes to amend §290.43 in numerous places to correct
typographical errors, such as replacing "clear well" with "clearwell," spelling
out "pounds per square inch" and parenthetically including the acronym "psi,"
adding hyphens where appropriate, and spelling out "American National Standards
Institute/National Sanitation Foundation." The commission proposes to amend §290.43(e)
to provide that an intruder-resistant fence is not required when water system
facilities are installed in a lockable building that is designed to prevent
intruder access.
Section 290.44, Water Distribution
The commission proposes to amend §290.44 to correct the spelling of
"waterline" in subsections (a)(4), (c), and (e)(4)(A) and (B). Other proposed
revisions under §290.44 involve acronyms, grammatical changes, typographical
error corrections, and minor administrative revisions to comply with Texas
Register requirements. For instance, the proposed revisions to §290.44(e)(4)(A)
and (B) are formatting changes and the proposed revisions to §290.44(e)(5)
and (i)(2)(K) would eliminate typographical errors by correctly spelling"springline"
and "mg/L."
Section 290.45, Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements
The commission proposes to amend §290.45 in order to indicate the
manner in which the rules are interpreted by the commission and the proposed
amendments are not intended to increase or decrease the existing capacity
requirements for any public water system.
The proposed amendment to §290.45(a)(1) indicates that the capacity
requirements in this section apply to individual pump stations and pressure
planes only if the individual facility serves an area of the system that cannot
be served effectively by the public water system's other facilities. The proposed
amendment adds the phrase "which serve portions of the system that are hydraulically
separated from, or incapable of being served by, other pump stations or pressure
planes." The commission proposes subsection (a)(5) and (6) to further indicate
how it evaluates compliance with the requirements of this section. The commission
proposes subsection (a)(5) to specify that the capacity of facilities that
have been inoperative for at least 30 days prior to the evaluation shall not
be included when determining compliance with the commission's capacity requirements
unless those facilities will be returned to an operative condition within
the next 30 days. The commission does not require each facility to be operated
every 60 days, but does require public water systems to maintain their essential
facilities in an operative condition. Subsection (a)(6) is proposed to ensure
that the treatment facilities at all public water systems have sufficient
capacity to meet the system's treated water production requirements, by requiring
that the capacity of the treatment facilities shall not be less than the required
raw water or groundwater production rate or the anticipated maximum daily
demand of the system. This aspect of the proposal involves "state-only" requirements,
so the commission seeks comment on this proposed amendment.
The proposed amendment to §290.45(d)(2)(A) provides a reference to
subparagraph (B) by adding the phrase, "subject to subparagraph (B) of this
paragraph, . . . ." Proposed subparagraph (B) is intended to explain that
the commission allows small noncommunity water systems without transient accommodation
units to meet the capacity requirements of subsection (d)(2)(B) if they provide
ground storage facilities.
Section 290.46, Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking
Water Systems
The commission proposes to amend and reorganize the operator certification
requirements in §290.46(e) that apply to public water systems. The organization
of the existing rule groups the requirements regarding the number of operators
that are required at each system in a different paragraph than the requirements
regarding the type of operators that are required at each system. The proposed
revision consolidates both operator number and operator type requirements
into one paragraph applicable to each type of system. In addition to reorganizing
subsection (e), the commission proposes several modifications to certain requirements
that apply to systems that treat surface water or serve more than 1,000 connections.
The proposed amendment to §290.46(e) reflects the new organizational
structure of the subsection and incorporates the provisions currently contained
in subsection (e)(3) to avoid redundancy. The commission also proposes to
relocate the exclusion that currently exists in subsection (e)(7) to subsection
(e)(1) so that it is located more prominently.
The proposed amendment to §290.46(e)(2) is to relocate the operator
certification requirements that apply to most public water systems. The content
of the current subsection (e)(2) would be incorporated into proposed subsection
(e)(3)(C), (4)(C), (5)(B) and (D), and (6)(B).
The commission proposes new subsection (e)(2)(A) and (C), containing identical
language to that currently contained in subsection (e)(5) and (6), respectively.
The commission also proposes to amend subsection (e)(4) and relocate it to
the proposed subsection (e)(2)(C). The proposed amendment to existing subsection
(e)(4) would eliminate redundant regulatory language and reflect a revision
in the commission's approval process for installations that use chlorine dioxide.
With the exception of the noted amendment to existing subsection (e)(4), the
proposal is intended to facilitate understanding of the rules and is not intended
to modify regulatory requirements.
The commission proposes to relocate the operator certification requirements
for systems that buy all of their treated water from another public water
system to subsection (e)(3). Proposed subsection (e)(3)(A) will contain only
the portion of the existing rule that applies to purchased water systems;
the portion of the existing subsection that applies to groundwater systems
is proposed to be relocated to subsection (e)(4)(A).
The proposed amendment to subsection (e)(3)(B) is intended to merge the
requirements that are currently contained in subsection (e)(1) and (3)(B)
into a single paragraph, with no change in regulatory requirements.
The proposed amendment to subsection (e)(3)(C) is intended to merge the
requirements that currently exist in subsection (e)(2). The commission also
intends the amendment to provide regulatory relief to some smaller purchased
water systems that are not able to hire two full-time operators while simultaneously
assuring that there are two operators with sufficient experience at, and familiarity
with, the facilities to assure adequate coverage. The requirement currently
contained in subsection (e)(3)(C) is proposed to be relocated to subsection
(e)(4)(B).
The commission proposes to delete existing subsection (e)(3)(D) and (E)
and to incorporate these requirements into proposed subsection (e)(4) - (6).
The commission proposes to relocate the operator certification requirements
for systems that treat groundwater sources that are not under the influence
of surface water to subsection (e)(4). As noted previously, the language currently
contained in subsection (e)(4) would be relocated to proposed subsection (e)(2)(C).
Proposed subsection (e)(4)(A) contains the portion of existing subsection
(e)(3)(A) that applies to groundwater systems. Similarly, proposed subsection
(e)(4)(B) is intended to merge the groundwater system requirements that are
currently contained in subsection (e)(1) and (3)(C) into a single paragraph,
with no change in regulatory requirements for these systems.
Proposed subsection (e)(4)(C) is intended to merge the requirements that
currently exist in subsection (e)(2) and (3)(C). The commission also intends
the amendment to provide regulatory relief to some smaller groundwater systems
that are not able to hire two full-time operators while simultaneously assuring
that there are two operators with sufficient experience at, and familiarity
with, the facilities to assure adequate coverage.
The commission proposes to relocate the operator certification requirements
for systems that treat groundwater sources that are under the influence of
surface water to subsection (e)(5). As noted previously, the language currently
contained in subsection (e)(5) would be relocated to proposed subsection (e)(2)(A).
Proposed subsection (e)(5)(A) addresses systems that serve no more than
1,000 connections and use cartridge or membrane filters to treat groundwater
sources that are under the direct influence of surface water. The proposed
subsection would merge the requirements that are currently contained in subsection
(e)(1) and (3)(D)(i) into a single paragraph, extend the requirement to systems
that use membrane technology, and incorporate additional training requirements
for Surface Water Operators who operate a system with groundwater sources.
The commission is aware that the operation of membrane technology requires
a higher level of expertise than is necessary to operate cartridge filters.
The commission is also aware that it requires systems using membranes to treat
surface water to be operated by an individual who holds a Class "C" Surface
Water license. However, both membranes and cartridge filters function as a
physical barrier to the passage of pathogens and the concentration of pathogens
in surface water is typically greater than that found in groundwater sources.
Proposed subsection (e)(5)(B) addresses systems that serve more than 1,000
connections and use cartridge or membrane filters to treat groundwater sources
that are under the direct influence of surface water. The proposed subsection
would merge the requirements that are currently contained in subsection (e)(2)
and (3)(D)(i) into a single paragraph. As noted in the discussion of proposed
subsection (e)(3)(C) and (4)(C), the commission is proposing to provide regulatory
relief for some smaller systems that are not able to hire two full-time operators
while simultaneously assuring that there are two operators with sufficient
experience at, and familiarity with, the facilities to assure adequate coverage.
Proposed subsection (e)(5)(C) addresses systems that serve no more than
1,000 connections and use coagulation and direct filtration to treat groundwater
sources that are under the direct influence of surface water. The proposed
subsection would merge the requirements that are currently contained in subsection
(e)(1) with an amended version of the language currently contained in subsection
(e)(3)(D)(ii) into a single paragraph and require systems to ensure that at
least one of their operators has completed the new surface water training
courses by January 1, 2007. The proposed revisions to the language currently
in subsection (e)(3)(D)(ii) reflect that Surface Water Operators require additional
training if they operate a system with wells, and the fact that the 40-hour
Surface Water Production course has been divided into two smaller segments,
the Surface Water Unit I course and the Surface Water Unit II course, which
may cumulatively require more than 40 hours to complete. The commission seeks
comment on the appropriateness of this "state-only" requirement for Surface
Water Operators to complete an approved Groundwater Production course.
Proposed subsection (e)(5)(D) addresses systems that serve more than 1,000
connections and use coagulation and direct filtration to treat groundwater
sources that are under the direct influence of surface water. The proposed
subsection would merge the requirements that are currently contained in subsection
(e)(2) and (3)(D)(ii) into a single paragraph and require systems to ensure
that at least one of their operators has completed the new surface water training
courses by January 1, 2007. As noted in the discussion of proposed subsection
(e)(3)(C) and (4)(C), the commission is proposing to provide regulatory relief
for some smaller systems that are not able to hire two full-time operators
while simultaneously assuring that there are two operators with sufficient
experience at, and familiarity with, the facilities to assure adequate coverage.
Proposed subsection (e)(5)(E) and (F) addresses systems that utilize a
conventional surface water treatment to treat groundwater sources that are
under the direct influence of surface water and contains the same regulatory
language that is currently contained in subsection (e)(3)(D)(iii) and (iv),
respectively, which the commission is proposing to delete. The proposal is
intended only to relocate the existing requirements to new subsections and
revise a reference to reflect the proposed organizational structure. No change
in regulatory requirement is intended.
The commission proposes to relocate the operator certification requirements
for systems that treat surface water sources to subsection (e)(6). As noted
previously, the language currently contained in subsection (e)(6) would be
relocated to proposed subsection (e)(2)(B).
The commission proposes new subsection (e)(6)(A) to address the operator
certification requirements at surface water systems serving fewer than 1,000
connections. This proposed subsection would merge the requirements that are
currently contained in subsection (e)(1) and (3)(E)(i) into a single paragraph
and require systems to ensure that at least one of their operators has completed
the new surface water training courses by January 1, 2007. In addition, the
commission proposes to provide regulatory relief for some smaller systems
that are not able to hire an operator who holds a Class "B" Surface Water
license on a full-time basis while simultaneously assuring that there is a
sufficient number of adequately trained operators to provide appropriate coverage
at the system. Specifically, the commission proposes to allow systems to contract
with a Class "B" operator to provide technical support if the system has a
Class "C" Surface Water Operator on staff. However, the commission proposes
to require that the contractor must be on-site at the water treatment plant
for four consecutive hours at least once every 14 days in order to assure
that the contractor is sufficiently familiar with the facilities to provide
technical support when it is needed. The commission seeks comment on whether
it is appropriate to allow such an approach and whether the duration and frequency
of the visits is adequate to detect operational problems and assure a current
working knowledge of the facilities.
The commission proposes new subsection (e)(6)(B) to address the operator
certification requirements at surface water systems serving more than 1,000
connections. This proposed subsection contains analogous requirements to those
currently contained in subsection (e)(2) and (3)(E)(i) and a revision to assure
that at least one of the operators has completed the new surface water training
courses by January 1, 2007. As noted in the discussion of proposed subsection
(e)(3)(C), (4)(C), and (5)(B) and (D), the commission is proposing to provide
regulatory relief for some smaller systems that are not able to hire two full-time
operators while simultaneously assuring that there are two operators with
sufficient experience at, and familiarity with, the facilities to assure adequate
coverage. As the discussion of subsection (e)(6)(A) indicates, the commission
is also proposing to provide regulatory relief for surface water systems that
serve no more than 1,000 connections by allowing those systems to use a part-time
contract operator to meet the requirements for a Class "B" operator.
Proposed subsection (e)(6)(C) and (D) contains the same regulatory language
that is currently contained in subsection (e)(3)(E)(ii) and (iii), respectively,
which the commission is proposing to delete. The proposed modification is
to relocate the existing requirements, with no change in regulatory requirements.
As noted previously, the commission proposes to delete existing subsection
(e)(7) and relocate its provisions to proposed subsection (e)(1).
The commission proposes a minor amendment to §290.46(f). As noted
in the discussion of §290.46(e), the commission proposes several provisions
which will provide regulatory relief to some systems that are required to
have at least two operators. Consequently, the commission proposes subsection
(f)(3)(A)(vii) to ensure that public water systems maintain the records needed
to determine compliance with the proposed amendment to §290.46(e). In
addition, the commission proposes subsection (f)(3)(C)(iii) to incorporate
reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in the federal Filter Backwash
Recycling Rule. The commission proposes to amend subsection (f)(4) to allow
the executive director to require the submission of all routine reports at
any time, even if they are required less frequently than once per quarter,
and any other documents that are needed to determine compliance with commission
requirements.
The commission proposes to change the incorrect reference to the Texas
Department of Health in §290.46(g) by replacing it with "executive director."
The commission proposes to amend §290.46(l) to require that dead-end
mains be flushed once per month and that these lines, as well as looped mains,
must be flushed in the event of water quality complaints.
The proposed amendment to §290.46(m)(4) would require public water
systems to repair leaks that occur in water treatment units such as clarifiers
and filters in addition to the other water storage and distribution facilities
currently identified in subsection (m). Similarly, proposed subsection (m)(6)
would require public water systems to maintain their mechanical equipment
in good working condition. The commission intended subsection (m) to cover
all public water system facilities and proposes the amendment because some
entities have concluded that they are not required to maintain all their public
water system equipment in a fully operational condition unless they are specifically
listed in subsection (m).
The commission proposes to amend §290.46(s)(1) so that it will apply
to the meters installed at public water systems that use groundwater sources,
and the commission notes that this is a "state- only" requirement. Although
the commission proposes that well meters be calibrated once every three years,
the agency solicits public comment on an appropriate calibration interval
for well meters.
The commission proposes to amend §290.46(s)(2)(A)(iii) and add §290.46(s)(2)(A)(iv).
Both of these proposals will reduce the calibration requirements for on-line
pH meters at surface water treatment plants. Several plants have started using
on-line instruments that were originally installed only for process control
to generate their compliance data. Some of these facilities reported that
the "data drift phenomena" that was prevalent in earlier generations of instruments
is no longer present and that their daily checks are extremely time-consuming
and are revealing no need to calibrate. Consequently, the commission is proposing
to relax the calibration requirements for on-line pH meters. The commission
solicits public comment on the proposed amendments, especially from individuals
who have identified appropriate verification and calibration intervals based
on a scientific analysis of data from a full-scale treatment plant.
The commission proposes to amend §290.46(v) regarding the installation
of electrical wiring so that systems may forgo the use of wiring conduit if
local or national electrical codes permit.
The proposed amendment to §290.47(i), Appendix I, Assessment of Hazard
and Section of Assemblies, would add veterinary clinics to the item on hospitals,
morgues, and other medical facilities due to the similarity of their potential
impact on public health. The commission also proposes to add Private/Individual/Unmonitored
wells to the list of facilities requiring premises isolation due to their
potential for introducing untreated water into the public drinking water supply.
Finally, the commission proposes to correct a typographical error in the key
included at the bottom of Appendix I.
Subchapter F, Drinking Water Standards Governing
Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements for Public Water Systems
Section 290.104, Summary of Maximum Contaminant Levels, Maximum Residual
Disinfectant Levels, Treatment Techniques, and Action Levels
The commission proposes to amend §290.104 to establish consistency
between state and federal rules regarding MCLs and treatment technique requirements.
The proposed amendment to subsection (b) would correct a typographical inconsistency
between the state and federal MCLs for barium, and similarly, the proposed
amendment to subsection (c) would eliminate a typographical inconsistency
between the state and federal MCLs for toluene and total xylenes. The commission
proposes to amend subsection (d) by deleting certain language which already
exists in §290.108. Because new language will be proposed to be added
under §290.108 in a follow-up rulemaking, deletion of this language under
subsection (d) is necessary to avoid a conflict between the two sections.
This action is necessary because of Texas Register rules which preclude a
subdivision of a rule undergoing simultaneous proposed amendments. The commission
proposes deleting currently existing subsection (g)(1) because the new turbidity
treatment technique has been effective since January 2002. The commission
also proposes to renumber subsection (g)(2) and (3) as subsection (g)(1) and
(2), respectively. The commission proposes subsection (l) to incorporate treatment
technique requirements that are consistent with the federal Filter Backwash
Recycling Rule.
Section 290.106, Inorganic Compounds
The commission proposes to amend §290.106(b)(1) to correct a typographical
inconsistency between the state and federal MCLs for barium.
Section 290.107, Organic Compounds
The commission proposes to amend §290.107(b)(2) to eliminate typographical
inconsistencies between state and federal rules regarding MCLs for toluene
and total xylenes. The commission also proposes to amend subsection (c)(1)(D)(vi)
to define the acronym designation "PCBs" as "polychlorinated byphenyls."
Section 290.111, Turbidity
The proposed amendment to §290.111 would remove language relating
to past compliance dates, consolidate many of the requirements currently contained
in subsection (b)(1) and (2), and incorporate several requirements of the
federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule into proposed subsections
(b)(2)(C) and (c) - (g). Since some of the proposed modifications to §290.42
would establish requirements that differ somewhat from those contained in
the federal regulations, the commission is soliciting public comment on specific
components of this proposal. These requests for public input are discussed
in more detail later in this preamble.
The proposed amendment to subsection (b) reflects that certain provisions
of subsection (b) are performance criteria instead of treatment technique
requirements, by adding the phrase "and performance criteria" to the title
of the subsection and the word "performance" prior to "criteria" at the end
of the sentence in subsection (b).
Subsection (b)(1) is proposed to be amended to add the title "Treatment
technique requirements." Additionally, proposed subsection (b)(1) contains
revisions that would merge the requirements currently contained in subsection
(b)(1) and (2) into a single paragraph. The language currently in subsection
(b)(2) is proposed to be relocated to subsection (b)(1), and the requirements
currently contained in subsection (b)(2)(A) and its subsequent subparagraphs
are proposed to be relocated to subsection (b)(1)(A) and its subsequent subparagraphs.
As noted, the commission proposes no change to subsection (b)(1)(B) as the
language is identical to that currently contained in subsection (b)(2)(B).
The commission proposes subsection (b)(1)(C) to facilitate the reorganization
of subsection (b). Proposed subsection (b)(1)(C) would contain the language
similar to that currently contained in subsection (b)(2)(C) with the added
condition that a public water system using groundwater under the direct influence
of surface water and serving fewer than 10,000 people must use conventional
media filters in order to qualify for an extension to the compliance date
for providing a 2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
. A reformatted version of (b)(2)(C)(ii) is relocated to (b)(1)(C)(ii).
The proposed amendment to subsection (b)(1)(C)(ii) is needed because the commission
must relocate the provisions currently contained in subsection (b)(1)(A)(i)
and (ii) to subsection (b)(1)(C)(ii)(I) and (II), respectively, in order to
merge subsection (b)(1) and (2) and to prepare for future rule amendments
that will be needed after January 1, 2005.
The commission proposes to revise the language under existing subsection
(b)(3) and relocate it to subsection (b)(2). Consequently, subsection (b)(2)
is proposed to be amended to add the title "Performance criteria for individual
filters" to identify the paragraph's contents as performance criteria rather
than as treatment technique requirements. In addition, subsection (b)(2) is
proposed to be amended to reflect that the requirement will now apply to all
systems instead of only to those that serve at least 10,000 people. The commission
proposes to relocate the contents of existing subsection (b)(3)(A) to subsection
(b)(2)(A) and amend the language to clearly state that this provision only
applies to systems that serve at least 10,000 people. The commission also
proposes to relocate existing subsection (b)(3)(B) to subsection (b)(2)(B)
and amend it for the same reasons that it is proposing to amend subsection
(b)(2)(A). The commission proposes to adopt subsection (b)(2)(C) to incorporate
requirements contained in the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule. As a result of these proposed changes to subsection (b)(2), the commission
proposes to delete existing subsection (b)(3).
Section 290.111(c)(3) is proposed to be amended to delete "Beginning January
1, 2002" to reflect that the effective date of this requirement has passed.
The commission proposes to amend subsection (c)(4) in order to facilitate
compliance with the requirements of the analogous federal Long Term 1 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule. First, the phrase "Beginning January 1, 2002"
is proposed to be deleted because the referenced date has passed. Next, the
commission proposes to relocate the current individual filter effluent monitoring
requirement for systems serving fewer than 10,000 people from existing subsection
(c)(4) to proposed subsection (c)(4)(A) and to adopt subsection (c)(4)(B)
to incorporate new individual filter effluent monitoring requirements for
these systems that become effective beginning January 1, 2005. The commission
notes that proposed subsection (c)(4)(B) contains a monitoring requirement
that differs from the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule in that it does not allow the option for systems serving fewer than 10,000
people with only two filters to install the turbidimeter and recorder on the
combined filter effluent line without installing an additional turbidimeter
on each individual filter.
As noted in the preamble discussion of Subchapter D, §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii),
the proposal to install turbidimeters on each filter at plants serving fewer
than 10,000 people with only two filters provides increased public health
protection and affords the public water system certain operational advantages
and cost savings. In addition, the proposal reduces the implementation cost
for the state by creating uniform monitoring and reporting requirements for
all surface water treatment plants, regardless of the population served or
the date of construction. Currently, §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii) - (iv) requires
a filter to be equipped with an on-line turbidimeter if that filter: 1) has
a capacity of at least 1.0 million gallons per day; 2) is located at a system
that serves at least 10,000 people; or 3) was constructed after October 1,
2000. The federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule requires
an on-line turbidimeter to be installed on each filter that is located at
a system which serves fewer than 10,000 people and has only one filter or
has more than two filters. The federal rule also implies that a system with
only two filters must continue to monitor the performance of individual filters
if its two filters already have individual on-line turbidimeters.
Proposed subsection (c)(4)(B) offers numerous public health and operational
benefits and reduces the complexity of the state implementation program. The
commission finds that the proposal's benefits would outweigh the initial cost
of approximately $1,200 to $3,600 for an additional turbidimeter at plants
that have only two filters and currently engage in combined filter effluent
monitoring without conducting individual filter effluent monitoring.
The commission proposes to amend §290.111(c)(5) to reflect that the
effective date of the rule has passed, correct a typographical error in the
Texas Administrative Code, and reference the appropriate provision of proposed
subsection (b). Proposed subsection (c)(5)(A) would update the references
to reflect the proposed restructuring of subsection (b) and to specify that
the filter profile, not the Filter Profile Report, must be prepared within
seven days of an elevated individual filter effluent turbidity event. The
commission proposes to amend subsection (c)(5)(B) to reference the appropriate
provisions of subsection (b) and provide that the filter assessment is not
required until after the public water system has experienced the third of
three events with elevated individual filter effluent turbidity levels. Similarly,
the proposed amendment to subsection (c)(5)(C) would provide that the deadline
for conducting a comprehensive performance evaluation is 90 days from the
first individual filter effluent exceedance in the second of two consecutive
months rather than from the first exceedance in the first of the two consecutive
months.
The commission proposes subsection (c)(6) to require systems serving fewer
than 10,000 people to conduct certain special filter studies if individual
filter effluent turbidity levels exceed 1.0 Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU).
The proposed provision is analogous to requirements contained in the federal
Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.
Proposed subsection (c)(6)(A) requires systems serving fewer than 10,000
people to identify the cause of each individual filter effluent turbidity
exceedance or to prepare a filter profile. This proposal is analogous to the
rule that the commission adopted in 2000 for systems serving at least 10,000
people and will ensure that the filter malfunctions at smaller plants will
receive the same level of scrutiny as filter malfunctions at larger plants.
Since filter malfunctions pose the same short-term health risk regardless
of population served, the proposal assures that all of the citizens of Texas
will receive the same level of protection against waterborne disease outbreaks.
This regulatory approach is even more important at smaller plants because
these plants typically have fewer filters and, under these conditions, a single
malfunctioning filter has a greater impact on the quality of the water consumed
by the public. Nevertheless, the commission is aware that the federal Long
Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule does not require systems serving
fewer than 10,000 people to produce a filter profile even if they cannot identify
the cause of the turbidity excursion. Because, in this respect, the commission
is proposing a rule which differs from the federal rule, the commission seeks
public comment on whether it is appropriate to require small systems to conduct
the same special monitoring that larger systems must conduct.
Proposed subsection (c)(6)(B) also contains a requirement that differs
from the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. Specifically,
the commission proposes to require systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people
to conduct a filter assessment following the third of three separate individual
filter effluent turbidity events that occur within a consecutive three-month
period, even if all three events occur within a single month. The analogous
federal provision requires the system to complete the assessment only after
three consecutive months of exceedances regardless of how many times a filter
exceeded performance criteria during the period. The commission finds that
elevated individual filter effluent turbidity levels pose a potential health
threat and the proposal would assure that the water system will identify the
cause of repeated turbidity excursions in a timely manner. Furthermore, the
proposal is consistent with the requirements that the commission adopted for
systems serving 10,000 people or more.
Proposed subsection (c)(6)(C) contains a requirement that varies from the
requirements of analogous provisions of the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule. The commission proposes that each time the filtered
water turbidity level for a specific filter or any combination of individual
filters exceeds 2.0 NTU on two consecutive 15-minute readings during two consecutive
months, the public water system must participate in a third-party comprehensive
performance evaluation within 120 days of the first exceedance in the second
month. The analogous federal provision requires the system to participate
in the comprehensive performance evaluation only if the same filter has two
consecutive months of exceedances. The commission finds that, because the
comprehensive performance evaluation involves a comprehensive evaluation of
the design, operation, maintenance, and administration of an entire treatment
plant, the comprehensive performance evaluation requirement should be extended
to address the performance of multiple filters in order to enhance the level
of public health protection. Furthermore, the proposal is consistent with
the requirements that the commission adopted for systems serving 10,000 people
or more which, for the same reason, are not identical to the corresponding
federal rules.
The commission proposes to amend §290.111(d)(3) to delete the phrase
"Beginning January 1, 2002," referring to a past compliance date. The commission
also proposes to renumber subsection (d)(4) as subsection (d)(5) and adopt
new subsection (d)(4) to incorporate the individual filter effluent monitoring
requirements for systems serving fewer than 10,000 people that are scheduled
to become effective on January 1, 2005.
The commission proposes to relocate the requirements currently contained
in subsection (d)(4) to subsection (d)(5) and to amend the language so that
it reflects that this monitoring requirement is scheduled to expire at the
end of 2004.
The commission proposes to amend §290.111(e)(2) to reflect that the
requirement to use the new Form 0102C has now been fully implemented. Proposed
subsection (e)(3) - (5) would incorporate the additional reporting requirements
imposed by the proposed revisions to the special individual filter effluent
monitoring requirements for systems serving fewer than 10,000 people.
The commission proposes to amend §290.111(f) to eliminate unnecessary
provisions and to incorporate an additional compliance determination for systems
that serve fewer than 10,000 people. These proposed revisions are needed to
maintain consistency with the requirements of the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule. Subsection (f)(3) is proposed to apply to all
public water systems that are subject to the requirements of §290.111.
The commission proposes to delete the existing requirement contained in subsection
(f)(5) because the subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii) treatment technique it references
has been replaced with a treatment technique currently contained in subsection
(b)(2)(A)(ii) and because existing subsection (f)(5) has been ineffective
since December 31, 2001. Under the proposal, existing subsection (f)(5) and
(6) would be amended and merged into a single paragraph numbered (f)(5). This
proposed amendment is the result of proposed amendments to existing subsection
(b)(1). As a result of this proposed amendment, subsection (f)(6) and (7)
is proposed as renumbered subsection (f)(5) and (6), respectively. Also, the
commission proposes to eliminate the references to a past compliance date
in the amended paragraphs and to incorporate into proposed subsection (f)(6)
the requirement for systems serving fewer than 10,000 people to correct the
performance-limiting factors identified during a comprehensive performance
evaluation.
The proposed amendment to §290.111(g)(2) would delete the reference
to subsection (b)(2) because it would be inapplicable following the amendment
to §290.111(b).
Section 290.117, Regulation of Lead and Cooper
The commission proposes to amend §290.117 to adhere to federal requirements,
as noted by EPA Region 6 after reviewing the commission's Lead and Copper
Program, and to make technical corrections.
Section 290.117(e)(1) and (5) is proposed to be amended to provide that
a public water system is eligible to receive reduced monitoring if the results
of 12 consecutive months of sampling show that the 90th percentile level of
lead or copper does not exceed the appropriate action level, rather than simply
any two six-month rounds, in compliance with federal requirements.
Section 290.117(g)(2) is proposed to be amended to incorporate the provision
of the federal Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions that allows waivers for
lead and copper tap sampling to be extended to all public water systems that
serve 3,300 or fewer people.
Section 290.117(h)(1)(H) - (J) and (N) is proposed to be amended by deleting
the word "large," thus ensuring that these provisions would be applied to
all water systems regardless of size. The need for this change was noted by
EPA Region 6 staff through review of the commission's draft federal Lead and
Copper Program.
Section 290.117(h)(2)(A) is proposed to be amended to require source water
monitoring every six-month period in which a public water system has a lead
or copper exceedance, in conformance with federal rules. The commission proposes
to delete the sentence "This requirement can be satisfied by normally scheduled
inorganic chemical sampling in compliance with the monitoring under the SDWA."
The commission also proposes to delete the language stating that if acceptable
entry point water data is not available for large systems, the water lead
level at the entry point shall be considered zero mg/L for purposes of determining
whether a corrosion control study is required because this option is not allowable
under federal rule. Additionally, subsection (h)(2)(A) is proposed to be amended
to correct the reference to §290.106.
Section 290.117(i)(2) is proposed to be amended to strike the size limitations
for public education, because all water systems are subject to the requirements
of paragraph (2). Section 290.117(i)(2)(G) is proposed to be amended to conform
to the federal requirement that systems provide public education materials
to their customers once every six months for as long as the system is in exceedance
status.
Section 290.117(j)(1) is proposed to be amended to provide that a system
required to perform water quality parameter monitoring is out of compliance
with its approved water quality parameter ranges if its water quality parameter
values fall outside its approved water quality parameter range for any nine
days, as opposed to nine consecutive days, in conformance with federal requirements.
Section 290.117(j)(3) is proposed to be amended to apply the definition
of systems deemed to have optimized corrosion control to all systems regardless
of size, as noted by EPA Region 6 staff after review of the commission's Lead
and Copper Program. Additionally, this section is proposed to be amended to
incorporate the federal requirement that small and medium-sized systems perform
corrosion control studies within 12 months of a confirmed lead or copper exceedance.
Section 290.117(j)(4)(H) is proposed to be amended to ensure that systems
address the copper action level as well as the lead action level through approval
of a corrosion control study. The proposed amendment deletes the phrases "installed
corrosion control treatment" and "installing corrosion control treatment"
and replacing them with "received approval for a corrosion control study"
and "receiving approval for a corrosion control study."
The commission proposes to delete the language in existing §290.117(k)(1)
- (5) and insert language which would adopt the federal requirements for lead
service line replacement by reference, which in this case provides better
clarity for the regulated community.
Section 290.121, Monitoring Plans
The commission proposes amended §290.121(b)(1)(A) to incorporate reporting
and recordkeeping mandates contained in the federal Filter Backwash Recycling
Rule. This proposed revision would require the plant schematic to show the
origins of recycled streams and information regarding pretreatment and reintroduction
of the recycled streams.
Section 290.122, Public Notification
The commission proposes to amend §290.122 to incorporate changes needed
to ensure consistency with federal rules, including needed revisions identified
during review of the commission's Lead and Copper Program. Section 290.122(a)
is proposed to be amended to reflect that there is also an acute violation
notice required for any maximum residual disinfectant level violation. Section
290.122(a)(2)(A) is proposed to be amended to correct an erroneous reference
to a provision in 290.46. Section 290.122(a)(2)(C) and (D) and (3)(C) is proposed
to be amended by replacing the word "hand" with the word "direct" in order
to incorporate the provision of the federal Public Notification Rule that
allows mail delivery or hand delivery for acute violations. Proposed §290.122(a)(2)(E)
would incorporate a new federal Public Notification Rule requirement. Proposed
subparagraph (E) would require that, if public notice is provided by posting,
the posting must remain in place for as long as the violation exists or seven
days, whichever is longer. Section 290.122(a)(3)(C), in addition to the change
to "hand" delivery, is proposed to be amended to conform to the federal requirement
that posted notices must remain in place for at least seven days.
Proposed §290.122(b)(2)(A) would incorporate the provision of the
federal Public Notification Rule that requires the initial notice for a non-acute
violation to be performed by mail or hand delivery, and that requires systems
to make a good faith effort to notify customers who might not be reached by
mail or hand delivery. Proposed §290.122(b)(2)(C) would incorporate the
federal requirement that public notices issued by posting must remain in place
for at least seven days. Section 290.122(b)(3)(A) is proposed to be deleted
because of redundancy. This provision inappropriately duplicated the provision
for initial public notice contained in §290.122(b)(2). Section 290.122(b)(3)(B)
and (C) is proposed to be relettered after deleting §290.122(b)(3)(A),
with a change of the word "hand" to the word "direct." Section 290.122(b)(3)(C),
in addition to being relettered as §290.122(b)(3)(B), is proposed to
be amended by incorporating the federal seven-day public notice requirement,
and to incorporate the provision of the federal Public Notification Rule that
requires the initial notice for a non-acute violation to be performed by direct
(i.e., mail or hand delivery) for noncommunity systems.
The commission proposes amended §290.122(c) to more accurately reflect
the required monitoring requirements by replacing the phrase "these standards"
with "this chapter." This amendment is needed because the monitoring requirements
for the federal Filter Backwash Recycling Rule are in §290.46(f)(3)(C)(iii)
of Subchapter D rather than in "these standards." Proposed §290.122(c)(1)(A)
would define the acronym designation "SCL" as "secondary constituent levels."
Proposed §290.122(c)(1)(E) would incorporate provisions of the federal
Public Notification Rule and Filter Backwash Recycling Rule.
Section 290.122(c)(2)(A) and (B) is proposed to be amended by replacing
the word "hand" with the word "direct" in order to incorporate the provision
of the federal Public Notification Rule that allows mail delivery or hand
delivery for monitoring and reporting violations. Proposed §290.122(c)(2)(C)
would incorporate the federal seven-day public notice requirement. Section
290.122(c)(3)(B) is also proposed to be amended to incorporate provisions
of the federal Public Notification Rule. The word "hand" is replaced with
the word "direct" in order to allow mail delivery or hand delivery for monitoring
and reporting violations, and to require that postings remain in place for
a minimum of seven days.
Section 290.122(d)(3) is proposed to be modified to correct the reference
for notifications that require mandatory public health language. Subsection
(d)(3)(A) is proposed to be amended to correct the reference to the federal
mandatory health effects language for MCLs and treatment technique requirements.
The commission proposes to reletter subsection (d)(3)(B) as subsection (d)(3)(C)
and to proposed new subsection (d)(3)(B), which would reference the federal
mandatory health effects language for secondary fluoride violations.
Section 290.122(d)(9) is proposed to incorporate a reference to the federal
notification requirements for systems that have received a variance or exemption
to one or more of the MCLs or treatment technique requirements. Section 290.122(g)
is proposed to incorporate the provision of the federal Public Notification
Rule that systems provide notification of violations to their customers.
Section 290.122(h) is proposed to include the provision in the federal
Public Notification Rule allowing the executive director to notify the public
directly of a violation as needed, without relaxing the requirement that the
system is responsible for notification.
Finally, the proposal also contains typographical error corrections and
administrative revisions to conform to Texas Register requirements.
FISCAL NOTE
Jan Washburn, Program Specialist in the Federal Grants Management and Strategic
Planning Section, has determined that for the first five-year period the proposed
amendments are in effect, there will be significant fiscal implications for
public drinking water systems owned by units of local government and businesses,
as well as for consumers, as a result of implementing the proposed amendments.
Fiscal implications are also expected for units of state government, specifically
the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, as a result of implementing the proposed
amendments. No significant fiscal implications are anticipated for the agency
as a result of enforcement of or compliance with the proposed amendments.
The proposed amendments would adopt certain federal drinking water regulations
which will ensure delivery of good quality drinking water by public water
systems. In some respects, the state version of the federal regulations would
differ slightly, in an effort to further protect public health. In addition
to the federal requirements, the proposal would include other state-oriented
amendments for protection of public health. Finally, the proposed amendments
would help ensure consistent application of agency practices.
The federal rules that are the basis for this rule package are the Lead
and Copper Rule Minor Revisions, the Public Notification Rule, Filter Backwash
Recycling Rule, and the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.
The majority of costs associated with this group of rules will be borne by
the systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people. Similar federal rules for
the larger systems were adopted in 2000 and became effective in 2002, so the
associated costs for those systems have been realized. These proposed amendments
will affect virtually all public water systems. The changes to the Lead and
Copper Rule Minor Revisions and the Public Notification Rule could affect
as many as 5,380 of the 6,650 public water systems in Texas on an intermittent
basis. Several of the rules related to lead and copper control, pH meter calibration,
and supervision by certified operators will lower the operational and maintenance
costs for systems. The changes to the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule will
affect all 435 surface water treatment plants, although many of them will
experience minimal impacts.
The costs outlined in this fiscal note are primarily attributable to the
federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. The proposed amendments
would affect most surface water treatment systems and some groundwater and
purchased water systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people. It is estimated
that approximately 750,000 customers served by these systems will be affected
by these specific rules. Systems using cartridges or membranes in their treatment
process or not using filters (incomplete treatment) are not considered in
the cost projections for the turbidimeter requirements of these rules. The
term "surface water treatment plant" is intended to include groundwater under
the direct influence of surface water. There are no costs anticipated due
to the implementation of the Public Notification Rule.
The proposed amendments include various provisions that do not have an
analogous federal counterpart. These 'state' amendments address issues specific
to Texas, rather than the more general Long Term Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule. Proposed changes include those related to design of facilities, such
as physical security or fencing, air relief devices, placement of intake points
to ensure the highest quality of water and wiring requirements. Other amendments
pertain to plant operations, such as proper maintenance of the facilities,
operator certification, and recordkeeping. Many amendments are existing requirements
and the language is only being relocated. The amendments and their pertinent
changes to either design or operating practices were assessed. Any significant
costs are detailed in this fiscal note and for all other changes to current
practice or design, there is no significant fiscal impact to the state, local
governments, individuals, or businesses.
COSTS SUMMARY
The financial implications of the proposed amendments will be presented
in two formats. First, total costs for equipment and operating expenses will
be arranged by corresponding rule: the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule and the corresponding amendments proposed by the state
to implement this rule; the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule; and the Lead and
Copper Rule Minor Revisions. Second, these costs will be presented by affected
class -- local and state governments, small and micro-businesses, and individuals
and water supply corporations.
Estimates for the cost of implementing the proposed amendments are based
on information the commission has compiled pertinent to the operations of
these water systems. Costs estimated for each affected class -- small and
micro-businesses, water supply corporations, and state and local governments
are average costs of that class. The estimated costs and cost savings are
per system costs/savings. Actual costs per system are dependent upon the system's
individual design, which can vary greatly between systems. These estimates
will be expressed in terms of capital or one-time and operational or ongoing
costs. Capital or one-time costs occur at a specific point in time. The remaining
costs are recurring or operational costs, such as the reporting requirements,
which is the most costly part of the rules. These costs will also be allocated
between costs resulting from the implementation of a federal proposed rule
and those resulting from implementation of the state proposed version of the
rule. These costs will be referred to as "state" costs, while the portions
of the rule implementing the strictly federal portions will be referred to
as "federal." All costs are estimated for the first five years the proposed
amendments are in effect. Lastly, costs by affected class can be found in
the attached tables with those costs rounded up in the discussion of each
class.
The total statewide cost for the implementation of all three of these rules
ranges from $5 million to $8.8 million for the first five years the proposed
amendments are in effect. These costs can be broken down by rule. The cost
to surface water treatment plants to implement the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule, if implemented strictly from the federal rules,
is estimated to range from $6.5 million to $12.7 million, for the first five
years the proposed amendments are in effect. The amendments proposed by the
state should result in a cost savings to public drinking water systems ranging
from $1.3 million to $5.2 million for the first five years the proposed amendments
are in effect. Total net cost for implementation of the federal Long Term
1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, considering the requirements of both
the federal and state proposed rules, ranges from $5.2 million to $7.5 million.
The most expensive portion of these rules is the operational or ongoing cost.
These costs cost total from $4.1 million to $6.2 million, for the first five
years the proposed amendments are in effect.
To implement the federal Filter Backwash Recycling Rule, surface water
treatment plants will need to expend from $175,000 to $1.6 million the first
five years the proposed amendments are in effect. The Lead and Copper Rule
Minor Revisions should provide a cost savings of approximately $330,000 for
the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect for systems serving
fewer than 3,300 persons.
Costs by affected class to implement all rules are as follows: costs to
local governments range from $3.9 million to $6.9 million; cost for state
government (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department) is a cost of from $37,000
to a savings of $136,000; the fiscal impact to water supply corporations will
range from $503,000 to $569,000; investor-owned utilities will incur costs
from $950,000 to $1.7 million.
LONG TERM 1 ENHANCED SURFACE WATER TREATMENT RULE
Capital and one-time costs
Turbidimeters and Recorders
The proposed amendments require the installation of an on-line turbidimeter
and data recorder on each filter. This proposal differs from the analogous
federal requirement, which allows public drinking water systems to install
the equipment on the combined filter effluent line if they have only two filters
without installing an additional turbidimeter and recorder on each individual
filter effluent line. Therefore, these costs are divided into state costs,
those turbidimeters that are required as a result of the state proposed rules,
and federal costs, those turbidimeters that are required by the federal proposed
rules. Turbidimeters provide continuous on-line measurement and determination
of turbidity, by measuring solids in the water. Data recorders would also
be required to ensure consistent recording of readings, as mandated by federal
rule.
The cost to purchase and install one turbidimeter is estimated to range
from $1,700 to $2,200 for the first filter and $1,200 to $1,400 for each additional
filter. With proper operation and maintenance, these devices should last at
least ten years. Annual calibration and maintenance cost for these devices
is estimated at $50 per year for each filter. The cost of a data recorder/supervisory
control and data acquisition will range from $500 to $1,000 for the equipment
and installation. The total combined capital cost is $2,200 to $3,200 for
the first filter and $1,700 to $2,400 for each additional filter. The recorders
are considered a federal requirement. A system's total capital outlay will
depend upon the specific amount of equipment needed. The total cost across
all systems for turbidimeters and data recorders ranges from $1 million to
$1.3 million. Included in this amount, the state proposed rule accounts from
$194,000 to $241,000 of additional equipment.
Operational Costs
Additional Data and Reporting
The proposed amendments require additional data reporting. To measure the
effectiveness of a plant's filters, readings are taken at prescribed intervals
during the day. Both the federal regulations and the proposed state rules
alter those reporting requirements. Additionally, the rules make a distinction
in the frequency of monitoring based on the design of the plants. The proposed
federal rule requirement would establish a 15-minute monitoring interval,
which is a change from the current four- hour interval sampling for combined
filter effluent (two filters with one turbidimeter) and daily sampling for
individual filter effluent (one filter with one turbidimeter) monitoring.
This increase in the frequency of sampling means that most systems will report
96 readings per day per filter rather than the one reading per filter for
most systems. The federal rules will also require the few systems with only
two filters and no individual filter turbidimeters, to monitor the water produced
by the two filters (blended water) every 15 minutes instead of once every
four hours or, for very small systems, the current once per day. The proposed
state rule would avoid the 15-minute monitoring requirement for blended water
by requiring all filters to be equipped with individual turbidimeters. Therefore,
the federal rule requires filters with individual turbidimeters and those
with combined (two) filters monitored by one turbidimeter to have readings
taken every 15 minutes. The additional monitoring required by both the existing
federal rule and the proposed state rule result in increased operating costs.
At 15-minute intervals, 2,976 (31 days) readings per filter per month are
produced and then aggregated into a monthly report. This is a change from
the current rule requiring each filter to be sampled only once per day and
the combined filter effluent (two filters with one turbidimeter) to be sampled
every four hours, or for very small systems, once per day.
The benefit to the systems for requiring the additional turbidimeters is
potentially reduced data manipulation in preparing the monthly reports. On
combined filter effluent (two filters, one turbidimeter), data must be analyzed
to determine compliance with the federal rule, requiring 95% of these 2,976
readings to be below 0.3 NTU. While the proposed state rule will require systems
with one turbidimeter per filter, to investigate each individual filter exceedance
above 1.0 NTU, they can calculate the plants' overall compliance with the
maximum allowed turbidity limit for combined filter effluent by using the
four-hour combined filter effluent readings, or six per day.
The federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule requires
systems serving fewer than 10,000 people to routinely report on the filters,
as well as conduct special filter studies if individual filter effluent turbidity
levels exceed prescribed levels. The routine reporting requirement is the
monthly filter report mentioned above. Additionally, there are reports that
are required when specific turbidity levels are exceeded. These reports are
a filter profile report, filter assessment, and corrective action plan. If
problems persist, a comprehensive performance evaluation must be undertaken.
As a result of the proposed amendments, the number of exceedance reports will
likely increase as the threshold for acceptable turbidity limits effectively
decreases.
The costs for this increased work load pertinent to filter assessment reports
and corrective actions due to filter assessment reports are apportioned to
either the state or federal requirements. These costs are based on the assumption
that all of the filter profiles and two-thirds of the assessment reports were
attributable to the state provisions versus one-third of the filter assessments
attributable to federal provisions. If systems identify the cause of each
individual filter effluent turbidity exceedance, no filter profile is required.
Federal rules do not require a filter profile when the plant does not know
what caused the event. For filter assessments, the proposed amendments require
systems to conduct a filter assessment following the third of three separate
individual filter effluent turbidity events occurring within a consecutive
three-month period, even if all three events occur within the same month.
The analogous federal provision requires the system to complete the assessment
only after three consecutive months of exceedances, regardless of how many
times a filter exceeded performance criteria during the period (three months).
Water system staff hours involved in completing the routine reports, the
largest portion of the reporting requirements, were estimated to range from
20 to 30 minutes per day, at a Class C operator salary range. For the series
of exceedance reports, the filter profile reports are anticipated to take
from one-half hour to four hours to prepare. The filter assessments are estimated
to take from 16 to 20 hours to complete and the corrective actions are anticipated
to take from 24 to 120 hours to complete. The comprehensive performance evaluation,
the most complex of these actions, is assumed to take from 500 to 1,200 hours.
The total reporting cost for all four groups of systems is estimated to range
from $5.7 million to $11.7 million for the first five years the proposed amendments
are in effect.
The proposed amendments also include minor operational requirements. First,
groundwater systems will need to calibrate the well meters they have been
required to have, once every three years. Additionally, for those systems
that hire part-time operators, they must document the activities of those
operators for 16 hours per month. If the operator works more than the 16 hours,
those activities need not be documented. This documentation is estimated to
take 15 minutes per week, and it is estimated 122 systems will choose to use
part time operators. Previously, the rules did not allow systems to hire part
time operators. The total cost of these two operational requirements ranges
from $200,000 to $280,000 for all systems over the first five years the rules
are in effect.
Savings to Offset Costs
Change in Operator Certification Requirements
The proposed amendments allow a system to staff plants with a Class C operator
rather than a Class B operator, provided the Class C operator is under the
supervision of a Class B operator, who may be a contractor. The contractor
must be at the plant four hours within every 14-day period. This provision
will provide regulatory relief to an estimated 87 systems. The salary differential
between a Class B and a Class C operator is estimated to range from $4.00
to $8.00 per hour, potentially providing significant cost savings to any system
that chooses to take advantage of this option. It is estimated that the cost
savings could range from $1.6 million to $5.3 million over the first five
years the proposed amendments are in effect. These offsets to cost are considered
benefits from implementing the proposed amendments.
On-line pH Meter Calibration
The proposed amendments also provide regulatory relief by taking advantage
of the technological efficiencies resulting from the use of on-line pH meters.
Currently, bench top pH meters and on-line pH meters must be calibrated daily.
Recent improvements in the design of most on-line pH meter electrodes have
resulted in increased reliability and do not need to be calibrated as often.
The proposed amendments lessen the calibration requirements for those on-line
meters to monthly, rather than daily, saving from one-half an hour to one
and one-half hours per day of water utility staff time. A system may have
up to seven meters; however, these cost savings are projected on a plant having
an average of three. It was estimated that for the 20 systems currently using
on-line pH meters, their total savings will range from $328,000 to $1,173,000
over the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect.
FILTER BACKWASH RECYCLING RULE
One - time Costs
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule and the Recycling Point
The proposed amendments incorporate design and operational mandates contained
in the federal Filter Backwash Recycling Rule. Surface water plants can recycle
the water backwashed while cleaning filters through the treatment plant or
simply discharge the wastewater. This is not as efficient as recycling the
water. Not recycling the water requires require the system to purchase more
water to meet its customers' needs, and discharging the water would require
the system to obtain a wastewater permit. This rule ensures that the contaminant
removal requirement established in the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule is not jeopardized by recycling practices. The proposed
amendments would require the liquids from sludge settling lagoons, spent backwash
water tanks, dewatering facilities, and similar facilities to be returned
to the raw waterline upstream of the raw water sample tap and coagulant feed
point. These liquids contain a high level of contamination and need to be
recycled through the treatment process. The federal Filter Backwash Recycling
Rule does not require that liquids be recycled starting at a point prior to
the raw water sampling tap and coagulant feed point, but requires the blended
recycled liquids to pass through all of the major unit processes at the facility.
An increase in the quality of water treatment and in facility operation
efficiency is expected by returning the untreated water to the raw waterline
upstream of the sample tap and coagulant feed point. An alternative to the
proposed practice would be to grab samples at the sampling tap to determine
the appropriate chemical dose needed to treat the contaminated water. This
alternative practice may be a burden to treatment facilities, as well as a
potential health risk as chemical doses may be insufficient for treating the
higher contamination levels found in liquids from sludge settling lagoons,
spent backwash water tanks, dewatering facilities, and similar facilities.
The proposed amendments may also require flow equalization basins, variable
speed pumps, or other facilities to be provided to prevent hydraulic surges
from occurring during the recycling process. These facilities are needed to
minimize the impact of recycling streams on treatment facility performance
and are required by federal rule.
The proposed amendments may cause a few surface water treatment facilities
to change the location to which they route liquids from sludge settling lagoons,
spent backwash water tanks, and dewatering facilities. Costs related to this
portion of the proposed amendments could range from simply digging a trench
and laying a six-inch pipeline to changing the location of some processes
and laying a 36-inch line.
It is estimated that three of the 435 surface water treatment systems in
the state, may have to relocate their recycling points, at a per incident
cost ranging from $1,000 to $200,000. The proposed amendments allow the executive
director to approve an alternate recycling point, should a system determine
that physically changing the recycling point is cost-prohibitive. Potentially
35 systems may apply for this waiver. Systems may hire a consultant or prepare
the request for the executive director to approve an alternate recycling point.
These costs have been estimated to range from $384 to $2,304 per system. For
these assumptions, costs are calculated using the salary for a Class B operator
documenting the recycling process, taking from 24 hours to 96 hours to prepare
the request.
Ongoing Costs
There are also additional federal reporting requirements pertinent to recycling,
which entails preparation of an annual report. These costs are a per system
cost and are shown as federal costs.
LEAD AND COPPER RULE MINOR REVISIONS
Reduced Monitoring for Lead and Copper cost savings
The implementation of this rule will only result in a cost savings to approximately
1,500 small systems; no additional costs are anticipated. The proposed amendments
are expected to reduce the frequency of sampling for lead and copper to once
every nine years for water systems in the Lead and Copper Monitoring Program
serving less than 3,300 people, if the water system is shown to consistently
not be in violation of the contaminant levels. The provisions require the
results of two consecutive tap sampling rounds to show that the 90th percentile
level of lead or copper does not exceed the appropriate action level.
It is estimated that 1,507 small public water systems (defined as serving
less than 3,300 people) will be impacted by the proposed amendments, if they
qualify for reduced monitoring. The proposed change in monitoring frequency
is a change from the past ten years of rigorous sampling. Of these, it is
further estimated that 512 systems are owned or operated by units of local
government and 995 are operated by businesses.
Estimated costs include the cost of sampling and water system labor costs.
System labor costs are approximately $30 per sample and the laboratory cost
is currently $22 per sample. The savings resulting from increased eligibility
for reduced monitoring under the Lead and Copper Monitoring Program will be
$111,020 over a five-year period for local governments and $215,540 for systems
owned by small businesses and water supply corporations. These are total estimated
costs for all 1,507 eligible systems. Systems affected by the Long Term 1
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and Filter Backwash Recycling Rule may
or may not be included in the group affected by the Lead and Copper Rule Minor
Revisions. The estimated savings to local governments, investor owned or water
supply corporations is included on their respective tables.
PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS
Ms. Washburn also determined that for each year of the first five years
the proposed amendments are in effect, the public benefit anticipated from
the enforcement of and compliance with the proposed amendments will be a reduced
risk of outbreaks of waterborne disease. Significant fiscal implications are
also anticipated for businesses and retail public water utilities as well
as consumers as a result of implementing the proposed amendments. It is anticipated
that any costs to investor-owned utilities, water supply corporations, and
local governments to implement the proposed amendments could be passed on
to consumers.
In 1990, EPA cited drinking water contaminants as one of the important
environmental risks and indicated that disease-causing microbial contaminants
are probably the greatest remaining health risk management challenge for drinking
water suppliers. Implementation of the proposed amendments is expected to
decrease the risk of waterborne disease caused by the parasite
Cryptosporidium parvum
.
Cryptosporidium
is
a protozoan parasite widely found in surface water supplies as the result
of contamination. The ingestion of this microorganism can cause gastrointestinal
illness, such as diarrhea, vomiting, stomach cramps, loss of appetite, and
a mild fever.
Cryptosporidium
is recognized
as one of the most common causes of waterborne disease and is not easily killed
by commonly-used disinfectants. The microorganism is relatively unaffected
by chlorine and chloramines in the concentrations that are used for drinking
water treatments.
Cryptosporidium
can only
be removed from water via a filtration process. The proposed amendments would
establish individual filter monitoring to minimize contaminant passthrough
and to support improved filter performance.
The proposed amendments include provisions that are consistent with federal
requirements found in the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule, which establishes an MCL of zero for
Cryptosporidium.
The proposed amendments also establish a minimum treatment technique
requirement. The proposed amendments require all public water systems, regardless
of size, to meet strengthened filter effluent turbidity limits. Implementation
of the proposed amendments will facilitate more reliable treatment of public
drinking water as well as quicker detection of equipment failure due to individual
filter effluent monitoring. This equipment will substantially increase the
ability of water treatment systems to respond to increases in turbidity, and
thus more quickly identify microorganisms that may cause disease.
Potential costs that a system could incur after a turbidity exceedance
might be similar to the experience of the Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District
in 1998, when a severe storm impacted its raw water supply. The result was
a
Cryptosporidiosis
outbreak. While this example
is not the same as water treatment under normal circumstances, it does illustrate
the impact of turbidity exceedance. The wells that the municipal utility district
was using are still out of service, causing the municipal utility district
to purchase water from the city of Round Rock at a cost of $.93/1,000 gallons
versus the $.09/1,000 gallons it would cost to produce water from its own
wells. The cost of the exceedances equates to approximately $320,000/year
in additional costs for that municipal utility district.
It is estimated that the public benefit of improved removal of
Cryptosporidium
, thereby reducing the incidence of
Cryptosporidiosis
, could save the public up to $1.3 million as a result
of disease avoidance. According to the Texas Department of Health, over the
last ten years, the number of reported
Cryptosporidiosis
cases where the individual sought medical attention has averaged 271
per year. This includes the Brushy Creek outbreak that significantly skewed
the average. For example, the number of reported cases in the year 2000 was
95 and in the year 2002 was 35. In 1998, the Health Department recorded 702
cases in Williamson County (Brushy Creek), out of the total cases for the
year of 907.
The Texas Department of Health does not record the source of the
Costs incurred by facilities to implement the proposed requirement may
result in increased fees paid by consumers for drinking water. Any increase
in fees would depend upon how the proposed amendments affect a particular
water facility. Some systems could absorb minimal additional costs, or, if
they chose to take advantage of the operational efficiencies offered in the
proposed amendments, could see a decline in their operational costs.
COST TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
Long Term 1 Surface Water Treatment
One-time costs
Some portions of the proposed amendments will impact all small water systems
to some extent. It is estimated that approximately 167 small water systems
owned by units of local government will be impacted by the proposed amendments
that pertain to turbidimeters. The total capital expenditures required to
implement the proposed amendments for local governments range from $676,000
to $878,000 before any offsets to costs are applied. The capital costs include
state turbidimeters ($121,800 - $151,200), federal turbidimeters ($482,000
- $582,000) and data recorders ($72,500 - $145,000).
Ongoing Costs
The ongoing and maintenance costs to local governments consist of the various
filter reporting requirements and actions and the cost of calibrating the
turbidimeters, and range from $4.2 million to $8.7 million for the first five
years the proposed amendments are in effect. The bulk of these costs pertains
to the monthly filter reporting requirements. The cost to calibrate well meters
in accordance with the requirements of the proposed rule is estimated to range
from $36 to $48 per system, or a total ranging from $46,000 to $62,000 for
the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect. The estimated
cost to document part-time operator hours ranges from $70,000 to $93,000 for
the first five years the amendments are in effect.
If the local governments take advantage of all the possible operational
offsets and efficiencies the proposed amendments make available, the five-year
cost of implementing the proposed amendments is reduced to a range of $3.8
million to $5.9 million. These offsets to costs (including Lead and Copper
Rule Minor Revisions) pertain to the state rules allowing systems to hire
Class C operators. The offset to costs for local governments from the changes
to pH meter calibration requirements ranges from $131,000 to $470,000.
FILTER BACKWASH RECYCLING RULE
One-time costs
It is estimated that the proposed amendments would result in two local
government systems relocating their recycling points, at a cost of $2,000
to $400,000. It is estimated that 25 systems will hire a consultant or prepare
a request for the executive director to approve an alternate recycling point
at a total cost of $11,600 to $458,000. Both of these costs are allocated
one-half to the state and the other half to the federal rules as there was
equal likelihood that either rule would be the impetus for the change.
Operational Costs
Operational costs consist of the monthly recycling report ranging from
$100,000 to $598,000.
Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions
The cost savings to local governments due to the proposed amendments are
expected to be $36,000 for the first five years that the proposed amendments
are in effect.
Figure 1: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble
COSTS TO STATE GOVERNMENT
Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
No significant fiscal implications are anticipated for the commission as
a result of administration or enforcement of the proposed amendments as there
are likely to be no new activities within the agency as a result of the proposal.
However, one area of state government that will be affected by the proposed
amendments is the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, having 11 surface water
treatment facilities.
One-time costs
Eight of these facilities will have to install additional turbidimeters
and data recorders. It is estimated that ten turbidimeters will be required
by state rules while 11 will result from the federal rules. The capital cost
for these systems consist of turbidimeters and data recorders, with these
costs ranging from $33,000 to $43,000.
Ongoing costs
The ongoing and maintenance costs to state government consist of the various
filter reporting requirements and actions and the cost of calibrating the
turbidimeters, and range from $189,000 to $395,000 for the first five years
the proposed amendments are in effect. The bulk of these costs pertains to
the monthly filter reporting requirements. The cost to calibrate well meters
is estimated to range from $3,000 to $4,000. The estimated cost to document
part-time operator hours ranges from $900 to $1,200 for the first five years
the proposed amendments are in effect.
If the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department takes advantage of the operational
offsets and efficiencies the proposed amendments make available, the cost
to implement the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
ranges from a savings of $180,000 to a cost of $30,000. This calculation is
unique in that the cost savings occurs at the higher end of the estimated
costs. The savings at the high end of the range is attributable to the greater
salary differential between the Class B and Class C operator used to estimate
the cost savings for the upper range. The high range yielded a large enough
cost savings to offset the capital costs for state government. The offsets
to costs are attributable only to the state rules allowing systems to hire
Class C operators.
Figure 2: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble
FILTER BACKWASH RECYCLING RULE
One-time costs
One-time estimated costs to state government for implementing the federal
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule range from $384 to $2,304. It is estimated
that the proposed amendments would result in no systems relocating their recycling
points. However, it is estimated that one system will request the commission
to approve an alternate recycling point at a cost from $400 to $2,000. These
costs are allocated one-half to the state and the other half to the federal
rules as there is equal likelihood that either rule would be the impetus for
the change.
Ongoing Costs
Operational costs for state government consist of the monthly recycling
report ranging from $7,000 to $41,000.
Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions
There is no allowance for reduction of lead and copper monitoring attributed
to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. These systems are currently exempt
from these monitoring requirements as they are non-transient, non-community
systems.
COSTS TO WATER SUPPLY CORPORATIONS
Long Term 1 Surface Water Treatment Rule
One-time costs
Water supply corporations are included in this class, and not businesses
as they are non-profit organizations. The capital costs for these systems
include state turbidimeters ($29,000 to $36,000) and federal turbidimeters
($88,200 - $107,000) and data recorders ($13,500 - $27,000), which are considered
federal.
Ongoing costs
The ongoing and maintenance costs of water supply corporations consist
of the various filter reporting requirements and actions and the cost of calibrating
the turbidimeters. They range from $715,000 to $1.5 million for the first
five years the proposed amendments are in effect. The bulk of these costs
pertains to the monthly filter reporting requirements. The cost to calibrate
well meters is estimated to range from $19,000 to $25,000. The estimated cost
to document part-time operator hours ranges from $21,000 to $28,000 for the
first five years the proposed amendments are in effect.
If the water supply corporations take advantage of all the possible operational
offsets and efficiencies the proposed amendments make available, the five-year
cost to these systems to implement the federal Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule will range from a cost of $487,000 to $436,000. The lower
cost at the high end of the range is attributable to the higher salary differential
between the Class B and Class C operators used to estimate the cost savings
for the upper range. The high range yielded a large enough cost savings to
reduce the total costs to the water supply corporations. These offsets to
costs pertain to the state rules allowing systems to hire Class C operators,
the pH meter offsets, and the Lead and Copper Monitoring Program offset.
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule
One-time costs
It is anticipated that no system will relocate its recycling point and
five systems will seek approval for an alternate recycling point. These costs
range from $1,900 to $12,000 and are considered both state and federal costs.
Figure 3: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble
Ongoing costs
Operational costs consist of the monthly recycling report ranging from
$21,000 to $139,000.
Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions
The cost savings due to the proposed amendments is expected to be $7,000
for the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect.
SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT
Adverse fiscal implications are anticipated for small or micro-businesses
as a result of implementation of the proposed amendments. Small and micro-businesses
affected by the proposed amendments would be those public drinking water systems
privately formed for the purpose of making a profit and owned by investors.
The commission does not keep data on the number of employees that water utilities
employ. Therefore, it was assumed that all 32 investor-owned/private utilities
were either small or micro-businesses.
Long Term 1 Surface Water Treatment Rule
One-time costs
The capital and one-time costs for these systems consist of turbidimeters
and data recorders. These costs range from $188,000 to $242,000.
Ongoing costs
The ongoing and maintenance costs of private/investor-owned systems consist
of the various filter reporting requirements, filter actions, and the cost
of calibrating the turbidimeters. They range from $1 million to $2.1 million
for the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect. The bulk of
these costs pertain to the monthly filter reporting requirements. The cost
to calibrate well meters is estimated to range from $46,900 to $63,000. The
estimated cost to document part-time operator hours ranges from $2,000 to
$2,500 for the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect.
If the investor-owned utilities take advantage of all the possible operational
offsets and efficiencies the proposed amendments make available, the five-year
cost to these systems ranges from $923,000 to $1.3 million. These offsets
to costs pertain to the state rules allowing systems to hire Class C operators,
the pH meter offset, and the Lead and Copper Monitoring Program offset.
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule
One-time costs
It is anticipated that one system will relocate its recycling point at
a per system cost of $1,000 to $200,000 and four systems will seek approval
for an alternate recycling point, at a per system cost of $384 to $2,304.
These total costs range from $3,000 to $209,000 and are considered both state
and federal costs.
Ongoing costs
Operational costs for investor owned systems consist of the monthly recycling
report ranging from $30,000 to $180,000.
Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions
The cost savings due to these amendments are expected to be $9,000 for
the first five years the proposed amendments are in effect.
Figure 4: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble
LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT
The commission has reviewed this proposed rulemaking and determined that
a local employment impact statement is not required because the proposed amendments
do not adversely affect a local economy in a material way for the first five
years the proposed amendments are in effect. The proposed amendments would:
include provisions that are consistent with federal requirements; make technical
corrections to the state rules that are analogous to the federal rules; include
requirements for the laboratory areas at surface water treatment facilities;
and make minor revisions to specify several existing regulatory requirements
regarding the design and operation of public water systems. The proposed amendments
are expected to affect most surface water treatment facilities and a few groundwater
systems that need to install advanced treatment in order to comply with an
MCL or minimum treatment technique requirement.
DRAFT REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION
The commission reviewed the proposed rulemaking in light of the regulatory
analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined
that the rulemaking does not meet the definition of a "major environmental
rule" as defined in that statute. A "major environmental rule" means a rule,
the specific intent of which, is to protect the environment or reduce risks
to human health from exposure and that may adversely affect in a material
way, the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,
the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector
of the state. Although the proposed amendments to Chapter 290 are intended
in part to reduce risks to human health from unsafe drinking water in public
water systems, the proposed amendments would not adversely affect in a material
way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,
the environment, or public health and safety of the state. The proposed amendments
would protect public health by improving the standards for public drinking
water. The proposed amendments would also, while providing an alternative
approach to compliance from the federal rules, require public drinking water
systems to meet the same regulatory standards set forth in the federal rules.
Further, it is not anticipated that the cost of complying with the proposed
amendments will be significant with respect to the economy as a whole; therefore,
they will not materially affect the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, or jobs.
Furthermore, the proposed rulemaking does not meet any of the four applicability
requirements listed in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225(a). This section
only applies to a major environmental rule, the result of which is to: 1)
exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required
by state law; 2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule
is specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement of a delegation
agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative of
the federal government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt
a rule solely under the general powers of the agency instead of under a specific
state law. This rulemaking does not meet any of these four applicability requirements
because this rulemaking: 1) does not exceed any standard set by federal law
for treatment of water utilized in public water systems and is proposed to
be consistent with federal rules; 2) does not exceed the requirements of state
law under Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 341, Subchapter C; 3) does
not exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or contract between the
state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement
any state and federal program on treatment of water utilized in public water
systems, but rather is proposed to be consistent with federal rules in order
to allow the state to maintain its authority to implement the federal Safe
Drinking Water Act; and 4) is not proposed solely under the general powers
of the agency, but rather specifically under Texas Health and Safety Code, §341.031,
which allows the commission to adopt and enforce rules to implement the federal
Safe Drinking Water Act, as well as the other general powers of the agency.
TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The commission evaluated the proposed amendments to Chapter 290 and performed
a preliminary assessment of whether it constitutes takings under Texas Government
Code, Chapter 2007. The primary purpose of the proposed amendments is to:
1) require public water systems, where needed, to institute changes to the
return of recycle flows to a plant's treatment process that may otherwise
compromise microbial control in response to the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations: Filter Backwash Recycling Rule published by the EPA in
the June 8, 2001 issue of the
Federal Register
(66
FR 31086), codified in 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142; 2) improve control of
microbial pathogens, specifically the protozoan
Cryptosporidium
, in drinking water and address risk trade-offs with
disinfection byproducts in response to the National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule published by
the EPA in the January 14, 2002 issue of the
Federal
Register
(67 FR 1812), codified in 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142; and
3) technically revise state rules to enhance their consistency with minor
revisions made by the EPA to the federal National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
for Lead and Copper, also known as the federal Lead and Copper Rule Minor
Revisions, published by the EPA in the January 12, 2000 issue of the
Promulgation and enforcement of the proposed amendments would constitute
neither a statutory nor a constitutional taking of private real property.
There are no burdens imposed on private real property under this rulemaking
because the proposed amendments neither relate to, nor have any impact on
the use or enjoyment of private real property, and there would be no reduction
in value of property as a result of this rulemaking. The rulemaking requires
community water systems to comply with drinking water standards protective
of human health and the environment. Furthermore, the proposed rulemaking
would make state standards for radionuclides consistent with existing federal
standards. The proposed amendments, while providing an alternative approach
to compliance from the federal rules, require public drinking water systems
to meet the same regulatory standards in federal rules.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The commission has reviewed this rulemaking and found that the proposal
is not a rulemaking subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP)
because the rulemaking is neither identified in 31 TAC §505.11, nor will
it affect any action or authorization identified in §505.11. Therefore,
the proposal is not subject to the CMP.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARING
The commission will hold a public hearing on this proposal in Austin on
September 3, 2003 at 2:00 p.m., in Building F, Room 2210, at the commission's
central office located at 12100 Park 35 Circle. The hearing is structured
for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals
may present oral statements when called upon in order of registration. Open
discussion will not be permitted during the hearing; however, commission staff
members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes before the hearing
and will answer questions before and after the hearing.
Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other accommodation
needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact the Office of
Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment at (512) 239-4900. Requests
should be made as far in advance as possible.
SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS
Comments may be submitted to Patricia Durón, Office of Environmental
Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087
or faxed to (512) 239-4808. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m., September
8, 2003, and should reference Rule Log Number 2003-013-290-WT. For further
information, please contact Ray Austin, Policy and Regulations Division, at
(512) 239-6814.
Subchapter D. RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
30 TAC §§290.38, 290.39, 290.41 - 290.47
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
These amendments are proposed under Texas Water Code, §5.102, which
establishes the commission's general authority necessary to carry out its
jurisdiction; §5.103, which establishes the commission's general authority
to adopt rules; §5.105, which establishes the commission's authority
to set policy by rule; and Texas Health and Safety Code, §341.031, which
allows the commission to adopt rules to implement the federal Safe Drinking
Water Act, 42 United States Code, §§300f to 300j-26.
The proposed amendments implement Texas Health and Safety Code, §341.031
and §341.0315, which require public water systems to comply with commission
rules adopted to ensure the supply of safe drinking water.
§290.38.Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this chapter shall have
the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. If
a word or term used in this chapter is not contained in the following list,
its definition shall be as shown in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
§141.2
[
(1)-(16)
(No change.)
(17)
Drinking water standards--The commission rules covering
drinking water standards in Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to Drinking
Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements
for Public Water [
(18)-(20)
(No change.)
(21)
Groundwater under the direct influence of surface water--Any
water beneath the surface of the ground with:
(A)
significant occurrence of insects or other macroorganisms,
algae, or large-diameter pathogens such as
Giardia
lamblia
or
Cryptosporidium
;
[
(B)
(No change.)
(22)-(26)
(No change.)
(27)
Licensed
professional engineer
[
(28)-(29)
(No change.)
(30)
Milligrams per liter (mg/L)--
A
[
(31)-(39)
(No change.)
(40)
Plumbing ordinance--A set of rules governing plumbing
practices which is at least as stringent and comprehensive as one of the following
nationally recognized codes:
(A)
the International Plumbing Code
;
[
(B)
(No change.)
(41)-(44)
(No change.)
(45)
Public drinking water program--Agency staff designated
by the executive director to administer the Safe Drinking Water Act and state
statutes related to the regulation of public drinking water. Any report required
to be submitted in this chapter to the executive director must be submitted
to the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
[
(46)
Public health engineering practices--Requirements in
this subchapter
[
(47)-(56)
(No change.)
§290.39.General Provisions.
(a)
Authority for requirements. [
(b)
Reason for
this subchapter
[
(c)
Required actions and approvals prior to construction. A
person may not begin construction of a public drinking water supply system
unless the executive director determines the following requirements have been
satisfied and approves construction of the proposed system.
(1)
A person proposing to install a public drinking water system
within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality; or within
1/2-mile
[
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(2)-(3)
(No change.)
(d)
Submission of plans.
(1)-(2)
(No change.)
(3)
The limits of approval are as follows.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
The commission's public drinking water program does not
examine plans and specifications in regard to the structural features of design,
such as strength of concrete or adequacy of reinforcing. Only the features
covered by
this subchapter
[
(C)
The consulting engineer and/or owner must provide surveillance
adequate to assure that facilities will be constructed according to approved
plans and must notify the executive director in writing upon completion of
all work. Planning materials
shall
[
(e)
Submission of planning material. In general, the planning
material submitted shall conform to the following requirements.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
All plans and drawings submitted may be printed on any
of the various papers which give distinct lines. All prints must be clear,
legible, and assembled to facilitate review.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
The location of all abandoned or inactive wells within
1/4-mile
[
(C)-(D)
(No change.)
(3)
(No change.)
(4)
A copy
[
(5)
(No change.)
(f)
Submission of business plans. The prospective owner of
the system or the person responsible for managing and operating the system
must submit a business plan to the executive director that demonstrates that
the owner or operator of the system has available the financial, managerial,
and technical capability to ensure future operation of the system in accordance
with applicable laws and rules. The executive director may order the prospective
owner or operator to demonstrate financial assurance to operate the system
in accordance with applicable laws and rules as specified in Chapter 37, Subchapter
O of this title (relating to Financial Assurance for Public Drinking Water
Systems and Utilities), or as specified by commission rule, unless the executive
director finds that the business plan demonstrates adequate financial capability.
A business plan shall include the information and be presented in a format
prescribed by the executive director. For community water systems, the business
plan shall contain, at a minimum, the following elements:
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
description of drinking water supply systems within a
two-mile
[
(3)-(9)
(No change.)
(10)
for retail public utilities as defined by Texas Water
Code
(TWC)
, §13.002:
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(11)-(13)
(No change.)
(g)
Business plans not required. A person is not required to
file a business plan if the person:
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
is a retail public utility as defined by
TWC
[
(3)
(No change.)
(4)
is a noncommunity nontransient water system and the person
has demonstrated financial assurance under
THSC
[
(h)-(i)
(No change.)
(j)
Changes in existing systems or supplies. Public water systems
shall notify the executive director prior to making any significant change
or addition to the system's production, treatment, storage, pressure maintenance,
or distribution facilities. Public water systems shall submit plans and specifications
for the proposed changes upon request. Changes to an existing disinfection
process at a treatment plant that treats surface water or groundwater that
is under the direct influence of surface water shall not be instituted without
the prior approval of the executive director.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
The executive director shall determine whether engineering
plans and specifications will be required after reviewing the initial notification
regarding the nature and extent of the modifications.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
Unless plans and specifications are required by Chapter
293 of this title (relating to Water Districts), the executive director will
not require another state agency or a political subdivision to submit planning
material on distribution line improvements if the entity has its own internal
review staff and complies with all of the following criteria
:
(i)
the
[
(ii)
a
[
(iii)
the
[
(C)
(No change.)
(3)
(No change.)
(k)
Planning material acceptance. Planning material for improvements
to an existing system which does not meet the requirements of all sections
of
this subchapter
[
(l)
Exceptions. Requests for exceptions to one or more of
the requirements in this subchapter
[
(1)-(3)
(No change.)
(m)
(No change.)
(n)
The commission may require the owner or operator of a public
drinking water supply system that was constructed without the approval required
by
(THSC)
[
(1)
provide
[
(2)
provide
[
(A)
The amount of the financial
assurance will equal the difference between the amount of projected system
revenues and the projected cash needs for the period of time prescribed by
the executive director.
(B)
The form of the financial assurance
will be as specified in Chapter 37, Subchapter O of this title and will be
as specified by the executive director.
(C)
If the executive director relies
on rate increases or customer surcharges as the form of financial assurance,
such funds shall be deposited in an escrow account as specified in Chapter
37, Subchapter O of this title and released only with the approval of the
executive director; and
(3)
provide copies of as-built engineering drawings and
specifications for any public water system production, storage, and pressure
maintenance facility that was constructed without the prior approval of the
executive director. The as-built materials shall conform to the requirements
of subsection (e) of this section and shall identify any modifications needed
to bring the facilities into compliance with applicable commission rules.
[
§290.41.Water Sources.
(a)
Water quality. The quality of water to be supplied must
meet the quality criteria prescribed by the commission's drinking water standards
contained in Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to [
(b)
Water quantity. Sources of supply, both ground and surface,
shall have a safe yield capable of supplying the maximum daily demands of
the distribution system during extended periods of peak usage and critical
hydrologic conditions. The
pipelines
[
(c)
Groundwater sources and development.
(1)
Groundwater sources shall be located so that there will
be no danger of pollution from flooding or from insanitary surroundings, such
as privies, sewage, sewage treatment plants, livestock and animal pens, solid
waste disposal sites or underground petroleum and chemical storage tanks and
liquid transmission pipelines, or abandoned and improperly sealed wells.
(A)
No well site which is within 50 feet of a tile or concrete
sanitary sewer, sewerage appurtenance, septic tank, storm sewer, or cemetery;
or which is within 150 feet of a septic tank perforated drainfield, areas
irrigated by low dosage, low angle spray on-site sewage facilities, absorption
bed, evapotranspiration bed, improperly constructed water well
,
or
underground petroleum and chemical storage tank or liquid transmission pipeline
will be acceptable for use as a public drinking water supply. Sanitary or
storm sewers constructed of ductile iron or
polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
[
(B)
No well site shall be located within 500 feet of a sewage
treatment plant or within 300 feet of a sewage wet well, sewage pumping station
,
or a drainage ditch which contains industrial waste discharges or
the wastes from sewage treatment systems.
(C)-(D)
(No change.)
(E)
All known abandoned or inoperative wells (unused wells
that have not been plugged) within
1/4-mile
[
(F)
A sanitary control easement or sanitary control easements
covering land within 150 feet of the well, or executive director approval
for a substitute authorized by this subsection, shall be obtained.
[
(i)
The
sanitary control easement(s) secured
[
(ii)
For the purpose of
a sanitary control
[
(iii)
A copy
[
(iv)
With the approval of the executive director,
the public water system may submit any of the following as a substitute for
obtaining, recording, and submitting a copy of the recorded sanitary control
easement(s) covering land within 150 feet of the well:
[
(I)
a copy of the recorded deed
and map demonstrating that the public water system owns all real property
within 150 feet of the well;
(II)
a copy of the recorded deed
and map demonstrating that the public water system owns a portion of real
property within 150 feet of the well, and a copy of the sanitary control easement(s)
that the public water system has obtained, recorded, and submitted to the
executive director applicable to the remaining portion of real property within
150 feet of the well not owned by the public water system; or
(III)
for a political subdivision,
a copy of an ordinance or land use restriction adopted and enforced by the
political subdivision which provides an equivalent or higher level of sanitary
protection to the well as a sanitary control easement.
(v)
If the executive director approves
a sanitary control easement substitute identified in clause (iv)(I) or (iv)(II)
of this subparagraph for a public water system and the public water system
conveys the property it owns within 150 feet of the well to another person
or persons, the public water system must at that time obtain, record, and
submit to the executive director a copy of the recorded sanitary control easement(s)
applicable to the conveyed portion of the property within 150 feet of the
well, unless the executive director approves a substitute identified in clause
(iv) of this subparagraph.
(2)
The premises, materials, tools, and drilling equipment
shall be maintained so as to minimize contamination of the
groundwater
[
(A)
Water used in any drilling operation shall be of safe sanitary
quality. Water used in the mixing of drilling fluids or mud shall contain
a chlorine residual of at least 0.5
milligrams per liter (mg/L)
[
(B)-(C)
(No change.)
(3)
The construction, disinfection, protection, and testing
of a well to be used as a public water supply source must meet the following
conditions.
(A)
Before placing the well into service, a public water system
shall furnish a copy of the well completion data, which includes the following
items: the Driller's Log (geological log and material setting report); a cementing
certificate; the results of a 36-hour pump test; the results of the microbiological
and chemical analyses required by subparagraphs (F) and (G) of this paragraph;
a legible copy of the recorded deed or deeds for all real property within
150 feet of the well;
a
legible
copy of the
sanitary
control easement(s)
[
(B)
(No change.)
(C)
The space between the casing and drill hole shall be sealed
by using enough cement under pressure to completely fill and seal the annular
space between the casing and the drill hole. The well casing shall be cemented
in this manner from the top of the shallowest formation to be developed to
the earth's surface. The driller shall utilize a pressure cementation method
in accordance with the AWWA Standard for Water Wells (A100-97), Appendix C:
Section C.3 (Positive Displacement Exterior Method); Section C.4 (Interior
Method Without Plug); Section C.5 (Positive Placement, Interior Method, Drillable
Plug);
and
Section C.6 (Placement Through Float Shoe Attached to
Bottom of Casing). Cementation methods other than those listed in this subparagraph
may be used on a site-specific basis with the prior written approval of the
executive director. A cement bonding log, as well as any other documentation
deemed necessary, may be required by the executive director to assure complete
sealing of the annular space.
(D)
When a gravel packed well is constructed, all gravel shall
be of selected and graded quality and shall be thoroughly disinfected with
a 50
mg/L
[
(E)-(F)
(No change.)
(G)
A complete physical and chemical analysis of the water
produced from a new well shall be made after 36 hours of continuous pumping
at the design withdrawal rate. Shorter pump test periods can be accepted for
large capacity wells producing from areas of known groundwater production
and quality so as to prevent wasting of water. Samples must be submitted to
a certified laboratory for chemical analyses. Tentative approval may be given
on the basis of tests performed by in-plant or private laboratories
,
but final acceptance by the commission shall be on the basis of results
from the certified laboratory. Appropriate treatment shall be provided if
the analyses reveal that the water from the well fails to meet the water quality
criteria as prescribed by the drinking water standards. These criteria include
turbidity, color and threshold odor limitations, and excessive hydrogen sulfide,
carbon dioxide
,
or other constituents or minerals which make the
water undesirable or unsuited for domestic use. Additional chemical and microbiological
tests may be required after the executive director conducts a vulnerability
assessment of the well.
(H)
(No change.)
(I)
The well site shall be fine graded so that the site is
free from depressions, reverse grades
,
or areas too rough for proper
ground maintenance so as to ensure that surface water will drain away from
the well. In all cases, arrangements shall be made to convey well pump drainage,
packing gland leakage, and floor drainage away from the wellhead. Suitable
drain pipes located at the outer edge of the concrete floor shall be provided
to collect this water and prevent its ponding or collecting around the wellhead.
This
wastewater
[
(J)-(Q)
(No change.)
(4)
Pitless [
(A)
Pitless units shall be shop fabricated from the point of
connection with the well casing to the unit cap or cover, be threaded or welded
to the well casing, be of watertight construction throughout
,
and
be of materials and weight at least equivalent and compatible to the casing.
The units must have a field connection to the lateral discharge from the pitless
unit of threaded, flanged
,
or mechanical joint connection. [
(B)-(C)
(No change.)
(D)
With the exception of the fact that the well was constructed
using a pitless unit, the well must otherwise meet all of the requirements
of paragraph (3) of this subsection.
[
[
(d)
Springs and other water sources.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Before placing the spring or similar source into service,
completion data similar to that required by subsection (c)(3)(A) of this section
must be submitted to the executive director for review and approval to the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
[
(3)
Springs and similar sources shall be constructed in a manner
which will preclude the entrance of surface water and debris.
(A)
The site shall be fine graded so that it is free from depressions,
reverse grades
,
or areas too rough for proper ground maintenance
in order to ensure that surface water will drain away from the source.
(B)-(E)
(No change.)
(F)
The encasement shall be provided with a gooseneck vent
or roof ventilator which is equipped with approved screens to prevent entry
of animals, birds, insects
,
and heavy air contaminants. Screens
shall be fabricated of corrosion-resistant material and shall be 16-mesh or
finer. Screens shall be securely clamped in place with stainless or galvanized
bands or wires.
(G)
(No change.)
(4)
Springs and similar sources must be provided with the appurtenances
required by subsection
(c)(3)(L) - (Q)
[
(e)
Surface water sources and development.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Intakes shall be located and constructed in a manner which
will secure raw water of the best quality available from the source.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
Raw water intakes shall not be located within 1,000 feet
of boat launching ramps, marinas, docks
,
or floating fishing piers
which are accessible by the public.
(C)-(F)
(No change.)
(G)
Intakes shall not be located
within 500 feet of a sewage treatment plant or lands irrigated with sewage
effluent.
(3)
The raw water pump station shall be located in a well-drained
area and shall be designed to remain in operation during flood events.
[
[
[
[
[
(4)
An all weather road shall be
provided to the raw water pump station.
(5)
The raw water pump station
and all appurtenances must be installed in a lockable building that is designed
to prevent intruder access or enclosed by an intruder-resistant fence with
lockable gates.
§290.42.Water Treatment.
(a)
Capacity
and location
. [
(1)
Based on current acceptable
design standards, the total capacity of the public water system's treatment
facilities must always be greater than its anticipated maximum daily demand.
(2)
The water treatment plant and
all pumping units shall be located in well-drained areas not subject to flooding
and away from seepage areas or where the underground water table is near the
surface.
(A)
Water treatment plants shall not be located
within 500 feet of a sewage treatment plant or lands irrigated with sewage
effluent. A minimum distance of 150 feet must be maintained between any septic
tank drainfield line and any underground treatment or storage unit. Any sanitary
sewers located within 50 feet of any underground treatment or storage unit
shall be constructed of ductile iron or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe with
a minimum pressure rating of 150 pounds per square inch (psi) and have watertight
joints.
(B)
Plant site selection shall also take into consideration
the need for disposition of all plant wastes in accordance with all applicable
regulations and state statutes, including both liquid and solid waste or by-product
material from operation and/or maintenance.
(3)
Each water treatment plant
shall be located at a site that is accessible by an all-weather road.
(b)
Groundwater.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Treatment facilities shall be provided for
groundwater
[
(A)-(C)
(No change.)
(3)-(6)
(No change.)
(7)
Air release devices shall be
installed in such a manner as to preclude the possibility of submergence or
possible entrance of contaminants. In this respect, all openings to the atmosphere
shall be covered with 16-mesh or finer corrosion-resistant screening material
or an equivalent acceptable to the executive director.
(c)
Springs and other water sources.
(1)
Water obtained from springs, infiltration galleries, wells
in fissured areas, wells in carbonate rock formations, or wells that do not
penetrate an impermeable strata or any other source subject to surface or
near surface contamination of recent origin shall be evaluated for the provision
of treatment facilities. Minimum treatment shall consist of coagulation with
direct filtration and adequate disinfection. In all cases, the treatment process
shall be designed to achieve at least a
2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts, a
3-log removal or inactivation of
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(2)-(5)
(No change.)
(6)
Return of the decanted water
or sludge to the treatment process shall be adequately controlled so that
there will be a minimum of interference with the treatment process and shall
conform to the applicable requirements of subsection (d)(3) of this section.
Beginning July 1, 2004, systems that do not comply with the provisions of
subsection (d)(3) of this section commit a treatment technique violation and
must notify their customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b)
of this title (relating to Public Notice).
(7)
Air release devices on treated
waterlines shall be installed in such a manner as to preclude the possibility
of submergence or possible entrance of contaminants. In this respect, all
openings to the atmosphere shall be covered with 16-mesh or finer corrosion-resistant
screening material or an equivalent acceptable to the executive director.
(d)
Surface water.
(1)
All water secured from surface sources shall be given complete
treatment at a plant which provides facilities for pretreatment disinfection,
taste and odor control, continuous coagulation, sedimentation, filtration,
covered clearwell storage
,
and terminal disinfection of the water
with chlorine or suitable chlorine compounds. In all cases, the treatment
process shall be designed to achieve at least a
2-log removal of
(2)
All plant piping shall be constructed so as to be thoroughly
tight against leakage. No cross-connection or interconnection shall be permitted
to exist in a filtration plant between a conduit carrying filtered or post-chlorinated
water and another conduit carrying raw water or water in any prior stage of
treatment.
(A)-(C)
(No change.)
(D)
Filters shall be located so that common walls will not
exist between them and aerators, mixing and sedimentation basins or
clearwells
[
(E)
(No change.)
(F)
Air release devices on treated
waterlines shall be installed in such a manner as to preclude the possibility
of submergence or possible entrance of contaminants. In this respect, all
openings to the atmosphere shall be covered with 16-mesh or finer corrosion-resistant
screening material or an equivalent acceptable to the executive director.
(3)
Return of the decanted water or
solids to the treatment
process
[
(A)
Unless the executive director
has approved an alternate recycling location, spent backwash water and the
liquids from sludge settling lagoons, spent backwash water tanks, sludge thickeners,
and similar dewatering facilities shall be returned to the raw waterline upstream
of the raw water sample tap and coagulant feed point. The blended recycled
liquids shall pass through all of the major unit processes at the plant.
(B)
Flow equalization basins, variable
speed pumps, or other facilities shall be provided to minimize the magnitude
and impact of hydraulic surges that occur during the recycling process.
(C)
Solids produced by dewatering
facilities such as sludge lagoons, sludge thickeners, centrifuges, mechanical
presses, and similar devices shall not be returned to the treatment plant
without the prior approval of the executive director.
(4)-(5)
(No change.)
(6)
Chemical storage facilities shall
comply with applicable
requirements in subsection (f)(1) of this section.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(7)
Chemical feed
facilities shall comply with the applicable
requirements in subsection (f)(2) of this section.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(8)
(No change.)
(9)
Flocculation equipment shall be provided.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
Flocculation facilities shall be designed to provide adequate
time and mixing intensity to produce a settleable floc under varying raw water
characteristics and raw water flow rates.
(i)
Flocculation facilities for straight-flow and up-flow sedimentation
basins shall provide a minimum theoretical detention time of at least 20 minutes
when operated at their design capacity. Flocculation facilities constructed
prior to October 1, 2000 are exempt from this requirement if the settled water
turbidity of each sedimentation basin remains below 10.0
Nephelometric
Turbidity Unit (NTU)
[
(ii)
(No change.)
(C)
Coagulated water or water from flocculators shall flow
to sedimentation basins in such a manner as to prevent destruction of floc.
Piping, flumes
,
and troughs shall be designed to provide a flow
velocity of 0.5 to 1.5 feet per second. Gates, ports
,
and valves
shall be designed at a maximum flow velocity of 4.0 feet per second in the
transfer of water between units.
(10)
Clarification facilities shall be provided.
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(C)
Clarification facilities shall be designed to remove flocculated
particles effectively.
(i)
(No change.)
(ii)
When operated at their design capacity, basins for straight-flow
or up-flow sedimentation of softened waters shall provide either a theoretical
detention time of at least 4.5 hours in the flocculation and sedimentation
chambers or a maximum surface overflow rate of 1.0
gallons
[
(iii)-(v)
(No change.)
(D)
Clarification facilities shall be designed to prevent the
accumulation of settled solids.
(i)
At treatment plants with a single clarification basin,
facilities shall be provided to drain the basin within six hours. In the event
that the plant site topography is such that gravity draining cannot be realized,
a permanently installed
electric-powered
[
(ii)
(No change.)
(11)
Gravity or pressure type filters shall be provided.
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(C)
The depth and condition of the media and support material
shall be sufficient to provide effective filtration.
(i)
The filtering material shall conform to
American Water
Works Association (AWWA)
[
(ii)
(No change.)
(iii)
The depth of filter sand, anthracite, granular activated
carbon, or other filtering materials shall be 24 inches or greater and provide
an L/d ratio of at least 1,000.
(I)
Rapid sand filters typically contain a minimum of eight
inches of fine sand with an effective size of 0.35 to 0.45
millimeter
(mm)
[
(II)
High-rate dual media filters typically contain a minimum
of
12
[
(III)
High-rate multi-media filters typically contain a minimum
of three inches of garnet media with an effective size of 0.2 to 0.3 mm, nine
inches of sand with an effective size of 0.5 to 0.6 mm, and
24
[
(IV)
(No change.)
(iv)
(No change.)
(D)
(No change.)
(E)
The filters shall be provided with facilities to monitor
the performance of the filter. Monitoring devices shall be designed to provide
the ability to measure and record turbidity as required by §290.111 of
this title [
(i)
(No change.)
(ii)
Beginning January 1, 2005, each filter operated by
a public water system that serves fewer than 10,000 people shall be equipped
with an on-line turbidimeter and recorder which will allow the operator to
measure and record the turbidity at 15-minute intervals.
[
(iii)
Each filter operated by a public water system that serves
at least 10,000 people shall be equipped with an on-line turbidimeter and
recorder which will allow the operator to
measure and record
[
(iv)
(No change.)
(v)
Each filter unit
that is not equipped with an on-line
turbidimeter and recorder
shall be equipped with a device to indicate
loss of head through the filter. In lieu of loss-of-head indicators, declining
rate filter units may be equipped with rate-of-flow indicators.
(F)
Filters shall be designed to ensure adequate cleaning during
the backwash cycle.
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(iii)
The rate of flow of backwash water shall not be less
than 20 inches vertical rise per minute (12.5
gallons per minute per
square foot
[
(iv)-(vii)
(No change.)
(G)
(No change.)
(12)
Pipe galleries shall provide ample working room, good
lighting
,
and good drainage provided by sloping floors, gutters
, and
[
(13)
The identification of influent, effluent, waste backwash,
and chemical feed lines shall be accomplished by the use of labels or various
colors of paint. Where labels are used, they shall be placed along the pipe
at no greater than
five-foot
[
(A)-(C)
(No change.)
(14)
(No change.)
(15)
An adequately equipped laboratory shall be available locally
so that daily microbiological and chemical tests can be conducted.
(A)
For plants serving 25,000 persons or more, the local laboratory
used to conduct the required daily microbiological analyses must be certified
by the
executive director
[
(B)
For plants serving populations of less than 25,000, the
facilities for making microbiological tests may be omitted if the required
microbiological samples can be submitted to
a laboratory certified by
the executive director
[
(C)-(F)
(No change.)
(G)
Plant laboratories must be designed, constructed,
equipped, operated, and maintained in a manner that will ensure laboratory
personnel can properly conduct various process control tests and produce accurate
data and reports on a timely basis.
[
(16)
Each surface water treatment
plant shall be provided with a computer and software for recording performance
data, maintaining records, and submitting reports to the executive director.
(e)
Disinfection.
(1)-(2)
(No change.)
(3)
Disinfection equipment shall be selected and installed
so that continuous and effective disinfection can be secured under all conditions.
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(C)
All disinfecting equipment in surface water treatment plants
shall include at least one functional standby unit of each capacity for ensuring
uninterrupted operation. Common standby units are permissible[
(D)-(G)
(No change.)
(4)
Systems that use chlorine gas must ensure that the risks
associated with its use are limited as follows
.
[
(A)-(C)
(No change.)
(5)
(No change.)
(6)
Where anhydrous ammonia feed equipment is utilized, it
must be housed in a separate enclosure equipped with both high and low level
ventilation to the outside atmosphere. The enclosure must be provided with
forced air ventilation which includes: screened and louvered floor level and
high level vents; a fan which is located at and draws air in through the floor
vent and discharges through the top vent; and a fan switch located outside
the enclosure. Alternately, systems may install negative pressure ventilation
as long as the facilities also have gas containment and treatment as prescribed
by the current
UFC
[
(f)
Surface water treatment plant
chemical storage and feed facilities.
(1)
Chemical storage facilities shall be designed
to ensure a reliable supply of chemicals to the feeders, minimize the possibility
and impact of accidental spills, and facilitate good housekeeping.
(A)
Bulk storage facilities at the plant shall be
adequate to store at least a 15-day supply of all chemicals needed to comply
with minimum treatment technique and maximum contaminant level (MCL) requirements.
The capacity of these bulk storage facilities shall be based on the design
capacity of the treatment plant. However, the executive director may require
a larger stock of chemicals based on local resupply ability.
(B)
Day tanks shall be provided to minimize the
possibility of severely overfeeding liquid chemicals. Day tanks will not be
required if adequate process control instrumentation and procedures are employed
to prevent chemical overfeed incidents.
(C)
Every chemical bulk storage facility and day
tank shall have a label that identifies the facility's or tank's contents
and a device that indicates the amount of chemical remaining in the facility
or tank.
(D)
Dry chemicals shall be stored off the floor
in a dry room that is located above ground and protected against flooding
or wetting from floors, walls, and ceilings.
(E)
Bulk storage facilities and day tanks must be
designed to minimize the possibility of leaks and spills.
(i)
The materials used to construct bulk storage
and day tanks must be compatible with the chemicals being stored and resistant
to corrosion.
(ii)
Except as provided in this clause, adequate
containment facilities shall be provided for all liquid chemical storage tanks.
(I)
Containment facilities for a single container
or for multiple interconnected containers must be large enough to hold the
maximum amount of chemical that can be stored with a minimum freeboard of
six vertical inches or to hold 110% of the total volume of the container(s),
whichever is less.
(II)
Common containment for multiple containers
that are not interconnected must be large enough to hold the volume of the
largest container with a minimum freeboard of six vertical inches or to hold
110% of the total volume of the container(s), whichever is less.
(III)
The materials used to construct containment
structures must be compatible with the chemicals stored in the tanks.
(IV)
Incompatible chemicals shall not be stored
within the same containment structure.
(V)
No containment facilities are required for hypochlorite
solution containers that have a capacity of 35 gallons or less.
(VI)
On a site-specific basis, the executive director
may approve the use of double-walled tanks in lieu of separate containment
facilities.
(F)
Chemical transfer pumps and control systems
must be designed to minimize the possibility of leaks and spills.
(G)
Piping, pumps, and valves used for chemical
storage and transfer must be compatible with the chemical being fed.
(2)
Chemical feed and metering facilities shall
be designed so that chemicals shall be applied in a manner which will maximize
reliability, facilitate maintenance, and ensure optimal finished water quality.
(A)
Each chemical feeder that is needed to comply
with a treatment technique or MCL requirement shall have a standby or reserve
unit. Common standby feeders are permissible, but generally, more than one
standby feeder must be provided due to the incompatibility of chemicals or
the state in which they are being fed (solid, liquid, or gas).
(B)
Chemical feed equipment shall be sized to provide
proper dosage under all operating conditions.
(i)
Devices designed for determining the chemical
feed rate shall be provided for all chemical feeders.
(ii)
The capacity of the chemical feeders shall
be such that accurate control of the dosage can be achieved at the full range
of feed rates expected to occur at the facility.
(iii)
Chemical feeders shall be provided with tanks
for chemical dissolution when applicable.
(C)
Chemical feeders, valves, and piping must be
compatible with the chemical being fed.
(D)
Chemical feed systems shall be designed to minimize
the possibility of leaks and spills and provide protection against backpressure
and siphoning.
(E)
If enclosed feed lines are used, they shall
be designed and installed so as to prevent clogging and be easily maintained.
(F)
Dry chemical feeders shall be located in a separate
room that is provided with facilities for dust control.
(G)
Coagulant feed systems shall be designed so
that coagulants are applied to the water prior to or within the mixing basins
or chambers so as to permit their complete mixing with the water.
(i)
Coagulant feed points shall be located downstream
of the raw water sampling tap.
(ii)
Coagulants shall be applied continuously during
treatment plant operation.
(H)
Chlorine feed units, ammonia feed units, and
storage facilities shall be separated by solid, sealed walls.
(I)
Chemical application points shall be provided
to achieve acceptable finished water quality, adequate taste and odor control,
corrosion control, and disinfection.
(g)
[
(h)
[
(i)
[
(j)
[
(k)
[
(1)
Safety equipment for all chemicals used in water treatment
shall meet applicable standards established by the
OSHA
[
(2)
Systems must comply with United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) requirements for Risk Management Plans.
(l)
[
(m)
Security. Each water treatment
plant and all appurtenances thereof shall be enclosed by an intruder-resistant
fence. The gates shall be locked during periods of darkness and when the plant
is unattended. A locked building in the fence line may satisfy this requirement
or serve as a gate.
§290.43.Water Storage.
(a)
Capacity. The minimum
clearwell
[
(b)
Location of clearwells, standpipes, and ground storage
and elevated tanks.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Insofar as possible,
clearwells
[
(3)
No storage tank or
clearwell
[
(4)
No storage tank or
clearwell
[
(c)
Design and construction of
clearwells
[
(1)-(2)
(No change.)
(3)
Overflows shall be designed in strict accordance with current
AWWA standards and shall terminate with a
gravity-hinged
[
(4)
All
clearwells
[
(5)
Inlet and outlet connections shall be located so as to
prevent
short-circuiting
[
(6)
Clearwells
[
(7)
Each
clearwell
[
(8)
All
clearwells
[
(9)-(10)
(No change.)
(d)
(No change.)
(e)
Facility
security
[
(f)
(No change.)
§290.44.Water Distribution.
(a)
Design and standards. All potable water distribution systems
including pump stations, mains, and both ground and elevated storage tanks,
shall be designed, installed
,
and constructed in accordance with
current American Water Works Association (AWWA) standards with reference to
materials to be used and construction procedures to be followed. In the absence
of AWWA standards, commission review may be based upon the standards of the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), commercial
,
and
other recognized standards utilized by licensed professional engineers.
(1)-(3)
(No change.)
(4)
Water transmission and distribution lines must be installed
in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. However, the top of the
waterline
[
(5)
(No change.)
(b)
Lead ban. The following provisions apply to the use of
lead in plumbing.
(1)
The use of pipes and pipe fittings that contain more than
8.0% lead or solders and flux that contains more than 0.2% lead is prohibited
in the following circumstances:
(A)
for
[
(B)
for
[
(2)
(No change.)
(c)
Minimum
waterline
[
Figure: 30 TAC §290.44(c) (No change.)
(d)
Minimum pressure requirement. The system must be designed
to maintain a minimum pressure of 35 psi at all points within the distribution
network at flow rates of at least 1.5 gallons per minute per connection. When
the system is intended to provide fire fighting capability, it must also be
designed to maintain a minimum pressure of 20 psi under combined fire and
drinking water flow conditions.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
When service is to be provided to more than one pressure
plane or when distribution system conditions and demands are such that low
pressures develop, the method of providing increased pressure shall be by
means of booster pumps taking suction from storage tanks. If an exception
to this requirement is desired, the designing engineer must furnish for the
executive director's review all planning material for booster pumps taking
suction from other than a storage tank. The planning material must contain
a full description of the supply to the point of suction, maximum demands
on this part of the system, location of pressure recorders, safety controls
,
and other pertinent information. Where booster pumps are installed
to take suction directly from the distribution system, a minimum residual
pressure of 20
psi
[
(3)-(6)
(No change.)
(e)
Location of waterlines. The following rules apply to installations
of waterlines, wastewater mains or laterals, and other conveyances/appurtenances
identified as potential sources of contamination. Furthermore, all ratings
specified shall be defined by ASTM or AWWA standards unless stated otherwise.
New mains, service lines, or laterals are those that are installed where no
main, service line, or lateral previously existed, or where existing mains,
service lines, or laterals are replaced with pipes of different size or material.
(1)-(3)
(No change.)
(4)
Where the
nine-foot
[
(A)
New
waterline installation - parallel lines
[
(i)-(iii)
(No change.)
(B)
New
waterline installation - crossing lines
[
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(iii)
Where a new potable waterline crosses a new, non-pressure
rated wastewater main or lateral and the standard pipe segment length of the
wastewater main or lateral is at least 18 feet, one segment of the waterline
pipe shall be centered over the wastewater main or lateral such that the joints
of the waterline pipe are equidistant and at least nine feet horizontally
from the centerline of the wastewater main or lateral. The potable waterline
shall be at least two feet above the wastewater main or lateral. Whenever
possible, the crossing shall be centered between the joints of the wastewater
main or lateral. The wastewater pipe shall have a minimum pipe stiffness of
115 psi at 5.0% deflection. The wastewater main or lateral shall be embedded
in cement stabilized sand (see
clause (vi) of this subparagraph
)
[
(iv)
Where a new potable waterline crosses a new, non-pressure
rated wastewater main or lateral and a standard length of the wastewater pipe
is less than 18 feet in length, the potable water pipe segment shall be centered
over the wastewater line. The materials and method of installation shall conform
with one of the following options
.
[
(I)
(No change.)
(II)
All sections of wastewater main or lateral within nine
feet horizontally of the waterline shall be encased in an
18-foot
[
(III)
When a new waterline crosses under a wastewater main
or lateral, the waterline shall be encased as described for wastewater mains
or laterals in subclause (II) of this clause or constructed of ductile iron
or steel pipe with mechanical or welded joints as appropriate. An absolute
minimum separation distance of one foot between the
waterline
[
(v)
Where a new potable waterline crosses a new, pressure rated
wastewater main or lateral, one segment of the waterline pipe shall be centered
over the wastewater line such that the joints of the waterline pipe are equidistant
and at least nine feet horizontally from the
center line
[
(vi)
(No change.)
(5)
Waterline and
wastewater main or lateral manhole or
cleanout separation
[
(6)
Location of
fire hydrants
[
(7)
Location of
potable or raw water supply or suction
lines
[
(8)
Proximity of
septic tank drainfields
[
(f)
Sanitary precautions and disinfection. Sanitary precautions,
flushing, disinfection procedures
,
and microbiological sampling
as prescribed in AWWA standards for disinfecting water mains shall be followed
in laying waterlines.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Special precautions must be taken when
waterlines
[
(3)
New mains shall be thoroughly disinfected in accordance
with AWWA Standard C651 and then flushed and sampled before being placed in
service. Samples shall be collected for microbiological analysis to check
the effectiveness of the disinfection procedure. Sampling shall be repeated
if contamination persists. A minimum of one sample for each 1,000 feet of
completed
waterline
[
(g)
(No change.)
(h)
Backflow, siphonage.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
No water connection from any public drinking water supply
system shall be
connected
[
(3)
(No change.)
(4)
All backflow prevention assemblies that are required according
to this section and associated table
located in
§290.47(i)
of this title shall be tested upon installation by a recognized backflow prevention
assembly tester and certified to be operating within specifications. Backflow
prevention assemblies which are installed to provide protection against health
hazards must also be tested and certified to be operating within specifications
at least annually by a recognized backflow prevention assembly tester.
(A)
Recognized backflow prevention assembly testers shall have
completed
an
[
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(B)
(No change.)
(C)
A
test report
[
(5)-(6)
(No change.)
(i)
Water hauling. When drinking water is distributed by tank
truck or trailer, it must be accomplished in the following manner
.
[
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
The equipment used to haul the water must be approved by
the executive director and must be constructed as follows
.
[
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
The tank shall be watertight and of an approved material
which is impervious and easily cleaned and disinfected. Any paint or coating
and any plastic or fiberglass materials used as contact surfaces must be approved
by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Food
and Drug Administration, or the
NSF
[
(C)-(J)
(No change.)
(K)
A minimum free chlorine residual of 0.5
mg/L
[
(L)
Operational records detailing the amount of water hauled,
purchases, microbiological sampling results, chlorine residual readings, dates
of disinfection
,
and source of water shall be maintained.
§290.45.Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements.
(a)
General provisions.
(1)
The requirements
contained
in this section are
to be used in evaluating both the total capacities for public water systems
and the capacities at individual pump stations and pressure planes
which
serve portions of the system that are hydraulically separated from, or incapable
of being served by, other pump stations or pressure planes
. The capacities
specified
[
(2)-(4)
(No change.)
(5)
The capacity of facilities
that have been inoperative for the past 30 days and will not be returned to
an operative condition within the next 30 days shall not be included when
determining compliance with the requirements of this section.
(6)
The capacity of the treatment
facilities shall not be less than the required raw water or groundwater production
rate or the anticipated maximum daily demand of the system.
(b)
Community water systems.
(1)
Groundwater supplies must meet the following requirements.
(A)
If fewer than 50 connections without ground storage, the
system must meet the following requirements:
(i)
(No change.)
(ii)
a pressure tank capacity of 50 gallons per connection
.
[
(B)-(F)
(No change.)
(2)
(No change.)
(c)
(No change.)
(d)
Noncommunity water systems serving other than transient
accommodation units.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Groundwater supplies must meet the following requirements.
(A)
Subject to the requirements of subparagraph (B) of
this paragraph, if
[
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(B)
Systems which serve 300 or more persons per day or
serve fewer than 300 persons per day and provide ground storage
[
(i)-(v)
(No change.)
(3)
(No change.)
(e)-(f)
(No change.)
(g)
Alternative capacity requirements. Public water systems
may request approval to meet alternative capacity requirements in lieu of
the minimum capacity requirements specified in this section. Any water system
requesting to use an alternative capacity requirement must demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the executive director that approving the request will
not compromise the public health or result in a degradation of service or
water quality. Alternative capacity requirements are unavailable for groundwater
systems serving fewer than 50 connections without total storage as specified
in subsection (b)(1) of this section or for noncommunity water systems as
specified in subsections (c) and (d) of this section.
(1)-(4)
(No change.)
(5)
Although elevated storage is the preferred method of pressure
maintenance for systems of over
2,500
[
(A)-(B)
(No change.)
(C)
Battery-powered
[
(D)
(No change.)
(6)
(No change.)
§290.46.Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking Water Systems.
(a)
General. When a public drinking water supply system is
to be established, plans shall be submitted to the executive director for
review and approval prior to the construction of the system. All public water
systems are to be constructed in conformance with
the requirements of
this subchapter
[
(b)
Microbiological. Submission of samples for microbiological
analysis shall be as required by Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to
Drinking Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements
for Public Water [
(c)
(No change.)
(d)
Disinfectant residuals and monitoring. A disinfectant residual
must be continuously maintained during the treatment process and throughout
the distribution system.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
The disinfection equipment shall be operated to maintain
the following minimum disinfectant residuals in each finished water storage
tank and throughout the distribution system at all times:
(A)
a free chlorine residual of 0.2
mg/L
[
(B)
a chloramine residual of 0.5
mg/L
[
(e)
Operation by trained and licensed personnel. Except as
provided in paragraph
(1) of this subsection, the production, treatment,
and distribution facilities at the public water system must be operated at
all times under the direct supervision of a water works operator who holds
an applicable, valid license issued by the executive director.
[
(1)
Transient noncommunity public water systems are exempt
from the requirements of this subsection if they use only groundwater or purchase
treated water from another public water system.
[
(2)
All public water systems that are subject to the provisions
of this subsection shall meet the following requirements.
[
(A)
Public water systems shall
not allow new or repaired production, treatment, storage, pressure maintenance,
or distribution facilities to be placed into service without the prior guidance
and approval of a licensed water works operator.
(B)
Public water systems shall
ensure that their operators are trained regarding the use of all chemicals
used in the water treatment plant. Training programs shall meet applicable
standards established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) or the Texas Hazard Communications Act, Texas Health and Safety Code,
Title 6, Chapter 502.
(C)
Beginning January 1, 2004,
public water systems using chlorine dioxide shall place the operation of the
chlorine dioxide facilities under the direct supervision of a licensed operator
who has a Class "C" or higher license.
(3)
Systems that only purchase treated water shall meet
the following requirements in addition to the requirements contained in paragraph
(2) of this subsection.
[
(A)
Purchased water systems serving no more than 250 connections
must employ an operator who holds a Class "D" or higher license.
[
(B)
Purchased water systems serving more than 250 connections,
but no more than 1,000 connections, must employ an operator who holds a Class
"C" or higher license.
[
(C)
Purchased water systems serving more than 1,000 connections
must employ at least two operators who hold a Class "C" or higher license
and who each work at least 16 hours per month at the public water system's
treatment or distribution facilities.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
(4)
Systems that treat groundwater and do not treat surface
water or groundwater that is under the direct influence of surface water shall
meet the following requirements in addition to the requirements contained
in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
[
(A)
Groundwater systems serving
no more than 250 connections must employ an operator with a Class "D" or higher
license.
(B)
Groundwater systems serving
more than 250 connections, but no more than 1,000 connections, must employ
an operator with a Class "C" or higher groundwater license.
(C)
Groundwater systems serving
more than 1,000 connections must employ at least two operators who hold a
Class "C" or higher groundwater license and who each work at least 16 hours
per month at the public water system's production, treatment, or distribution
facilities.
(5)
Systems that treat groundwater that is under the direct
influence of surface water must meet the following requirements in addition
to the requirements contained in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
[
(A)
Systems which serve no more
than 1,000 connections and utilize cartridge or membrane filters must employ
an operator who holds a Class "C" or higher groundwater license and has completed
a four-hour training course on monitoring and reporting requirements or who
holds a Class "C" or higher surface water license and has completed the Groundwater
Production course.
(B)
Systems which serve more than
1,000 connections and utilize cartridge or membrane filters must employ at
least two operators who meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) of this
paragraph and who each work at least 24 hours per month at the public water
system's production, treatment, or distribution facilities.
(C)
Systems which serve no more
than 1,000 connections and utilize coagulant addition and direct filtration
must employ an operator who holds a Class "C" or higher surface water license
and has completed the Groundwater Production course or who holds a Class "C"
or higher groundwater license and has completed a Surface Water Production
course. Effective January 1, 2007, the public water system must employ at
least one operator who has completed the Surface Water Unit I course and the
Surface Water Unit II course.
(D)
Systems which serve more than
1,000 connections and utilize coagulant addition and direct filtration must
employ at least two operators who meet the requirements of subparagraph (C)
of this paragraph and who each work at least 24 hours per month at the public
water system's production, treatment, or distribution facilities. Effective
January 1, 2007, the public water system must employ at least two operators
who have completed the Surface Water Unit I course and the Surface Water Unit
II course.
(E)
Systems which utilize complete
surface water treatment must comply with the requirements of paragraph (6)
of this subsection.
(F)
Each plant must have at least
one Class "C" or higher operator on duty at the plant when it is in operation
or the plant must be provided with continuous turbidity and disinfectant residual
monitors with automatic plant shutdown and alarms to summon operators so as
to ensure that the water produced continues to meet the commission's drinking
water standards during periods when the plant is not staffed.
(6)
Systems that treat surface water must meet the following
requirements in addition to the requirements contained in paragraph (2) of
this subsection.
[
(A)
Surface water systems that
serve no more than 1,000 connections must employ at least one operator who
holds a Class "B" or higher surface water license. Contract operators may
be used to meet the requirements of this subparagraph if the contractor is
completely familiar with the design and operation of the plant and spends
at least four consecutive hours at the plant at least once every 14 days and
the system also employs an operator who holds a Class "C" or higher surface
water license. Effective January 1, 2007, the public water system must employ
at least one operator who has completed the Surface Water Unit I course and
the Surface Water Unit II course.
(B)
Surface water systems that
serve more than 1,000 connections must employ at least two operators; one
of the required operators must hold a Class "B" or higher surface water license
and the other required operator must hold a Class "C" or higher surface water
license. Each of the required operators must work at least 32 hours per month
at the public water system's production, treatment, or distribution facilities.
Effective January 1, 2007, the public water system must employ at least two
operators who have completed the Surface Water Unit I course and the Surface
Water Unit II course.
(C)
Each surface water treatment
plant must have at least one Class "C" or higher surface water operator on
duty at the plant when it is in operation or the plant must be provided with
continuous turbidity and disinfectant residual monitors with automatic plant
shutdown and alarms to summon operators so as to ensure that the water produced
continues to meet the commission's drinking water standards during periods
when the plant is not staffed.
(D)
Public water systems shall
not allow Class "D" operators to adjust or modify the treatment processes
at surface water treatment plant unless an operator who holds a Class "C"
or higher surface license is present at the plant and has issued specific
instructions regarding the proposed adjustment.
[
(f)
Operating records and reports. Water systems must maintain
a record of water works operation and maintenance activities and submit periodic
operating reports.
(1)-(2)
(No change.)
(3)
All public water systems shall maintain a record of operations.
(A)
The following records shall be retained for at least two
years:
(i)-(iv)
(No change.)
(v)
the dates that storage tanks and other facilities were
cleaned; [
(vi)
the maintenance records for water system equipment and
facilities
; and
[
(vii)
for systems that do not employ
full-time operators to meet the requirements of subsection (e) of this section,
a monthly summary of the work performed and the number of hours worked by
each of the part-time operators used to meet the requirements of subsection
(e) of this section.
(B)
(No change.)
(C)
The following records shall be retained for a period of
five years after they are no longer in effect:
(i)
the records concerning a variance or exemption granted
to the system; [
(ii)
Concentration Time (CT) studies for surface water treatment
plants
; and
[
(iii)
the Recycling Practices Report
form and other records pertaining to site-specific recycle practices for treatment
plants that recycle.
(D)
(No change.)
(E)
The following records shall be retained for at least
ten
[
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(iii)
any written reports, summaries, or communications relating
to sanitary surveys of the system conducted by the system itself, by a private
consultant, or by the executive director shall be kept for a period not less
than
ten
[
(iv)
(No change.)
(F)
(No change.)
(4)
Water systems shall submit
routine reports and any
additional documentation that the executive director may require to determine
compliance with the requirements of this chapter
[
(A)
The reports must be submitted to the
Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality
[
(B)-(C)
(No change.)
(g)
Disinfection of new or repaired facilities. Disinfection
by or under the direction of water system personnel must be performed when
repairs are made to existing facilities and before new facilities are placed
into service. Disinfection must be performed in accordance with AWWA requirements
and water samples must be submitted to a laboratory approved by the
executive director
[
(h)-(i)
(No change.)
(j)
Customer service inspections. A customer service inspection
certificate shall be completed prior to providing continuous water service
to new construction, on any existing service either when the water purveyor
has reason to believe that cross-connections or other potential contaminant
hazards exist, or after any material improvement, correction, or addition
to the private water distribution facilities. Any customer service inspection
certificate form which varies from the format found in §290.47(d) of
this title (relating to Customer Service Inspection Certificate) must be approved
by the executive director prior to being placed in use.
(1)
Individuals with the following credentials shall be recognized
as capable of conducting a customer service inspection certification.
(A)
(No change.)
(B)
Customer service inspectors who have completed a
commission-approved
[
(2)-(3)
(No change.)
(4)
A customer service inspection is an examination of the
private water distribution facilities for the purpose of providing or denying
water service. This inspection is limited to the identification and prevention
of
cross-connections
[
(k)
(No change.)
(l)
Flushing of mains. All dead-end mains must be flushed at
monthly intervals [
(m)
Maintenance and housekeeping. The maintenance and housekeeping
practices used by a public water system shall ensure the good working condition
and general appearance of the system's facilities and equipment. The grounds
and facilities shall be maintained in a manner so as to minimize the possibility
of the harboring of rodents, insects, and other disease vectors, and in such
a way as to prevent other conditions that might cause the contamination of
the water.
(1)
Each of the system's ground, elevated
,
and pressure
tanks shall be inspected annually by water system personnel or a contracted
inspection service.
(A)
Ground and elevated storage tank inspections must determine
that the vents are in place and properly screened, the roof hatches closed
and locked, flap valves and gasketing provide adequate protection against
insects, rodents
,
and other vermin, the interior and exterior coating
systems are continuing to provide adequate protection to all metal surfaces,
and the tank remains in a watertight condition.
(B)-(C)
(No change.)
(2)-(3)
(No change.)
(4)
All water
treatment units,
storage and pressure
maintenance facilities, distribution system lines
,
and related
appurtenances shall be maintained in a watertight condition and be free of
excessive solids.
(5)
(No change.)
(6)
Pumps, motors, valves, and
other mechanical devices shall be maintained in good working condition.
(n)
Engineering plans and maps. Plans, specifications, maps
,
and other pertinent information shall be maintained to facilitate
the operation and maintenance of the system's facilities and equipment. The
following records shall be maintained on file at the public water system and
be available to the executive director upon request
.
[
(1)-(2)
(No change.)
(3)
Copies of well completion data such as well material setting
data, geological log, sealing information (pressure cementing and surface
protection), disinfection information, microbiological sample results
,
and a chemical analysis report of a representative sample of water
from the well shall be kept on file for as long as the well remains in service.
(o)
(No change.)
(p)
Data on water system ownership and management. The agency
shall be provided with information regarding water system ownership and management.
(1)
When a water system changes ownership, a written notice
of the transaction must be provided to the executive director. When applicable,
notification shall be in accordance with Chapter 291 of this title (relating
to
Utility Regulations
[
(2)
(No change.)
(q)
Special precautions. Special precautions must be instituted
by the water system owner or responsible official in the event of low distribution
pressures (below 20 psi), water outages, microbiological samples found to
contain
E. coli
or fecal coliform organisms,
failure to maintain adequate chlorine residuals, elevated finished water turbidity
levels, or other conditions which indicate that the potability of the drinking
water supply has been compromised.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
The flowchart found in §290.47(h) of this title shall
be used to determine if a boil water notification must be issued in the event
of a loss of distribution system pressure. If a boil water notice is issued
under
[
(3)
A boil water notification shall be issued if the turbidity
of the finished water produced by a surface water treatment plant exceeds
5.0 NTU. The boil water notice shall remain in effect until the water entering
the distribution system has a turbidity level below 1.0 NTU, the distribution
system has been thoroughly flushed, a minimum of 0.2
mg/L
[
(4)
(No change.)
(r)
(No change.)
(s)
Testing equipment. Accurate testing equipment or some other
means of monitoring the effectiveness of any chemical treatment processes
must be used by the system.
(1)
Flow measuring devices and rate-of-flow controllers that
are required by §290.42(d) of this title shall be calibrated at least
once every 12 months.
Well meters required by §290.41(c)(3)(N) of
this title shall be calibrated at least once every three years.
(2)
Laboratory equipment used for compliance testing shall
be properly calibrated.
(A)
pH meters shall be properly calibrated.
(i)-(ii)
(No change.)
(iii)
On-line pH meters shall be calibrated according to
manufacturer
[
(iv)
The calibration of on-line
pH meters shall be checked at least once each week with a primary standard
or by comparing the results from the on-line unit with the results from a
properly calibrated benchtop unit. If necessary, the on-line unit shall be
recalibrated with primary standards.
(B)
Turbidimeters shall be properly calibrated.
(i)-(iii)
(No change.)
(iv)
The calibration of
on-line
[
(C)
(No change.)
(t)-(u)
(No change.)
(v)
Electrical wiring. All water system electrical wiring must
be
securely
installed [
§290.47.Appendices.
(a)-(d)
(No change.)
(e)
Appendix E. Boil Water Notification.
(f)
Appendix F. Sample Backflow Prevention Assembly Test and
Maintenance Report.
(g)
Appendix G. Operator and/or Employment Notice.
(h)
(No change.)
(i)
Appendix I. Assessment of Hazard and Selection of Assemblies.
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on July 28, 2003.
TRD-200304535
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: September 7, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-6087
141.2
]. Other technical terms used shall have
the meanings or definitions listed in the latest edition of
The Drinking Water Dictionary
, prepared by the American Water Works
Association.
Supply
] Systems).
,
] or
Professional
Engineer
]--An engineer who maintains a current license through the Texas
Board of Professional Engineers in accordance with its requirements for professional
practice.
a
]
measure of concentration, equivalent to and replacing parts per million [
(ppm)
] in the case of dilute solutions.
,
]
or
Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission
], Water Supply Division, MC 155, P.O.
Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.
these sections
] or guidelines promulgated
by the executive director.
The
] Texas Health
and Safety Code
(THSC)
, Chapter 341, Subchapter C prescribes the
duties of the commission relating to the regulation and control of public
drinking water systems in the
state
[
State
].
The
statute requires
[
These statutes require
] that the commission
ensure that public water systems: supply safe drinking water in adequate quantities,
are financially stable and technically sound, promote use of regional and
area-wide drinking water systems, and review completed plans and specifications
and business plans for all contemplated public water systems not exempted
by
THSC,
[
Health and Safety Code
] §341.035(d).
The
statute
[
statutes
] also
requires
[
require
] the commission be notified of any subsequent material changes,
improvements, additions, or alterations in existing systems and, consider
compliance history in approving new or modified public water systems.
these sections
] and minimum criteria.
This subchapter has
[
These sections
have
] been adopted to ensure regionalization and area-wide options are
fully considered, the inclusion of all data essential for comprehensive consideration
of the contemplated project, or improvements, additions, alterations
,
or changes thereto and to establish minimum standardized public health
design criteria in compliance with existing state statutes and in accordance
with good public health engineering practices. In addition, minimum acceptable
financial, managerial, technical
,
and operating practices must
be specified to ensure that facilities are properly operated to produce and
distribute a safe, potable water.
one-half mile
] of the corporate boundaries of a
district, or other political subdivision providing the same service; or within
1/2-mile
[
one-half mile
] of a certificated service area boundary
of any other water service provider shall provide to the executive director
evidence that:
these sections
] will be
reviewed.
should
] be submitted
to the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
[
Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission
], Water Supply Division, MC 153, P.O.
Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.
1/4 mile
] of a proposed
well site
[
wellsite
] shall be shown or reported.
Copies
] of each fully executed
sanitary control easement
and any other documentation demonstrating compliance
with §290.41(c)(1)(F) of this title (relating to Water Sources)
shall
be provided to the executive director prior to placing the well into service.
Each original easement document
, if obtained,
must be recorded
in the deed records at the county courthouse.
Section 290.47(c)
[
See §290.47(c)
] of this title (relating to Appendices)
includes
[
for
] a suggested form.
two mile
] radius of the proposed system, copies
of written requests seeking to obtain service from each of those drinking
water supply systems, and copies of the responses to the written requests;
Texas Water Code
], §13.002, unless that person is a utility as
defined by that section;
Texas Health
and Safety Code
], Chapter 361 or 382 or
TWC
[
Texas Water
Code
], Chapter 26.
The
] internal review staff
includes
[
must include
] one or more licensed professional
engineers that are employed by the political subdivision and must be separate
from, and not subject to the review or supervision of, the engineering staff
or firm charged with the design of the distribution extension under review
;
[
.
]
A
] licensed professional engineer
on the internal review staff determines and certifies in writing that the
proposed distribution system changes comply with the requirements of §290.44
of this title
(relating to Water Distribution)
and will not result
in a violation of any provision of §290.45 of this title
;
[
.
]
The
] state agency or political
subdivision includes a copy of the written certification described in this
subparagraph with the initial notice that is submitted to the executive director.
these regulations
] will not be considered
unless the necessary modifications for correcting the deficiencies are included
in the proposed improvements, or unless the executive director determines
that reasonable progress is being made toward correcting the deficiencies
and no immediate health hazard will be caused by the delay.
these sections
] shall
be considered on an individual basis. Any water system which requests an exception
must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the executive director that the exception
will not compromise the public health or result in a degradation of service
or water quality.
Texas Health and Safety Code
], §341.035,
that has a history of noncompliance with
(THSC)
[
Texas Health
and Safety Code
], Chapter 341, Subchapter C or commission rules, or
that is subject to a commission enforcement action to take the following action:
Provide
] the executive director
with a business plan that demonstrates that the system has available the financial,
managerial, and technical resources adequate to ensure future operation of
the system in accordance with applicable laws and rules. The business plan
must fulfill all the requirements for a business plan as set forth in subsection
(f) of this section
;
[
.
]
Provide
] adequate financial
assurance of the ability to operate the system in accordance with applicable
laws and rules. The executive director will set the amount of the financial
assurance, after the business plan has been reviewed and approved by the executive
director
;
[
. The amount of the financial assurance will equal
the difference between the amount of projected system revenues and the projected
cash needs for the period of time prescribed by the executive director. The
form of the financial assurance will be as specified in Chapter 37, Subchapter
O of this title (relating to Financial Assurance for Public Drinking Water
Systems and Utilities), and will be as specified by the executive director.
]
If the executive director relies on rate increases or customer
surcharges as the form of financial assurance, such funds shall be deposited
in an escrow account as specified in Chapter 37, Subchapter O of this title
(relating to Financial Assurance for Public Drinking Water Systems and Utilities),
and released only with the approval of the executive director.
]
the
] Drinking
Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements
for Public Water [
Supply
] Systems).
pipe lines
] and
pumping capacities to treatment plants or distribution systems shall be adequate
for such water delivery. Minimum capacities required are specified in §290.45
of this title (relating to Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements).
PVC
] pipe meeting
American Water Works Association
(AWWA)
[
AWWA
] standards, having a minimum working pressure
of 150
pounds per square inch (psi)
[
psi
] or greater,
and equipped with pressure type joints may be located at distances of less
than 50 feet from a proposed well site
,
but in no case shall the
distance be less than ten feet.
one quarter mile
] of a proposed
well site
[
wellsite
] shall be
reported to the
commission
[
Commission
] along with existing
or potential pollution hazards. These reports are required for community and
nontransient, noncommunity
groundwater
[
ground water
]
sources. Examples of existing or potential pollution hazards which may affect
groundwater
[
ground water
] quality include, but are not limited
to: landfill and dump sites, animal feedlots, military facilities, industrial
facilities, wood-treatment facilities, liquid petroleum and petrochemical
production, storage, and transmission facilities, Class 1, 2, 3, and 4 injection
wells, and pesticide storage and mixing facilities. This information must
be submitted prior to construction or as required by the executive director.
A sanitary control easement covering that portion of the land within 150-feet
of the well location shall be secured from all property owners and recorded
in the deed records at the county courthouse.
]
easement
] shall provide that none of the pollution hazards
covered in subparagraphs (A) - (E) of this paragraph, or any facilities that
might create a danger of pollution to the water to be produced from the well
,
will be located thereon.
this
] easement, an improperly constructed water well is
one which fails to meet the surface and subsurface construction standards
for public water supply wells. Residential type wells within
a sanitary
control
[
the
] easement must be constructed to public water
well standards.
Copies
] of the
recorded
sanitary control easement(s)
[
easements
] shall
be included with plans and specifications submitted
to the executive
director
for review.
political
subdivisions which have adopted and enforce equivalent ordinances or land
use restrictions may substitute these documents for sanitary control easements.
]
under ground water
] during drilling operation.
mg/l
].
Sanitary Control Easement
]
or other
documentation demonstrating compliance with paragraph (1)(F) of this subsection
; [
and
] an original or legible copy of a United States Geological
Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle showing the accurate well location
to the executive director
; and a map demonstrating the well location
in relation to surrounding property boundaries
. All the documents listed
in this paragraph must be approved by the executive director before final
approval is granted for the use of the well.
mg/l
] chlorine solution as it is added to
the well cavity.
waste water
] shall be disposed of in
a manner that will not cause any nuisance from mosquito breeding or stagnation.
Drains shall not be directly connected to storm or sanitary sewers.
well
] units may be desirable in areas
subject to vandalism or extended periods of subfreezing weather.
Each unit must terminate at least 18 inches above the concrete sealing block
and at least two feet above the highest known water mark or 100-year flood
elevation, whichever is higher.
]
Completed pitless well unit
installations must be provided with above ground level raw water sampling
cocks, concrete sealing blocks and flow measuring devices.
]
(E)
The well casing and pitless
unit must be properly sealed and cemented in accordance with paragraph (3)(C)
of this subsection.]
Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission
], Water Supply Division, MC 153, P.O. Box 13087,
Austin, Texas 78711- 3987.
(c)(3)(M) - (P)
]
of this section.
The water treatment plant and all pumping units shall be located in well-drained
areas not subject to flooding and away from seepage areas or where the underground
water table is near the surface.
]
(A)
Water treatment plants shall
not be located within 500 feet of a sewage treatment plant or lands irrigated
with sewage effluent. A minimum distance of 150 feet must be maintained between
any septic tank drainfield line and any underground treatment or storage unit.
Any sanitary sewers located within 50 feet of any underground treatment or
storage units shall be constructed of ductile iron or PVC pipe with a minimum
pressure rating of 150 psi and have watertight joints.]
(B)
Plant site selection shall
also take into consideration the need for disposition of all plant wastes
in accordance with all applicable regulations and state statutes including
both liquid and solid waste or by-product material from operation and/or maintenance.]
(C)
The water treatment plant
and all appurtenances thereof shall be enclosed by an intruder-resistant fence.
The gates shall be locked during periods of darkness and when the plant is
unattended. A locked building in the fence line may satisfy this requirement
or serve as a gate.]
(D)
An all weather road shall
be provided to the treatment plant and to the raw water pump station.]
Based on current
acceptable design standards, the total capacity of the public water system's
production and treatment facilities must always be greater than its anticipated
maximum daily demand.
]
ground water
] if the water does not meet the drinking water
standards. The facilities provided shall be in conformance with established
and proven methods.
Effective January 1, 2002, the treatment process shall also be designed to
provide a 2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts.
Treatment facilities constructed after October 1, 2000 shall be designed to
achieve at least a 2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts.
] The executive director may require additional levels
of treatment in cases of poor source water quality.
Effective January 1, 2002, the treatment process shall
also be designed to achieve at least a 2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts. Treatment facilities constructed after October
1, 2000 shall be designed to achieve at least a 2-log removal of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts.
] The executive director may require
additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality.
clear wells
]. This rule is not strictly applicable,
however, to partitions open to view and readily accessible for inspection
and repair.
sludge to the raw water
] shall be adequately controlled
so that there will be a minimum of interference with the treatment process.
Beginning July 1, 2004, systems that do not comply with the provisions of
this paragraph commit a treatment technique violation and must notify their
customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b) of this
title.
[
Any discharge of wastewater shall be in accordance with
all applicable state and federal statutes and regulations including Chapter
305 of this title (relating to Consolidated Permits), Chapter 309 of this
title (relating to Domestic Wastewater Effluent Limitation and Plant Siting),
and Chapter 319 of this title (relating to General Regulations Incorporated
into Permits).
]
be designed
to ensure a reliable supply of chemicals to the feeders, minimize the possibility
and impact of accidental spills, and facilitate good housekeeping.
]
(A)
Bulk storage facilities at
the plant shall be adequate to store at least 15 days supply of chemicals
at design capacity. However, the executive director may require a larger stock
of chemicals based on local resupply ability.]
(B)
Day tanks shall be provided
to minimize the possibility of severely overfeeding liquid chemicals. Day
tanks will not be required if adequate process control instrumentation and
procedures are employed to prevent chemical overfeed incidents.]
(C)
Every chemical bulk storage
facility and day tank shall have a label that identifies the facility's or
tank's contents and a device that indicates the amount of chemical remaining
in the facility or tank.]
(D)
Dry chemicals shall be stored
off the floor in a dry room that is located above ground and protected against
flooding or wetting from floors, walls, and ceilings.]
(E)
Bulk storage facilities and
day tanks must be designed to minimize the possibility of leaks and spills.]
(i)
The materials used to construct bulk storage
and day tanks must be compatible with the chemicals being stored and resistant
to corrosion.]
(ii)
Except as provided in this clause, adequate
containment facilities shall be provided for all liquid chemical storage tanks.]
(I)
Containment facilities for a single container
or for multiple, interconnected containers must be large enough to hold the
maximum amount of chemical that can be stored with a minimum freeboard of
six vertical inches or to hold 110% of the total volume of the container(s),
whichever is less.]
(II)
Common containment for multiple containers
that are not interconnected must be large enough to hold the volume of the
largest container with a minimum freeboard of six vertical inches or to hold
110% of the total volume of the container(s), whichever is less.]
(III)
The materials used to construct containment
structures must be compatible with the chemicals stored in the tanks.]
(IV)
Incompatible chemicals shall not be stored
within the same containment structure.]
(V)
No containment facilities are required for
hypochlorite solution containers that have a capacity of 35 gallons or less.]
(VI)
On a site-specific basis, the executive director
may approve the use of double-walled tanks in lieu of separate containment
facilities.]
(F)
Chemical transfer pumps and
control systems must be designed to minimize the possibility of leaks and
spills.]
(G)
Piping, pumps, and valves
used for chemical storage and transfer must be compatible with the chemical
being fed.]
and metering
facilities shall be designed so that chemicals shall be applied in a manner
which will maximize reliability, facilitate maintenance, and ensure optimal
finished water quality.
]
(A)
Each chemical feeder shall
have a standby or reserve unit. Common standby feeders are permissible, but,
generally, more than one standby feeder must be provided due to the incompatibility
of chemicals or the state in which they are being fed (solid, liquid or gas).]
(B)
Chemical feed equipment shall
be sized to provide proper dosage under all operating conditions.]
(i)
Devices designed for determining the chemical
feed rate shall be provided for all chemical feeders.]
(ii)
The capacity of the chemical feeders shall
be such that accurate control of the dosage can be achieved at the full range
of feed rates expected to occur at the facility.]
(iii)
Chemical feeders shall be provided with tanks
for chemical dissolution when applicable.]
(C)
Chemical feeders, valves,
and piping must be compatible with the chemical being fed.]
(D)
Chemical feed systems shall
be designed to minimize the possibility of leaks and spills and provide protection
against backpressure and siphoning.]
(E)
If enclosed feed lines are
used, they shall be designed and installed so as to prevent clogging and be
easily maintained.]
(F)
Dry chemical feeders shall
be located in a separate room that is provided with facilities for dust control.]
(G)
Coagulant feed systems shall
be designed so that coagulants are applied to the water prior to or within
the mixing basins or chambers so as to permit their complete mixing with the
water.]
(i)
Coagulant feed points shall be located downstream
of the raw water sampling tap.]
(ii)
Coagulants shall be applied continuously during
treatment plant operation.]
(H)
Chlorine feed units, ammonia
feed units, and storage facilities shall be separated by solid, sealed walls.]
(I)
Chemical application points
shall be provided to achieve acceptable finished water quality, adequate taste
and odor control, corrosion control and disinfection.]
NTU
] and the treatment plant meets
with turbidity requirements of §290.111 of this title (relating to Turbidity).
gallon
] per minute per square foot of surface area in the sedimentation
chamber.
electric powered
] pump station shall be provided to dewater the basin. Public water
systems with other potable water sources that can meet the system's average
daily demand are exempt from this requirement.
AWWA
] standards and be free from
clay, dirt, organic matter
,
and other impurities.
mm
], eight inches of medium sand with an effective
size of 0.45 to 0.55 mm, and eight inches of coarse sand with an effective
size of 0.55 to 0.65 mm. The uniformity coefficient of each size range should
not exceed 1.6.
twelve
] inches of sand with an effective size
of 0.45 to 0.55 mm and
24
[
twenty-four
] inches of anthracite
with an effective size of 0.9 to 1.1 mm. The uniformity coefficient of each
material should not exceed 1.6.
twenty-four
] inches of anthracite with an effective size of 0.9 to 1.1
mm. The uniformity coefficient of each size range should not exceed 1.6.
(relating to Turbidity)
].
Each
filter with a capacity of 1.0 million gallons per day or more shall be equipped
with an on-line turbidimeter.
]
determine
] the turbidity at 15-minute intervals.
gpm/sq. ft.
]) and usually not more than 35 inches
vertical rise per minute (21.8
gallons per minute per square foot
[
gpm/sq. ft.
]).
ad
] sumps. Adequate ventilation to prevent condensation
and to provide humidity control is also required.
five foot
] intervals.
Color coding must be by solid color or banding. If bands are used, they shall
be placed along the pipe at no greater than
five-foot
[
five
foot
] intervals.
Texas Department of Health
]
to conduct coliform analyses.
one of the Texas Department of Health's
certified laboratories
] on a timely basis.
Effective January 1, 2002,
each surface water treatment plant shall be provided with a computer and software
for recording performance data, maintaining records and submitting reports
to the executive director.
]
,
]
but, generally, more than one standby unit must be provided because of the
differences in feed rates or the physical state in which the disinfectants
are being fed (solid, liquid, or gas).
:
]
Uniform Fire Code (UFC)
].
(f)
] Other treatment processes.
The adjustment of fluoride ion content, special treatment for iron and manganese
reduction, special methods for taste and odor control, demineralization, corrosion
control processes, and other proposals covering other treatment processes
will be considered on an individual basis,
in accordance with
[
pursuant to
] §290.39(l) of this title [
(relating to General
Provisions)
]. Package-type treatment systems and their components shall
be subject to all applicable design criteria in this section. Where innovative/alternate
treatment systems are proposed, the licensed professional engineer must provide
pilot test data or data collected at similar full-scale operations demonstrating
that the system will produce water that meets the requirements of Subchapter
F of this
chapter
[
title
] (relating to Drinking Water
Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements for
Public [
Drinking
] Water [
Supply
] Systems). Pilot test
data must be representative of the actual operating conditions which can be
expected over the course of the year. The executive director may require proof
of a one-year
manufacturer's
[
manufacturers
] performance
warrantee or guarantee assuring that the plant will produce treated water
which meets minimum state and federal standards for drinking water quality.
(g)
] Sanitary facilities for water
works installations. Toilet and hand washing facilities provided in accordance
with established standards of good public health engineering practices shall
be available at all installations requiring frequent visits by operating personnel.
(h)
] Permits for waste discharges.
Any discharge of wastewater and other plant wastes shall be in accordance
with all applicable state and federal statutes and regulations.
Permits
for discharging wastes from water treatment processes shall be obtained from
the
commission
[
agency
], if necessary.
(i)
] Treatment chemicals and media.
All chemicals and any additional or replacement process media used in treatment
of water supplied by public water systems must conform to American National
Standards Institute/National Sanitation Foundation (ANSI/NSF) Standard 60
for direct additives and ANSI/NSF Standard 61 for indirect additives. Conformance
with these standards must be obtained by certification of the product by an
organization accredited by ANSI.
(j)
] Safety.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
] or
Texas
Hazard Communication Act
[
the Texas Hazard Communications Act
],
Texas Health and Safety Code
[
Health and Safety Code
], Title
6
[
5
], Chapter 502.
(k)
] Plant operations manual. A
thorough plant operations manual must be compiled and kept
up-to-date
[
up to date
] for operator review and reference. This manual
should be of sufficient detail to provide the operator with routine maintenance
and repair procedures
, with protocols to be utilized in the event of
a natural or man-made catastrophe,
as well as provide telephone numbers
of water system personnel, system officials, and local/state/federal agencies
to be contacted in the event of an emergency.
clear
well
], storage tank, and pressure maintenance capacity shall be governed
by the requirements in §290.45 of this title (relating to Minimum Water
System Capacity Requirements).
clear
wells
] or treated water tanks shall not be located under any part of
any buildings and, when possible, shall be constructed partially or wholly
above ground.
clear well
] located below ground level is allowed within 50 feet of a sanitary
sewer or septic tank. However, if the sanitary sewers are constructed of 150
pounds per square inch (psi) pressure-rated
[
psi pressure rated
] pipe with pressure-tested, watertight joints as used in water main
construction, the minimum separation distance is
ten
[
10
]
feet.
clear well
] located below ground level is allowed within 150 feet of a septic
tank soil absorption system.
clear wells
], standpipes, ground storage tanks, and elevated tanks.
All facilities for potable water storage shall be covered and designed, fabricated,
erected, tested
,
and disinfected in strict accordance with current
American Water Works Association (AWWA) standards and shall be provided with
the minimum number, size and type of roof vents, man ways, drains, sample
connections, access ladders, overflows, liquid level indicators
,
and
other appurtenances as specified in these rules. Bolted tanks shall be designed,
fabricated, erected
,
and tested in strict accordance with current
AWWA Standard D103. The roof of all tanks shall be designed and erected so
that no water ponds at any point on the roof and, in addition, no area of
the roof shall have a slope of less than 0.75 inch per foot.
gravity hinged
] and weighted cover. The cover shall fit tightly with
no gap over 1/16 inch. If the overflow terminates at any point other than
the ground level, it shall be located near enough and at a position accessible
from a ladder or the balcony for inspection purposes. The overflow(s) shall
be sized to handle the maximum possible fill rate without exceeding the capacity
of the overflow(s). The discharge opening of the overflow(s) shall be above
the surface of the ground and shall not be subject to submergence.
clear wells
] and
water storage tanks shall have a liquid level indicator located at the tank
site. The indicator can be a float with a moving target, an ultrasonic level
indicator, or a pressure gauge calibrated in feet of water. If an elevated
tank or standpipe has a float with moving target indicator, it must also have
a pressure indicator located at ground level. Pressure gauges must not be
less than three inches in diameter and calibrated at not more than two-foot
intervals. Remote reading gauges at the owner's treatment plant or pumping
station will not eliminate the requirement for a gauge at the tank site unless
the tank is located at the plant or station.
short circuiting
] or stagnation
of water. Clearwells used for disinfectant contact time shall be appropriately
baffled.
Clear wells
] and potable
water storage tanks shall be thoroughly tight against leakage, shall be located
above the groundwater table, and shall have no walls in common with any other
plant units containing water in the process of treatment. All associated appurtenances
including valves, pipes, and fittings shall be tight against leakage.
clear well
] or potable
water storage tank shall be provided with a means of removing accumulated
silt and deposits at all low points in the bottom of the tank. Drains shall
not be connected to any waste or sewage disposal system and shall be constructed
so that they are not a potential agent in the contamination of the stored
water.
clear wells
], ground
storage tanks, standpipes, and elevated tanks shall be painted, disinfected,
and maintained in strict accordance with current AWWA standards. However,
no temporary coatings, wax grease coatings, or coating materials containing
lead will be allowed. No other coatings will be allowed which are not approved
for use (as a contact surface with potable water) by the
EPA
[
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
], National Sanitation
Foundation (NSF), or [
the
] United States Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). All newly installed coatings must conform to
American National
Standards Institute/National Sanitation Foundation (ANSI/NSF)
[
ANSI/NSF
] Standard 61 and must be certified by an organization accredited
by ANSI.
fencing
]. All
potable water storage tanks and pressure maintenance facilities must be
installed in a lockable building that is designed to prevent intruder access
or
enclosed by an
intruder-resistant
[
intruder resistant
] fence with lockable gates. Pedestal-type elevated storage tanks with
lockable doors and without external ladders are exempt from this requirement.
The gates and doors must be kept locked whenever the facility is unattended.
water line
] must be located below the frost line
and in no case shall the top of the
waterline
[
water line
] be less than 24 inches below ground surface.
For
] installation or repair
of any public water supply
;
[
,
] and
For
] installation or repair
of any plumbing in a residential or nonresidential facility providing water
for human consumption and connected to a public drinking water supply system.
water line
] sizes.
The minimum
waterline
[
water line
] sizes are for domestic
flows only and do not consider fire flows. Larger pipe sizes shall be used
when the licensed professional engineer deems it necessary. It should be noted
that the required sizes are based strictly on the number of customers to be
served and not on the distances between connections or differences in elevation
or the type of pipe. No new
waterline
[
water line
] under
two inches in diameter will be allowed to be installed in a public water system
distribution system. These minimum line sizes do not apply to individual customer
service lines.
pounds per square inch (psi)
] must
be maintained on the suction line at all times. Such installations must be
equipped with automatic pressure cut-off devices so that the pumping units
become inoperative at a suction pressure of less than 20 psi. In addition,
a continuous pressure recording device may be required at a predetermined
suspected critical pressure point on the suction line in order to record the
hydraulic conditions in the line at all times. If such a record indicates
critical minimum pressures (less than 20 psi), adequate storage facilities
must be installed with the booster pumps taking suction from the storage facility.
Fire pumps used to maintain pressure on automatic sprinkler systems only for
fire protection purposes are not considered as in-line booster pumps.
nine foot
] separation
distance cannot be achieved, the following criteria shall apply
.
[
:
]
Waterline Installation - Parallel Lines
].
Waterline Installation - Crossing Lines
].
§290.44(e)(4)(B)(vi) of this title
]) for the total length
of one pipe segment plus 12 inches beyond the joint on each end.
:
]
18 foot
] (or longer) section of pipe. Flexible encasing pipe shall have
a minimum pipe stiffness of 115 psi at 5.0% deflection. The encasing pipe
shall be centered on the waterline and shall be at least two nominal pipe
diameters larger than the wastewater main or lateral. The space around the
carrier pipe shall be supported at five-foot (or less) intervals with spacers
or be filled to the springline with washed sand. Each end of the casing shall
be sealed with
watertight
[
water tight
] non-shrink cement
grout or a manufactured
watertight
[
water tight
] seal.
An absolute minimum separation distance of six inches between the encasement
pipe and the waterline shall be provided. The wastewater line shall be located
below the waterline.
water line
] and the wastewater main or lateral shall be provided. Both
the waterline and wastewater main or lateral must pass a pressure and leakage
test as specified in AWWA C600 standards.
centerline
] of the wastewater main or lateral. The potable waterline
shall be at least six inches above the wastewater main or lateral. Whenever
possible, the crossing shall be centered between the joints of the wastewater
main or lateral. The wastewater pipe shall have a minimum pressure rating
of at least 150 psi. The wastewater main or lateral shall be embedded in cement
stabilized sand (see clause (vi) of this subparagraph) for the total length
of one pipe segment plus 12 inches beyond the joint on each end.
Wastewater Main or Lateral Manhole or Cleanout
Separation
]. The separation distance from a potable waterline to a wastewater
main or lateral manhole or cleanout shall be a minimum of nine feet. Where
the nine-foot separation distance cannot be achieved, the potable waterline
shall be encased in a joint of at least 150 psi pressure class pipe at least
18 feet long and two nominal sizes larger than the new conveyance. The space
around the carrier pipe shall be supported at
five-foot
[
five feet
] intervals with spacers or be filled to the
springline
[
spring line
] with washed sand. The encasement pipe shall
be centered on the crossing and both ends sealed with cement grout or manufactured
sealant.
Fire Hydrants
]. Fire hydrants shall not be installed within nine feet vertically
or horizontally of any wastewater main, wastewater lateral
,
or
wastewater service line regardless of construction.
Potable or Raw Water Supply or Suction Lines
]. Suction
mains to pumping equipment shall not cross wastewater mains, wastewater laterals
,
or wastewater service lines. Raw water supply lines shall not be installed
within five feet of any tile or concrete wastewater main, wastewater lateral,
or wastewater service line.
Septic Tank Drainfields
]. Waterlines shall not be installed closer than
ten feet to septic tank drainfields.
water lines
] are laid under any flowing or intermittent
stream or semipermanent body of water such as marsh, bay
,
or estuary.
In these cases, the water main shall be installed in a separate watertight
pipe encasement and valves must be provided on each side of the crossing with
facilities to allow the underwater portion of the system to be isolated and
tested to determine that there are no leaks in the underwater line. Alternately,
and with the permission of the executive director, the watertight pipe encasement
may be omitted.
water line
] will be required or
at the next available sampling point beyond 1,000 feet as designated by the
design engineer.
allowed
] to any condensing,
cooling
,
or industrial process or any other system of nonpotable
usage over which the public water supply system officials do not have sanitary
control, unless the said connection is made in accordance with the requirements
of paragraph (1) of this subsection. Water from such systems cannot be returned
to the potable water supply.
a
] executive director approved course
on cross-connection control and backflow prevention assembly testing, pass
an examination administered by the
executive director,
[
TNRCC
or its designated agent
] and hold current professional certification
as a backflow prevention assembly tester.
Test Report
] must
be completed by the recognized backflow prevention assembly tester for each
assembly tested. The signed and dated original must be submitted to the public
water supplier for
recordkeeping
[
record keeping
] purposes.
Any form which varies from the format specified in Appendix F
located
in §290.47(f)
of this title [
(relating to Backflow Prevention
Assembly Test and Maintenance Report)
] must be approved by the executive
director prior to being placed in use.
:
]
:
]
National Sanitation Foundation
]. Effective January 1, 1993, any newly installed surfaces shall conform
to ANSI/NSF Standard 61 and must be certified by an organization accredited
by ANSI.
mg/l
] or, if chloramines are used as the primary disinfectant, a chloramine
residual of 1.0
mg/L
[
mg/l
] (measured as total chlorine)
shall be maintained in the water being hauled. Chlorine or chlorine containing
compounds may be added on a "batch" basis to maintain the required residual.
listed
] in this section are minimum requirements
only.
;
]
If
] fewer than 300 persons per day are
served, the system must meet the following requirements:
If 300 or more persons per day are served, the system
] must meet the
following requirements:
2500
] connections,
it is recognized that local conditions may dictate the use of alternate methods
utilizing hydropneumatic tanks and on-site emergency power equipment. Alternative
capacity requirements to the elevated storage requirements may be obtained
based on request to and approval by the executive director. Special conditions
apply to systems qualifying for an elevated storage alternative capacity requirement.
Battery powered
]
or uninterrupted power supply pressure monitors and chart recorders which
are configured to activate immediately upon loss of normal power must be provided
for pressure maintenance facilities. These records must be kept for a minimum
of three years and made available for review by the executive director. Records
must include chart recordings of all power interruptions including interruptions
due to periodic emergency power under-load testing and maintenance.
these sections
] and maintained and operated
in accordance with the following minimum acceptable operating practices. Owners
and operators shall allow entry to members of the commission and employees
and agents of the commission onto any public or private property at any reasonable
time for the purpose of inspecting and investigating conditions relating to
public water systems in the state. Members, employees, or agents acting under
this authority shall observe the establishment's rules and regulations concerning
safety, internal security, and fire protection, and if the property has management
in residence, shall notify management or the person then in charge of his
presence and shall exhibit proper credentials.
Supply
] Systems). Microbiological samples may
be required by the executive director for monitoring purposes in addition
to the routine samples required by the drinking water standards. These samples
shall be submitted to a certified laboratory. (A list of the certified laboratories
can be obtained by contacting the executive director).
mg/l
]; or
mg/l
] (measured as total chlorine) for those systems that feed ammonia.
(7) of this subsection, all public water systems must be operated continuously
under the direct supervision of an adequately trained and appropriately licensed
water works operator.
]
Systems serving
no more than 1,000 connections must employ at least one operator meeting the
applicable requirements of paragraph (3) of this subsection.
]
Systems
that serve more than 1,000 connections must employ at least two operators
who meet the applicable requirements of paragraph (3) of this subsection.
]
The production, treatment, and distribution
facilities of all public water systems must be operated at all times under
the direct supervision of a water works operator who holds an applicable,
valid license issued by the executive director.
]
Systems serving fewer than 250 connections must employ an operator with a
Class "D" or higher license if they only use groundwater or purchased treated
water.
]
Systems that serve 250 or more connections
must employ an operator with a Class "C" or higher license if they only use
purchased treated water.
]
Systems that serve 250 or
more connections must employ an operator with a Class "C" or higher Groundwater
license if they use groundwater and do not treat groundwater that is under
the direct influence of surface water or surface water.
]
(D)
Systems that treat groundwater
that is under the direct influence of surface water and do not treat surface
water must meet the following requirements related to the direct supervision
of their facilities:]
(i)
Systems which utilize cartridge filters must
employ an operator who has a Class "C" or higher Surface water license or
has a Class "C" or higher Groundwater license and has completed a four-hour
training course on monitoring and reporting requirements.]
(ii)
Systems which utilize coagulant addition and
direct filtration must employ an operator who has a Class "C" or higher Surface
Water license or has a Class "C" or higher Groundwater license and has completed
a 40-hour Surface Water Production course.]
(iii)
Systems which utilize complete surface water
treatment must comply with the requirements of subparagraph (E) of this paragraph.]
(iv)
Each plant must have at least one Class "C"
or higher operator on duty at the plant when it is in operation or the plant
must be provided with continuous turbidity and disinfectant residual monitors
with automatic plant shutdown and alarms to summon operators so as to ensure
that the water produced continues to meet the commission's drinking water
standards during periods when the plant is not staffed.]
(E)
Systems that treat surface
water must meet the following requirements related to the supervision of their
facilities.]
(i)
Beginning January 1, 2003, systems that treat
surface water must employ at least one operator who holds a Class "B" or higher
surface water license. Until January 1, 2003, these systems must employ at
least one operator who holds a Class "B" or higher surface water license or
who holds a Class "C" or higher Surface water license and has completed an
approved 20-hour water laboratory course.]
(ii)
Each surface water treatment plant must have
at least one Class "C" or higher surface water operator on duty at the plant
when it is in operation or the plant must be provided with continuous turbidity
and disinfectant residual monitors with automatic plant shutdown and alarms
to summon operators so as to ensure that the water produced continues to meet
the commission's drinking water standards during periods when the plant is
not staffed.]
(iii)
Public water systems shall not allow Class
"D" operators to adjust or modify the treatment processes at surface water
treatment plant unless an operator who holds a Class "C" or higher surface
license is present at the plant and has issued specific instructions regarding
the proposed adjustment.]
Beginning January 1, 2004,
the treatment facilities at all systems using chlorine dioxide must be under
the direct supervision of a licensed operator who has completed additional
training. Unless a higher level of certification is required by paragraph
(3) of this subsection, public water systems using chlorine dioxide must place
those facilities under the direct supervision of a licensed operator who has
a Class "C" or higher license and has completed an approved water laboratory
course.
]
Public water systems shall not allow new or repaired production, treatment,
storage, pressure maintenance or distribution facilities to be placed into
service without the prior guidance and approval of a licensed water works
operator.
]
Public water systems shall ensure that their
operators are trained regarding the use of all chemicals used in the water
treatment plant. Training programs shall meet applicable standards established
by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) or the Texas Hazard
Communications Act, Texas Health and Safety Code, Title 6, Chapter 502.
]
(7)
Transient noncommunity public
water systems are exempt from the requirements of this subsection if they
use only groundwater or purchase treated water from another public water system.]
and
]
.
]
and
]
.
]
10
] years:
10
] years after completion of the survey involved;
and
any monthly or
quarterly reports required by the executive director
].
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
], Water Supply Division, MC 155, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087
by the tenth day of the month following the end of the reporting period.
Texas Department of Health
]. The sample
results must indicate that the facility is free of microbiological contamination
before it is placed into service. When it is necessary to return repaired
mains to service as rapidly as possible, doses may be increased to 500
mg/L
[
mg/l
] and the contact time reduced to
1/2
[
one-half
] hour.
commission approved
] course, passed
an examination administered by the
executive director,
[
TNRCC
or its designated agent
] and hold current professional certification
or endorsement as a customer service inspector.
cross connections
], potential
contaminant hazards
,
and illegal lead materials. The customer service
inspector has no authority or obligation beyond the scope of the commission's
regulations. A customer service inspection is not a plumbing inspection as
defined and regulated by the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners (TSBPE).
A customer service inspector is not permitted to perform plumbing inspections.
State statutes and TSBPE adopted rules require that TSBPE licensed plumbing
inspectors perform plumbing inspections of all new plumbing and alterations
or additions to existing plumbing within the municipal limits of all cities,
towns
,
and villages which have passed an ordinance adopting one
of the plumbing codes recognized by TSBPE. Such entities may stipulate that
the customer service inspection be performed by the plumbing inspector as
a part of the more comprehensive plumbing inspection. Where such entities
permit customer service inspectors to perform customer service inspections,
the customer service inspector shall report any violations immediately to
the local entity's plumbing inspection department.
or more frequently
]
. Dead-end lines and
other mains shall be flushed as needed
if water quality complaints are
received from water customers or if disinfectant residuals fall below acceptable
levels as specified in §290.110 of this title (relating to Disinfectant
Residuals).
:
]
Water Rates
]). Those systems
not subject to Chapter 291 of this title shall notify the executive director
of changes in ownership by providing the name of the current and prospective
owner or responsible official, the proposed date of the transaction, and the
address and phone number of the new owner or responsible official. The information
listed in this paragraph and the system's public drinking water supply identification
number, and any other information necessary to identify the transaction shall
be provided to the executive director 120 days before the date of the transaction.
pursuant to
] this section, it shall remain in effect
until water distribution pressures in excess of 20 psi can consistently be
maintained, a minimum of 0.2
mg/L
[
mg/l
] free chlorine
residual or 0.5
mg/L
[
mg/l
] chloramine residual (measured
as total chlorine) is present throughout the system, and water samples collected
for microbiological analysis are found negative for coliform organisms.
mg/l
] free chlorine residual or 0.5
mg/L
[
mg/l
]
chloramine residual (measured as total chlorine) is present throughout the
system, and water samples collected for microbiological analysis are found
negative for coliform organisms.
manufacturers
] specifications at least once
every 30 days
[
each day
].
online
]
turbidimeters shall be checked at least once each week with a primary standard,
a secondary standard, or the manufacturer's proprietary calibration confirmation
device or by comparing the results from the on-line unit with the results
from a properly calibrated benchtop unit. If necessary, the on-line unit shall
be recalibrated with primary standards.
in a securely mounted conduit
]
in compliance with a local or national electrical code.
Subchapter F. DRINKING WATER STANDARDS GOVERNING DRINKING WATER QUALITY AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS