Part 1. TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Chapter 290. PUBLIC DRINKING WATER

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission) proposes amendments to §§290.38, 290.39, 290.41, 290.42, 290.44 - 290.47, 290.101 - 290.104, 290.106 - 290.110, 290.112 - 290.114, 290.117 - 290.119, 290.121, 290.122, 290.272, 290.273, 290.275, and the repeal of §290.111. The commission proposes new §§290.111, 290.115, and 290.116.

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED RULES

The primary purposes of the proposed amendments and new rules are to implement federal regulations pertaining to the safety of drinking water from groundwater and surface water sources. The proposed amendments also limit the exposure of the public to waterborne disease and enhance the customer's ability to know if there is something harmful in their drinking water. These amendments and new rules are proposed in response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBP2) and Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2) promulgated in January 2006; the Ground Water Rule (GWR) promulgated in October 2006; and the Public Notification Rule (PNR) promulgated in 2000. These rules are necessary for the state to maintain primacy for regulating public water systems (PWSs).

DBP2 provides public drinking water customers more equitable protection from the risks of disinfection byproducts. Its provisions include a one-year period of EPA-required increased early implementation sampling called the Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) that will be used to select new compliance monitoring sites; new compliance determination methods; operational evaluation level reporting; increased detail for currently required monitoring plans; and updated analytical methods.

LT2 provides increased protection from the protozoan Cryptosporidium found in surface water. Its provisions include a special period of increased early implementation sampling to determine the concentration of Cryptosporidium oocysts in source water; new required treatment levels for Cryptosporidium removal determined on a plant-by-plant basis; defined technologies for Cryptosporidium removal called the microbial toolbox; and updated analytical methods.

The GWR provides greater protection from pathogens to customers of PWSs that provide drinking water, in part or in whole, from sources of groundwater. Provisions of EPA's rule include raw water sampling at wells following any total coliform detection in a distribution system; required corrective action if fecal indicators are detected in a well; newly defined violations for the presence of fecal contaminants in raw water; and updated analytical methods.

TCEQ adopted requirements of the federal PNR in 2002, but three provisions remain to be added to our rule language. First, the rules require all public water systems that must issue public notice to certify in writing that the notice has been sent. Second, the rules change the amount of time in which a public water system must notify the TCEQ and its customers of an acute violation from one business day to 24 hours. Third, the rules ensure appropriate enforcement and tracking of public notice violations by including a reference to public notice violations under each constituent's compliance determination subsection.

The commission also proposes changes to ensure consistency of the state rules with the existing federal Total Coliforms (Including Fecal Coliforms and E. Coli) rule (TCR) and Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts rule (DBP1).

Additionally, the proposed rules reflect changes to the Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §341.033(i), made during the 79th Regular Legislative Session, regarding homeland security. Finally, the commission proposes to move the definition of "process control duties" from 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC), §30.387, to this chapter.

Throughout the preamble the commission notes that the amendments that it is making are being proposed to make its rules consistent with the federal rules. When the commission uses the words "consistent with" in the preamble they mean the following: Where the EPA provided flexibility for the state to implement the federal rules the commission is proposing rules that provide standards consistent with the federal directives and that fit with existing state rules. Where EPA did not provide flexibility to the states, the commission has incorporated the federal rule requirements into Chapter 290 but changed the language, without changing the regulatory requirements, to fit the state rules.

SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION

In addition to implementation of the federal laws discussed previously, the commission proposes administrative changes throughout the proposed rule to reflect the agency's current practices and to conform with Texas Register and agency guidelines. These changes include updating references to the TCEQ's predecessor agencies, updating cross-references, deleting effective dates that have already passed, and correcting typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors.

Subchapter D: Rules and Regulations for Public Water Systems

Subchapter D contains requirements for the physical facilities associated with public water systems. TCEQ must review and approve plans for facilities under EPA's special primacy conditions of 40 CFR §142.

Section 290.38, Definitions, contains definitions related to the design, pressure, flow, and treatment requirements that are contained in Subchapter D.

The commission proposes to amend §290.38 to add definitions found in LT2 and renumber the current definitions to maintain alphabetical order.

Specifically, the commission proposes to amend §290.38 to add definitions for the following terms: bag filter; cartridge filter; filtrate; and membrane filtration to incorporate definitions in the federal LT2 in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §141.2.

The commission also proposes to amend §290.38 to add definitions for the following terms: challenge test; direct integrity test; indirect integrity monitoring; log removal value (LRV); membrane LRV_C-Test ; membrane module; membrane sensitivity; membrane unit; quality control release value (QCRV); resolution; and sensitivity. The term "log removal" is a term of art that describes the percent removal of a constituent: 1-log removal equals 90% removal; 2-log removal equals 99% removal; and so forth. These definitions are based on definitions in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719 and Glossary EPA 815-R-06-009, the EPA Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual.

The commission also proposes to amend §290.38 to add the definitions of "chemical disinfectant" and "reactor validation testing" to incorporate definitions in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720 and the EPA 815-R-06-007, EPA Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual Glossary, and to amend the definition of "disinfectant" to differentiate this definition from the definition of "chemical disinfectant."

The commission proposes to move the definition for "innovative/alternate treatment" from §290.42(g) to §290.38 for consistency with the organizational principle that definitions be grouped in this section. This definition is also proposed to be amended for consistency with the microbial toolbox options for meeting Cryptosporidium treatment requirements in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.715.

The commission proposes to move the definition of "process control duties" from §30.387(5) to §290.38 because the definition applies to allowable activities at public water systems, not to individuals who are licensed water operators. Chapter 30 contains requirements for becoming licensed as a public water system operator, as contrasted with Chapter 290, Subchapter F, which contains the requirements related to what types of operators a public water system must hire, and what duties those personnel may perform. The rule language of Chapter 30 related to water operators is under revision in the Occupational Licensing rule package, with the definition of "process control duties" proposed to be deleted and moved to Chapter 290. The language is proposed to be deleted from those rules based on an interoffice agreement that it is better placed in Chapter 290. The docket number for the Occupational Licensing rule package is 2006-1699-RUL and the rule project number is 2006-041-030-CE. The Occupational Licensing rule package is scheduled to go to agenda in September 2007 for adoption.

Section 290.39, General Provisions, describes how public water systems must submit plans or exception requests.

The commission proposes to add new §290.39(j)(1)(E) to specifically state the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2)(viii) that describes how the executive director will determine the ability of modified membrane modules to inactivate microorganisms.

The commission proposes to add new §290.39(l)(4) to specifically state the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.721(f) that the executive director be able to establish requirements for systems that have been issued an exception.

Section 290.41, Water Sources, contains the requirements for sources of water that are used as drinking water, for example, location and construction requirements for wells or surface water intake structures.

The commission proposes to amend §290.41(c)(3)(C) to reference the most current version of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Standard for Water Wells and the most current standard's appendices.

The commission proposes to add new §290.41(d)(5) to incorporate 40 CFR §141.710(f) which requires systems with new springs or similar source to perform microbiological source water quality testing to determine the level of treatment required under LT2.

The commission proposes to amend §290.41(e)(1)(F) to include the proper spelling of the word Escherichia and the proper italicization of the words coli , Giardia and Cryptosporidium .

The commission proposes to add new §290.41(e)(1)(G) to incorporate 40 CFR §141.710(f) requiring systems with new surface water intakes, groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water, and bank filtration wells to perform microbiological source water quality testing to determine the level of treatment, known as Bin Classification, required under LT2.

Section 290.42, Water Treatment, covers design and construction requirements related to drinking water treatment. It also provides the conditions under which a treatment process can be considered acceptable to meet the health-based standards of Subchapter F.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(a)(2) by changing the term "underground water" to "groundwater" to be consistent with the use of the term "groundwater" throughout the subchapter.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(b)(8) to incorporate the requirements of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(6)(iv) that the executive director may require viral treatment on groundwater systems based on raw water sampling results showing the presence of fecal indicator organisms.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(c)(1) to incorporate the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.711(a) that systems using spring or other water sources with raw water monitoring results showing the presence of fecal indicators may be required to design treatment systems to achieve higher levels of Cryptosporidium treatment.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(c)(6) to eliminate the date because the effective date of the regulation change has passed.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(d)(1) to incorporate the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.711(a) that systems using surface water sources with raw water monitoring results showing elevated levels of Cryptosporidium will be required to design treatment systems to achieve higher levels of Cryptosporidium treatment.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(d)(3) and §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii) to eliminate the dates because the effective dates of the regulation changes have passed.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(g) to include the review and design requirements of bag and cartridge filtration, membrane filtration, and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection as specified in 40 CFR §141.119 and 40 CFR §141.120. Currently, the only innovative treatment with specific requirements is package treatment. Bag and cartridge filtration, membrane filtration, and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection are alternate treatment techniques included in the LT2 "microbial tool box" which are identified as the most likely to be used by Texas systems to meet the new LT2 requirements. The addition of the other innovative treatments with specific design requirements under the federal LT2 from EPA creates the need for new, separate paragraphs.

Specifically, the commission proposes to amend §290.42(g) by moving the definition of "innovative/alternate treatment" systems from the text of this subsection to §290.38 for consistency with the organizational principle that groups all definitions related to this subchapter in §290.38.

The commission proposes to amend §290.42(g) to incorporate the requirement that the executive director have the ability to require and review pilot protocols prior to pilot studies. The amendment is consistent with existing rules and new federal law. The existing requirements of §290.39(l) and the new requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.119 and 40 CFR §141.120 include provisions for challenge studies and validation studies. Existing §290.121 also requires that all compliance samples have a monitoring plan approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(1) to contain the sentence in existing §290.42(g) regarding the design requirements for package-type treatment systems.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2) to incorporate the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(a) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can receive microbiological treatment credit if specified criteria are met.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(A) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the entire plant flow is treated by the filters.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if approved by the executive director based on challenge testing that must be conducted in accordance with criteria established by EPA and the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B)(i) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a)(1) that bag and cartridge filtration systems must apply a factor of safety to the log removal credit determined from challenge testing.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B)(ii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a)(2) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the challenge testing is performed on bag or cartridge filtration devices that are identical to the filtration devices that will be used by the public water system.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B)(iii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a)(2) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the challenge testing is performed on bag or cartridge filtration devices that are arranged in an identical configuration to the filtration devices that will be used by the public water system.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B)(iv) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a)(1) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can receive microbiological treatment credit based on challenge testing performed before January 5, 2006 if the testing met the EPA criteria, is submitted by the system and is approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(B)(v) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(a)(10) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the bag or cartridge filtration devices used in the challenge study have not been modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the filter and to provide that if the bag or cartridge filtration device has been modified in this manner, a new challenge study must be conducted.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(2)(C) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(a) that bag and cartridge filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane systems have been challenge tested, have the ability for direct and indirect integrity testing, and are designed to meet the other requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b) describing the conditions under which membrane filtration systems can receive microbiological treatment credit under LT2.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(A) to incorporate the criteria of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2) that membrane filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if approved by the executive director based on challenge testing that must be conducted in accordance with criteria established by EPA and the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(A)(i) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2)(v), (b)(2)(vi) and (b)(2)(vii) that membrane systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if, before stating the challenge tests, the system submits and receives executive director approval for the challenge testing protocol. That protocol must include the plan for testing the membranes and for calculating how well the membranes remove microbes.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(A)(ii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2)(i) that membrane systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the challenge testing is performed on membrane filtration devices that are identical to the filtration devices that will be used by the public water system. If smaller-scale membrane devices are used in the challenge testing, then they must be identical in material and similar in construction to the filtration devices that will be used by the public water system.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(A)(iii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2) that membrane filtration systems can receive microbiological treatment credit based on challenge testing performed before January 5, 2006, if the testing met the EPA criteria, is submitted by the system and is approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(A)(iv) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2)(viii) that membranes can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane devices used in the challenge study have not been modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the filter, or the quality control release value. If the bag or cartridge filtration device has been modified in this manner, a new challenge study must be conducted.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(B) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3) that membrane filtration system can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane systems is designed to conduct and record the results of direct integrity tests demonstrating a removal efficiency equal to or greater than the removal credit awarded by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(B)(i) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(i), that membrane systems be designed to allow direct integrity testing of each membrane unit.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(B)(ii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(ii), that membrane systems be designed to allow direct integrity testing that has a resolution of 3 micrometers or less.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(B)(iii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(iii), that membrane systems be designed to allow direct integrity testing that has a sensitivity to verify log removal credit that meets EPA criteria.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(B)(iv) to incorporate the ability of the state described in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(iv) to approve less frequent direct integrity testing.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(C) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(4) and (b)(4)(i) that membrane filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane system is designed to conduct and record the results of continuous indirect integrity tests, describes the equipment required to perform these tests, and restates the ability of the state to allow alternative monitoring technology as contained in existing §290.39(1).

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(D), (g)(3)(D)(i) and (g)(3)(D)(ii) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(1) that the microbiological treatment credit that membrane filtration systems can receive is no greater than the lower of the credits received through challenge testing or direct integrity testing.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(E) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(b) that membrane filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane systems have been challenge tested, have the ability for direct and indirect integrity testing, and are designed to meet the other requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(3)(F) to incorporate the requirement of EPA 815-R-06-009, EPA Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual, that membrane filtration systems can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the membrane systems are designed with the described cross connection control measures.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(4) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.73(d) describing how bag, cartridge and membrane filters can receive microbial credit before the compliance date of LT2.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5) to incorporate the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(1) that UV light reactors may receive microbiological treatment credit.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5)(A) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(1) that UV light reactors can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the UV light reactors are located after the water has been treated with filtration to remove turbidity that would interfere with disinfection. Turbidity is a measurement of the cloudiness of water, used as a surrogate measurement indicating the potential presence of pathogens. Water higher in turbidity is less safe than water with low turbidity.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5)(B) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(2) that UV light reactors can only receive microbiological treatment credit if approved by the executive director based on validation testing that must be conducted in accordance with criteria established by EPA and the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5)(B)(i) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(2)(i) that UV light reactors can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the validation testing addresses the impact of UV absorbance, lamp fouling, lamp aging, on-line sensor uncertainty, hydraulic turbulence factors, effect of critical failures, piping configuration, lamp and sensor locations, and any other data deemed necessary by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5)(B)(ii) to incorporate the criteria of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(2)(ii) that UV light reactors can only receive microbiological treatment credit if the validation testing is performed on a UV light reactor that is essentially identical to the UV light reactor that will be used by the public water system and that the water used in the validation testing is essentially identical to the water used by the system.

The commission proposes to add new §290.42(g)(5)(C) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) that a UV light reactor system can only receive microbiological treatment credit if it is designed to conduct and record parameters to determine if the reactors are operating within the validated conditions approved by the executive director.

Section 290.44, Water Distribution, contains the design requirements for drinking water distribution systems. The commission proposes to amend §290.44(h)(4)(A) to change the words "professional certification" to "license." All previously issued backflow prevention assembly tester certificates expired December 1, 2002. This certification was replaced by licensing in 30 TAC §30.51(c).

Section 290.45, Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements, contains the minimum water system capacity requirements. The commission proposes to amend §290.45(c)(1)(B)(ii) to correct the typographical error of gpm to gallons per unit.

The commission proposes to amend the figure, Table A, in §290.45(d)(1) to correct the units for capacity by adding the phrase "/Day."

Section 290.46, Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking Water Systems, contains the minimum acceptable operating requirements for public water systems, for example, record retention periods.

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(e)(2)(C) to eliminate the date because the effective date of the regulation change has passed.

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(f)(3)(B)(iv) to change the title of §290.111 to be consistent with the name change proposed for that section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(B)(vii) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.722(a) that raw surface water monitoring results be kept for three years after bin classification. Bin classification is the process under the federal LT2 whereby the executive director establishes the level of microbial inactivation that is required at individual water treatment plants treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(B)(viii) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.722(b) that public water systems retain records related to system notification to the executive director of treatment in lieu of monitoring for three years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(B)(ix) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.722(c) that public water systems retain records of all surface water treatment monitoring that is used to determine log inactivation or removal for three years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(D)(iv) to incorporate the requirement of existing federal requirement 40 CFR §141.33(f) that all monitoring plans be kept for five years to follow the standard organization for record retention requirements, consistent with existing §290.121.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(D)(v) to incorporate the requirement of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(b)(3) that all corrective action plans and schedules for groundwater systems be kept by the public water system for five years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(D)(vi) to incorporate the requirement of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(b)(3) that all documentation of the reason for an invalidated fecal indicator source sample be kept by the public water system for five years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(D)(vii) to incorporate the requirement of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(b)(4) that all notifications to wholesale systems due to coliform positive samples be kept by the public water system for five years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(D)(viii) to incorporate the requirement of existing 40 CFR §141.153 that all consumer confidence report compliance documentation be kept for five years, consistent with the organization of record retention requirements. Record retention requirements for reports required by the drinking water standards of Subchapter F are contained in §290.46(f) as part of the minimum operating requirements for public water systems.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(E)(v) to incorporate the requirement of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.601(c)(4) that Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) reports be kept by the public water system for ten years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(E)(vi) to incorporate the requirement of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.601(c)(4) that any notification of modifications to an IDSE report be kept by the public water system for ten years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(E)(vii) to incorporate the requirement of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.601(b)(4) that 40/30 certifications be kept by the public water system for ten years.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(f)(3)(E)(viii) to incorporate the requirement of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(b)(1) that documentation of corrective actions be kept by the public water system for ten years.

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(g) to spell out the acronym for American Water Works Association at its first usage.

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(j) by change the name of §290.47(d) from "Customer Service Inspection Certificate" to "Appendices" to reflect the existing name of §290.47. Additionally, the commission proposes to include the acronym for the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners in §290.46(j)(1)(A).

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(j)(1)(B) to change the words "certification or endorsement" to "license." All previously issued customer service inspection endorsements expired. This endorsement was replaced by a license in existing §30.81(c).

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(s) to incorporate requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(b) and 40 CFR §141.720(d) to include testing requirements for membrane systems and UV light.

The commission proposes to amend §290.46(s)(2)(C) to differentiate between the existing requirements for chemical disinfectants and the new requirements of 40 CFR §141.720(d) for the use of UV light.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(s)(2)(D) to include the requirements of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) that UV light analyzers be properly calibrated.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(s)(2)(D)(i) to include the requirements of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) that duty UV sensors be verified with reference UV sensors monthly.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(s)(2)(D)(ii) to include the requirements of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) that reference UV sensors be calibrated yearly or sooner.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(s)(2)(D)(iii) to include the requirements of 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) that UV transmittance sensors be calibrated weekly.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(s)(2)(E) to include the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719 that systems must verify performance of direct integrity testing and equipment as approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.46(w) to incorporate the requirements of THSC §341.003(i) for systems to have a plan to notify the commission in case of an event that negatively impacts the production and delivery of safe and adequate drinking water. Paragraphs (1) through (5) describe emergency events that trigger notification.

Section 290.47, Appendices, contains the flow chart for systems to use in determining whether a boil water notice is needed when pressure in the distribution system drops.

The commission proposes to amend the figure, Boil Water Notification, in §290.47(e) to update the TCEQ's phone number.

The commission proposes to amend the figure, Service Agreement, in §290.47(f) to replace the term "calibration date" with the term "Date Tested for Accuracy" as stated in §290.44(h)(4)(B) and to add a line for the certified tester to sign the form as required by §290.44(h)(4)(C).

The commission proposes to amend §290.47(h) to replace "TNRCC" with "TCEQ" in the graphic.

Subchapter F: Drinking Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements

Subchapter F contains the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), treatment techniques, sampling frequencies and locations, and reporting requirements for drinking water quality as provided by the EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and its amendments.

Section 290.101, Purpose, states the purpose of the drinking water standards and other requirements contained in Subchapter F. The commission proposes to amend §290.101 to correct typographical and syntax errors. The periods after each letter in the acronym for United States Code are proposed to be removed, the term " et seq. " is proposed to be italicized and the period after "et seq " is proposed to be removed, and the acronym "EPA" is proposed to be replaced with the full name of the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Section 290.102, General Applicability, describes the conditions under which the drinking water standards apply to a water system. The commission proposes to amend §290.102 to correct typographical and syntax errors. The commission proposes to amend the catchline of §290.102(a) to eliminate the initial capital letter on the word "applicability." The commission proposes to correct the reference to the Safe Drinking Water Act in §290.102(b) by replacing the existing word "Safety" with the word "Safe," and to insert the full name of the Code of Federal Regulations before referring to the acronym "CFR." The commission proposes to amend §290.102(d) by adding the catchline "Motion to overturn" for consistency with Agency syntax protocols. The commission proposes to amend the catchlines in §290.102(e) and (f) to eliminate the initial capital letters on words that are not first in the catchline for consistency with Agency syntax protocols.

Section 290.103, Definitions, contains definitions related to the drinking water standards and other requirements that are contained in Subchapter D.

The commission proposes to amend §290.103 to add definitions resulting from the new federal GWR, LT2, and DBP2, to correct typographical and syntax errors, and to renumber existing definitions to accommodate the new definitions and to maintain alphabetical order. The definitions of §290.103 are for terms used throughout Subchapter F.

The commission proposes to add a definition of the term "assessment source monitoring" which is used in proposed §290.109 and §290.116 as new §290.103(1) consistent with the definition in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(b) and 30 TAC §290.109(c)(4)(E).

The commission proposes to add a definition given in the federal DBP2 and LT2 in 40 CFR §141.2 of the concept of a combined distribution system (CDS) group of systems as new §290.103(2) as, "A CDS is the interconnected distribution system consisting of the distribution systems of wholesale systems and of the consecutive systems that receive finished water." The commission proposes to add new §290.103(2)(A) to state that a CDS may be modified to eliminate minor interconnections as provided in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(8). The commission proposes new §290.103(2)(B) to provide that the CDS determination for compliance with DBP2 and LT2 can be different for a single system. The LT2 method for determining CDS based on treatment plants is proposed to be added as new §290.103(2)(B)(i) consistent with the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.701. The commission proposes to add the DBP2 method for basing CDS on retail population served as new §290.103(2)(B)(ii) consistent with the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.600(b).

The commission proposes to add the definition from the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.2 of "consecutive system" to describe purchased water systems as new §290.103(6).

The commission to add a reference to Cryptosporidium and proposes to italicize the term " Giardia lamblia " within the definition of "disinfection profile" in existing §290.103(4), renumbered to §290.103(7).

The commission proposes to define "dual sample set" as a pair of trihalomethane and haloacetic acid samples in accordance with the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.2 as new §290.103(10).

The commission proposes to add the definition of "fecal indicators" from the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(c)(2) as new §290.103(15).

The commission proposes to add the definition of "finished water" as new §290.103(18) consistent with the definition of "uncovered finished water reservoir" in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.2.

The commission proposes to define the corrective action required in response to confirmed fecal contamination of groundwater as "groundwater corrective action" in new §290.103(19), consistent with the requirements of new §290.116 and the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403.

Likewise, the plan required for a system that must take corrective action is proposed to be defined as "groundwater corrective action plan" in new §290.103(20) consistent with the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(4) and new §290.116(b).

The commission proposes to add a definition of "groundwater system" consistent with the federal GWR in §141.400(b) as new §290.103(21).

The commission proposes to define "hydrogeologic sensitivity assessments" for determination of groundwater sensitivity in new §290.103(24) as provided in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.400(c)(5).

The commission proposes to define the new compliance method of taking a locational running annual average (LRAA) from the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.2 as "locational running annual average" in §290.103(25).

The commission proposes to define the term "operational evaluation level (OEL)" as described in the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.626 in new §290.103(29).

The commission proposes to add a definition for the term "raw water" as new §290.103(30) for consistency in designating raw water monitoring for surface water and groundwater under the new federal GWR and LT2.

The commission proposes new §290.103(31) to contain the definition of the term "raw groundwater source sampling" consistent with the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402 and existing §290.109(c)(4).

The commission proposes to define the term "triggered source water monitoring" in new §290.103(35) as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(a)(1) and existing §290.109(c)(4)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.103(37) to contain the definition of the term "wholesale system" from the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.2.

Section 290.104, Summary of Maximum Contaminant Levels, Maximum Residual Disinfection Levels, Treatment Techniques, and Action Levels, contains a summary of MCLs, maximum residual disinfectant levels, treatment techniques, and action levels for drinking water. This summary consolidates the limits that are spread through the individual sections relating to specific contaminants.

The commission proposes to amend §290.104 to add references to requirements added elsewhere as part of the incorporation of new federal requirements, remove references to effective dates that have passed, to correct internal references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

The commission proposes to amend the table in §290.104(b) to remove references to the existing arsenic MCL effective date of January 23, 2006, because that date has passed.

The commission proposes to amend the internal reference in §290.104(g) because the title of §290.111 is proposed to be changed to "Surface Water Treatment" as a result of LT2. In §290.104(g)(1) the commission proposes to remove the initial capital letters from the term "Nephelometric Turbidity Unit." The commission proposes to reword §290.104(g)(2) to conform to the new contents of §290.111, which are proposed to be changed as a result of the incorporation of LT2.

Section 290.104(i) is proposed to be amended to amend the internal reference to §290.113, and to add a reference to §290.115. Both changes result from the proposed revisions resulting from incorporation of DBP2.

Section 290.106, Inorganic Contaminants, contains the health-based standards, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public notification requirements for inorganic contaminants that may be found in drinking water sources.

The commission proposes to amend §290.106 to include elements related to the PNR, to remove references to effective dates that have passed, to correct citations, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

The commission proposes to delete §290.106(a)(4) to remove references to the existing arsenic MCL effective date of January 23, 2006, because that date has passed and the commission proposes to amend the table in §290.106(b) for the same reason.

New §290.106(f)(8) is proposed to be added to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification. The change is necessary for consistency with PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule, to accommodate internal agency procedures for identifying violations by specific citations in the Consolidated Compliance and Enforcement Data System (CCEDS), and thus to ensure delivery of public notice violation data to EPA as part of the TCEQ's primacy requirements.

The commission proposes to amend §290.106(g)(1) to conform to the requirement under the federal PNR of 40 CFR §141.602 requiring a system to notify the public of a nitrate violation within 24 hours, replacing the existing reference allowing this notification to occur on the next business day.

Section 290.107, Organic Contaminants, contains the health-based standards, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public notification requirements for synthetic and naturally occurring organic contaminants that may be found in drinking water sources.

The commission proposes to amend §290.107 to eliminate a reference to a past compliance date, to include elements of the PNR, to correct references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

The commission proposes to delete the catchline in §290.107(c)(2)(A)(i) to conform to agency syntax protocols.

The commission proposes to amend §290.107(c)(2)(C)(ii) to remove the December 31, 1992 effective date, because all public water systems have completed initial compliance monitoring since that time.

The commission proposes to amend §290.107(e) to correct the agency's address to conform to United States Postal Service requirements.

The commission proposes to add new §290.107(f)(3) to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with EPA's Public Notification Rule requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

Section 290.108, Radionuclides Other than Radon, contains the health-based standards, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public notification requirements for radiochemicals (other than radon) that may be found in drinking water sources.

The commission proposes to amend §290.108 to eliminate compliance dates that have passed, to include elements of the PNR, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

The commission proposes to amend §290.108(a) to remove the reference to the December 8, 2003, effective date for the uranium MCL because that date has passed, and the reference to the December 21, 2007, effective date to complete initial uranium monitoring is because all systems in Texas have done initial monitoring.

The commission proposes to remove the uranium MCL effective date from §290.108(b)(1)(C). References to moot uranium monitoring effective dates are proposed to be removed from §290.108(c)(1)(A)(iii), §290.108(c)(1)(A)(iii)(I), §290.108(c)(1)(A)(iii)(II) and §290.108(c)(1)(A)(iii)(III) because all required monitoring has been accomplished.

The commission proposes to amend the TCEQ's mailing address in §290.108(e) to conform with United States Postal Service requirements.

The commission proposes to add new §290.108(f)(5) to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification Rule (PN) Rule.

Existing §290.109, Microbial Contaminants, contains the health-based standards, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public notification requirements for microbial contaminants that may be found in drinking water. The existing section contains requirements from the federal TCR and is proposed to be extensively amended to incorporate new elements of the federal GWR, because the GWR is intended to address microbial contamination of raw water sources. The commission proposes to change the wording throughout §290.109 to make sampling references consistent.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(b) relating to MCLs for microbial contaminants to include the GWR treatment technique requirements under 40 CFR §141.403 which establish a standard for fecal microbial indicators for raw groundwater sources.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(b)(1) to contain the existing MCL definitions for microbial contaminants in the distribution system in existing §290.109(b).

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(b)(1)(A) to incorporate existing §290.109(b)(1). The commission also proposes to add the words "routine distribution" to specify that the samples this paragraph applies to are those routinely collected from the distribution system and proposes to correct the MCL language as being achieved when more than 5% of samples collected in a month are coliform positive for a system that collects at least 40 routine distribution coliform samples, consistent with the federal Total Coliform Rule in 40 CFR §141.21.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(b)(1)(B) to incorporate existing §290.109(b)(2). The commission also proposes to add the words "routine distribution" to identify the samples referred to in these subparagraphs as those routinely collected from the distribution system. Additionally, the commission proposes that the MCL language be made consistent with the federal Total Coliform Rule in 40 CFR §141.21 as being achieved when more than 5% of samples collected in a month are coliform positive for a system that collects fewer than 40 routine distribution coliform samples.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(b)(1)(C) to identify the distribution coliform acute MCL which was not previously defined in §290.109(b). This change is proposed to maintain consistency with the organization other of sections in Subchapter F, in which all MCLs are identified specifically in a single subsection.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(b)(2) to contain the non-detection standards for fecal indicators in raw groundwater sources as established in the GWR treatment technique requirements under 40 CFR §141.403.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(c) to include monitoring requirements of other fecal indicator organisms identified in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(c)(2). In addition, the commission proposes to use the term E. coli rather than Escherichia coli for consistency with the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(c)(1)(A) to identify the routine samples referred to in this subparagraph specifically as distribution coliform samples rather than as any other type of bacteriological samples. Because the new federal rule initiates requirements for viral indicator sampling at raw sample sites as well as bacterial sampling at distribution sample sites, it is now necessary to make this distinction. The commission also proposes to add the word "quality" to clarify the aspects of the water that may impact sample site selection. In addition, the commission proposes to indicate that other sampling sites may be used only if adjacent to active service connections rather than potentially implying that any active or inactive service connections could be used.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(c)(1)(B), (c)(2), (c)(2)(A) through (c)(2)(D), (c)(2)(F), (c)(3), (c)(3)(A), (c)(3)(A)(i), (c)(3)(A)(ii), and (c)(3)(C) to specify and clarify that the sampling indicated in this subparagraph refers to distribution coliform samples rather than other microbial contaminants. The commission proposes to change the wording throughout §290.109 to make sampling references consistent. Because the new federal rule requirements initiate requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, it is now necessary to make this distinction.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4) to incorporate the groundwater source monitoring requirements of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402.

In new §290.109(c)(4)(A), the commission proposes to approve the use of E. coli as a fecal indicator for raw groundwater source monitoring required under the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402. In §290.109(c)(4)(A)(i) and (c)(4)(A)(ii), the commission proposes to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.402(a)(1) which requires public water systems to conduct triggered source monitoring if they do not provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses and are notified of a distribution coliform positive. The term "4-log" treatment means that the technology used has the ability to remove at least 99.99% of viruses present in the raw source water.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4)(B) to incorporate the raw source sampling requirements of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(a)(2). The new subparagraph requires drinking water systems using groundwater sources to take source samples within 24 hours of being notified of a distribution coliform sample positive. In new §290.109(c)(4)(B)(i) and (c)(4)(B)(ii), the commission proposes to allow the extension of the 24-hour period and allows systems to sample a representative subset of groundwater sources if approved by the executive director. In new §290.109(c)(4)(B)(iii), the commission proposes to incorporate the provisions under 40 CFR §141.402(a)(2)(iii) which allow systems serving fewer than 1,000 people to use the required raw source sample as one of the four required distribution repeat samples.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4)(C) to incorporate the requirements under the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(a)(4) that a system which purchases water from a groundwater system must notify the provider within 24 hours of a positive coliform distribution sample. In new §290.109(c)(4)(C)(i) and (c)(4)(C)(ii), the commission proposes to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.402(a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(ii) which require wholesale systems to conduct raw source monitoring with 24 hours of being notified of the receiving system's positive distribution sample. Additionally, the wholesaler must notify its receiving systems within 24 hours of being notified that a source sample was positive for a fecal indicator.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4)(D) to incorporate the requirements under 40 CFR §141.402(a)(5) which allow the primacy agency to waive the triggered source monitoring requirements under circumstances identified in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(ii). The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4)(D)(i) and (c)(4)(D)(ii) to allow this waiver based on distribution system deficiencies that caused the distribution coliform positive and the collection of an invalid distribution sample.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(c)(4)(E) to incorporate 40 CFR §141.402(b) which allows primacy agencies to conduct assessment source monitoring on groundwater sources deemed to be susceptible to fecal contamination, prior to positive distribution coliform samples.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(d) to contain the analytical invalidation requirements contained in existing §290.109(c)(4). This is consistent with the organizational principle that all analytical requirements for a contaminant are contained in a single subsection.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(d)(1) to contain the sample invalidation text moved from existing §290.109(c)(4). In addition to moving that paragraph, the commission proposes to change §290.109(d)(1) to identify the term "sample" to specify "distribution coliform sample." This distinction is needed to differentiate the invalidation requirements for raw groundwater source samples found in the proposed §290.109(d)(2) from the existing invalidation requirements for distribution coliform samples.

The commission proposes new §290.109(d)(1)(A) through (d)(1)(E) to contain the requirements existing §290.109(c)(4)(A) through (c)(4)(E) that require written notification from laboratories when improper sample analysis occurred in order to document that the improper analysis caused the positive result and give the executive director the discretion to invalidate a sample.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(d)(2) to address fecal indicator positive source sample invalidation as allowed by the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(d).

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(d)(2)(A) to incorporate the public water systems requirements in the event of a laboratory invalidation of a fecal indicator positive source samples as required by 40 CFR §141.402(d).

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(d)(2)(B) to provide the criteria under which invalidation of a fecal indicator positive source sample will be allowed as contained in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(d).

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(e) to replace "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" with "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality."

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(f)(1)(A) to identify the repeat sample referred to as those collected in the distribution system. In addition, the commission proposes to use the term E. coli rather than Escherichia coli for consistency with the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(f)(1)(B) to identify the repeat and routine sample as those collected in the distribution system. In addition, the commission proposes to use the term E. coli rather than Escherichia coli for consistency with CFR §141.402.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(f)(2) to replace the term "bacteriological samples" with the term" routine distribution coliform samples." In addition, the commission proposes to use the term E. coli rather than Escherichia coli for consistency with 40 CFR §141.402. Because the new federal rule requirements initiate requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, it is now necessary to make this distinction.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(f)(3) to identify samples referred to as routine distribution coliform samples. Because the new federal rule requirements initiate requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, it is now necessary to make this distinction. In addition, the commission proposes to use the term E. coli rather than Escherichia coli for consistency with 40 CFR §141.402.

The commission proposes to add a new §290.109(f)(4) to contain the non-detection standards for fecal indicators in raw groundwater sources as established in the GWR treatment technique requirements under 40 CFR §141.403.

The commission proposes to renumber existing §290.109(f)(4) to §290.109(f)(5) and further identify the coliform samples referred to in this paragraph as distribution coliform samples. Because the new federal rule requirements initiate requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, it is now necessary to make this distinction.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(f)(6) to specify that failure to collect the required number of raw source samples will result in a monitoring violation as defined under the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(h).

The commission proposes to renumber existing §290.109(f)(5) to §290.109(f)(7) in order to retain the correct numbering sequence after inserting additional paragraphs resulting from the federal GWR.

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(f)(8) to specify that failure to issue public notice or certify that public notice has been performed will result in a public notice violation consistent with EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

The commission proposes to renumber existing §290.109(f)(6) to §290.109(f)(9) and to identify the routine and repeat samples referred to in this paragraph as distribution coliform samples. The new federal GWR initiates requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, so it is now necessary to make this distinction.

The commission proposes to renumber existing §290.109(f)(7) to §290.109(f)(10) and to identify the samples referred to in this paragraph as distribution coliform samples. Because the new federal rule requirements initiate requirements for microbiological contaminants other than coliform bacteria, it is now necessary to make this distinction.

The commission proposes to renumber existing §290.109(f)(8) to §290.109(f)(11) in order to retain the correct numbering sequence after inserting additional paragraphs resulting from the federal GWR.

The commission proposes to amend §290.109(g)(1) to further identify the requirements as boil water notice requirements of Subchapter D and correct the incorrect internal reference from §290.46(s)(3) to §290.46(q).

The commission proposes to add new §290.109(g)(2) to require public notice of fecal indicator positive source samples in accordance with §290.122(a)(1)(F) of this title and the requirements of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(8).

Existing §290.110, Disinfectant Residuals, contains the requirements for maintaining disinfectant residuals in drinking water distribution systems and in surface water treatment plants. This section is proposed to be extensively amended in response to the federal LT2, which adds complexity to the requirements for surface water treatment plants. In order to simplify and clarify the requirements, the existing requirements for surface water treatment plants are proposed to be moved to §290.111 with requirements from the federal LT2. Section 290.110 is therefore proposed to be amended to contain only the requirements for disinfectant residuals in drinking water distribution systems. The proposed amendments will also establish an alternate analytical method for chlorine dioxide which will allow public water systems to use this method should they so choose, allowing greater flexibility for the regulated community. Finally, the proposed amendment will specify that failure to issue public notice or certify that public notice has been performed will result in a public notice violation.

In §290.110(b), the commission proposes to delete a reference to treatment technique requirements that apply only to systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water because all of the conditions for surface water treatment (and treatment of groundwater under the direct influence of surface water) are proposed to be moved to the new section containing all of the requirements for surface water treatment plants (and plants treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water) in §290.111, relating to Surface Water Treatment. Throughout Chapter 290, and in the federal SDWA, the requirements for treatment of groundwater under the direct influence of surface water are identical to the requirements for treatment of surface water, except where specific differences are explicitly noted.

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(b)(1) by replacing the specific requirement with a general requirement that public water systems ensure that water is adequately disinfected before entering the distribution system. The commission proposes to move the specific treatment technique requirements currently contained in §290.110(b)(1) to §290.111(c).

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(b)(1)(A) to reference the section of the proposed rules that will contain the disinfection (pathogen inactivation) requirements for systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water. The commission proposes to amend §290.110(b)(1)(B) to reference the proposed section that contains the analogous requirements for systems treating groundwater. The specific requirements currently contained in these two subparagraphs are proposed to be moved to §290.111(d)(1).

The commission proposes to delete §290.110(b)(5)(A) and (b)(5)(B), which are no longer needed because the effective date of the regulatory change has passed.

The commission proposes to move the requirements contained in existing §290.110(c)(1) to proposed new §290.111(d)(2). The commission proposes to move the requirements contained in existing §290.110(c)(1)(A) through (c)(1)(C) to proposed new §290.111(d)(2)(A) through (d)(2)(C), respectively. The commission proposes to renumber the remaining paragraphs in §290.110(c) accordingly.

The commission proposes to move the analytical requirements currently contained in §290.110(d)(1) and (d)(2) to §290.111(d)(4)(A) and (d)(4)(B), respectively. As a result, the remaining paragraphs in this subsection are proposed to be renumbered accordingly.

In addition to renumbering §290.110(d)(5) to §290.110(d)(3), the proposed amendment would also allow the use of additional analytical methods for chlorine dioxide described in 40 CFR §141.75. New §290.110(d)(3)(A) is proposed to contain the method in existing §290.110(d)(5).

The commission proposes amendments in §290.110(e) to allow the commission to comply with minimum federal requirements, update and correct references contained in existing provisions, and reduce the reporting requirements for transient, noncommunity systems that only treat groundwater or distribute treated water purchased from another public water system.

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(e)(1) to require public water systems with a chlorine dioxide maximum residual disinfection level (MRDL) violation to notify the executive director within 24 hours instead of by the end of the next business day. This proposed change is needed to assure compliance with the requirements of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(5) and (b)(2).

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(e)(2) to eliminate a reference to an effective date which has already passed and identify the current reporting forms used by plants treating surface water and groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(e)(4) by eliminating a reference to an effective date which has passed and by identifying the form number of the Disinfectant Level Quarterly Operating Report (DLQOR) that must be completed by plants that treat groundwater or distribute treated water purchased from another public water system. The commission also proposes to replace the word "submit" with the word "complete" because the commission is proposing to reduce the reporting requirements for transient noncommunity water systems. The commission proposes new §290.110(e)(4)(A) and (e)(4)(B) to retain the existing reporting requirement for community and nontransient noncommunity systems but only require transient noncommunity water systems to provide a copy of the DLQOR if one is requested by the executive director consistent with the applicability of existing 40 CFR §141.130(a)(1).

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(e)(5) to correct the errors in the mailing address of the TCEQ's Water Supply Division for consistency with U S Postal Service standards and to replace "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" with "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality."

The commission is proposing to amend §290.110(f). The proposed revisions to §290.110(f)(4) and (f)(5)(B) result from moving the provisions contained in existing §290.110(b)(1) and (c)(1) to §290.111(d)(1)(D) and from the renumbering proposed for the paragraphs in §290.110(c). The proposed change to §290.110(f)(5)(C) corrects a grammatical error. The commission proposes new §290.110(f)(10) to comply with directives received from the EPA and contained in their publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(g)(1) to resolve inconsistencies between state and federal regulations and delete a redundant sentence. The proposal requires a water system with an MRDL violation for chlorine dioxide to consult with the executive director within 24 hours rather than notify the executive director by the end of the next business day, consistent with the requirements of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(5) and (b)(2). The proposed amendment to §290.110(g)(1) will also eliminate redundant verbiage more appropriately contained solely in §290.110(g).

The commission proposes to amend §290.110(g)(2) to update citations that changed as a result of moving the requirement currently in §290.110(b)(1) to §290.111(d)(1)(D).

The commission proposes to repeal existing §290.111 and replace it with a new §290.111 to incorporate new federal rule requirements, to relocate some of the requirements currently contained in §290.110 into this section, and to amend several of the existing provisions.

Existing §290.111, Turbidity, contains the turbidity requirements for surface water treatment plants; turbidity is a surrogate for possible microbial contamination. All of the conditions for surface water treatment (and treatment of groundwater under the direct influence of surface water) are proposed to be moved to the new section containing all of the requirements for surface water treatment plants (and plants treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water). Throughout Chapter 290, and in the federal SDWA, the requirements for treatment of groundwater under the direct influence of surface water are identical to the requirements for treatment of surface water, except where specific differences are explicitly noted. The new federal LT2 increases the disinfection requirements for surface water treatment plants, and also ties disinfection requirements to levels of turbidity or microbes in the source water. Therefore, the proposed new §290.111 brings all of these requirements for surface water treatment plants together in one section. The commission also proposes changing the name of §290.111 from "Turbidity" to "Surface Water Treatment" to more accurately reflect what is contained in this section.

The proposed new §290.111 will continue to contain requirements that only apply to plants treating surface water or groundwater that is under the direct influence of surface water. In addition, the proposed section will incorporate new requirements regarding raw surface water monitoring; move and amend the existing overall treatment technique requirements for viruses, Giardia lamblia , and Cryptosporidium parvum ; relocate and amend the existing disinfection and inactivation requirements for these pathogens; update the existing turbidity requirements for plants using conventional filters; contain new performance requirements for unconventional filters such as cartridge and membrane filters; identify new treatment credits that plants providing enhanced treatment can receive; and relocate and amend the existing requirements related to monitoring and reporting, compliance determinations, and public notification.

The commission proposes new §290.111(a) to identify the types of public water systems that are subject to the requirements of this proposed section. The proposed requirement is currently contained in existing §290.111(a). In new §290.111(a)(1) through (a)(3), the commission proposes implementation schedules for systems treating surface water, groundwater under the direct influence of surface water, or a combination of these sources. The proposed implementation schedules are consistent with the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.73 and related federal regulations.

The commission proposes new §290.111(b) to incorporate the raw surface water monitoring requirements contained in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.700(c)(1) to require a system treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water to conduct two rounds of special monitoring to determine site-specific minimum treatment technique requirements for Cryptosporidium parvum and other pathogens. Proposed §290.111(b) would allow the executive director to waive the monitoring requirements for systems that meet the maximum treatment technique requirements imposed by the federal rule, in accordance with the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.701(d).

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(1) to establish the mechanism that the commission proposes to use to ensure that raw surface water monitoring plans comply with the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.701 and §141.702(a).

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(2) to incorporate the raw water sampling location requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.703.

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(3) to address several requirements contained within LT2. The proposed new §290.111(b)(3)(A) through (b)(3)(C) incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.700(b)(1) and 40 CFR §141.701(a)(1). The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(3)(A)(i) and (b)(3)(A)(ii) to provide the population or combined distribution system basis for scheduling raw surface water Cryptosporidium sampling consistent with the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.700(b)(1). The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(3)(B) to address the requirements of 40 CFR §141.701(a)(3) and (a)(4). Proposed new §290.111(b)(3)(B)(i) through (b)(3)(B)(iii) contain the LT2 basis for Cryptosporidium sampling at small systems with elevated E. coli levels. The proposed §290.111(b)(3)(C) gives the executive director the latitude needed to implement 40 CFR §141.701(e).

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(4) to address the raw water sample scheduling requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.702(b) and (b)(1). The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(4)(A) to contain the requirement that samples be collected within two days before or after the date approved by the executive director. The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(4)(B) to contains the requirement that if a system fails to collect the sample within that period, they must explain why in writing.

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(5) to consolidate and define an implementation approach for meeting the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.702(b)(2) and (c).

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(6) to incorporate the analytical requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.704 and §141.705. The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(6)(A) and (b)(6)(B) to contain the analytical requirements for raw water Cryptosporidium and E. coli , respectively. The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(6)(B)(i) through (b)(6)(B)(iii) to contain details for approved sample collection requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.705. The commission proposes to add new §290.111(b)(6)(C) to contain the analytical requirement that turbidity be analyzed at a laboratory approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(7) to address the reporting requirements of 40 CFR §141.706 and to facilitate implementation of the regulatory approach of proposed new §290.111(b)(5). Proposed §290.111(b)(7)(A) requires systems to use the commission form 20358 for reporting raw surface sample results. Proposed new §290.111(b)(7)(A)(i) requires systems to explain in writing if they miss a required sample period. Proposed new §290.111(b)(7)(A)(ii) requires that if the lab could not obtain a valid analytical result from the sample, that the system submit a request to collect a replacement sample to the executive director, consistent with the federal LT2 requirements of 40 CFR §141.706. The commission proposes new §290.111(b)(7)(B) to contain the reporting deadline, consistent with 40 CFR §141.706, and subsection (b)(7)(C), to contain the mailing address for reports consistent with existing §290.111(e)(7).

The commission proposes new §290.111(c) to implement the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §§141.170(a), 141.170(a)(1), 141.500(a)(1), 141.700(c)(3) and (c)(5), 141.710, 141.711, and 141.713.

The commission proposes new §290.111(c)(1) and (c)(2) to contain the Giardia lamblia and viral treatment technique requirements in existing §290.111(b)(1).

The commission proposes new §290.111(c)(3) to incorporate the treatment technique requirements for Cryptosporidium parvum . Proposed new §290.111(c)(3)(A) through (c)(3)(C) will incorporate new requirements imposed by various paragraphs in 40 CFR §§141.710, 141.711, and 141.713. The commission proposes Figure 30 TAC §290.111(c)(3)(b), Treatment Technique Requirements for Cryptosporidium , to present the information in a clear and organized manner. The proposed new §290.111(c)(3)(D) will contain the Cryptosporidium parvum requirement currently in §290.111(b)(1).

The commission proposes §290.111(c)(4) to incorporate a Cryptosporidium treatment technique requirement for sources that receive a raw surface water source monitoring waiver under proposed §290.111(b).

The commission proposes new §290.111(c)(5) to contain requirements moved from existing §290.110(b)(1) and §290.111(b)(1).

The commission proposes new §290.111(c)(6) to authorize the executive director to establish requirements for watershed control and treatment processes that are used to meet LT2 treatment technique requirements for waterborne pathogens. This proposal provides the executive director with the means to comply with the special primacy requirements of 40 CFR §142.16(n) and to ensure that a water system meets the applicable requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.721(f).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(1) to move the requirements currently in various parts of existing §290.110, to provide some additional treatment options from LT2, and to incorporate provisions of the federal rule. Specifically, the commission proposes to add new §290.111(d)(1)(A) and (d)(1)(B) to contain the requirements of existing §290.110(b)(1) and existing §290.111(b)(1). The commission proposes Figure 30 TAC §290.111(d)(1), Microbial Inactivation Requirements, to present the information in a clear and organized manner.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(1)(C) to allow the executive to director to reduce the inactivation requirements for plants that are assigned to Bin 1 that are meeting enhanced performance standards at the effluent of each individual filter. The term "Bin" refers to the required level of microbial removal and inactivation at a surface water treatment plant (or plant treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water). There are four possible Bin classifications: Bin 1, Bin 2, Bin 3, and Bin 4. The higher the Bin number, the higher the level of treatment that must be provided. The commission proposes to limit this additional removal credit to plants assigned to Bin 1 because plants assigned to Bins 2 - 4 have a higher source water pathogen concentration and it would therefore be inappropriate for such plants to reduce the level of protection provided by the disinfection process.

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(d)(1)(D) to incorporate the existing §290.110(f)(4) that a system which fails to meet the inactivation requirements for a four-hour period commits a treatment technique violation.

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(d)(1)(E) to incorporate the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(ii).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(2) to contain the requirements for in-plant monitoring related to the effectiveness of disinfection moved from existing §290.110(c)(1).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(2)(A) to contain the requirements for monitoring pH. temperature, and flow moved from §290.110(c)(1)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(2)(B) to contain the requirements for determining contact time moved from §290.110(c)(1)(B).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(2)(C) to contain the requirements for retesting when inactivation fails to meet the inactivation requirements moved from §290.110(c)(1)(C).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(3) to contain monitoring requirements imposed by the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3) for systems using UV to meet the inactivation requirements of this proposed subsection.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(3)(A) to contain the requirement for monitoring UV intensity, lamp status and flow imposed by the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(3)(B) to contain the requirements for plants in Bins 2, 3, or 4 to also monitor the volume of water treated in accordance with the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4) to relocate or copy many of the requirements currently contained §290.110(d), to allow the use of a new analytical method for chlorine dioxide, and to identify the approved method for measuring ozone concentrations.

The proposed new §290.111(d)(4)(A) and (d)(4)(B) contain the requirements for pH analysis and temperature measurement consistent with existing §290.110(d)(1) and (d)(2), respectively.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(C) to contain the requirements for in-plant free chlorine monitoring moved from existing §290.110(d)(3), except that the reference to color comparator methods has been intentionally omitted. The comparator methods are less precise and yield more subjective results. Consequently, they should not be used to quantify the level of inactivation achieved by the disinfection process.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(C)(i), (d)(4)(C)(ii), (d)(4)(C)(iii), and (d)(4)(C)(iv) to contain the requirements for amperometric, DPD Ferrous, DPD photometric, and springaldizine methods to measure free chlorine moved from existing §290.110(d)(3)(A), §290.110(d)(3)(B), §290.110(d)(3)(C)(i), and §290.110(d)(3)(D), respectively.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(D) to contain the requirements for in-plant chloramine monitoring moved from existing §290.110(d)(3), except that the reference to color comparators methods has been intentionally omitted. Color comparators accuracy is inadequate to quantify the level of inactivation achieved by the disinfection process.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(D)(i), (d)(4)(D)(ii), and (d)(4)(D)(iii) to contain the requirements for in-plant chloramine monitoring moved from existing §290.110(d)(4)(A), (d)(4)(B), and (d)(4)(C)(i), respectively.

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(E) to contain the requirements for in-plant chlorine dioxide monitoring of existing §290.110(d)(5).

The commission proposes new §290.111(d)(4)(E)(i) to contain the amperometric method currently approved in the existing §290.110(d)(5)(A) and proposes §290.111(d)(4)(E)(ii) to contain a reference to the new Lissamine Green method also proposed in new §290.110(d)(3)(B).

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(d)(4)(F) to reference the EPA-approved Indigo Method for measuring ozone residuals.

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(d)(4)(G) to contain the analytical requirements for UV of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i).

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(e) to contain the treatment technique requirements for turbidity currently contained in §290.111(b). Proposed new §290.111(e) addresses all of the treatment techniques, performance criteria, monitoring requirements, special investigation requirements, and analytical methods related to turbidity monitoring at plants using conventional filters. These requirements are currently contained in §290.111(b) through (d) and are proposed to be reorganized and updated to remove references to the implementation timelines for provisions that have already become effective.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(1) to contain the combined filter effluent (CFE) turbidity standards of existing §290.111(b)(1). The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(1)(A) to contain the existing requirement of §290.111(b)(1)(A) and proposes new §290.111(e)(1)(B) to contain the existing requirement of §290.111(b)(1)(B). The provisions of existing §290.111(b)(1)(C) are not proposed to be transferred because the effective date of this provision has passed.

The commission proposes to add new §290.111(e)(2) to contain the individual filter effluent turbidity (IFE) standards that currently exist in §290.111(b)(2). The commission proposes to add new §290.111(e)(2)(A) to contain the requirements currently contained in §290.111(b)(2)(B) and (b)(2)(C). The commission proposes to merge the requirements currently contained in §290.111(b)(2)(B) and (b)(2)(C) and move them to proposed §290.111(e)(2)(A) since the effective date for small systems has passed. The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(2)(B) to contain the requirements of existing §290.111(b)(2)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(3) to contain the routine turbidity monitoring requirements currently contained in §290.111(c). The proposed new §290.111(e)(3)(A) contains the CFE requirements of existing §290.111(c)(1)(A) and the proposed new §290.111(e)(3)(B) contains the CFE requirements of existing §290.111(c)(2)(A).

Proposed new §290.111(e)(3)(C) contains the IFE monitoring requirements currently contained in existing §290.111(c)(3) and (c)(4)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(3)(D) to relocate the CFE and IFE monitoring requirements for plants that continuously monitor CFE in lieu of IFE from existing §290.111(c)(1)(B), (c)(2)(B), and (c)(4)(B) to proposed new §290.111(e)(3)(D).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(3)(D)(i) to contain the requirements for CFE monitoring from existing §290.111(c)(1)(B).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(3)(D)(ii) to contain the requirements for IFE monitoring from existing §290.111(c)(1)(C).

The commission proposes to delete the provisions equivalent to those currently contained in §290.111(c)(1)(C), (c)(2)(C), or (c)(4)(C) because the effective dates of these existing provisions have passed.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4) to contain the special monitoring requirements currently contained in §290.111(c)(5) through (c)(7).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(A) to contain the special monitoring requirements of existing §290.111(c)(5) and (c)(6), merging the requirements for large and small plants, since all plants are subject to the same requirements now.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(A)(i) to contain the filter profile requirements of existing §290.111(c)(5)(A) and (c)(6)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(A)(ii) to contain the filter assessment requirements of existing §290.111(c)(5)(B) and (c)(6)(B).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(A)(iii) to contain the comprehensive performance evaluation requirements of existing §290.111(c)(5)(C) and (c)(6)(C).

Similarly, the commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(B) will contain the special monitoring requirements for systems monitoring CFE in lieu of IFE currently contained in §290.111(c)(7).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(B)(i) to contain the filter profile requirements for systems monitoring CFE in lieu of IFE of existing §290.111(c)(7)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(B)(ii) to contain the filter assessment requirements for systems monitoring CFE in lieu of IFE of existing §290.111(c)(7)(B).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(4)(B)(iii) to contain the comprehensive performance evaluation requirements for systems monitoring CFE in lieu of IFE of existing §290.111(c)(7)(C).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5) to contain the analytical requirements currently contained in §290.111(d) and reference a new turbidity method recently approved by the EPA.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(A)(i) and (e)(5)(A)(ii) to relocate the provisions currently contained in §290.111(d)(1). The commission proposes to add new §290.111(e)(5)(A)(iii) to reference the Hach FilterTrak Method 10133 contained in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.74(a)(2).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(B) to contain the requirements of existing §290.111(d)(2) regarding continuous or grab sampling for turbidity.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(C) to contain the requirements for continuous turbidity monitoring in existing §290.111(d).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(C)(i) to contain the SCADA requirements for continuous turbidity monitoring in existing §290.111(d)(3)(A).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(C)(ii) to contain the SCADA requirements for grab sampling at large systems when there is a failure of continuous turbidity monitoring in existing §290.111(d)(3)(B).

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(C)(iii) to contain the requirements of existing §290.111(d)(5)(B) grab sampling when there is a failure of continuous turbidity monitoring at small systems.

The commission proposes new §290.111(e)(5)(D) to relocate the requirement currently contained in §290.111(d)(6). The commission proposes not to replace the expired provision contained in the §290.111(d)(7), which is proposed for repeal.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f) to incorporate the requirements of current §290.111(b)(1)(B) and establish minimum filtration requirements consistent with those contained in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(1) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.73(d) that requires the state to set treatment technique requirements for unconventional filtration technologies.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(1)(A) to incorporate the requirements currently contained in §290.111(b)(1)(B) and proposes new §290.111(f)(1)(B) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.73(d) that require the state to set operating requirements for unconventional filtration technologies if microbial treatment credit is awarded.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2), (f)(2)(A) and (f)(2)(B) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.700(a) and provide consistency with existing §290.111(c)(1).

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(C) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(4)(i) and (b)(4)(ii) which require membrane filters be monitored continuously and readings recorded.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3) and (b)(3)(i) that require systems using membrane filters to conduct direct integrity testing.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(i) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(ii) and (b)(3)(iii) that systems using membrane filters conduct direct integrity testing with sufficient sensitivity.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(ii) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(iv) that systems using membrane filters conduct direct integrity testing that allows them to assure the membrane unit meets the removal credit approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(iii) to incorporate the ability of the state described in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(vi) and 40 CFR §141.73(d) to approve less frequent direct integrity testing.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(iv) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(vi) regarding the frequency of direct integrity testing and the ability of the state to approve less frequent direct integrity testing to these same systems.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(v) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(4)(iv) and (b)(4)(v) that systems using membrane filters conduct direct integrity testing if indirect integrity testing shows possible system failure.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(D)(vi) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(v) that systems using membrane filters which fail direct integrity testing must remove the membrane unit from service until it is fixed.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(2)(E) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.73(d) that requires the state to set monitoring requirements for unconventional filtration technologies if microbial treatment credit is awarded.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3) to consistently apply the analytical requirements in proposed §290.111(e)(5) to turbidity measurements.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3)(A) which references the proposed new §290.111(e)(5)(A) in order to maintain consistency in the methods used to measure CFE turbidity levels regardless of the type of filtration technology used at the plant.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3)(B) to incorporate provisions consistent with the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(4)(i). Although the proposed rule continues to allow the executive director to approve other methods of monitoring water quality, the proposal also continues to require the EPA-approved Hach FilterTrak Method 10133 at plants that choose to monitor the turbidity level of the water produced by individual filter units.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3)(C) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.73(d) that requires the state to set analytical requirements for unconventional filtration technologies.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3)(D) to extend the data collection requirements proposed in new §290.111(e)(5)(C) to unconventional filtration technologies.

The commission proposes new §290.111(f)(3)(E) to consistently apply the monitoring requirements in proposed §290.111(e)(5)(C)(ii) to cartridge filters.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g) to implement various provisions of the LT2 which identify several approaches that treatment plants can use to achieve enhanced pathogen control and allow the state to establish design, operational, monitoring, and reporting requirements for these approaches.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(1) to incorporate the provisions of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.718(b). The proposed rules will allow the executive director to approve a 1.0-log Cryptosporidium removal credit for plants that meet enhanced IFE performance criteria or approve a 0.5-log Cryptosporidium removal credit to plants that meet enhanced CFE, but not enhanced IFE, performance criteria. The commission's proposal is consistent with the LT2 requirement that plants meeting both enhanced IFE and CFE performance criteria receive credit for providing a maximum of 1.0-log Cryptosporidium credit.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(1)(A) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.718(b) that plants have the ability to receive additional 1.0-log microbiological treatment credit for media filters if specified conditions are met on each filter.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(1)(A)(i), (g)(1)(A)(ii), and (g)(1)(A)(iii) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(b) that plants receive an additional microbiological treatment credit if the filtered water turbidity of each filter is continuously monitored and recorded every 15 minutes and the filtered water turbidity of each filter is less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95% of the measurements recorded each month, and if no individual filter produces water above 0.3 NTU in two consecutive readings.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(1)(B), (g)(1)(B)(i), and (g)(1)(B)(ii) to address the requirements of 40 CFR §141.718(b)(3) that the executive director has the ability to approve additional treatment credits if the plant does not meet §290.111(g)(1)(A) and if the executive director determines that the failure was caused by unusual and short term events that could not be prevented by plant design, operation or maintenance and if this is only the first or second such failure within the last twelve months.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(2) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.718(a) that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for media filters if three conditions are met. Specifically, the commission proposes new §290.111(g)(2)(A), (g)(2)(B), and (g)(2)(C) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.718(a) and (b) that plants receive additional microbiological treatment credit if the filtered water turbidity of each filter is continuously monitored and recorded every 15 minutes, and the combined filter effluent turbidity is less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95% of the measurements recorded each month. As the third condition, the commission proposes new §290.111(g)(2)(C) to incorporate the implicit requirements of 40 CFR §141.718(a) and (b) to ensure that a treatment plant does not receive a total of more than 1.0 log of additional credit allowed by federal rule for plants meeting enhanced performance standards for both IFE and CFE turbidity levels in the same month.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(3) to incorporate the requirement of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.719(c) that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for a second set of filters if four conditions are met. As the first of these four conditions, the commission proposes new §290.111(g)(3)(A) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(c) that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for a second set of filters if the filters meet existing state filter design criteria. As the second of these four conditions, the commission proposes new §290.111(g)(3)(B) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(c) that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for a second set of filters if all of the plant flow passes through both stages of filters. As the third and fourth of these four conditions, the commission proposes new §290.111(g)(3)(C) and (g)(3)(D) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.719(c) to establish that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for a second set of filters if the individual filter turbidity of the first stage of filters is monitored and recorded every 15 minutes. To receive the additional credit for the second stage of filtration, the first stage of filters must also meet the existing minimum requirements to achieve the existing treatment credit.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(3)(D) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.719(c) and existing §290.111(e)(1)(A) that plants have the ability to receive an additional 0.5-log microbiological treatment credit for a second set of filters if the individual filter turbidity of the first stage of filters is below 1.0 NTU. To receive the additional credit for the second stage of filtration, the first stage of filters must meet the existing minimum requirements to achieve the existing treatment credit.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(4) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(c) that plants have the ability to receive an additional microbiological treatment credit for other treatment strategies if approved by the executive director.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(4)(A) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(c) that plants have the ability to receive an additional microbiological treatment credit for other treatment strategies if the other strategies achieve a quantifiable reduction in the risk of waterborne disease and treats all the water produced by the plant.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(4)(B) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(c) and 40 CFR §141.715(a)(1) that plants have the ability to receive an additional microbiological treatment credit for other treatment strategies if the other strategies conform to applicable requirements found in 40 CFR §§141.715 through 141.720.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(4)(C) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(c)(3) that the executive director have the ability to establish minimum site-specific requirements for alternative treatment strategies.

The commission proposes new §290.111(g)(4)(D) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.718(c)(1) that the executive director cannot approve additional treatment credits for alternative treatment strategies if the treatment process already has treatment credits in this subsection.

The commission proposes new §290.111(h) to move the provisions currently contained in §290.111(e) and to incorporate the reporting requirements associated with the new federal rules.

The commission proposes new §290.111(h)(1) in order to relocate the requirement currently in §290.111(e)(1). The proposed change also results in an amendment which reduces the time that a public water system has to consult with the executive director following a CFE reading over 1.0 NTU. This amendment is necessitated by requirements of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(5) and (b)(2).

The proposed new §290.111(h)(2) contains a version of the requirement in existing §290.111(e)(2). The proposed amendment more accurately describes the types of systems that must submit a Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

Similarly, the proposed new §290.111(h)(3) contains an amended version of the requirement in existing §290.111(e)(3). The proposal results in a provision which updates the description of, and form number for, the report used by plants that continuously monitor CFE turbidity in lieu of IFE turbidity.

The proposed new §290.111(h)(4), (h)(5) and (h)(6) contain amended versions of the requirements in existing §290.111(e)(4) through (e)(6). In this case, the amendments reflect the locations of the applicable provisions in the new §290.111(e)(4).

The proposed new §290.111(h)(7) and (h)(8) contain the reporting requirements for plants using membrane and UV facilities, respectively, and address the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §171.721(f)(10) and (15), respectively.

The proposed new §290.111(h)(9) would require systems using other technologies to meet the treatment technique requirements of state and federal rules to submit other reports that the executive director needs to determine if the plant is meeting minimum standards. This proposed provision is consistent with the LT2 requirements contained in 40 CFR §171.721(f), (f)(8), (f)(9), and 40 CFR §171.718(c)(3).

The proposed new §290.111(h)(10) contains an amended version of the requirement in existing §290.111(e)(7) which is proposed to be amended to use the correct name of the TCEQ and the correct syntax protocol for the mailing address.

The commission proposes new §290.111(i)(1) to address all of the monitoring violations that could occur under proposed §290.111. The proposed new §290.111(i)(1) covers the requirements in existing §290.110(c)(1) and §290.111(f)(1) and addresses various monitoring requirements contained throughout 40 CFR Part 141, Subpart Q - Enhanced Treatment for Cryptosporidium.

The proposed new §290.111(i)(2) relocates the reporting violations in existing §290.110(c)(2) and §290.111(f)(2) and (f)(3) and addresses various reporting requirements contained throughout 40 CFR Part 141, Subpart Q - Enhanced Treatment for Cryptosporidium.

The commission proposes new §290.111(i)(3) which will replace the analogous existing rule, §290.111(f)(4).

The commission proposes new §290.111(i)(4) to establish the criteria for an acute treatment technique violation for plants using membrane technology and in response to the federal LT2 requirements in 40 CFR §141.173(b) and 40 CFR §141.551(a)(2).

The proposed new §290.111(i)(5) relocates the provisions in existing §290.110(b)(1), replaces the current version of §290.111(f)(5) which the commission proposes to repeal, and allows the executive director to implement the requirements of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.711(a).

The commission proposes new §290.111(i)(6) to contain an existing violation criteria in §290.111(f)(6).

The commission proposes the new §290.111(i)(7) to comply with directives received from the EPA and contained in their publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

The commission proposes to relocate the public notice requirements in existing §290.111(g) to proposed new §290.111(j).

The commission proposes new §290.111(j)(1) to relocate and amend the public notification requirements in existing §290.111(g)(1). This would address the proposed acute treatment technique requirements for plants using membrane technology and assure that systems notify their customers in accordance with the timelines established in the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.202(b)(2).

The proposed new §290.111(j)(2) contains an amended version of the rule currently contained in §290.111(g)(2). This would allow the commission to address the provisions of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(5) and (b)(2), incorporating the correct 24-hour reporting requirement, to replace the incorrect reference to reporting occurring by the end of the next business day.

The proposed new §290.111(j)(2)(A) addresses the requirement in the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(b)(2) for the executive director to determine the level of customer notification required after the occurrence of a combined filter turbidity exceedance of 1.0 NTU based on the results of the consultation with the water system.

The commission proposes new §290.111(j)(2)(B) to incorporate 40 CFR §141.202(b)(2) requiring a system to notify its customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(a) if they fail to consult with the executive director after the occurrence of a combined filter turbidity exceedance of 1.0 NTU.

The commission proposes the new §290.111(j)(3) to address the public notification requirements in existing §290.110(b)(1) and §290.111(f)(5) and treatment technique requirements described in §290.111(c), (d)(1), (e)(1) and (f)(1).

Section 290.112, Total Organic Carbon (TOC), contains requirements related to the removal of naturally occurring organic material (total organic carbon) in source water that may form potentially harmful disinfection by-products.

The commission proposes to amend §290.112 to add references to elements added elsewhere as part of the incorporation of new federal requirements, to remove references to effective dates that have passed, to correct internal references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

Section 290.112(b)(1) is proposed to be amended to write out the first use of the terms "total organic carbon" and "milligrams per liter" before using their acronyms, in accordance with agency syntax protocols. Section 290.112(b)(2)(C) is proposed to be amended to write out the first use of the terms "calcium carbonate," "total trihalomethanes," and "haloacetic acid-group of five" prior to using their acronyms. Section 290.112(b)(2)(E) is proposed to be amended to write out the first use of the terms "specific ultraviolet absorbance" and "liters per milligram-meter" prior to using their acronyms.

In §290.112(e)(1) is proposed to be amended to update the name of the agency from "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" to "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality" in the mailing address, consistent with United States Postal Service syntax protocols. The TCEQ form number for the Monthly Operational Report for Total Organic Carbon is proposed to be added to §290.112(e)(2). The references to large system and small system effective reporting dates in 2001 and 2003 are proposed to be deleted from §290.112(e)(2)(A) and (e)(2)(B), respectively. References to disinfection by-products requirements in §290.112(e)(3)(A) are proposed to be updated to refer to §290.113 and §290.115 containing existing Stage 1 and proposed DBP2 requirements. Section 290.112(e)(3)(B) is proposed to be amended by deleting the description of the internal reference to §290.113 because that description appears earlier in the text of this section.

Section 290.112(f)(4) is proposed to be added to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

Existing §290.113, Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5), contains the standards for disinfection by-products resulting from the Stage 1 Disinfection Byproducts Rule promulgated by the EPA in December 1998.

The commission proposes to amend the title of §290.113 by adding the term "Stage 1" because this section includes the requirements of the federal Stage 1 Disinfection Byproducts Rule. This proposed amendment provides differentiation from 30 TAC §290.115 which is proposed to be added to include the provisions of the federal DBP2. The term "Stage 2" is proposed to be added to reference the provisions of the new rule.

The commission proposes to amend §290.113(a)(1) to include the schedule in Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(a)(1), Date to Start Stage 2 Compliance, upon which public water systems may cease to comply with the provisions of the Stage 1 Disinfection Byproducts Rule and must start to comply with the provisions of DBP2, as contained in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(1) through (c)(5). The commission proposes to amend §290.113(a)(2) to ensure that the monitoring dates are clear. The commission proposes to delete the existing language of §290.113(a)(1) through (a)(4) which reference effective dates that are in the past.

The commission proposes to add new §290.113(a)(2) to specify the dates upon which compliance with the Stage 1 requirements of this section will cease.

The commission proposes to amend Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(3) by adding "Stage 1" to the title of the figure so that the new title is "Stage 1 Routine Monitoring Frequency and Locations for TTHM and HAA5." This proposed amendment provides differentiation from 30 TAC §290.115 which is proposed to be added to include the provisions of the federal DBP2.

The commission proposes to amend Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(4) by adding "Stage 1" to the title of the figure so that the new title is "Stage 1 Reduced Monitoring Frequency and Locations for TTHM and HAA5." This proposed amendment provides differentiation from 30 TAC §290.115 which is proposed to be added to include the provisions of the federal DBP2.

The commission proposes to amend §290.113(e) to replace the outdated name of the agency with the current name and to format the agency's address consistent with United States Postal Service standards.

Section 290.114, Other Disinfection By-products (Chlorite and Bromate) contains the health-based standards, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public notification requirements for disinfection by-products other than trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids. It includes standards for chlorite, which is a by-product of disinfecting water using chlorine dioxide, and standards for bromate, which is a by-product of disinfecting water using ozone.

The commission proposes to amend §290.114 to add references to elements added elsewhere as part of the incorporation of new federal requirements, to remove references to effective dates that have passed, to correct internal references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

In §290.114(a)(1) the first use of the term "milligrams per liter" is proposed to be written out prior to use of its abbreviation. Section 290.114(a)(2)(B)(iv) and (a)(2)(B)(v) are proposed to be deleted to eliminate references to compliance deadlines that have passed. References to past deadlines are proposed to be removed from §290.114(a)(3). Specifically, the commission proposes to delete §290.114(a)(3)(B) which contains a compliance date that has passed, and proposes to renumber §290.114(a)(3)(C). The internal reference to reporting analytical results in existing §290.114(a)(4)(B) is proposed to be corrected to conform with agency syntax protocols. In §290.114(a)(4)(C) it is proposed to update the name of the agency from "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" to "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality" in the mailing address, consistent with United States Postal Service standards. New §290.114(a)(5)(D) is proposed to be added to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with the PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule.

The commission proposes to amend §290.114(b)(3) to delete the description of the contents of §290.119 because that subsection is previously referenced in this section. In addition, the reference in §290.114(b)(3) to use of certified labs is proposed to be amended to reflect that authority for certification of drinking water laboratories under the Safe Drinking Water Act has passed from the (then) Texas Department of Health to the TCEQ. The commission proposes to amend §290.114(b)(4) to update the name of the agency from "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" to "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality" in the mailing address, consistent with United States Postal Service standards. New §290.114 (b)(5)(D) is proposed to be added to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule. The commission proposes to amend §290.114(b)(6)(A) by deleting the description of the contents of §290.122(b) to conform to the syntax standards.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115, Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5), to contain the requirements of DBP2. EPA promulgated DBP2 as part of their congressional mandate to promulgate rules to reduce the risk to public health from potentially carcinogenic disinfection by-products, specifically trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids. Trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids increase the longer the water resides in distribution system pipes. The Stage 1 Disinfection By-products Rule based compliance on a running annual average of samples collected at all locations in the distribution system, which means that public water system customers living in more remote areas of a distribution system currently experience much greater risk than customers living near the plant. DBP2 reduces this inequity by requiring systems to identify locations in the system with elevated trihalomethane and haloacetic acid levels and changing the compliance determination method to base compliance on locational running annual averages. The federal DBP2 is significantly different than the existing Stage 1 requirements, so a new section is proposed.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(a) to contain the existing requirements of §290.113(a), consistent with the applicability requirements of the new federal DBP2 requirements. New §290.115(a)(1) is proposed to be added to reference the start dates for early monitoring requirements contained in proposed §290.115(c). New §290.115(a)(2) is proposed to be added to specify the dates upon which compliance with all of the requirements of DBP2 will start, and the requirements of the Stage 1 Disinfection Byproducts Rule contained in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(1) through (c)(5) will cease. The commission proposes Figure 30 TAC §290.115(a)(2), Date to Start Stage 2 Compliance, to present the information in a clear and organized manner. New §290.115(a)(2)(A) is proposed to be added to contain the requirement of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(6) that establishes the start date for systems performing quarterly monitoring. New §290.115(a)(2)(B) is proposed to be added to contain the requirement of 40 CFR §141.620(c)(6)(ii) that establishes the start date for systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(b) to contain the MCL of existing §290.113(b); to incorporate the new MCL compliance method of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.625(b); and to contain the operation evaluation levels (OELs) for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and the regulated group of five haloacetic acids (HAA5) of 40 CFR §141.626. New §290.115(b)(1) is proposed to be added to incorporate the MCLs for TTHM and HAA5 from existing §290.113(b), consistent with the MCLs set by the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.64(b)(1)(i) and 40 CFR §141.625(b). New §290.115(b)(1)(A) is proposed to be added to contain the MCL for TTHM from existing §290.113(b)(1) and new §290.115(b)(1)(B) is proposed to be added to contain the MCL for HAA5 from existing §290.113(b)(2).

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(b)(2) to contain the calculation basis for determining the OEL of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.626(a). New §290.115(b)(2)(A) is proposed to be added to contain the OEL for TTHM and §290.115(b)(2)(B) is proposed to be added to contain the OEL for HAA5 from 40 CFR §141.626(a).

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c) to contain the Stage 2 monitoring requirements for TTHM and HAA5 and to contain the elements of existing §290.113(c) that continue to apply under the new federal DBP2 rule.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1) to contain the Stage 2 requirement of 40 CFR §141.600(a) that systems must determine Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations with representative high TTHM and HAA5 concentrations throughout the distribution system. In addition, the commission proposes to incorporate the dates that public water systems must determine these sites, as provided in the federal DBP2, 40 CFR §141.620(c)(1) through (5). This information is in Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(1), Date to Establish Stage 2 Sites.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(A) to contain the federal requirement of 40 CFR §141.600(b) that if a system is required to perform initial distribution system evaluation (IDSE) sampling, then that system must use those results when determining Stage 2 compliance locations.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(B) to contain the related provision of 40 CFR §141.622(a)(2) describing the process that systems which are not required to do the early IDSE sampling must use to set Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(B)(i) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.622(a)(2) that systems which are required to have the same number of sample sites under both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 requirements can continue to use their existing Stage 1 sample locations under the new Stage 2 rules.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(B)(ii) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.622(a)(2) requiring that systems with fewer existing Stage 1 sampling locations than the number of locations required by Stage 2 must identify additional sampling sites, and describing the required nature of these sample sites.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(B)(iii) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.622(a)(2) that if a system has more existing Stage 1 sites than they are required to have under Stage 2, that the sites with highest TTHM and HAA5 levels must be used for Stage 2 compliance.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(1)(C) to incorporate the protocol for selecting Stage 2 sample sites given in the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.605(c) by reference.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(2) to contain the routine Stage 2 sampling requirements of 40 CFR §141.621(a)(2) and to contain the existing requirement of §290.113(c)(2) that compliance samples must be collected under normal operating conditions. Section 290.115(c)(2) also contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(2), Routine Stage 2 Monitoring Frequency and Number of Sites, which is included to present the dates in a clear and organized manner.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3) to contain the reduced Stage 2 sampling locations and frequency of 40 CFR §141.623, which allows systems to sample less frequently if there are relatively low levels of TTHM and HAA5 detected in the distribution system. Section 290.115(c)(3) also contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(3), Reduced Stage 2 Monitoring Frequency and Number of Sites, which is included to present the information in a clear and organized manner.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(A) to contain the requirement of 40 CFR §141.623(a) that only compliance data may be used to qualify for reduced monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(B) to contain the provisions of DBP2 relating to qualification to start reduced monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(B)(i) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(a) describing the conditions under which systems that are sampling annually or triennially may remain on reduced monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(B)(ii) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(b) describing the conditions under which a system sampling quarterly may remain on reduced monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(B)(iii) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.623(a) describing the total organic carbon levels that must be maintained to allow a system treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water to qualify for reduced monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(C) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.623(c) describing when systems will be returned to routine monitoring after reduced monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(C)(i) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(c) describing the conditions under which a system sampling quarterly will be returned to routine monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(C)(ii) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(c) describing the conditions under which a system sampling annually or triennially will be returned to routine monitoring. New §290.115(c)(3)(C)(iii) is proposed to be added to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(c) describing the total organic carbon conditions under which a system treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water will be returned to routine monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(D) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.623(c) providing state authority to return a system to its routine monitoring schedule at any time.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(E) to contain the provisions 40 CFR §141.627 requiring systems that are on reduced monitoring for Stage 1 and that have different monitoring locations for Stage 1 than for Stage 2 to initiate routine Stage 2 monitoring at the inception of the rule's effective dates.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(F) to contain the conditions of 40 CFR §141.627 under which a system on reduced monitoring for Stage 1 may remain on reduced monitoring without interruption in the transition to Stage 2. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(F)(i) through (c)(3)(F)(iii) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.627 establishing that a system must have received a waiver to initial distribution system sampling, meet Stage 2 reduced monitoring criteria, and have the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 monitoring locations to remain on reduced monitoring through the transition to the Stage 2 rule requirements.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(3)(G) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(3) allowing the executive director to perform calculations and determine whether the system is eligible for reduced monitoring in lieu of having the system report that information.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(4) to contain the increased monitoring provisions of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.625. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(4)(A) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.625(a) requiring a system on less frequent monitoring to increase monitoring to quarterly if any compliance sample exceeds a maximum contaminant level. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(4)(B) to contain the conditions of 40 CFR §141.625(c) under which a system on increased quarterly monitoring may be returned to routine monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(4)(C) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.628 setting sample locations and timing for increased monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5) to contain the provisions of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.600 for initial distribution system evaluation sampling (IDSE). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(A) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.600(d)(1) providing conditions under which very small systems may waive initial distribution system evaluation sampling.

The commission proposes to add §290.115(c)(5)(B) to contain the provisions and timing of 40 CFR §141.600(d)(1) providing conditions under which the executive director may grant a waiver of IDSE sampling to systems that have shown very low levels of TTHM and HAA5 in Stage 1. Section §290.115(c)(5)(B) also contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(B), Timing of Stage 1 Samples Evaluated for 40/30 IDSE Waiver, which is included to present the information in an organized and clear manner. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(B)(i) to establish the criteria of 40 CFR §141.603(b)(1) requiring that each sample a system collected under Stage 1 must have been less than half the maximum contaminant level to waive IDSE sampling. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(B)(ii) to contain the provisions of 40 CFR §141.603(b)(2) requiring submittal of data to qualify to waive iDSE sampling. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(B)(iii) to contain the authority granted the state in 40 CFR §141.603(b)(3) to require IDSE sampling even if the system meets other qualification requirements.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C) to incorporate the provisions of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.600(c) giving planning requirements, sampling schedules and reporting elements for systems that are required to perform IDSE sampling. Section 290.115(c)(5)(C) also contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C), IDSE Schedule, which is included to present the information in a clear and organized manner.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(i) to list the required IDSE sampling plan elements. New §290.115(c)(5)(C)(i)(I) is proposed to be added to include the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(1) describing the required IDSE sampling plan schematic. New §290.115(c)(5)(C)(i)(II) is proposed to be added to include the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(2) relating to justification for sample site selection.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii) to describe how IDSE sampling must proceed in accordance with 40 CFR §141.601(b) and 40 CFR §141.601(a)(1). New §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(I) is proposed to be added to incorporate the required number and type of IDSE sites of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(1). Section §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(I) contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(I), Number and Type of IDSE Sample Sites, which is included to present the information in a clear and organized manner. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(II) to include the requirement for collection of dual sample sets at each monitoring location given in 40 CFR §141.601(a)(1). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(III) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(2) that IDSE sample locations must be different than the existing Stage 1 monitoring locations. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(VI) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(2) requiring that IDSE sample locations must be distributed throughout the distribution system. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(V) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(1) describing the frequency of IDSE monitoring. Section §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(V) contains Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(V), Frequency of IDSE Monitoring, which is included to present the information in a clear and organized manner. The commission proposes to add §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(VI) to incorporate the requirement of 40 CFR §141.601(a)(4) that the IDSE monitoring frequency and locations may not be reduced.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iii) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(c) describing the required elements of the IDSE report. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iii)(I) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(c)(1) requiring that the data be reported in the format directed by the executive director, as provided in regulatory guidance. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iii)(II) is proposed to be added to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.601(c)(1) that a system must provide a new map or other documentation if changes occurred to the system after submittal of the IDSE plan. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iii)(III) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.601(c)(2) requiring that the IDSE report must include an explanation of any deviations from the approved initial distribution system evaluation plan. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iii)(IV) to incorporate the requirements of 40 CFR §141.601(c)(3) requiring that the IDSE report recommend and justify Stage 2 sample sites under DBP2.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(c)(5)(C)(iv) to allow systems to meet the initial distribution system requirements through submittal of a system specific study, as described in 40 CFR §141.602. The system specific study requirements are complex and expected to be used by few systems.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(d) to establish that compliance samples analyzed for TTHM and HAA5 must be analyzed using the methods contained in the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.600(e).

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e) to include the reporting requirements for TTHM and HAA5 of existing §290.113(e), 40 CFR §141.626, and 40 CFR §141.629. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1) to incorporate the requirements of existing §290.113(e) requiring systems to report to the executive director results of any test related to TTHM or HAA5. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(A) to incorporate the provision of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(i) for submitting quarterly results. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(A)(i) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(i) requiring systems to report the number of samples taken during the last quarter. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(A)(ii) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(ii) that systems report the date and results of each sample taken during the previous quarter. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(A)(iii) to contain the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(iii) that systems must report compliance calculations. New §290.115(e)(1)(A)(iv) is proposed to be added to include the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(iv) that systems must report whether the MCL was exceeded at any monitoring location. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(A)(v) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(v) that systems must report exceedance of an operation evaluation level.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(B) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(iii) relating to reporting locational running annual average exceedances.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(1)(C) to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(2) and (a)(2)(v) relating to total organic carbon and disinfectant residual reporting requirements, respectively, for systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water and seeking to conduct reduced monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(2) to incorporate the operation evaluation reporting requirements of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.626. New §290.115(e)(2)(A) is proposed to be added to incorporate the schedule of 40 CFR §141.626(b)(1) requiring systems to submit required operation evaluation reports 90 days after an operation evaluation level exceedance. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(2)(B) to contain the description of the contents of an operation evaluation report. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(2)(B)(i) through (e)(2)(B)(vi) to list the specific areas of distribution system operation to be discussed in the operation evaluation report. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(2)(C) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.626(b)(2)(i) allowing the scope of an operation evaluation report to be limited with executive director approval, and requiring that limitation to be documented in writing as provided by 40 CFR §141.626(b)(2)(ii). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(e)(2)(D) to contain the requirement of 40 CFR §141.626(b)(1) that the operation evaluation report be submitted and approved in writing.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f) to contain the existing compliance determination requirements of §290.113(f) and additional requirements for compliance calculations and requirements of the new federal rule. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1) to contain the MCL compliance determination provision of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.625(b) requiring that compliance be based on the locational running annual average, and specifying the MCL violations for TTHM and HAA5. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(A) to contain the existing requirements of §290.113 that compliance will be calculated based on approved sample sites, and that invalidated samples will not be used for determining compliance. Additionally, new §290.115(f)(1)(A) is proposed to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.625(b) that compliance will be calculated based on the locational running annual average of quarterly samples, but if one sample would cause an MCL exceedance even if following quarters had low concentrations of TTHM or HAA5, compliance calculations may use less than four quarters of data. In addition, new §290.115(f)(1)(A) is proposed to incorporate the provisions of 40 CFR §141.625(b) that if a system fails to collect all required samples, compliance will be based on the available data.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(B) to provide the starting schedule for compliance determination under the new federal rule, as provided in 40 CFR §141.620(c). New §290.115(f)(1)(B)(i) is proposed to be added to incorporate the start time for Stage 2 compliance determination for systems monitoring quarterly in accordance with 40 CFR §141.620(c)(7). New §290.115(f)(1)(B)(ii) is proposed to be added to incorporate the start time for Stage 2 compliance determination for systems where a locational running annual average would be exceeded regardless of the results of subsequent quarters, as contained in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(7). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(B)(iii) to incorporate the start time for Stage 2 compliance determination for systems that are required to monitor less frequently than quarterly, as contained in 40 CFR §141.620(c)(7). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(B)(iv) to incorporate the start time for systems monitoring annually or triennially that start monitoring quarterly in the quarter following an exceedance, as contained in 40 CFR §141.629(a)(1)(iii).

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(C) to contain the requirement of existing §290.113(f)(7) that if a public water system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCL for TTHM or HAA5, the system commits an MCL violation for the entire period. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(D) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.629(a)(3) that the executive director may choose to perform calculations and determine MCL exceedences in lieu of having the system report that information. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(1)(E) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.600(f) establishing that initial distribution system evaluation results will not be used for the purpose of compliance determination.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(2) to contain the requirements for monitoring violations from existing §290.113 and from the new federal rule. The provisions of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.625(b) defining a monitoring violation and its period are proposed to be added to §290.115(f)(2). Additionally, the commission proposes to amend this requirement to make it clearer that violations will accrue against the system on a quarterly basis.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(3) to establish a monitoring violation related to the requirement under proposed §290.115(e)(2) that systems may be required to perform monitoring in order to evaluate distribution system operation. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(4) to contain the monitoring violation requirement of existing §290.113(f)(2) relating to a system's responsibility to perform compliance monitoring. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(5) to establish a reporting violation related to the requirement under proposed §290.115(e)(2) that systems submit any required operation evaluation report to the executive director. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(f)(6) to explicitly identify the type of violation resulting from failure to perform a required public notification for consistency with PNR requirements specified in publication EPA 816-R-01-010, Final State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification Rule (PN) Rule.

The commission proposes to add new §290.115(g) to contain the existing public notification requirements of §290.113(g) and to add requirements related to the new federal rule. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(g)(1) to contain the MCL public notification requirement of existing §290.113(g)(1). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(g)(2) to contain the monitoring violation requirements of existing §290.113(g)(2). The commission proposes to add new §290.115(g)(3) to contain the provision of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.601(c)(4) that any initial distribution system evaluation compliance documents must be made available to the executive director or the public upon request. The commission proposes to add new §290.115(g)(4) to incorporate the provision of 40 CFR §141.626(b)(1) that operation evaluation reports must be made available to the executive director or the public upon request.

The commission proposes to add a new §290.116, Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques, to incorporate the new federal corrective action and treatment technique requirements for groundwater systems contained in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(a) to identify the applicability of the corrective action and treatment technique requirements for groundwater systems as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(a)(1) to identify the requirements and applicability of the treatment technique requirements for groundwater systems with existing sources not required to meet the groundwater source monitoring requirements as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(b).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(a)(2) to specify the requirements and applicability of the treatment technique requirements for groundwater systems with new sources not required to meet the groundwater source monitoring requirements as described in 40 CFR §141.403(b).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b) to give the corrective action plan requirements for groundwater systems that have a fecal indicator positive source sample as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(4).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(1) to establish the time frame in which a system has to consult with the state and develop a corrective action plan to address the fecal indicator positive source sample as described in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(4).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(2) to establish the time frame for public water systems to comply with the corrective action plan to address the fecal indicator positive source sample as described in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(5).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(3) to require executive director approval before any changes to the corrective action plan as described in the federal GWR in CFR §141.403(a)(5)(ii)(A).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(4) which allows the executive director to establish interim measures to protect public health in addition to the requirements of the corrective action plan as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(5)(ii)(B).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(5) which identifies corrective action options required for corrective action plans as described in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(6).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(5)(A) which identifies well disinfection and fecal indicator monitoring as a corrective action option consistent with 40 CFR §141.403(a)(4) and the special primacy requirements of 40 CFR §142.16(o)(1)(iii).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(5)(B) which identifies the corrective action of eliminating the groundwater source that was found to be fecal indicator positive as defined in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(6)(ii).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(5)(C) which identifies the corrective action of eliminating the source of fecal contamination, followed by well disinfection and source monitoring as defined in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(6)(iii).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(b)(5)(D) which identifies the corrective action of providing 4-log treatment of viruses as defined in 40 CFR §141.403(a)(6)(iv).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c) requiring groundwater systems to demonstrate 4-log treatment of viruses by meeting minimum disinfection requirements as required by the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(b) and maintaining consistency with disinfectant monitoring requirements of existing §290.110(c).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(1) requiring groundwater systems to monitor the performance of chemical disinfection facilities as required by 40 CFR §141.403(b) and maintaining consistency with disinfectant monitoring requirements of existing §290.110(c).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(1)(A) to incorporate the monitoring requirements of groundwater systems serving a population greater than 3,300 that are achieving 4-log viral inactivation as required by 40 CFR §141.403(b)(3)(i)(A).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(1)(B) to incorporate the disinfectant monitoring requirements needed to achieve 4-log viral inactivation for groundwater systems serving a population less than 3,300 as required by 40 CFR §141.403(b)(3)(i)(B) consistent with the disinfectant monitoring requirements of existing §290.110(c)(1)(A).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(1)(C) to establish the requirements for disinfection contact time as it relates to the disinfectant monitoring requirements of 40 CFR §141.403(b)(3)(i) and to maintain consistency with contact time determination requirements of existing §290.110(c)(1)(B).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(1)(D) to establish the requirements for increased disinfection monitoring if appropriate levels of treatment are not achieved. This relates to the disinfectant monitoring requirements of 40 CFR §141.403(b)(3)(i) and maintains consistency with contact time determination requirements of §290.110(c)(1)(C).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(2) requiring groundwater systems to monitor the performance of UV light disinfection facilities as allowed by the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(b)(3)(ii) which specifies the monitoring requirements for alternative treatment and by 40 CFR §141.720(d)(3)(i) which establishes the monitoring requirements for UV light disinfection facilities.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3) to apply the analytical requirements for disinfectant monitoring provided in existing §290.110(d) to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section. These existing requirements apply to systems operating under normal conditions described in §290.110 and also apply to systems performing corrective action or treatment under the federal GWR, as detailed throughout proposed §290.116.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(A) to specify that the analytical requirements for pH meters contained in existing §290.110(d)(1) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(B) to specify that the analytical requirements for temperature measurements as given in existing §290.110(d)(2) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(C) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring free chlorine residual as specified in existing §290.110(d)(3) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(C)(i) to specify that apply the analytical requirements for measuring free chlorine residual using amperometric titration as provided in §290.110(d)(3)(A) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(C)(ii) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring free chlorine residual using DPD Ferrous titration as set out in existing §290.110(d)(3)(B) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(C)(iii) to specify that apply the analytical requirements for measuring free chlorine residual using a DPD method using a colorimeter or spectrophotometer as described in existing §290.110(d)(3)(C) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(C)(iv) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring free chlorine residual using springaldizine as given in existing §290.110(d)(3)(D) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(D) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chloramine residual given in existing §290.110(d)(4) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(D)(i) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chloramine residual using amperometric titration specified in existing §290.110(d)(4)(A) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(D)(ii) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chloramine residual using DPD Ferrous titration in existing §290.110(d)(4)(B) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(D)(iii) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chloramine residual using a DPD that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer of existing §290.110(d)(4)(C) and (d)(4)(C)(i) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(E) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chlorine dioxide residual as defined in existing §290.110(d)(5) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(E)(i) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chlorine dioxide residual using amperometric titration as defined in existing §290.110(d)(5)(A) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(E)(ii) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring chlorine dioxide residual using Lissamine Green B as defined in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.74(a)(2) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(c)(3)(F) to specify that the analytical requirements for measuring ozone residual as defined in the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.74(a)(2) also apply to the groundwater systems that must meet the requirements of this section.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(d) establishing the reporting requirements for groundwater systems required to meet the criteria of this section as required by the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(d)(1) establishing the treatment reporting requirements for groundwater systems required to meet the 4-log treatment of viruses as required by 40 CFR §141.405(a)(1).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(d)(2) establishing the notification requirements for groundwater systems achieving 4-log treatment of viruses that are not subject to raw groundwater source monitoring as required by 40 CFR §141.403(b). This paragraph also establishes the December 1, 2009 deadline for this notification.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(d)(3) requiring groundwater systems to notify the executive director within 30 days of completing the required corrective action in accordance with the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(a)(2).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(d)(4) requiring a groundwater system that fails to conduct triggered source monitoring to provide written documentation that it was providing 4-log treatment of viruses within 30 days of the positive distribution coliform sample. This paragraph incorporates the requirements of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.405(a)(3).

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(e) establishing the compliance determination requirements for groundwater systems required to meet the criteria of this section as required by the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.404.

The commission proposes to incorporate 40 CFR §141.404(b)(1) by adding new §290.116(e)(1) establishing the violation of the treatment technique requirement if a groundwater system does not complete corrective action in accordance with the executive director approved corrective action plan or interim measures required by the executive director.

The commission proposes to incorporate 40 CFR §141.404(b)(2) by adding new §290.116(e)(2) establishing the violation of the treatment technique requirement if a groundwater system is not in compliance with the executive director approved corrective action plan and schedule.

The commission proposes to incorporate 40 CFR §141.404(c) by adding new §290.116(e)(3) establishing the violation of the treatment technique requirement if a groundwater system fails to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses and the failure is not corrected within four hours.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(e)(4) establishing the monitoring violation for groundwater systems that fail to conduct the required disinfectant monitoring.

The commission proposes to add new §290.116(e)(5) establishing the reporting violation for groundwater systems that fail to report the results of the required disinfectant monitoring.

The commission proposes to add a new §290.116(e)(6) establishing a public notice violation for groundwater systems that fail to issue required public notice.

The commission proposes to incorporate the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.404(d) by adding new §290.116(f) establishing the public notice requirement for treatment technique, monitoring, or reporting violations as given in this section.

Section 290.117, Regulation of Lead and Copper, contains the action levels, sampling requirements, reporting requirements, and public education requirements for lead and copper, which can be released into drinking water under corrosive conditions. The commission proposes to amend §290.117 to add references to elements added elsewhere as part of the incorporation of new federal requirements, to remove references to effective dates that have passed, to correct internal references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

In §290.117(b) the commission proposes to have initial capital letters removed within the catchline, in accordance with agency syntax protocols. The commission proposes to delete the table in §290.117(c)(8) because it contains references to start dates for lead and copper monitoring that have passed and all Texas public water systems have completed the initial monitoring referred to in that table. In §290.117(d), the commission proposes to remove initial capital letters within the catchline, in accordance with agency standards. Throughout §290.117(h) internal references to the table setting the number of water quality parameter monitoring locations are corrected from §290.117(c)(8) to §290.117(h)(1)(D). The word "title" in §290.117(h)(1)(D) is proposed to be replaced with the word "section" to meet agency syntax standards.

Section 290.118, Secondary Constituent Levels, contains the existing secondary, non-health-based standards in drinking water. The commission proposes to amend the reference to certified laboratories in §290.118(d) to reflect that authority for certification of drinking water laboratories under the Safe Drinking Water Act has passed from the (then) Texas Department of Health to the TCEQ.

Section 290.119, Analytical Procedures, contains the analytical methods that are acceptable for compliance sampling of drinking water. The commission proposes to amend §290.119(b) to update the name of the agency from "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" to "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality."

Section 290.121, Monitoring Plans, contains the requirements for systems to use a monitoring plan to describe when and where they take compliance samples.

The commission proposes to update the internal references in §290.121(b)(1) to reflect inclusion of the new federal rule requirements. The commission proposes new §290.121(b)(6) to add a reference to the source water monitoring plans required under the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.402(a)(2)(ii). The commission proposes to add new §290.121(b)(7) to add a reference to initial distribution system evaluation plans under the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.600(1). The commission proposes new §290.121(b)(8) to add a reference to the raw water monitoring plans required under the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.703(f). The commission proposes to remove outdated references to effective dates starting in 2001, 2003, and 2004 from existing §290.121(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) and proposes to renumber resulting paragraphs. The commission proposes to update §290.121(d)(1) specify that a reporting violation occurs not only when a system fails to submit a monitoring plan upon request, but also if it is required to submit its monitoring plan because it treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

Section 290.122, Public Notification, contains public notification requirements for systems to follow when their drinking water fails to meet one of the drinking water standards.

The commission proposes to amend §290.122 to add references to elements added elsewhere as part of the incorporation of new federal requirements, to correct internal references, and to correct typographical and syntax errors.

The commission proposes to amend §290.122(a)(1)(B) by removing capitalization of the words from the term "Nephelometric Turbidity Unit" and to incorporate public notification requirements of the federal PNR. The commission proposes to add new §290.122(a)(1)(B)(i) to contain the requirement of existing §290.122(a)(1)(B) regarding notification when combined filter effluent turbidity is over 5.0 NTU. The commission proposes to add new §290.122(a)(1)(B)(ii) to contain the requirement of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(6) for notification when combined filter effluent turbidity is over 1.0 NTU at a membrane treatment plant. The commission proposes to add new §290.122(a)(1)(B)(iii) to contain the requirement of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(6) for notification after consultation with the executive director when combined filter effluent turbidity is over 1.0 NTU at a treatment plant using technology other than membranes. The commission proposes to add new §290.122(a)(1)(B)(iv) to contain the requirement of the federal PNR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(6) for notification of customers in cases where a system fails to consult with the executive director when combined filter effluent turbidity is over 1.0 NTU at a treatment plant using technology other than membranes.

The commission proposes to add new §290.122(a)(1)(F) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.202(a)(8) requiring groundwater systems to notify the public of detection of E. coli or other fecal indicators in raw groundwater source samples as an acute health violation. The subsequent paragraph is re-alphabetized to maintain alphabetical order.

The commission proposes to add new §290.122(b)(1)(C) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.403(a) requiring groundwater systems to notify the public of failure to take corrective action or failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer. The subsequent paragraphs are re-alphabetized to maintain alphabetical order.

The commission proposes to add new §290.122(b)(1)(D) to incorporate the provision of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.211(a) that a system must notify customers if they fail to collect three months of required Cryptosporidium data.

The commission proposes to add new §290.122(d)(3)(C) to incorporate the provisions of the federal LT2 in 40 CFR §141.211(d)(1) requiring surface water systems to include the mandatory contaminant-specific language in addition to any language required by the executive director, when notifying the public of repeated failure to conduct surface water source monitoring for Cryptosporidium .

The commission renumbers existing §290.122(d)(3)(C) to §290.122(d)(3)(D).

The commission proposes to amend §290.122(f) to incorporate the provisions of the federal PNR 40 CFR §141.31(d) requiring a signed certificate of delivery with proof of public notification submitted to the executive director.

Subchapter H: Consumer Confidence Reports

Subchapter H contains the requirements for community water systems to deliver a report of drinking water quality, called a Consumer Confidence Report, to all of their customers annually. The commission proposes to amend Subchapter H, Consumer Confidence Reports, to incorporate provisions of the federal GWR, LT2, and GWR rules. Since 1998, all public water systems have been required to send their customers and annual report of drinking water quality called the Consumer Confidence Report. All new regulations from EPA, such as the GWR, LT2, and DBP2, contain provisions for how to notify customers regarding any new contaminants or new ways of calculating compliance. The commission also proposes administrative changes throughout these sections to be consistent with Texas Register requirements and with Subchapter D and Subchapter F of Chapter 290.

Section 290.272, Content of the Report, describes the required contents of the consumer confidence reports.

The commission proposes to add new §290.272(c)(4)(D)(iii) requiring systems to include the highest locational running average and range of individual sample results for total trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids for all monitoring locations expressed in the same units as the MCL, consistent with the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.53(d)(4)(iv)(B).

The commission proposes to add new §290.272(e)(7) to incorporate the provisions of the federal DBP2 in 40 CFR §141.153(d)(4)(iv)(c) requiring systems to include individual sample results in calculations for the initial distribution system evaluation to be reported in the annual consumer confidence report.

The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(7) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i) require inclusion in the consumer confidence report of any fecal indicator-positive groundwater source sample that is not invalidated by the executive director.

The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(7)(A) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(A) that a system must notify its customers of the source of any fecal contamination, if that source is known, and notify them of the dates that the fecal indicator was detected in the source. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(7)(B) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(B) that a system must notify its customers of any actions that have been taken to address the fecal contamination, and the date of such action. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(7)(C) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(C) that a system must notify its customers of the plan to address any fecal contamination and any progress that has been made towards addressing the contamination. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(7)(D) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(D) that a system must notify its customers using the mandatory health effects language.

The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(8) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i) to require the consumer confidence report to describe any significant deficiency. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(8)(A) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(A) that a system must notify its customers of any significant deficiency and the date that it was identified. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(8)(B) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(i)(B) that a system must notify its customers of their plan for addressing any significant deficiency. The commission proposes to add new §290.272(g)(8)(C) to incorporate the provisions of the federal GWR in 40 CFR §141.53(h)(6)(ii) that a system must notify its customers of any significant deficiency that was corrected and the date that it was corrected. Significant deficiencies are part of the special primacy conditions for the state of 40 CFR §142. This requires states to define at least one significant deficiency related to each of the eight sanitary survey elements: source, treatment, distribution, storage facilities, pressure maintenance facilities, data reporting, system management, and operator compliance with licensing.

Section 290.273, Required Additional Health Information, provides the required additional health information that must be included in consumer confidence reports.

The commission proposes to amend §290.273(b) to remove the transition level and language for reporting arsenic levels consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR §141.154 because applicability has passed.

Section 290.275, Appendices A - D, provides the mandatory language used to explain contaminant detections and violations in the consumer confidence reports.

Section §290.275(1) is Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(1), Appendix A--Converting Maximum Contaminant Level Compliance Values for Consumer Confidence Reports. The commission proposes to amend §290.275(1) to insert the language of 40 CFR Appendix A to Subpart O relating to the maximum contaminant compliance value for fecal indicators of drinking water as number 3. Subsequent table elements are proposed to be renumbered to maintain the table sequence.

The commission proposes to remove footnote 1 of §290.275(1) related to the effective date of the arsenic MCL since this date has passed.

Section 290.275(2) is Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(2), Appendix B--Sources of Regulated Contaminants. The commission proposes to amend §290.275(2) to insert the language of the federal GWR in 40 CFR Appendix A to Subpart O relating to the source of fecal indicators of drinking water as number 3. Subsequent table elements are proposed to be renumbered to maintain the table sequence.

The commission proposes to remove footnote 1 of §290.275(2) related to the effective date of the arsenic MCL which has passed.

Section 290.275(3) is Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(3), Appendix C--Health Effects Language. The commission proposes to amend §290.275(3) to insert the health effects language of the federal GWR in 40 CFR Subpart O, Appendix A relating to the mandatory health effects language for fecal indicators in drinking water as number 3. Subsequent table elements are proposed to be renumbered accordingly to maintain the table sequence.

FISCAL NOTE: COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Nina Chamness, Analyst, Strategic Planning and Assessment, determined that, for the first five-year period the proposed rules are in effect, fiscal implications, which may be significant, are anticipated for the agency and other units of state and local governments as a result of administration or enforcement of the proposed rules. The proposed rules would incorporate recent federal water regulations for PWSs and are necessary in order for the state to maintain primacy for regulating PWSs. All implementation costs incurred by all affected parties are due to compliance with federal mandates. For purposes of this fiscal note, all cost analyses, for all parties, have been based on EPA estimates.

Some of the proposed rules are not anticipated to have a fiscal impact on any regulated party. Specifically, the changes to the federally-mandated DBP1, PNR, and TCR are not expected to have any financial impact on affected parties. The changes to the DBP1 rule allow the TCEQ to effectively distinguish between the current requirements and the DBP2 requirements that will take effect in several years but do not change any of the technical requirements of the existing DBP1 rule. The changes to the PNR reduce the time allowed for public water systems to notify the TCEQ of an acute violation but do not change the notification requirements for customers. The changes in the TCR requirements reflect that the agency uses the federally-mandated compliance calculation and have no regulatory impact on public water systems.

In addition, the requirement for public water systems to maintain internal procedures for notifying the executive director in the event of a threat to the security of the water supply does not pose any significant fiscal impact because the rules give the water system wide latitude to develop their system specific plan and do not require the publication or distribution of the plan.

However, compliance with the GWR, LT2 and DBP2 is anticipated to have fiscal implications for the agency and regulated parties.

The GWR, LT2 and DBP2 federal rules are anticipated to increase costs to the agency by varying degrees during the first five years of implementation, and compliance costs are estimated to total as much as $7 million during this period. If current funding is not adequate to implement the proposed rules, the agency may need to request additional appropriation authority for the 2010 - 2011 biennium in order to better implement the rules' provisions.

Fiscal implications are also anticipated for other state agencies that own or operate drinking water systems. Staff estimates that 146 PWSs are owned by other state agencies, including Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, and Texas Department of Transportation. The GWR is expected to affect 115 PWSs operated by state agencies, and LT2 and DBP2 are expected to affect 10 and 46 state agency PWSs respectively. Total estimated costs for these state agencies during the first five years of implementation may be as much as $713,000.

The primary purpose of the proposed rules is to incorporate federal regulations pertaining to the safety of drinking water from groundwater and surface water sources. EPA has adopted the GWR, which seeks to provide greater protection from pathogens to customers of PWSs that provide drinking water, in part or in whole, from sources of groundwater. EPA has also adopted LT2, which provides increased protection from the protozoan Cryptosporidium found in surface water, and DBP2, which seeks to provide public drinking water customers more equitable protection from the risks of disinfection byproducts.

The proposed rules will require the agency to process much greater numbers of water samples, develop and update data management systems, review and approve a greater number of reports, develop and provide training to agency and PWSs' staffs, increase monitoring, and perform other compliance tasks. Costs to implement the proposed rules will vary from year to year depending on federal time frames for implementation of each federal regulation, the time required to amend and implement operating procedures and monitoring requirements, and the time required to train agency staff and PWSs' staff on the new rule requirements. The WSD may find it necessary to implement efficiencies, increase contract activities, and/or obtain additional resources. Details of agency costs for each part of the proposed rules were based upon EPA estimates and can be seen in the following table:

Figure 1: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble

Estimated costs to other state agencies are also based on EPA estimates and are detailed in the table below:

Figure 2: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble

Full implementation of the GWR is not scheduled to take place until December 1, 2009. Both the LT2 and DBP2 are not scheduled for full implementation until October 1, 2014. Implementation costs vary each year depending on federal timelines in the different rules regarding compliance. Although some of the federal implementation dates extend beyond the five year analysis of the proposed rules, staff has seen that some PWSs may voluntarily correct contaminant or disinfectant levels immediately to the levels required by these federal regulations when sampling indicates corrections are needed. This voluntary action may accelerate the level of costs, but it may also accelerate any estimated cost benefits in public health costs.

The proposed rules are also expected to increase costs for PWSs owned by local governments and businesses. Staff estimates that there are as many as 6,692 PWSs in the state. Of these, 2,912 are owned or operated by local governments and as many as 3,525 PWSs are owned or operated by businesses. If a PWS is close to non-viability or has poor source water quality, implementation costs could be significant.

Total cost estimates to comply with the Stage 2 Drinking Water Rules will vary each year for each rule and depend on federal compliance timelines, size of customer base, monitoring requirements, and possible treatment requirements. Estimated costs for local governments thought to be affected by each rule are based on EPA estimates and are shown in the following table:

Figure 3: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble

PWSs owned by local governments have options to finance compliance costs for these rules. Local governments may be eligible for financial assistance. It is possible that PWSs owned by local governments will not pass any compliance costs on to their customer base. Any increase in costs incurred by local government PWSs is anticipated to be similar to estimates provided by EPA for the federal rules. EPA estimates that the mean annual household cost increase for the GWR ranges from $0.21 to $16.54 nationwide depending on system size, with the national mean cost for all systems using groundwater estimated to be $0.51 per household. EPA estimates that the mean cost to a household would increase $2.10 per year for LT2 compliance. EPA also estimates that for DBP2 compliance the mean cost increase per household is $0.62 per year.

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS

Ms. Chamness also determined that for each year of the first five years the proposed new rules are in effect, the public benefit anticipated from the changes seen in the proposed rules will be greater protection of public health and lower rates of illness and fatalities caused by contaminants in public drinking water. EPA estimates that there will be significant savings due to decreases in lost wages and in medical costs for treating waterborne illnesses. As mentioned earlier, most savings are projected by EPA to be experienced in future years beyond the first five years the proposed rules are implemented. Based on EPA projections, staff estimates that there will be cost savings during the first five years of rule implementation, but long term cost savings due to decreased illnesses associated with drinking water are projected to be even more significant.

Business-owned PWSs may own or operate a community water system or a noncommunity water system. A community water system is defined as a PWS which has a potential to serve at least 15 residential service connections on a year-round basis or serves at least 25 residents on a year-round basis. A noncommunity water system is any water system that is not a community system. There are two different types of noncommunity water systems. A nontransient noncommunity water system is a public water system that is not a community water system and regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons at least six months out of the year. A transient noncommunity water system is a public water system that is not a community water system and serves at least 25 persons at least 60 days out of the year, yet by its characteristics, does not meet the definition of a nontransient noncommunity water system.

An estimated 1,622 of the business-owned PWSs serve noncommunity customers. These businesses-owned PWSs are expected to recover compliance costs by charging more for services or products. The amount of increase is not known, but it is expected to have minimal fiscal implications for the market served and would depend on the size of the transient customer base, the type of service, or the number of products available for purchase.

Business-owned PWSs that own or operate community PWSs also have options to recover compliance costs through grant funding, but they could also pass these costs on to their customer base. There are an estimated 1,903 of these PWSs in the state. The increase per household is estimated to be the same as the estimated increase that could be seen in PWSs owned or operated by local governments. EPA estimates that the mean annual household cost increase for the GWR ranges from $0.21 to $16.54 nationwide depending on system size, with the national mean cost for all systems using groundwater estimated to be $0.51 per household. EPA estimates that the mean cost to a household would increase $2.10 per year for LT2 compliance. EPA also estimates that for DBP2 compliance the mean cost increase per household is $0.62 per year. If compliance costs are too high for the customer base to bear, the financial stability of these business-owned PWSs would be threatened, and they may have to seek financial, managerial, and /or technical assistance.

Most businesses that are thought to be affected by the proposed rules serve smaller populations and have less revenue than PWSs owned or operated by local governments. Therefore, this fiscal analysis assumes that business owned PWSs serving fewer than 50,000 customers will be small or micro-businesses. Please see the section called SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT for an analysis of the cost implications of the proposed rules on those businesses.

SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT

Adverse fiscal implications are anticipated for some small or micro-businesses as a result of the proposed rules. It is anticipated that any cost increases to comply with the proposed rules may be recovered by charging a higher price to PWS customers or by obtaining financial assistance. If a business-owned PWS becomes non-viable and major corrective action is needed to comply with the rules, the business may have to consolidate with neighboring business-owned PWSs or local governments.

Of the 3,299 business-owned PWSs that might be affected by the GWR, 17 are thought to belong to small businesses and 3,282 are thought to be micro-businesses. Of the 36 business-owned PWSs that might be affected by the LT2 rule, one is thought to be owned or operated by a small business and 35 are thought to be owned or operated by a micro-business. The DBP2 rule is projected to affect 23 small businesses and 2,514 micro-businesses.

Based on EPA estimates, the statewide costs to small and micro-businesses are shown in the following table:

Figure 4: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble

A small business is defined as having fewer than 100 employees or less than $1 million in annual gross receipts. A micro-business is defined as having no more than 20 employees. Although EPA estimates compliance costs based on the number of customers served instead of number of employees or gross receipts, staff has assumed that systems with smaller populations will usually have fewer employees for purposes of this fiscal note. The cost per employee for a small and micro-businesses for the proposed rules are based on EPA estimates and are shown in the following tables.

Figure 5: 30 TAC Chapter 290--Preamble

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT

The commission reviewed this proposed rulemaking and determined that a local employment impact statement is not required because the proposed rules do not adversely affect a local economy in a material way for the first five years that the proposed rules are in effect.

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 by 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 environmental 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. This rulemaking does not meet the statutory definition of a "major environmental rule" because, while the rule is intended to reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure, it does not 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.

The specific intent of the proposed amendments is to incorporate recent changes in the federal drinking water regulations in order to maintain the state's primary enforcement responsibility with regard to drinking water. This is accomplished by enacting rules no less stringent than the federal regulations and adopting adequate procedures for implementation and enforcement of those rules. The proposed amendments require drinking water systems to meet the same regulatory standards set forth in the federal rules, while providing alternative approaches to compliance based in part on stakeholder input and taking into account special considerations related to this state's particular source water conditions. The federal regulations that would be implemented through the proposed amendments are designed to reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure by limiting public exposure to waterborne disease and enhancing the public's awareness of contamination of its drinking water.

This rulemaking does not meet the statutory definition of a "major environmental rule" because 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 or a sector of the state. 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, the proposed amendments will not adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, or jobs.

The fiscal impact of the amendments proposed to incorporate the federal DBP2, GWR, and LT2 are outlined in the Fiscal Note of this preamble, and although the proposed amendments may increase costs for some retail public utilities, the additional costs are not expected to adversely affect this sector of the economy.

The proposed amendments to §290.46 resulting from changes made to the THSC during the 79th Regular Session by SB 9 require a public water system to maintain internal procedures to notify the executive director in the event of a threat to the security of the water supply. This proposed provision gives the water supply system wide latitude in how it chooses to comply with the rule; it does not require the system to incur any costs in the development of this plan, nor does it require publication or distribution of the plan. Therefore, development and maintenance of the plan will result in little or no fiscal impact to a water supply system or its customers.

The proposed amendments resulting from the federal TCR and PNR will have no fiscal impact on the regulated community or its customers. The language of these rules is being amended to more accurately reflect the federal rules. Because the agency's current methods of implementation comply with the federal rules, no changes to state implementation will result from the amendments. The revisions to the PNR are required by EPA to maintain primacy.

Existing §290.113, Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5), contains the standards for disinfection by-products resulting from DBP1 promulgated by the EPA in December 1998. This rule package proposes amendments that would add the requirements of DBP2 promulgated by the EPA in January 2006. Amendments to DBP1 proposed by this rulemaking would change references so that the Chapter 290 rules distinguish between the DBP1 and DBP2 rules. Because these amendments result in no changes in implementation, they will result in no fiscal impact to the regulated community.

This rulemaking does not qualify as a major environmental rule because it will not have an adverse economic effect. Additionally, this rulemaking does not meet the definition of a major environmental rule because it does not meet any of the four applicability requirements listed in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225(a). Section 2001.0225 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 used 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 used 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, pursuant to the agreements between the EPA and TCEQ; 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.

The commission invites public comment regarding this draft regulatory impact analysis determination. Written comments on the draft regulatory impact analysis determination may be submitted to the contact person at the address listed under the SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS section of this preamble.

TAKING IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The commission evaluated the proposed amendments to Chapter 290 and performed an assessment of whether the amendments would constitute a taking under Chapter 2007 of the Texas Government Code. The primary purposes of the proposed amendments are to incorporate federal regulations related to: 1) protecting public drinking water consumers from the risks of disinfectant byproducts more equitably than previous rules in response to the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: DBP2 published by the EPA in the January 4, 2006 issue of the Federal Register ; 2) providing increased public health protection from the protozoan Cryptosporidium in drinking water in response to the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: LT2 published by the EPA in the January 5, 2006 issue of the Federal Register ; and 3) providing greater protection from pathogens for customers of public water systems that operate wells through new monitoring, reporting, and compliance requirements, in response to National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: GWR, published in the November 8, 2006 issue of the Federal Register . Additional amendments are proposed to: 1) require by rule certification of public notice in order to gain primacy over the PNR adopted by the TCEQ in 2002; 2) address security issues at public water systems through rulemaking related to policy and response planning in response to Senate Bill 9, 79th regular Texas legislative session (2005); 3) update system design requirements to reflect current technology; 4) add requirements for consumer confidence reports relating to the new rules; 5) ensure consistency with the existing federal TCR and DBP1; and 6) correct any typographical errors, formatting mistakes, incorrect references, or citation changes identified through review of the rule language and delete references to compliance initiation dates that have already passed and make other non-substantive changes. The proposed amendments would substantially advance these purposes by amending notice, reporting, and licensing requirements and adding new technology options to Chapter 290, 30 Texas Administrative Code, and making non-substantive changes.

The commission's analysis indicates that Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007 does not apply to these proposed rules because this is an action that is reasonably taken to fulfill an obligation mandated by federal law, which is exempt under Texas Government Code, §2007.003(b)(4). In order to maintain primacy over public drinking water, the state must enact rules no less stringent than the federal drinking water regulations as required by 40 CFR §142.10. Further, Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007 does not apply to these proposed rules because this is an action that is taken in response to a real and substantial threat to public health and safety; that is designed to significantly advance the health and safety purpose; and that does not impose a greater burden than is necessary to achieve the health and safety purpose. Thus, this action is exempt under Texas Government Code, §2007.003(b)(13). The proposed rules are designed to ensure that drinking water for public consumption is treated and monitored sufficiently to minimize exposure to waterborne disease. The proposed rules are designed to accomplish this goal without imposing unnecessary burdens.

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 rule 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 property value as a result of this rule. The rule requires public drinking water system to comply with drinking water standards protective of human health and the environment and brings those standards in concurrence with those of the corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, the proposed rules would not constitute a taking under Texas Government Code Chapter 2007.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The commission reviewed the proposed rules and found that they are neither identified in Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.11(b)(2) or (4), nor will they affect any action/authorization identified in Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.11(a)(6). Therefore, the proposed rules are not subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARING

The commission will hold a public hearing on this proposal in Austin on August 30, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Building E, Room 201S, 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. There will be no open discussion during the hearing; however, commission staff members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes before the hearing.

Persons who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact Patricia Duron, Office of Legal Services, at (512) 239-6087. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible.

SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS

Comments may be submitted to Patricia Duron, MC 205, Office of Legal Services, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at http://www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rules/ecomments/ . File size restrictions may apply to comments submitted via the eComments system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 2006-045-290-PR. The comment period closes September 10, 2007. Copies of the proposed rules can be obtained from the commission's Web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/rules/propose_adopt.html . For further information, please contact Alicia Diehl, Water Supply Division, at (512) 239-1626.

Subchapter D. RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS

30 TAC §§290.38, 290.39, 290.41, 290.42, 290.44 - 290.47

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

These amendments are proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC) §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 (THSC) §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; and THSC §341.0315, which requires public water systems to comply with commission rules adopted to ensure the supply of safe drinking water.

The proposed amendments implement TWC §§5.102, 5.103, 5.105, THSC §341.031, and §341.0315.

§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. 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.

(1) - (7) (No change.)

(8) Bag Filter--Pressure-driven separation device that removes particulate matter larger than 1 micrometer using an engineered porous filtration media. They are typically constructed of a non-rigid, fabric filtration media housed in a pressure vessel in which the direction of flow is from the inside of the bag to the outside.

(9) Cartridge filter--Pressure-driven separation device that removes particulate matter larger than 1 micrometer using an engineered porous filtration media. They are typically constructed as rigid or semi-rigid, self-supporting filter elements housed in pressure vessels in which flow is from the outside of the cartridge to the inside.

(10) [ (8) ] Certified laboratory--A laboratory certified by the commission to analyze water samples to determine their compliance with maximum allowable constituent levels.

(11) Challenge test--A study conducted to determine the removal efficiency (log removal value) of a device for a particular organism, particulate, or surrogate.

(12) Chemical disinfectant--Any oxidant, including but not limited to chlorine, chlorine dioxide, chloramines, and ozone added to the water in any part of the treatment or distribution process, that is intended to kill or inactivate pathogenic microorganisms.

(13) [ (9) ] Community water system--A public water system which has a potential to serve at least 15 residential service connections on a year-round basis or serves at least 25 residents on a year-round basis.

(14) [ (10) ] Connection -- A single family residential unit or each commercial or industrial establishment to which drinking water is supplied from the system. As an example, the number of service connections in an apartment complex would be equal to the number of individual apartment units. When enough data is not available to accurately determine the number of connections to be served or being served, the population served divided by three will be used as the number of connections for calculating system capacity requirements. Conversely, if only the number of connections is known, the connection total multiplied by three will be the number used for population served. For the purposes of this definition, a dwelling or business which is connected to a system that delivers water by a constructed conveyance other than a pipe shall not be considered a connection if:

(A) the water is used exclusively for purposes other than those defined as human consumption (see human consumption);

(B) the executive director determines that alternative water to achieve the equivalent level of public health protection provided by the drinking water standards is provided for residential or similar human consumption, including, but not limited to, drinking and cooking; or

(C) the executive director determines that the water provided for residential or similar human consumption is centrally treated or is treated at the point of entry by a provider, a pass through entity, or the user to achieve the equivalent level of protection provided by the drinking water standards.

(15) [ (11) ] Contamination--The presence of any foreign substance (organic, inorganic, radiological or biological) in water which tends to degrade its quality so as to constitute a health hazard or impair the usefulness of the water.

(16) [ (12) ] Cross-connection--A physical connection between a public water system and either another supply of unknown or questionable quality, any source which may contain contaminating or polluting substances, or any source of water treated to a lesser degree in the treatment process.

(17) Direct integrity test--A physical test applied to a membrane unit in order to identify and isolate integrity breaches/leaks that could result in contamination of the filtrate.

(18) [ (13) ] Disinfectant-- A chemical or a treatment which is intended to kill or inactivate pathogenic microorganisms in water. [ Any oxidant, including but not limited to chlorine, chlorine dioxide, chloramines, and ozone added to the water in any part of the treatment or distribution process, that is intended to kill or inactivate pathogenic microorganisms. ]

(19) [ (14) ] Disinfection--A process which inactivates pathogenic organisms in the water by chemical oxidants or equivalent agents.

(20) [ (15) ] Distribution system--A system of pipes that conveys potable water from a treatment plant to the consumers. The term includes pump stations, ground and elevated storage tanks, potable water mains, and potable water service lines and all associated valves, fittings, and meters, but excludes potable water customer service lines.

(21) [ (16) ] Drinking water--All water distributed by any agency or individual, public or private, for the purpose of human consumption or which may be used in the preparation of foods or beverages or for the cleaning of any utensil or article used in the course of preparation or consumption of food or beverages for human beings. The term "Drinking Water" shall also include all water supplied for human consumption or used by any institution catering to the public.

(22) [ (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 Systems).

(23) [ (18) ] Elevated storage capacity--That portion of water which can be stored at least 80 feet above the highest service connection in the pressure plane served by the storage tank.

(24) [ (19) ] Emergency power--Either mechanical power or electric generators which can enable the system to provide water under pressure to the distribution system in the event of a local power failure. With the approval of the executive director, dual primary electric service may be considered as emergency power in areas which are not subject to large scale power outages due to natural disasters.

(25) Filtrate--The water produced from a filtration process; typically used to describe the water produced by filter processes such as membranes.

(26) [ (20) ] Groundwater--Any water that is located beneath the surface of the ground and is not under the direct influence of surface water.

(27) [ (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 ; or

(B) significant and relatively rapid shifts in water characteristics such as turbidity, temperature, conductivity, or pH which closely correlate to climatological or surface water conditions.

(28) [ (22) ] Health hazard--A cross-connection, potential contamination hazard, or other situation involving any substance that can cause death, illness, spread of disease, or has a high probability of causing such effects if introduced into the potable drinking water supply.

(29) [ (23) ] Human consumption--Uses by humans in which water can be ingested into or absorbed by the human body. Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to drinking, cooking, brushing teeth, bathing, washing hands, washing dishes, and preparing foods.

(30) Indirect integrity monitoring--The monitoring of some aspect of filtrate water quality, such as turbidity, that is indicative of the removal of particulate matter.

(31) Innovative/alternate treatment--Any treatment process that does not have specific design requirements in §290.42(a) - (f) of this title (relating to Water Treatment). For example, the adjustment of fluoride ion content, special treatment for metals, iron, manganese, organic and inorganic contaminant reduction, special methods for taste and odor control, demineralization, corrosion control processes, membrane filtration, bag/cartridge filters, ozone, chlorine dioxide, Ultraviolet (UV) light disinfection, and other treatment processes.

(32) [ (24) ] Interconnection--A physical connection between two public water supply systems.

(33) [ (25) ] Intruder-resistant fence--A fence six feet or greater in height, constructed of wood, concrete, masonry, or metal with three strands of barbed wire extending outward from the top of the fence at a 45 degree angle with the smooth side of the fence on the outside wall. In lieu of the barbed wire, the fence must be eight feet in height. The fence must be in good repair and close enough to surface grade to prevent intruder passage.

(34) [ (26) ] L/d ratio--The dimensionless value that is obtained by dividing the length (depth) of a granular media filter bed by the weighted effective diameter "d" of the filter media. The weighted effective diameter of the media is calculated based on the percentage of the total bed depth contributed by each media layer.

(35) [ (27) ] Licensed professional engineer--An engineer who maintains a current license through the Texas Board of Professional Engineers in accordance with its requirements for professional practice.

(36) Log removal value (LRV)--Removal efficiency for a target organism, particulate, or surrogate expressed as log ₁₀ (i.e., log ₁₀ (feed concentration) - log ₁₀ (filtrate concentration).

(37) [ (28) ] Maximum daily demand--In the absence of verified historical data or in cases where a public water system has imposed mandatory water use restrictions within the past 36 months, maximum daily demand means 2.4 times the average daily demand of the system.

(38) [ (29) ] Maximum contaminant level (MCL)--The MCL for a specific contaminant is defined in the section relating to that contaminant.

(39) Membrane filtration--A pressure or vacuum driven separation process in which particulate matter larger than one micrometer is rejected by an engineered barrier, primarily through a size-exclusion mechanism, and which has a measurable removal efficiency of a target organism that can be verified through the application of a direct integrity test; includes the following common membrane classifications microfiltration (MF), ultrafiltration (UF), nanofiltration (NF), and reverse osmosis (RO), as well as any "membrane cartridge filtration" (MCF) device that satisfies this definition.

(40) Membrane LRV _C-Test --The number that reflects the removal efficiency of the membrane filtration process demonstrated during challenge testing. The value is based on the entire set of LRVs obtained during challenge testing, with one representative LRV established per module tested.

(41) Membrane module--The smallest component of a membrane unit in which a specific membrane surface area is housed in a device with a filtrate outlet structure.

(42) Membrane sensitivity--The maximum log removal value (LRV) that can be reliably verified by a direct integrity test.

(43) Membrane unit--A group of membrane modules that share common valving, which allows the unit to be isolated from the rest of the system for the purpose of integrity testing or other maintenance.

(44) [ (30) ] Milligrams per liter (mg/L)--A measure of concentration, equivalent to and replacing parts per million in the case of dilute solutions.

(45) [ (31) ] Monthly reports of water works operations--The daily record of data relating to the operation of the system facilities compiled in a monthly report.

(46) [ (32) ] National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards--The standards of the NFPA , 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, Massachusetts, 02269-9101.

(47) [ (33) ] National Sanitation Foundation (NSF)--The NSF or reference to the listings developed by the foundation, P.O. Box 1468, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106.

(48) [ (34) ] Noncommunity water system--Any public water system which is not a community system.

(49) [ (35) ] Nonhealth hazard--A cross-connection, potential contamination hazard, or other situation involving any substance that generally will not be a health hazard, but will constitute a nuisance, or be aesthetically objectionable, if introduced into the public water supply.

(50) [ (36) ] Nontransient noncommunity water system--A public water system that is not a community water system and regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons at least six months out of the year.

(51) [ (37) ] psi--Pounds per square inch.

(52) [ (38) ] Peak hourly demand--In the absence of verified historical data, peak hourly demand means 1.25 times the maximum daily demand (prorated to an hourly rate) if a public water supply meets the commission's minimum requirements for elevated storage capacity and 1.85 times the maximum daily demand (prorated to an hourly rate) if the system uses pressure tanks or fails to meet the commission's minimum elevated storage capacity requirement.

(53) [ (39) ] Plumbing inspector--Any person employed by a political subdivision for the purpose of inspecting plumbing work and installations in connection with health and safety laws and ordinances, who has no financial or advisory interest in any plumbing company, and who has successfully fulfilled the examinations and requirements of the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners.

(54) [ (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; or

(B) the Uniform Plumbing Code.

(55) [ (41) ] Potable water customer service line--The sections of potable water pipe between the customer's meter and the customer's point of use.

(56) [ (42) ] Potable water service line--The section of pipe between the potable water main to the customer's side of the water meter. In cases where no customer water meter exists, it is the section of pipe that is under the ownership and control of the public water system.

(57) [ (43) ] Potable water main--A pipe or enclosed constructed conveyance operated by a public water system which is used for the transmission or distribution of drinking water to a potable water service line.

(58) [ (44) ] Potential contamination hazard--A condition which, by its location, piping or configuration, has a reasonable probability of being used incorrectly, through carelessness, ignorance, or negligence, to create or cause to be created a backflow condition by which contamination can be introduced into the water supply. Examples of potential contamination hazards are:

(A) bypass arrangements;

(B) jumper connections;

(C) removable sections or spools; and

(D) swivel or changeover assemblies.

(59) Process control duties--Activities that directly affect the potability of public drinking water, including: making decisions regarding the day-to-day operations and maintenance of public water system production and distribution; maintaining system pressures; determining the adequacy of disinfection and disinfection procedures; taking routine microbiological samples; taking chlorine residuals and microbiological samples after repairs or installation of lines or appurtenances; and operating chemical feed systems, filtration, disinfection, or pressure maintenance equipment; or performing other duties approved by the executive director.

(60) [ (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, Water Supply Division, MC 155, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(61) [ (46) ] Public health engineering practices--Requirements in this subchapter or guidelines promulgated by the executive director.

(62) [ (47) ] Public water system--A system for the provision to the public of water for human consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances, which includes all uses described under the definition for drinking water. Such a system must have at least 15 service connections or serve at least 25 individuals at least 60 days out of the year. This term includes; any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities under the control of the operator of such system and used primarily in connection with such system, and any collection or pretreatment storage facilities not under such control which are used primarily in connection with such system. Two or more systems with each having a potential to serve less than 15 connections or less than 25 individuals but owned by the same person, firm, or corporation and located on adjacent land will be considered a public water system when the total potential service connections in the combined systems are 15 or greater or if the total number of individuals served by the combined systems total 25 or greater at least 60 days out of the year. Without excluding other meanings of the terms "individual" or "served," an individual shall be deemed to be served by a water system if he lives in, uses as his place of employment, or works in a place to which drinking water is supplied from the system.

(63) Quality Control Release Value (QCRV)--A minimum quality standard of a non-destructive performance test (NDPT) established by the manufacturer for membrane module production that ensures that the module will attain the targeted log removal value (LRV) demonstrated during challenge testing.

(64) Reactor Validation Testing--A process by which a full-scale UV reactor's disinfection performance is determined relative to operating parameters that can be monitored. These parameters include flow rate, UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor and the UV lamp status.

(65) Resolution--The size of the smallest integrity breach that contributes to a response from a direct integrity test in membranes used to treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

(66) [ (48) ] Sanitary control easement--A legally binding document securing all land, within 150 feet of a public water supply well location, from pollution hazards. This document must fully describe the location of the well and surrounding lands and must be filed in the county records to be legally binding.

(67) [ (49) ] Sanitary survey--An onsite review of the water source, facilities, equipment, operation and maintenance of a public water system, for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy for producing and distributing safe drinking water.

(68) Sensitivity--The maximum log removal value (LRV) that can be reliably verified by a direct integrity test in membranes used to treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water; also applies to some continuous indirect integrity monitoring methods.

(69) [ (50) ] Service line--A pipe connecting the utility service provider's main and the water meter, or for wastewater, connecting the main and the point at which the customer's service line is connected, generally at the customer's property line.

(70) [ (51) ] Service pump--Any pump that takes treated water from storage and discharges to the distribution system.

(71) [ (52) ] Transfer pump--Any pump which conveys water from one point to another within the treatment process or which conveys water to storage facilities prior to distribution.

(72) [ (53) ] Transient noncommunity water system--A public water system that is not a community water system and serves at least 25 persons at least 60 days out of the year, yet by its characteristics, does not meet the definition of a nontransient noncommunity water system.

(73) [ (54) ] Uniform Fire Code--The standards of the International Conference of Building Officials, 5360 Workman Mill Road, Whittier, California, 90601-2298.

(74) [ (55) ] Wastewater lateral--Any pipe or constructed conveyance carrying wastewater, running laterally down a street, alley, or easement, and receiving flow only from the abutting properties.

(75) [ (56) ] Wastewater main--Any pipe or constructed conveyance which receives flow from one or more wastewater laterals.

§290.39.General Provisions.

(a) - (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) The following changes are considered to be significant:

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) proposed changes in existing distribution systems when the change is greater than 10% of the existing distribution capacity or 250 connections, whichever is smaller, or results in the water system's inability to comply with any of the applicable capacity requirements of §290.45 of this title (relating to Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements); [ and ]

(E) proposed replacement or change of membranes modules; and

(F) [ (E) ] any other material changes specified by the executive director.

(2) - (3) (No change.)

(k) (No change.)

(l) Exceptions. Requests for exceptions to one or more of the requirements in this subchapter 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.

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(4) The executive director may establish site specific design, operation, maintenance, and reporting requirements for systems that have been issued an exception to the subchapter.

(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 [ (THSC) ], §341.035, that has a history of noncompliance with THSC [ (THSC) ], Chapter 341, Subchapter C or commission rules, or that is subject to a commission enforcement action to take the following action:

(1) - (2) (No change.)

§290.41.Water Sources.

(a) - (b) (No change.)

(c) Groundwater sources and development.

(1) Groundwater sources shall be located so that there will be no danger of pollution from flooding or from unsanitary [ 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) - (F) (No change.)

(2) (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) - (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 ( A100-06 [ A100-97 ]), Appendix C: Section C. 2 [ 3 ] (Positive Displacement Exterior Method); Section C. 3 [ 4 ] (Interior Method Without Plug); Section C. 4 [ 5 ] (Positive Placement, Interior Method, Drillable Plug); and Section C. 5 [ 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) - (E) (No change.)

(F) Upon well completion, or after an existing well has been reworked, the well shall be disinfected in accordance with current AWWA standards for well disinfection except that the disinfectant shall remain in the well for at least six hours.

(i) Before placing the well in service, the water containing the disinfectant shall be flushed from the well and then samples of water shall be collected and submitted for microbiological analysis until three successive daily raw water samples are free of coliform organisms. The analysis of these samples must be conducted by a laboratory approved by the [ Texas ] Department of State Health Services .

(ii) (No change.)

(G) - (Q) (No change.)

(4) (No change.)

(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, Water Supply Division, MC 153, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 [ 78711-3987 ].

(3) - (4) (No change.)

(5) All systems with new springs or similar sources must monitor microbiological source water quality at the new springs or similar sources in accordance with §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment) on a schedule determined by the executive director. The system must notify the agency of the new spring or similar source prior to construction. The executive director may waive these requirements if the spring or similar source has been determined not to be under the direct influence of surface water.

(e) Surface water sources and development.

(1) To determine the degree of pollution from all sources within the watershed, an evaluation shall be made of the surface water source in the area of diversion and its tributary streams. The area where surface water sources are diverted for drinking water use shall be evaluated and protected from sources of contamination.

(A) - (E) (No change.)

(F) Before approval of a new surface water source, the system shall provide the executive director with information regarding specific water quality parameters of the potential source water. These parameters are pH, total coliform, Escherichia coli [ Eserichia coli ], turbidity, alkalinity, hardness, bromide, total organic carbon, temperature, color, taste and odor, regulated volatile organic compounds, regulated synthetic organic compounds, regulated inorganic compounds, and possible sources of contamination. If data on the incidence of Giardia [ Giardia ] cysts and Cryptosporidium [ Cryptosporidium ] oocysts has been collected, the information shall be provided to the executive director. This data shall be provided to the executive director as part of the approval process for a new surface water source.

(G) All systems with new surface water intakes or new bank filtration wells must monitor microbiological source water quality at the new surface water intakes or new bank filtration wells in accordance with §290.111 of this title on a schedule determined by the executive director. The system must notify the agency of the new surface water intake or bank filtration well prior to construction.

(2) - (5) (No change.)

§290.42.Water Treatment.

(a) Capacity and location.

(1) (No change.)

(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 groundwater [ underground ] water table is near the surface.

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(3) (No change.)

(b) Groundwater.

(1) (No change.)

(2) Treatment facilities shall be provided for groundwater if the water does not meet the drinking water standards. The facilities provided shall be in conformance with established and proven methods.

(A) Filters provided for turbidity and microbiological quality control shall be preceded by coagulant addition and shall conform to the requirements of subsection (d)(11) [ (d)(10) ] of this section. Filtration rates for iron and manganese removal, regardless of the media or type of filter, shall be based on a maximum rate of five gallons per square foot per minute.

(B) - (C) (No change.)

(3) - (7) (No change.)

(8) The executive director may require 4-log removal or inactivation of viruses based on raw water sampling results required by §290.116 of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques).

(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 Giardia cysts, and a 4-log removal or inactivation of viruses before the water is supplied to any consumer. The executive director may require additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality. Based on raw water monitoring results, the executive director may require additional levels of treatment for Cryptosporidium treatment as specified in §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment).

(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. Systems [ 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) (No change.)

(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 Cryptosporidium oocysts, a 3-log removal or inactivation of Giardia cysts, and a 4-log removal or inactivation of viruses before the water is supplied to any consumer. The executive director may require additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality. Based on raw water monitoring results, the executive director may require additional levels of treatment for Cryptosporidium treatment as specified in §290.111 of this title.

(2) (No change.)

(3) Return of the decanted water or solids to the treatment process shall be adequately controlled so that there will be a minimum of interference with the treatment process. Systems [ 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 (relating to Public Notice) .

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(4) - (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 [ Nephelometric Turbidity Unit ] (NTU) and the treatment plant meets with turbidity requirements of §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment [ Turbidity ]).

(ii) (No change.)

(C) (No change.)

(10) (No change.)

(11) Gravity or pressure type filters shall be provided.

(A) - (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) Each [ 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. The executive director may allow combined filter effluent monitoring in lieu of individual filter effluent monitoring under the following conditions:

(I) - (II) (No change.)

(iii) - (v) (No change.)

(F) - (G) (No change.)

(12) - (16) (No change.)

(e) - (f) (No change.)

(g) Other treatment processes. Innovative/alternate 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 §290.39(l) of this title. [ 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 (relating to Drinking Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements for Public Water 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 a pilot study protocol to be submitted for review and approval prior to conducting a pilot study to verify compliance with the requirements of §290.39(l) of this title and Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to Drinking Water Standards Governing Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements for Public Water Systems). The executive director may require proof of a one-year manufacturer's performance warrantee or guarantee assuring that the plant will produce treated water which meets minimum state and federal standards for drinking water quality.

(1) Package-type treatment systems and their components shall be subject to all applicable design criteria in this section.

(2) Bag and cartridge filtration systems or modules installed or replaced after April 1, 2012, and used for microbiological treatment, can receive Cryptosporidium and Giardia removal credit of up to 2.0-log for individual bag or cartridge filters and up to 2.5-log for bag or cartridge filters operated in series by meeting the criteria in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of this paragraph.

(A) The filter system must treat the entire plant flow.

(B) To be eligible for this credit, systems must receive approval from the executive director based on the results of challenge testing that is conducted according to the criteria established by 40 CFR §141.719(a) and the executive director.

(i) A factor of safety equal to 1.0-log for individual bag or cartridge filters and 0.5-log for bag or cartridge filters in series must be applied to challenge testing results to determine removal credit.

(ii) Challenge testing must be performed on full-scale bag or cartridge filters, and the associated filter housing or pressure vessel, that are identical in material and construction to the filters and housings the system will use for removal of Cryptosporidium and Giardia .

(iii) Bag or cartridge filters must be challenge tested in the same configuration that the system will use, either as individual filters or as a series configuration of filters.

(iv) Systems may use results from challenge testing conducted prior to January 5, 2006, if prior testing was consistent with 40 CFR §141.719, submitted by the system's licensed professional engineer, and approved by the executive director.

(v) If a previously tested filter is modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the filter product line, additional challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of the modified filter must be conducted and results submitted to the executive director for approval.

(C) Pilot studies must be conducted using filters that will meet the requirements of this section.

(3) Membrane filtration systems or modules installed or replaced after April 1, 2012 and used for microbiological treatment, can receive Cryptosporidium and Giardia removal credit for membrane filtration if the systems or modules meet the criteria in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of this paragraph.

(A) The membrane module used by the system must undergo challenge testing to evaluate removal efficiency. Challenge testing must be conducted according to the criteria established by 40 CFR §141.719(b)(2) and the executive director.

(i) All membrane module challenge test protocols and results, the protocol for calculating the representative Log Removal Value (LRV) for each membrane module, the removal efficiency, calculated results of LRV _C-Test , and the non-destructive performance test with its Quality Control Release Value (QCRV) must be submitted to the executive director for review and approval prior to beginning a membrane filtration pilot study at a public water system.

(ii) Challenge testing must be conducted on either a full-scale membrane module identical in material and construction to the membrane modules to be used in the system's treatment facility, or a smaller-scale membrane module identical in material and similar in construction to the full-scale module if approved by the executive director.

(iii) Systems may use data from challenge testing conducted prior to January 5, 2006, if prior testing was consistent with 40 CFR §141.719, submitted by the system's licensed professional engineer, and approved by the executive director.

(iv) If a previously tested membrane is modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the membrane product line or the applicability of the non-destructive performance test and associated QCRV, additional challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of the modified membrane and determine a new QCRV for the modified membrane must be conducted and results submitted to the executive director for approval.

(B) The membrane system must be designed to conduct and record the results of direct integrity testing in a manner that demonstrates a removal efficiency equal to or greater than the removal credit awarded to the membrane filtration system approved by the executive director and meets the requirements in clauses (i) - (ii) of this subparagraph.

(i) The design must provide for direct integrity testing of each membrane unit.

(ii) The design must provide direct integrity testing that has a resolution of 3 micrometers or less.

(iii) The design must provide direct integrity testing with a sensitivity sufficient to verify the log removal credit approved by the executive director. Sensitivity is determined by the criteria in 40 CFR §141.719(b)(3)(iii).

(iv) The executive director may reduce the direct integrity testing requirements for membrane units.

(C) The membrane system must be designed to conduct and record continuous indirect integrity monitoring on each membrane unit. The turbidity of the water produced by each membrane unit must be measured using the Hach FilterTrak Method 10133. The executive director may approve the use of alternative technology to monitor the quality of the water produced by each membrane unit.

(D) The level of removal credit approved by the executive director shall not exceed the lower of:

(i) the removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing conducted under the conditions in §290.42(g)(3)(A) of this title, or

(ii) the maximum removal efficiency that can be verified through direct integrity testing used with the membrane filtration process under the conditions in §290.42(g)(3)(B) of this title.

(E) Pilot studies must be conducted using membrane modules that will meet the requirements of this section.

(F) Membrane systems must be designed so that membrane units' feed water, filtrate, backwash supply, waste and chemical cleaning piping shall have cross-connection protection to prevent chemicals from all chemical cleaning processes from contaminating other membrane units in other modes of operation. This may be accomplished by the installation of a double block and bleed valving arrangement, a removable spool system or other alternative methods approved by the executive director.

(4) Bag, cartridge or membrane filtration systems or modules installed or replaced before April 1, 2012 and used for microbiological treatment, can receive Cryptosporidium and Giardia removal credit of up to 2.0-log based on site specific pilot study results, design, operation, and reporting requirements.

(5) Ultraviolet (UV) light reactors used for microbiological inactivation can receive Cryptosporidium , Giardia and virus inactivation credit if the reactors meet the criteria in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of this paragraph.

(A) UV light reactors can receive inactivation credit only if they are located after filtration.

(B) In lieu of a pilot study, the UV light reactors must undergo validation testing to determine the operating conditions under which a UV reactor delivers the required UV dose. Validation testing must be conducted according to the criteria established by 40 CFR §141.720(d)(2) and the executive director.

(i) The validation study must include the following factors: UV absorbance of the water; lamp fouling and aging; measurement uncertainty of on-line sensors; UV dose distributions arising from the velocity profiles through the reactor; failure of UV lamps and other critical system components; inlet and outlet piping or channel configuration of the UV reactor; lamp and sensor locations; and other parameters determined by the executive director.

(ii) Validation testing must be conducted on a full-scale reactor that is essentially identical to the UV reactor(s) to be used by the system and using waters that are essentially identical in quality to the water to be treated by the UV reactor.

(C) The UV light reactor systems must be designed to monitor and record parameters to verify the UV reactors operation within the validated conditions approved by the executive director. The UV light reactor must be equipped with facilities to monitor and record UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, flow rate, lamp status, and other parameters designated by the executive director.

(h) - (m) (No change.)

§290.44.Water Distribution.

(a) - (g) (No change.)

(h) Backflow, siphonage.

(1) - (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 executive director approved course on cross-connection control and backflow prevention assembly testing, pass an examination administered by the executive director, and hold a current license [ professional certification ] as a backflow prevention assembly tester.

(i) (No change.)

(ii) Backflow prevention assembly testers may test and repair assemblies on firelines only if they are permanently employed by an Approved Fireline Contractor. The State Fire Marshal's [ Marshall's ] office requires that any person performing maintenance on firelines must be employed by an Approved Fireline Contractor.

(B) - (C) (No change.)

(5) - (6) (No change.)

(i) (No change.)

§290.45.Minimum Water System Capacity Requirements.

(a) - (b) (No change.)

(c) Noncommunity water systems serving transient accommodation units. The following water capacity requirements apply to noncommunity water systems serving accommodation units such as hotel rooms, motel rooms, travel trailer spaces, campsites, and similar accommodations.

(1) Groundwater supplies must meet the following requirements.

(A) (No change.)

(B) For systems serving fewer than 100 accommodation units with ground storage or serving 100 or more accommodation units, the system must meet the following requirements:

(i) (No change.)

(ii) a ground storage capacity of 35 gallons per unit [ gpm ];

(iii) - (iv) (No change.)

(2) (No change.)

(d) Noncommunity water systems serving other than transient accommodation units.

(1) The following table is applicable to paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection and shall be used to determine the maximum daily demand for the various types of facilities listed.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.45(d)(1)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.45(d)(1) ]

(2) (No change.)

(e) - (g) (No change.)

§290.46.Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking Water Systems.

(a) - (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 milligrams per liter (mg/L) [ mg/L ]; or

(B) (No change.)

(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) (No change.)

(2) All public water systems that are subject to the provisions of this subsection shall meet the following requirements.

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) Public [ 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) - (6) (No change.)

(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) (No change.)

(B) The following records shall be retained for at least three years:

(i) - (iii) (No change.)

(iv) the turbidity monitoring results and exception reports for individual filters as required by §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment [ Turbidity ]);

(v) the calibration records for laboratory equipment, flow meters, rate-of-flow controllers, on-line turbidimeters, and on-line disinfectant residual analyzers; [ and ]

(vi) the records of backflow prevention device programs ; [ . ]

(vii) the raw surface water monitoring results must be retained for three years after bin classification required by §290.111 of this title;

(viii) notification to the executive director that a system will provide 5.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment in lieu of raw surface water monitoring; and

(ix) the results of all surface water treatment monitoring that are used to demonstrate log inactivation or removal.

(C) (No change.)

(D) The following records shall be retained for at least five years:

(i) (No change.)

(ii) the results of inspections (as required in subsection (m)(1) of this section) for all water storage and pressure maintenance facilities; [ and ]

(iii) the results of inspections as required by subsection (m)(2) of this section for all pressure filters ; [ . ]

(iv) any monitoring plans required by §290.121(b) of this title (relating to Monitoring Plans);

(v) documentation of compliance with state approved corrective action plan and schedules required to be completed by groundwater systems that must take corrective actions;

(vi) documentation of the reason for an invalidated fecal indicator source sample;

(vii) notification to wholesale system(s) of a distribution coliform positive sample for consecutive systems using groundwater; and

(viii) Consumer Confidence Report compliance documentation.

(E) The following records shall be retained for at least ten years:

(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 years after completion of the survey involved; [ and ]

(iv) copies of the Customer Service Inspection reports required by subsection (j) of this section ; [ . ]

(v) copy of any Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) report required by §290.115 of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5));

(vi) state notification of any modifications to an IDSE report;

(vii) copy of any 40/30 certification required by §290.115 of this title; and

(viii) documentation of corrective actions taken by groundwater systems in accordance with §290.116 of this title.

(F) (No change.)

(4) (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 American Water Works Association (AWWA) [ AWWA ] requirements and water samples must be submitted to a laboratory approved by the executive director. 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 and the contact time reduced to 1/2 hour.

(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 Appendices [ 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) Plumbing Inspectors and Water Supply Protection Specialists licensed by the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners (TSBPE) .

(B) Customer service inspectors who have completed a commission-approved course, passed an examination administered by the executive director, and hold current professional license [ certification or endorsement ] as a customer service inspector.

(2) (No change.)

(3) These customer service inspection requirements are not considered acceptable substitutes for and shall not apply to the sanitary control requirements stated in §290.102(a)(5) of this title (relating to General Applicability [ Definitions ]).

(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, 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 TSBPE [ 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.

(k) - (n) (No change.)

(o) Filter backwashing at surface water treatment plants. Filters must be backwashed when a loss of head differential of six to ten feet is experienced between the influent and effluent loss of head gauges or when the turbidity level at the effluent of the filter reaches 1.0 nephelometric turbidity unit (NTU) [ NTU ].

(p) (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 pounds per square inch (psi) [ 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) - (4) (No change.)

(r) (No change.)

(s) Testing equipment. Accurate testing equipment or some other means of monitoring the effectiveness of any chemical treatment or pathogen inactivation or removal processes must be used by the system.

(1) (No change.)

(2) Laboratory equipment used for compliance testing shall be properly calibrated.

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) Chemical disinfectant [ Disinfectant ] residual analyzers shall be properly calibrated.

(i) - (iii) (No change.)

(D) Ultraviolet (UV) light disinfection analyzers shall be properly calibrated.

(i) The accuracy of duty UV sensors shall be verified with a reference UV sensor monthly, according to the UV sensor manufacturer.

(ii) The reference UV sensor shall be calibrated by the UV sensor manufacturer on a yearly basis, or sooner if needed.

(iii) If used, the Ultraviolet Transmittance (UVT) analyzer shall be calibrated weekly according to the UVT analyzer manufacturer specifications.

(E) Systems must verify the performance of direct integrity testing equipment in a manner and schedule approved by the executive director.

(t) (No change.)

(u) Abandoned wells. Abandoned public water supply wells owned by the system must be plugged with cement according to 16 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) [ TAC ] Chapter 76 (relating to Water Well Drillers and Water Well Pump Installers). Wells that are not in use and are non-deteriorated as defined in those rules must be tested every five years or as required by the executive director to prove that they are in a non-deteriorated condition. The test results shall be sent to the executive director for review and approval. Deteriorated wells must be either plugged with cement or repaired to a non-deteriorated condition.

(v) (No change.)

(w) Security. All systems shall maintain internal procedures to notify the executive director by a toll-free reporting phone number immediately of the following events, if the event may negatively impact the production or delivery of safe and adequate drinking water:

(1) an unusual or unexplained unauthorized entry at property of the public water system;

(2) an act of terrorism against the public water system;

(3) an unauthorized attempt to probe for or gain access to proprietary information that supports the key activities of the public water system;

(4) a theft of property that supports the key activities of the public water system; or

(5) a natural disaster, accident, or act that results in damage to the public water system.

§290.47.Appendices.

(a) - (b) (No change.)

(c) Appendix C. Sample Sanitary Control Easement Document for a Public Water Well.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(c)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(c) ]

(d) Appendix D. Customer Service Inspection Certification.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(d) (.pdf)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(d) ]

(e) Appendix E. Boil Water Notification.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(e)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(e) ]

(f) Appendix F. Sample Backflow Prevention Assembly Test and Maintenance Report.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(f) (.pdf)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(f) ]

(g) (No change.)

(h) Appendix H. Special Precautions.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(h) (.pdf)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.47(h) ]

(i) (No change.)

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 27, 2007.

TRD-200703275

Robert Martinez

Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Earliest possible date of adoption: September 9, 2007

For further information, please call: (512) 239-6087

30 TAC §§290.101 - 290.104, 290.106 - 290.119, 290.121, 290.122

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

These amendments and new sections are proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC) §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 (THSC) §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;and THSC §341.0315, which requires public water systems to comply with commission rules adopted to ensure the supply of safe drinking water.

The proposed amendments and new sections implement TWC §5.102, §5.103, §5.105, THSC §341.031, and §341.0315.

§290.101.Purpose.

The purpose of these standards is to assure the safety of public water supplies with respect to microbiological, chemical and radiological quality and to further efficient processing through control tests, laboratory checks, operating records and reports of public water supply systems. These standards are written to comply with the requirements of the Federal "Safe Drinking Water Act," 42 USC [ U.S.C. ] §300f type-name="italic">et seq. [ et. seq. ], and the "Primary Drinking Water Regulations" which have been promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency [ EPA ].

§290.102.General Applicability.

(a) General applicability [ Applicability ]. This subchapter shall apply to all public water systems as described in each section, unless the system:

(1) - (5) (No change.)

(b) Variances and exemptions. Variances and exemptions may be granted at the discretion of the executive director according to the Safe [ Safety ] Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 United States Code (USC), §300g-4 and §300g-5, and according to National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Subpart K, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) [ CFR ] §§142.301 - 142.313. The executive director may not approve variances or exemptions from:

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(c) Extensions. An extension to the compliance deadline for an MCL or treatment technique that becomes effective on or after January 1, 2002 , may be granted at the discretion of the executive director in accordance with the SDWA, 42 USC, §300g-1(b)(10).

(1) The executive director may extend the effective date of an MCL or treatment technique for up to two years if all of the following conditions apply:

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) the extension is granted only to public water systems that were in operation on the date that the MCL or treatment technique was promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [ EPA ];

(D) - (F) (No change.)

(2) - (3) (No change.)

(d) Motion to overturn. Any person may file a motion to overturn the executive director's decision to grant or deny a variance, exemption, or extension under this section according to the procedures set out in §50.139 of this title (relating to Motion to Overturn Executive Director's Decision).

(e) Monitoring schedule [ Schedule ]. All monitoring required by this chapter shall be conducted in a manner and on a schedule approved by the executive director in concurrence with the requirements of the administrator of the EPA.

(f) Modified monitoring [ Monitoring ]. When a public water system supplies water to one or more other public water systems, the executive director may modify the monitoring requirements imposed by this chapter to the extent that the interconnection of the systems justifies treating them as a single system for monitoring purposes. Any modified monitoring shall be conducted pursuant to a schedule specified by the executive director in concurrence with the requirements of the administrator of the EPA.

§290.103.Definitions.

The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this subchapter. If a word or term used in this subchapter is not contained in the following list, its definition shall be as shown in §290.38 of this title (relating to Definitions) or in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §141.2. Other technical terms used shall have the meanings or definitions listed in the latest edition of "Glossary, Water and Wastewater Control Engineering," prepared by a joint editorial board representing the American Public Health Association, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Water Works Association, and the Water Pollution Control Federation.

(1) Assessment source monitoring--Raw groundwater source monitoring required by the executive director based on groundwater source susceptibility to fecal contaminants.

(2) Combined distribution system (CDS)--The interconnected distribution system consisting of the distribution systems of wholesale systems and of the consecutive systems that receive finished water.

(A) The executive director may determine that the CDS does not include certain systems based on factors such as providing or receiving a relatively small amount of water or only on an emergency basis.

(B) A public water system may be determined to be in a different CDS for the purposes of compliance with regulations based on the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBP2) and the Long Term Stage 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2).

(i) For the purposes of raw water monitoring under LT2, the CDS shall be based on the retail and wholesale population served by each surface water treatment plant or plant treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

(ii) For the purposes of DBP2, the CDS shall be determined based on the retail population served within each individual system's distribution system.

(3) [ (1) ] Compliance cycle--The nine-year (calendar year) cycle during which public water systems must monitor. Each compliance cycle consists of three, three-year compliance periods. The first compliance cycle begins January 1, 1993, and ends December 31, 2001. The second begins January 1, 2002, and ends December 31, 2010. The third begins January 1, 2011, and ends December 31, 2019. The cycle continues thereafter in a similar pattern.

(4) [ (2) ] Compliance period--A three-year (calendar year) period within a compliance cycle. Each compliance cycle has three, three-year compliance periods. Within the first compliance cycle, the first compliance period is called the initial compliance period and runs from January 1, 1993 , to December 31, 1995. The second period from January 1, 1996, to December 31, 1998. The third period from January 1, 1999 , to December 31, 2001. Compliance periods in subsequent compliance cycles follow the same pattern.

(5) [ (3) ] Comprehensive performance evaluation (CPE)--A thorough review and analysis of a treatment plant's performance-based capabilities and the associated administrative, operation and maintenance practices. It is conducted to identify factors that may be adversely impacting a plant's capability to achieve compliance and to emphasize approaches that can be implemented without significant capital improvements. The comprehensive performance evaluation consists of the following components: assessment of plant performance; evaluation of major unit processes; identification and prioritization of performance limiting factors; assessment of the applicability of comprehensive technical assistance; and preparation of a CPE report.

(6) Consecutive system--A public water system that receives some or all of its finished water from one or more wholesale systems. Delivery may be through a direct connection or through the distribution system of one or more consecutive systems.

(7) [ (4) ] Disinfection profile--A summary of daily Cryptosporidium , Giardia lamblia [ Giardia lamblia ] and viral inactivation obtained through disinfection at the treatment plant.

(8) [ (5) ] Disinfection by-products (DBP)--Chemical compounds formed by the reaction of a disinfectant with the natural organic matter present in water.

(9) [ (6) ] DPD--Abbreviation for N,N-diethyl-p-phenylenediamine, a reagent used in the determination of several residuals. DPD methods are available for both volumetric (titration) and colorimetric determinations, and are commonly used in the field as part of a colorimetric test kit.

(10) Dual sample set--A set of two samples collected at the same time and same location, with one sample analyzed for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and the other sample analyzed for haloacetic acids-group of five (HAA5). Dual sample sets are collected for the purposes of conducting an initial distribution system evaluation and determining compliance with the TTHM and HAA5 maximum contaminant levels.

(11) [ (7) ] Enhanced coagulation--The removal of disinfection by-product precursors to a specified level by conventional coagulation and sedimentation.

(12) [ (8) ] Enhanced softening--The removal of disinfection by-product precursors to a specified level by softening.

(13) [ (9) ] Entry point [ to the distribution system ]--Any point where a source of treated water first enters the distribution system. Entry points to the distribution system may include points where chlorinated well water, treated surface water, rechlorinated water from storage, or water purchased from another supplier enters the distribution system.

(14) [ (10) ] Entry point sampling site--A sampling site representing the quality of the water entering the distribution system at each designated entry point.

(15) Fecal indicators--Microbiological organisms used to indicate the presence of fecal contamination. Examples include: fecal coliform, E. coli , enterococci, and coliphage.

(16) [ (11) ] Filter assessment--An in-depth evaluation of an individual filter, including the analysis of historical filtered water turbidity from the filter, development of a filter profile, evaluation of media condition, identification and prioritization of factors limiting filter performance, appraisal of the applicability of corrections, and preparation of a filter self-assessment report.

(17) [ (12) ] Filter profile--A graphical representation of individual filter performance, based on continuous turbidity measurements or total particle counts versus time for an entire filter run. The filter profile must include all the data collected from the time that the filter placed into service until the time that the backwash cycle is complete and the filter is restarted. The filter profile must also include data collected as another filter is being backwashed.

(18) Finished water--Water that is introduced into the distribution system of a public water system and intended for distribution and consumption without further treatment, except as necessary to maintain water quality within the distribution system (e.g., booster disinfection, addition of corrosion control chemicals).

(19) Groundwater corrective action--Action required when a raw groundwater source sample is found to be positive for E. coli or other fecal indicators as described under §290.116(b) of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques).

(20) Groundwater corrective action plan--A plan approved by the executive director documenting the steps to be taken to address fecal contamination of a groundwater source as described under §290.116(b) of this title. The groundwater corrective action plan must be approved within 30 of being notified of the fecal contamination.

(21) Groundwater system--For the purposes of compliance with §290.109 of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants) and with §290.116 of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques), a public water system that provides, uses, or distributes any groundwater except if the groundwater is combined with surface water (or with groundwater under the direct influence of surface water) prior to treatment.

(22) [ (13) ] Haloacetic acids (five) (HAA5)--The sum of the monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid concentrations in milligrams per liter, rounded to two significant figures after adding the sum.

(23) [ (14) ] Halogen--One of the chemical elements chlorine, bromine, or iodine.

(24) Hydrogeologic sensitivity assessment--A determination of whether groundwater systems obtain water from hydrogeologically sensitive sources.

(25) Locational running annual average (LRAA)--The average of analytical results for samples taken at a specific monitoring location during the previous four calendar quarters.

(26) [ (15) ] Maximum contaminant level (MCL)--The maximum concentration of a regulated contaminant that is allowed in drinking water before the public water system is cited for a violation. Maximum contaminant levels for regulated contaminants are defined in the applicable sections of this subchapter.

(27) [ (16) ] Maximum residual disinfectant level (MRDL)--The disinfectant concentration that may not be exceeded in the distribution system. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of waterborne microbial contaminants.

(28) [ (17) ] Minimum acceptable disinfectant residual--The lowest disinfectant concentration allowed in the distribution system for microbial control.

(29) Operational evaluation level (OEL)--Calculated level of TTHM or HAA5, an exceedance of which requires a system to perform an evaluation of factors in the distribution system contributing to disinfection by-product formation and submit an operation evaluation report as described in §290.115(e)(2) of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)).

(30) Raw water--Water prior to any treatment including disinfection that is intended to be used, after treatment, as drinking water.

(A) Raw groundwater is water from a groundwater source.

(B) Raw surface water is any water from a surface water source or from a groundwater under the direct influence of surface water source.

(31) Raw groundwater source sampling--Fecal indicator sampling at untreated groundwater sources including triggered source water and assessment source monitoring.

(32) [ (18) ] Specific ultraviolet absorption at 254 nanometers (nm) (SUVA)--An indirect indicator of whether the organic carbon in water is humic or non-humic. It is calculated by dividing a sample's ultraviolet absorption at a wavelength of 254 nm (UV254) (in inverse meters [ m ^-1 ]) by its concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (in milligrams per liter [ mg/L ]).

(33) [ (19) ] Total organic carbon (TOC)--The concentration of total organic carbon, in milligrams per liter, measured using heat, oxygen, ultraviolet irradiation, chemical oxidants, or combinations of these oxidants that convert organic carbon to carbon dioxide, rounded to two significant figures. TOC is a surrogate measure for precursors to formation of disinfection by-products.

(34) [ (20) ] Total trihalomethanes (TTHM)--The sum of the chloroform, dibromochloromethane, bromodichloromethane, and bromoform concentrations in milligrams per liter, rounded to two significant figures after summing.

(35) Triggered source water monitoring--Raw groundwater source monitoring required for systems not providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses when a routine distribution coliform sample is positive.

(36) [ (21) ] Trihalomethane (THM)--One of the family of organic compounds named as derivatives of methane, wherein three of the four hydrogen atoms in methane are each substituted by a halogen atom in the molecular structure.

(37) Wholesale system--A public water system that treats source water as necessary to produce finished water and then delivers some or all of that finished water to another public water system. Delivery may be through a direct connection or through the distribution system of one or more consecutive systems.

§290.104.Summary of Maximum Contaminant Levels, Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels, Treatment Techniques, and Action Levels.

(a) (No change.)

(b) MCLs for inorganic compounds. The MCLs for inorganic contaminants listed in this subsection apply to public water systems as provided in §290.106 of this title (relating to Inorganic Contaminants).

Figure: 30 TAC §290.104(b)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.104(b) ]

(c) - (f) (No change.)

(g) Surface water treatment [ Turbidity ]. Systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet the turbidity treatment technique requirements as provided in §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment [ Turbidity ]).

(1) The turbidity level of the combined filter effluent must never exceed 1.0 nephelometric turbidity unit [ Nephelometric Turbidity Unit ] (NTU) and the turbidity level of the combined filter effluent must be 0.3 NTU or less in at least 95% of the samples tested each month.

(2) Systems are subject to the raw water monitoring, pathogen removal and inactivation and individual filter turbidity provisions of §290.111 of this title.

(h) (No change.)

(i) Disinfection by-products (total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA5)). The MCLs for TTHM and HAA5 apply to water systems as provided in §290.113 of this title (relating to Stage 1 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) and in §290.115 of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) . The MCLs for TTHM and HAA5 are:

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(j) - (l) (No change.)

§290.106.Inorganic Contaminants.

(a) Applicability. All public water systems are subject to the requirements of this section.

(1) - (3) (No change.)

[ (4) Public water systems shall comply with the 0.05 milligrams per liter (mg/L) MCL for arsenic until January 23, 2006 and comply with the 0.010 mg/L MCL for arsenic starting January 23, 2006. ]

(b) Maximum contaminant levels for IOCs. The MCLs for IOCs listed in the following table apply to community and nontransient, noncommunity water systems. The MCLs for nitrate, nitrite, and total nitrate and nitrite also apply to transient, noncommunity water systems.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.106(b)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.106(b) ]

(c) - (e) (No change.)

(f) Compliance determination for IOCs. Compliance with this section shall be determined using the following criteria.

(1) - (7) (No change.)

(8) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(g) Public notice for IOCs. A public water system that violates the requirements of this section must notify the executive director and the system's customers.

(1) A public water system that violates the MCL for nitrate, nitrite, or the sum of nitrate and nitrite shall notify the executive director within 24 hours [ by the next business day ] and the water system customers of this acute violation in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(a) of this title (relating to Public Notification).

(2) - (5) (No change.)

(h) - (j) (No change.)

§290.107.Organic Contaminants.

(a) - (b) (No change.)

(c) Monitoring requirements for organic contaminants. Public water systems shall monitor for organic contaminants at the locations and frequency in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection. All monitoring conducted under the requirements of this section must be conducted at sites designated in the public water system's monitoring plan. All samples must be taken during periods of normal operation.

(1) (No change.)

(2) VOC monitoring requirements. Monitoring of the VOC contaminants shall be conducted at the frequency and locations given in this paragraph.

(A) VOC monitoring locations. Monitoring of the VOC contaminants shall be conducted at the following locations.

(i) [ Routine monitoring locations for VOCs. ] Systems shall routinely sample at sample sites representative of each entry point to the distribution system.

(ii) - (iii) (No change.)

(B) (No change.)

(C) Routine VOC monitoring frequency. Monitoring of the VOC contaminants shall be conducted at the following frequency.

(i) (No change.)

(ii) If the initial monitoring for VOC contaminants has been completed [ by December 31, 1992 ], and the system did not detect any VOC contaminant listed in subsection (b)(2) of this section, the system shall take one sample annually beginning with the initial compliance period.

(iii) - (v) (No change.)

(D) - (F) (No change.)

(d) (No change.)

(e) Reporting requirements for organic contaminants. Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later. The copies must be mailed to the Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, [ Water Supply Division, MC 155, ] P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(f) Compliance determination for organic contaminants. Compliance with the MCLs of subsection (b)(1) and (2) of this section shall be determined based on the analytical results obtained at each entry point to the distribution system.

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(3) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(g) - (h) (No change.)

§290.108.Radionuclides Other than Radon.

(a) Applicability. All community water systems shall comply with the requirements of this section regarding radionuclide contaminants. Public water systems treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must comply with the radionuclide requirements for surface water systems. Public water systems shall comply with the initial monitoring requirements [ for uranium by December 31, 2007 ]. [ Public water systems shall comply with the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for uranium starting December 8, 2003. ]

(b) Maximum contaminant levels (MCL) . The concentration of radionuclide contaminants in the water entering the distribution system shall not exceed the following MCLs.

(1) MCLs for naturally occurring radionuclides are as follows:

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) [ effective December 8, 2003, ] 30 micrograms per liter (µg/L) [ (g/L) ] for uranium.

(2) (No change.)

(c) Monitoring requirements. Public water systems shall measure the concentration of radionuclides at locations and frequencies specified in the system's monitoring plan. All samples must be collected during normal operating conditions.

(1) Monitoring frequency for naturally occurring radionuclides. The monitoring frequency requirements for gross alpha particle activity, combined radium-226 and radium-228, and uranium are as follows.

(A) Initial monitoring frequency. All systems that use a new source of water must begin to conduct initial monitoring of the new source within 90 days after initiating use of the source.

(i) - (ii) (No change.)

[ (iii) Systems without acceptable historical data, as defined in subclauses (I) - (III) of this clause, shall collect four consecutive quarterly samples at all entry points before December 31, 2007. ]

[ (I) Systems with a single entry point may use entry point or distribution system sample results from the January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2004 compliance period. ]

[ (II) Systems with multiple entry points may use entry point sample results from the January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2004 compliance period. ]

[ (III) Systems with no entry point sample results from the January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2004 compliance period that have distribution sample results from that compliance period, may request that these samples be used based on documentation from the system establishing that distribution results represent constituent levels at each entry point. ]

(B) - (G) (No change.)

(2) - (3) (No change.)

(d) (No change.)

(e) Reporting requirements. Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this section. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later. The copies must be mailed to the Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, [ Water Supply Division, MC 155, ] P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(f) Compliance determination. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be determined as follows.

(1) - (4) (No change.)

(5) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(g) - (j) (No change.)

§290.109.Microbial Contaminants.

(a) (No change.)

(b) Maximum contaminant levels (MCL) for microbial contaminants. Treatment techniques and MCL requirements for microbial contaminants are based on detection of those contaminants or fecal indicator organisms. [ The MCL for microbial contaminants if based on the presence or absence of total coliform bacteria in a sample. ]

(1) The MCL for microbial contaminants in the distribution system is based on the presence of total or fecal coliform bacteria in routine, repeat, and increased monitoring distribution samples.

(A) [ (1) ] For a system which collects at least 40 routine distribution [ bacteriological ] samples per month, the MCL is achieved when more than 5.0% of samples collected in a month are coliform positive. [ total coliform-positive samples, of the samples collected during the month. ]

(B) [ (2) ] For a system which collects fewer than 40 routine distribution samples per month [ samples/month ], the MCL is achieved when more than one sample is coliform positive. [ one total coliform positive sample, of the samples collected during the month. ]

(C) The acute MCL is achieved when a repeat sample is fecal coliform or E. coli positive; or a total coliform positive repeat sample follows a fecal coliform or E. coli positive routine sample.

(2) For systems required to collect raw groundwater samples, the standard is no detection of fecal indicators in a raw groundwater samples.

(c) Monitoring requirements for microbial contaminants. Public water systems shall collect samples for total coliform , [ and for ] fecal coliform , E. coli [ or Escherichia coli ] , or other fecal indicator organisms at locations and frequency as directed by the executive director . All compliance samples must be collected during normal operating conditions.

(1) Routine microbial sampling locations. Public water systems shall routinely monitor for microbial contaminants at the following locations.

(A) Public water systems must collect routine distribution coliform [ bacteriological ] samples at active service connections which are representative of water quality throughout the distribution system. Other sampling sites may be used if located adjacent to active service connections.

(B) Public water systems shall collect distribution coliform samples [ monitor for microbial contaminants ] at locations specified in the system's monitoring plan.

(2) Routine distribution coliform [ microbial ] sampling frequency. Public water systems must sample for distribution coliform [ microbiological contaminants ] at the following frequency : [ . ]

(A) Community and noncommunity public water systems must collect routine distribution coliform [ bacteriological ] samples at a frequency based on the population served by the system . [ : ]

(i) - (iii) (No change.)

(B) A public water system which uses surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must collect routine distribution coliform samples at regular time intervals throughout the month.

(C) A public water system which uses only uses only purchased water or groundwater not under the direct influence of surface water and serves more than 4,900 persons must collect routine distribution coliform samples at regular time intervals throughout the month.

(D) A public water system which uses only purchased water or groundwater not under the direct influence of surface water and serves 4,900 persons or fewer may collect all required routine distribution coliform samples on a single day if they are taken from different sites.

(E) (No change.)

(F) If a system collecting fewer than five routine distribution coliform samples per month has one or more total coliform-positive samples and the executive director does not invalidate the sample(s) in accordance with subsection (c)(4) of this section, it must collect at least five routine distribution coliform samples during the next month the system provides water to the public.

(3) Repeat distribution coliform sampling [ microbial monitoring ] requirements. Systems shall conduct repeat monitoring if one or more of the routine samples is found to contain coliform organisms.

(A) If a routine distribution coliform sample is [ total ] coliform-positive, the public water system must collect a set of repeat distribution coliform samples within 24 hours of being notified of the positive result, or as soon as possible if the local laboratory is closed.

(i) A system which collects more than one routine distribution coliform sample per month must collect no fewer than three repeat samples for each [ total ] coliform-positive sample found.

(ii) A system which collects one routine distribution coliform sample per month must collect no fewer than four repeat samples for each [ total ] coliform-positive sample found.

(B) The system must collect all repeat samples on the same day, except [ that ] a system with a single service connection may collect daily repeat samples until the required number of repeat samples has been collected.

(C) The system must collect at least one repeat sample from the sampling tap where the original [ total ] coliform-positive sample was taken, and at least one repeat sample at a tap within five service connections upstream and at least one repeat sample at a tap within five service connections downstream of the original sampling site. If a fourth repeat sample is required, it must be collected within five service connections upstream or downstream. If the positive routine sample was collected at the end of the distribution line, one repeat sample must be collected at that point and all other samples must be collected within five connections upstream of that point.

(D) If one or more repeat samples in the set is total coliform-positive, the public water system must collect an additional set of repeat samples in the manner specified in subparagraphs (A) - (C) of this paragraph. The additional samples must be collected within 24 hours [ 24-hours ] of being notified of the positive result or as soon as possible if the local laboratory is closed. The system must repeat this process until either total coliforms are not detected in one complete set of repeat samples or the system determines that the MCL for total coliforms has been exceeded.

(E) (No change.)

(4) Raw groundwater source monitoring. Any raw groundwater source sample required under this paragraph must be collected at a location prior to any treatment of the groundwater source.

(A) General requirements. A groundwater system must conduct triggered source water monitoring for E. coli or other fecal indicators, if both of the following conditions exist.

(i) The system does not provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer for each groundwater source; and

(ii) The system is notified that a routine distribution coliform sample is positive and the sample is not invalidated under paragraph (5) of this subsection.

(B) Sampling requirements. A groundwater system must collect, within 24 hours of notification of the distribution total coliform positive sample, at least one raw groundwater source E. coli sample from each groundwater source in use at the time the distribution coliform-positive sample was collected.

(i) The executive director may extend the 24-hour time limit on a case-by case basis if the system cannot collect the raw groundwater source sample within 24 hours due to circumstances beyond its control.

(ii) If approved by the executive director and documented in the system's monitoring plan, systems with more than one groundwater source may be allowed to sample a representative groundwater source or sources. Systems must modify their current monitoring plan to identify one or more groundwater sources that are representative of each distribution coliform sampling site and is intended to be used for representative source sampling.

(iii) A groundwater system serving 1,000 people or fewer may use one of the four required repeat samples collected from a raw groundwater source to meet both the repeat requirements of subparagraph (A)(ii) of this paragraph and the triggered raw source monitoring requirements in this paragraph. If a required repeat sample is used to meet both requirements and found to be E. coli positive, the system will have achieved an acute MCL as defined in subsection (b)(1)(C) of this section and corrective action will be required for the groundwater source were the sample was found to be E. coli positive.

(C) Consecutive and wholesale systems. Consecutive groundwater systems receiving drinking water from a wholesaler must notify the wholesale system(s) within 24 hours of being notified of the positive coliform distribution sample. The wholesale groundwater system(s) must comply with the following:

(i) A wholesale groundwater system that receives notice of a distribution coliform sample positive from a consecutive system it serves must collect a sample from each of its groundwater sources within 24 hours of the notification and analyze each sample for the presence of E. coli .

(ii) If any raw source sample is E. coli positive, the wholesale groundwater system must notify all consecutive systems served by that groundwater source of the fecal indicator positive within 24 hours of being notified.

(D) Exceptions to the triggered source monitoring requirements. A groundwater system is not required to comply with the triggered source monitoring requirements if any of the following conditions exist.

(i) The executive director determines and documents in writing, that the distribution coliform positive sample is caused by a distribution system deficiency; or

(ii) The distribution coliform positive sample is collected at a location that meets the distribution coliform sample invalidation criteria as specified in paragraph (5) of this subsection.

(E) Assessment source monitoring. The executive director may require monthly source assessment raw monitoring without the presence of a positive total coliform distribution sample if well conditions exist that indicate the groundwater may be susceptible to fecal contamination.

[ (4) Sample invalidation. The executive director may invalidate a total coliform-positive sample if one of the following conditions is met. ]

[ (A) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the laboratory establishes that improper sample analysis caused the total coliform-positive result. ]

[ (B) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the results of repeat samples collected as required by this section determines that the total coliform-positive sample resulted from a domestic or other non-distribution system plumbing problem. The executive director cannot invalidate a sample on the basis of repeat sample results unless all repeat sample(s) collected at the same tap as the original total coliform-positive sample are also total coliform-positive, and all repeat samples collected within five service connections of the original tap are total coliform-negative. Under those circumstances, the system may cease resampling and request that the executive director invalidate the sample. The system must provide copies of the routine positive and all repeat samples. ]

[ (C) The executive director may invalidate a sample if there are substantial grounds to believe that the total coliform-positive result is due to a circumstance or condition which does not reflect water quality in the distribution system. In this case, the system must still collect all repeat samples required by this section, and use them to determine compliance with the MCL for total coliforms in subsection (f) of this section. The system must provide written documentation which must state the specific cause of the total coliform-positive sample, and the action the system has taken, or will take, to correct this problem. The executive director may not invalidate a total coliform-positive sample solely on the grounds that all repeat samples are total coliform-negative. ]

[ (D) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the laboratory establishes that the sample was unsuitable for analysis. ]

[ (E) If a sample is invalidated, the system must collect another sample from the same location as the original sample within 24-hours of being notified, or as soon as possible if the laboratory is closed, and have it analyzed for the presence of total coliforms. The system must continue to resample within 24 hours and have the samples analyzed until it obtains a valid result. ]

(5) Culture analysis. If any routine or repeat sample is total coliform-positive, that total coliform-positive culture medium will be analyzed to determine if fecal coliforms or [ type-name="italic">E. coli ] bacteria are present. If fecal coliforms or E. coli are present, the system must notify the executive director by the end of the day in accordance with subsection (g) of this section.

(d) Analytical requirements for microbial contaminants. Analytical procedures shall be performed in accordance with §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures). Testing for microbial contaminants shall be performed at a laboratory certified by the executive director.

(1) Distribution coliform sample invalidation. The executive director may invalidate a distribution total coliform-positive sample if one of the following conditions is met.

(A) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the laboratory provides written notice that improper sample analysis caused the total coliform-positive result.

(B) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the results of repeat samples collected as required by this section determines that the total coliform-positive sample resulted from a domestic or other non-distribution system plumbing problem. The executive director cannot invalidate a sample on the basis of repeat sample results unless all repeat sample(s) collected at the same tap as the original total coliform-positive sample are also total coliform-positive, and all repeat samples collected within five service connections of the original tap are total coliform-negative. Under those circumstances, the system may cease resampling and request that the executive director invalidate the sample. The system must provide copies of the routine positive and all repeat samples.

(C) The executive director may invalidate a sample if there are substantial grounds to believe that the total coliform-positive result is due to a circumstance or condition which does not reflect water quality in the distribution system. In this case, the system must still collect all repeat samples required by this section, and use them to determine compliance with the MCL for total coliforms in subsection (f) of this section. The system must provide written documentation which must state the specific cause of the total coliform-positive sample, and the action the system has taken, or will take, to correct this problem. The executive director may not invalidate a total coliform-positive sample solely on the grounds that all repeat samples are total coliform-negative.

(D) The executive director may invalidate a sample if the laboratory provides written notice that the sample was unsuitable for analysis.

(E) If a sample is invalidated by the laboratory, the system must collect another sample from the same location as the original sample within 24 hours of being notified, or as soon as possible if the laboratory is closed, and have it analyzed for the presence of total coliform. The system must continue to resample within 24 hours and have the samples analyzed until it obtains a valid result.

(2) A groundwater system may obtain invalidation of a fecal indicator positive groundwater source sample if the conditions of subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph apply. If the executive director invalidates a fecal indicator positive groundwater source sample, the system must collect another source sample as specified in subsection (c)(4) of this section within 24 hours of being notified of the invalidation.

(A) Notice from the laboratory must document that improper sample analysis occurred. If a laboratory invalidates a sample, the system must collect another sample from the same location as the original sample within 24 hours of being notified of the invalidated sample, and have it analyzed for the presence of E. coli . The system must continue to re-sample within 24 hours and have the samples analyzed until it obtains a valid result. If approved by the executive director, the 24-hour time limit may be extended.

(B) The executive director may invalidate the sample if the system provides written documentation that there is substantial evidence that a fecal indicator positive groundwater source sample is not related to source water quality. If the executive director invalidates a sample, the system must collect another sample from the same location as the original sample within 24 hours of being notified of the invalidated sample, and have it analyzed for the presence of E. coli .

(e) Reporting requirements for microbial contaminants. Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later. The copies must be mailed to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(f) Compliance determination for microbial contaminants. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be determined using the following criteria each month that the system is in operation.

(1) A system commits an acute MCL violation if:

(A) A repeat distribution system sample is fecal coliform-positive or E. coli [ Escherichia coli ] -positive; or

(B) A total coliform-positive repeat distribution system sample follows a fecal coliform-positive or E. coli [ Escherichia coli ]-positive routine distribution system sample.

(2) A system that collects at least 40 routine distribution coliform [ bacteriological ] samples per month commits a nonacute MCL violation if more than 5.0% of the samples collected during a month are total coliform-positive, but none of the initial or repeat samples are fecal coliform-positive or E. coli [ Escherichia coli ]-positive.

(3) A system that collects fewer than 40 routine distribution coliform samples per month commits a nonacute MCL violation if more than one sample collected during a month is total coliform-positive, but none of the initial or repeat samples are fecal coliform-positive or E. coli [ Escherichia coli ]-positive.

(4) A public groundwater system that is required to collect raw source samples, commits a treatment technique violation if any source sample is found to be positive for E. coli or other approved fecal indicator. A public groundwater system is required to conduct corrective action as described in §290.116 of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques) if a source sample is confirmed positive for E. coli or other fecal indicators.

(5) [ (4) ] A public water system that fails to provide the required number of suitable distribution coliform samples commits a monitoring violation.

(6) A public water system that fails to provide the required number of suitable raw source samples commits a monitoring violation.

(7) [ (5) ] A public water system that fails to report the results of the monitoring tests required by this section commits a reporting violation.

(8) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that notification has been performed commits a public notice reporting violation.

(9) [ (6) ] Results of all routine and repeat distribution coliform samples not invalidated by the executive director must be included in determining compliance with the MCL for total coliforms.

(10) [ (7) ] Distribution coliform samples Samples invalidated by the executive director shall not be included in determining compliance with the MCL for total coliforms.

(11) [ (8) ] Special purpose samples, such as those taken to determine whether disinfection practices are sufficient following pipe placement, replacement, or repair, shall not be used to determine compliance with the MCL for microbiological contaminants.

(g) Public notification for microbial contaminants. A system that is out of compliance with the requirements described in this section must notify the public using the procedures described in §290.122 of this title (relating to Public Notification) for microbial contamination.

(1) A public water system that commits an acute MCL violation for microbial contaminants must notify the water system customers in accordance with the boil water notice requirements of §290.46(q) [ §290.46(s)(3) ] of this title (relating to Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking Water Systems) and the public notice requirements of §290.122(a) of this title.

(2)

A public groundwater system that receives a valid E. coli or other fecal indicator positive source sample must notify the water system customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(a)(1)(F) of this title. The system must continue to notify the public annually until the fecal contamination in the source water is determined by the executive director to be corrected as specified under §290.116 of this title.

(3) [ (2) ] A public water system that has fecal coliforms or E. coli present must notify the executive director by the end of the day when the system is notified of the test result, unless the system is notified of the result after the commission's office is closed, in which case the system must notify the executive director before the end of the next business day.

(4) [ (3) ] A public water system which commits an MCL violation must report the violation to the executive director immediately after it learns of the violation, but no later than the end of the next business day, and notify the public in accordance with §290.122(b) of this title.

(5) [ (4) ] A public water system which has failed to comply with a coliform monitoring requirement must report the monitoring violation to the executive director within ten days after the system discovers the violation and notify the public in accordance with §290.122(c) of this title.

§290.110.Disinfectant Residuals.

(a) (No change.)

(b) Minimum and maximum acceptable disinfectant concentrations. Public water systems shall provide the minimum levels of disinfectants in accordance with the provisions of this section. Public water systems shall not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs) provided in this section. [ The disinfection process at a system treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water shall meet the treatment technique requirements provided in this section. ]

(1) The disinfection process used by public water systems must ensure that water has been adequately disinfected before it enters the distribution system. [ The disinfection protocols used by public water systems with surface water sources or groundwater sources that are under the direct influence of surface water must ensure that the total treatment process achieves at least 99.9% (3-log) inactivation or removal of Giardia lamblia cysts and at least 99.99% (4-log) inactivation or removal of viruses before the water is supplied to any consumer. The executive director may require additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality. ]

(A) The disinfection process used by public water systems treating surface water sources or groundwater sources that are under the direct influence of surface water must meet the requirements of §290.111(d) of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment). [ The disinfection process at a surface water treatment plant that uses coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration facilities shall provide at least a 0.5-log inactivation of Giardia lamblia cysts and a 2-log inactivation of viruses. ]

(B) The executive director may require the disinfection process used by public water systems treating groundwater sources that are not under the direct influence of surface water to meet the requirements of §290.116 of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques). [ The disinfection process at a surface water treatment plant or a plant treating groundwater under the direct influence of surface water that uses microfiltration or ultrafiltration processes shall provide at least a 4-log inactivation of viruses. ]

(C) (No change.)

(2) The residual disinfectant concentration in the water entering the distribution system shall be at least 0.2 milligram per liter (mg/L) free chlorine or 0.5 mg/L chloramine.

(3) - (4) (No change.)

(5) The running annual average of the free chlorine or chloramine residual of the water within the distribution system shall not exceed an MRDL of 4.0 mg/L.

[ (A) Effective January 1, 2002, public water systems that serve at least 10,000 people and use surface water sources or groundwater sources that are under the influence of surface water must comply with the MRDL for chlorine and chloramine. ]

[ (B) Effective January 1, 2004, all community water systems and nontransient, noncommunity water systems must comply with the MRDL for chlorine and chloramine. ]

(c) Monitoring requirements. Public water systems shall monitor the performance of the disinfection facilities to ensure that appropriate disinfectant levels are maintained. All monitoring conducted pursuant to the requirements of this section must be conducted at sites designated in the public water system's monitoring plan.

[ (1) Public water systems that treat surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water must verify that they meet the disinfection requirements of subsection (b)(1) of this section. ]

[ (A) The disinfectant residual, pH, temperature, and flow rate of the water in each disinfection zone must be measured at least once each day during a time when peak hourly raw water flow rates are occurring. ]

[ (B) Disinfection contact time will be based on tracer study data or a theoretical analysis submitted by the system owner or their designated agent and approved by the executive director and the actual flow rate that is occurring at the time that monitoring occurs. ]

[ (C) Treatment plants that fail to demonstrate an appropriate level of treatment must repeat these tests at four-hour or shorter intervals until compliance has been reestablished. ]

(1) [ (2) ] Public water systems that treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must verify that they meet the disinfection requirements of subsection (b)(2) of this section.

(A) Public water systems that treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water and sell treated water on a wholesale basis or serve more than 3,300 people must continuously monitor and record the disinfectant residual of the water entering the distribution system. If there is a failure in the continuous monitoring equipment, grab sampling every four hours may be conducted in lieu of continuous monitoring, but for no more than five working days following the failure of the equipment.

(B) Public water systems that treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water, serve 3,300 or fewer people and do not sell treated water on a wholesale basis must monitor and record the disinfectant residual of the water entering the distribution system with either continuous monitors or grab samples.

(i) If a system uses grab samples, the samples must be collected on an ongoing basis at the frequency prescribed in the following table.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.110(c)(1)(B)(i)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.110(c)(2)(B)(i) ]

(ii) The grab samples cannot be taken at the same time and the sampling interval is subject to the executive director's review and approval.

(iii) Treatment plants that use grab samples and fail to detect an appropriate disinfectant residual must repeat the test at four-hour or shorter intervals until compliance has been reestablished.

(2) [ (3) ] Public water systems that treat groundwater or that purchase and resell treated water must, upon the request of the executive director, verify that they meet the disinfection requirements of subsection (b)(2) of this section.

(3) [ (4) ] Each treatment plant using chlorine dioxide must monitor and record the chlorine dioxide residual of the water entering the distribution system at least once each day. If the chlorine dioxide residual in the water entering the distribution system exceeds the MRDL contained in subsection (b)(3) of this section, the treatment plant must conduct additional tests.

(A) If the public water system does not have additional chlorination facilities in the distribution system, it must conduct three additional tests at the service connection nearest the treatment plant where an elevated chlorine dioxide residual was detected. The first additional test must be conducted within two hours after detecting an elevated chlorine dioxide residual at the entry point to the distribution system. The two subsequent tests must be conducted at six-hour to eight-hour intervals thereafter.

(B) If the public water system has additional chlorination facilities in the distribution system, it must conduct an additional test at the service connection nearest the treatment plant where an elevated chlorine dioxide residual was detected, an additional test at the first service connection after the point where the water is rechlorinated, and an additional test at a location in the far reaches of the distribution system. The additional test at the location nearest the treatment plant must be conducted within two hours after detecting an elevated chlorine dioxide residual at the entry point to the distribution system. The two other tests must be conducted at six-hour to eight-hour intervals thereafter.

(4) [ (5) ] Public water systems shall monitor the disinfectant residual at various locations throughout the distribution system.

(A) Public water systems that use groundwater or purchased water sources only and serve fewer than 250 connections and fewer than 750 people daily, must monitor the disinfectant residual at representative locations in the distribution system at least once every seven days.

(B) Public water systems that serve at least 250 connections or at least 750 people daily, and use only groundwater or purchased water sources must monitor the disinfectant residual at representative locations in the distribution system at least once per day.

(C) Public water systems using surface water sources or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must monitor the disinfectant residual tests at least once per day at representative locations in the distribution system.

(D) All public water systems must monitor the residual disinfectant concentration each time that a bacteriological sample is collected, as specified in §290.109 of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants).

(d) Analytical requirements. All monitoring required by this section must be conducted at a facility approved by the executive director and using methods that conform to the requirements of §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures).

[ (1) The pH analysis must be conducted using a pH meter with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 pH units. ]

[ (2) The temperature of the water must be measured using a thermometer or thermocouple with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.5 degrees Celsius. ]

(1) [ (3) ] The free chlorine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(A) Amperometric titration;

(B) N,N-diethyl- p -phenylenediamine (DPD) [ DPD ] Ferrous titration; [ or ]

(C) DPD colorimetric ; or [ . ]

(i) The free chlorine residual within the treatment plant and at the point where the treated water enters the distribution system must be measured with a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(ii) The free chlorine residual within the distribution system must be measured with a colorimeter, spectrophotometer, or color comparator test kit.

(D) Springaldizine (FACTS) .

(2) [ (4) ] The chloramine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(A) Amperometric titration;

(B) DPD Ferrous titration; or

(C) DPD colorimetric.

(i) The chloramine residual within the treatment plant and at the point where the treated water enters the distribution system must be measured with a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(ii) The chloramine residual within the distribution system must be measured with a colorimeter, spectrophotometer, or color comparator test kit.

(3) [ (5) ] The chlorine dioxide residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using one of the following methods: [ The chlorine dioxide residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using an amperometric titrator with platinum-platinum electrodes. ]

(A) the amperometric titration method using a titrator with platinum-platinum electrodes;

(B) the spectrophotometric Lissamine Green B method, or

(C) with the written permission of the executive director, the DPD-glycine method using a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(e) Reporting requirements. Any owner or operator of a public water system subject to the provisions of this section is required to report to the executive director the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this section.

(1) Systems exceeding the MRDL for chlorine dioxide in subsection (b)(3) of this section must report the exceedance to the executive director within 24 hours of the event [ at least by the end of the next business day ].

(2) Public water systems that use surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water must submit a Surface Water Monthly Operating Report (commission Form 0102C) or a Surface Water Monthly Operating Report for 2-Filter Plants (commission Form 0103) each month. [ Monthly Operating Report for Surface Water Treatment Plants each month. Until January 1, 2001, systems must submit commission Form 0102A. After January 1, 2001, systems must submit commission Form 0102C. ]

(3) (No change.)

(4) Public [ Effective January 1, 2004, public ] water systems that use purchased water or groundwater sources only must complete [ submit ] a Disinfection Level Quarterly Operating Report (DLQOR, commission Form 20067) [ Quarterly Distribution Report for Public Water Systems ] each quarter.

(A) Community and nontransient noncommunity public water systems must submit the Disinfection Level Quarterly Operating Report each quarter, by the tenth day of the month following the end of the quarter.

(B) Transient noncommunity public water systems must retain the Disinfection Level Quarterly Operating Reports and must provide a copy if requested by the executive director.

(5) Monthly and quarterly reports required by this section must be submitted to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, [ P.O. Box 13087, ] MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 by the tenth day of the month following the end of the reporting period.

(f) Compliance determinations. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be determined using the following criteria.

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(4) A public water system that uses surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water and fails to meet the requirements of subsection (b)(2) [ (b)(1) or (2) ] of this section for a period longer than four consecutive hours commits a nonacute treatment technique violation. A public water system that fails to conduct the additional testing required by subsection (c)(1)(B)(iii) [ (c)(1)(C) and (c)(2)(B)(iii) ] of this section also commits a nonacute treatment technique violation.

(5) A public water system that uses chlorine dioxide and exceeds the level specified in subsection (b)(3) of this section violates the MRDL for chlorine dioxide.

(A) (No change.)

(B) If a public water system violates the MRDL for chlorine dioxide and fails to collect each of the three additional distribution samples required by subsection (c)(3) [ (c)(4) ] of this section, the system commits an acute MRDL violation for chlorine dioxide.

(C) If a public water system violates the MRDL for chlorine dioxide but none of the three additional distribution samples violates the MRDL, the system commits a [ an ] nonacute MRDL violation for chlorine dioxide.

(6) - (9) (No change.)

(10) A public water system that fails to issue a required public notice or certify that it has issued that notice commits a violation.

(g) Public notification requirements. The owner or operator of a public water system that violates the requirements of this section must notify the executive director and the people served by the system.

(1) A public water system that fails to meet the requirements of subsection (b)(3) of this section, shall notify the executive director within 24 hours of the event [ by the end of the next business day ] and the customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122 of this title (relating to Public Notification). [ Public notification requirements. The owner or operator of a public water system that violates the requirements of this section must notify the executive director and the people served by the system. ]

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(2) A public water system that uses surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water and fails to meet the minimum disinfection requirements of subsection (b)(2) [ (b)(1) or (2) ] of this section shall notify the executive director by the end of the next business day and the customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b) of this title.

(3) - (5) (No change.)

§290.111.Surface Water Treatment.

(a) Applicability. A public water system that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must comply with the requirements of this section.

(1) A public water system that treats surface water must comply with the requirements of this section beginning on the effective date of the rule.

(2) A public water system that treats groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must comply with the requirements of this section beginning on a date specified by the executive director. This compliance date shall not exceed 18 months from the date that the executive director first notifies the system that the groundwater source is under the direct influence of surface water.

(3) A public water system that treats both surface water and groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet the compliance date in paragraph (1) of this subsection at plants that treat any surface water and must meet the compliance date in paragraph (2) of this subsection at plants that treat only groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

(b) Raw surface water monitoring. A public water system that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must conduct two rounds of special raw surface water monitoring at each surface water intake and at each well producing groundwater under the direct influence of surface water for the purpose of establishing minimum treatment technique requirements for Cryptosporidium and other pathogens. The executive director may waive the raw surface water monitoring requirements for an intake or a well if the combination of pathogen removal and disinfection processes used to treat the raw water achieves at least a 5.5-log total removal and inactivation of Cryptosporidium parvum .

(1) Raw water monitoring plans. A system must submit a proposed raw surface water monitoring plan when requested by the executive director. The proposed plan must identify all of the system's intakes and wells; provide the location of each raw water sampling point; include the parameters that will be monitored and the frequency and dates that samples will be collected; and specify the laboratories that will perform the analyses. Raw surface water monitoring must be conducted in accordance with a monitoring plan that has been approved by the executive director. The executive director shall not approve a raw surface water monitoring plan unless it indicates that the system will meet the requirements of 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §§141.701 - 141.707.

(2) Sampling location. A system must collect each raw water sample at a location approved by the executive director. Samples must be collected from the raw water line prior to any treatment and before the first point where a recycled stream is returned to the treatment process.

(3) Sampling parameters and frequency. A system must collect raw water samples at a frequency approved by the executive director.

(A) Unless the executive director approves an alternate sampling regimen, a system must monitor turbidity, E. coli , and Cryptosporidium levels in the raw water at least once each month for a period of not less than 24 consecutive months if the system:

(i) serves at least 10,000 people; or

(ii) is part of combined distribution system in which one or more systems serve at least 10,000 people and the system with the well or intake regularly provides water to another public water supply.

(B) A system that is not required to monitor under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph must either monitor in accordance with the requirements of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph or monitor turbidity and E. coli levels in their raw water at least once every two weeks for a period of not less than 12 consecutive months. A system that does not initially monitor for Cryptosporidium and has elevated E. coli levels must conduct additional raw water monitoring.

(i) A system must conduct additional monitoring if the average E. coli level exceeds 50 colony-forming units per 100 milliliters in the raw water produced by a surface water intake located on a river or flowing stream.

(ii) A system must conduct additional monitoring if the average E.coli level exceeds 10 colony-forming units per 100 milliliters in the raw water produced by a surface water intake not located on a river or flowing stream or the raw water produced by a well.

(iii) A system that must conduct additional monitoring must monitor turbidity, E. coli , and Cryptosporidium levels in the raw water at least twice each month for a period of not less than 12 consecutive months, or at least once each month for a period of not less than 24 consecutive months.

(C) The executive director may approve an alternate sampling frequency for intakes and wells that operate only part of the year.

(4) Sampling schedule and dates. A system must collect raw water samples in accordance with a schedule approved by the executive director.

(A) A system must collect a raw water sample no sooner than two days before the date approved by the executive director and no later than two days after the approved date, unless an extreme condition or situation exists that poses a danger to the sample collector.

(B) A system which is unable to collect a sample within this five-day period must collect the sample as close as possible to the approved date and must notify the executive director in writing why the sample was not collected on the approved date.

(5) Replacement samples. If, for any reason, the laboratory is unable to report a valid analytical result for a scheduled sample, the system must submit a replacement sample on a date approved by the executive director.

(6) Analytical requirements. Raw water samples collected pursuant to this subsection must be analyzed at an approved or certified laboratory.

(A) Cryptosporidium samples must be analyzed using one of the methods approved in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §141.704(a) and by a laboratory that is approved under Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Laboratory Quality Assurance Evaluation Program for Analysis of Cryptosporidium in Water.

(B) E. coli samples must be analyzed using one of the methods approved in 40 CFR §136.3(a) for the enumeration of E. coli in source water and by a laboratory that is certified or accredited by the executive director.

(i) Systems must ensure that samples are maintained between 0 ^o C and 10 ^o C during storage and transportation to the laboratory.

(ii) The time between sample collection and the initiation of the analysis may not exceed 30 hours without the prior approval of the executive director.

(iii) The executive director may allow up to 48 hours between sample collection and the initiation of the analysis if the analysis is conducted by the Colilert reagent version of Standard Method 9223B.

(C) Turbidity samples must be analyzed using a method and at a laboratory approved by the executive director.

(7) Reporting requirements for raw surface water sample results. The owner or operator of a public water system must provide to the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection.

(A) Results must be submitted using the Raw Surface Water Sampling Report (commission Form 20358) or in another format that is approved by the executive director and contains the information required by 40 CFR §141.706(e).

(i) If the sample was not collected within the 5-day window described in paragraph (4)(A) of this subsection, the result must be accompanied by the information required in paragraph (4)(B) of this subsection.

(ii) If the laboratory report indicates that a valid analytical result could not be reported, the laboratory report must be accompanied by a request to collect a replacement sample.

(B) The results must be submitted within ten days of their receipt by the public water system and no later than 10 days after the end of the first month following the month that the sample was collected.

(C) The results and any additional information must be mailed to the Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(c) Treatment technique requirements. A system that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet minimum treatment technique requirements before the water reaches the entry point to the distribution system.

(1) The combination of pathogen removal and disinfection processes used by a public water system must achieve at least a 4.0-log removal/inactivation of viruses.

(2) The combination of pathogen removal and disinfection processes used by a public water system must achieve at least a 3.0-log removal/inactivation of Giardia lamblia .

(3) A public water system that is required by subsection (b) of this section to conduct raw surface water monitoring must comply with the requirements of this paragraph.

(A) The average Crytosporidium level and Bin Classification shall be determined in accordance with the requirements established by 40 CFR §141.710.

(B) The combination of pathogen removal and disinfection processes must achieve the removal/inactivation of Cryptosporidium parvum specified in the following table beginning 36 months after being assigned a Bin Classification by the executive director.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.111(c)(3)(B)

(C) A system that has been assigned to Bin 3 or Bin 4 must achieve at least 1.0-log removal/inactivation of Cryptosporidium using one or a combination of the following: bag filters, cartridge filters, chlorine dioxide, membranes, ozone, or ultraviolet light.

(D) Prior to the effective date of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, the combination of disinfection and filtration processes used by a public water system to treat for Cryptosporidium must achieve at least a 2.0-log removal/inactivation of Cryptosporidium parvum .

(4) The combination of disinfection and filtration processes at plants that do not monitor each source in accordance with the requirements of subsection (b) of this section must achieve at least a 5.5-log removal /inactivation of Cryptosporidium parvum .

(5) The executive director may require additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality.

(6) The executive director may establish minimum design, operational, and reporting requirements for watershed control programs and treatment processes used to meet the treatment technique requirements of this subsection.

(d) Microbial inactivation requirements. A system that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet minimum disinfection requirements before the water is supplied to any consumer.

(1) Inactivation table. The disinfection process must achieve the minimum microbial inactivation levels shown in the following table.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.111(d)(1)

(A) The disinfection process at treatment plants not described in the Microbial Inactivation Requirements table must provide the level of disinfection required by the executive director.

(B) The executive director may require additional levels of treatment in cases of poor source water quality.

(C) The executive director may reduce the inactivation requirement for plants that meet the individual filter effluent performance criteria contained in subsection (g)(1) of this section and have been assigned a Bin 1 classification under the provisions of subsection (c)(3) of this section.

(D) A system that fails to meet the inactivation requirements of this section for a period of longer than four consecutive hours commits a nonacute treatment technique violation. A system that fails to conduct the additional testing required by subsection (d)(2)(C) of this section also commits a nonacute treatment technique violation.

(E) A system that has a plant assigned a Bin 2, 3, or 4 classification under the provisions of subsection (c)(3) of this section and uses ultraviolet light (UV) disinfection facilities to meet the treatment technique requirements for Cryptosporidium must meet the nactivation requirements of this subsection in at least 95% of the water treated each month.

(2) Monitoring requirements for chemical disinfectants. Public water systems must monitor the performance of the disinfection facilities to ensure that appropriate disinfectant levels are maintained. All monitoring conducted pursuant to the requirements of this subsection must be conducted at sites designated in the public water system's monitoring plan.

(A) The disinfectant residual, pH, temperature, and flow rate of the water in each disinfection zone must be measured at least once each day during a time when peak hourly raw water flow rates are occurring.

(B) Disinfection contact time will be based on tracer study data or a theoretical analysis submitted by the system owner or their designated agent and approved by the executive director and the actual flow rate that is occurring at the time that monitoring occurs.

(C) Treatment plants that fail to demonstrate an appropriate level of treatment must repeat these tests at four-hour or shorter intervals until compliance has been reestablished.

(3) Monitoring requirements for UV disinfection facilities. Public water systems must monitor the performance of the UV disinfection facilities.

(A) A system must continuously monitor and record UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, lamp status, the flow rate through the unit, and other parameters prescribed by the executive director to ensure that the units are operating within validated conditions.

(B) A system with a plant that has been assigned a Bin 2, 3, or 4 classification under the provisions of subsection (c)(3) of this section must also monitor and record the amount of water treated by each UV unit each month and the amount of water produced each month when the unit was not operating within validated conditions.

(4) Analytical requirements. All monitoring required by this subsection must be conducted at a facility approved by the executive director and using methods that conform to the requirements of §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures).

(A) The pH analysis must be conducted using a pH meter with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 pH units.

(B) The temperature of the water must be measured using a thermometer or thermocouple with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.5 degrees Celsius.

(C) The free chlorine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 milligrams per liter (mg/L) using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titration;

(ii) DPD Ferrous titration;

(iii) a DPD method that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer; or

(iv) Springaldizine (FACTS).

(D) The chloramine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titration;

(ii) DPD Ferrous titration; or

(iii) a DPD method that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(E) The chlorine dioxide residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titrator with platinum-platinum electrodes; or

(ii) Lissamine Green B.

(F) The ozone residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using the Indigo Method and using a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(G) The UV dose must be measured by a calibrated sensor approved by the executive director.

(e) Filtration requirements for conventional filters. A system that uses granular media filters to treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet minimum filtration requirements before the water is supplied to any consumer.

(1) Treatment technique requirements for combined filter effluent. Treatment plants using conventional media filtration must meet the following turbidity requirements.

(A) The turbidity level of the combined filter effluent must never exceed 1.0 nephelometric turbidity unit (NTU).

(B) The turbidity level of the combined filter effluent must be 0.3 NTU or less in at least 95% of the samples tested each month.

(2) Performance criteria for individual filter effluent. The filtration techniques must ensure the public water system meets the following performance criteria.

(A) The turbidity from each individual filter effluent should never exceed 1.0 NTU.

(B) At a public water system that serves 10,000 people or more, the turbidity from each individual filter effluent should not exceed 0.5 NTU at four hours after the individual filter is returned to service after backwash or shutdown.

(3) Routine turbidity monitoring requirements. A system must monitor the performance of its filtration facilities.

(A) A system that serves fewer than 500 people and continuously monitors the turbidity level of each individual filter must measure and record the turbidity level of the combined filter effluent at least once each day that the plant is in operation.

(B) A system that serves at least 500 people and continuously monitors the turbidity level of each individual filter must measure and record the turbidity level of the combined filter effluent at least every four hours that the system serves water to the public.

(C) Except as provided in subparagraph (D) of this paragraph, a system must continuously monitor the filtered water turbidity at the effluent of each individual filter and record the turbidity value every 15 minutes.

(D) A system that serves fewer than 10,000 people and monitors combined filter effluent turbidity in lieu of individual filter effluent turbidity under the provisions of §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii) of this title (relating to Water Treatment) must:

(i) continuously monitor the turbidity of the combined filter effluent and record the turbidity value every 15 minutes; and

(ii) measure and record the turbidity level at the effluent of each filter at least once each day the plant is in operation.

(4) Special investigation requirements. A system which fails to produce water with acceptable turbidity levels must investigate the cause of the problem and take appropriate corrective action. The executive director can waive these special monitoring requirements for systems that have a corrective action schedule approved by the executive director.

(A) A public water system that fails to meet the turbidity criteria specified in subsection (e)(2) of this section must conduct additional monitoring.

(i) Each time a filter exceeds an applicable filtered water turbidity level specified in subsection (e)(2) of this section for two consecutive 15-minute readings, the public water system must either identify the cause of the exceedance or produce a filter profile on the filter within seven days of the exceedance.

(ii) Each time a filter exceeds the filtered turbidity level specified in subsection (e)(2)(A) of this section for two consecutive 15-minute readings on three separate occasions during any consecutive three-month period, the public water system must conduct a filter assessment on the filter within 14 days of the third exceedance.

(iii) 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 (CPE). If the system serves at least 10,000 people, the CPE must be conducted within 90 days of the first exceedance in the second month. If the system serves fewer than 10,000 people, the CPE must be conducted within 120 days of the first exceedance in the second month.

(B) A system that serves fewer than 10,000 people, monitors combined filter effluent turbidity in lieu of individual filter effluent turbidity, and fails to meet the turbidity criteria in subsection (e)(1)(A) of this section must conduct additional monitoring. The executive director may waive these special monitoring requirements for systems that have a corrective action schedule approved by the executive director.

(i) Each time the combined filter effluent turbidity level exceeds 1.0 NTU for two consecutive 15-minute readings, the public water system must either identify the cause of the exceedance or complete a filter profile on the combined filter effluent within seven days of the exceedance.

(ii) Each time the combined filter effluent turbidity level exceeds 1.0 NTU for two consecutive 15-minute readings on three separate occasions during any consecutive three-month period, the public water system must conduct a filter assessment on each filter within 14 days of the third exceedance.

(iii) Each time the combined filter effluent turbidity level 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.

(5) Analytical requirements for turbidity. All monitoring required by this subsection must be conducted by a facility approved by the executive director and using methods that conform to the requirements of §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures). Equipment used for compliance measurements must be maintained and calibrated in accordance with §290.46(s) of this title (relating to Minimum Acceptable Operating Practices for Public Drinking Water Systems).

(A) Turbidity must be measured with turbidimeters that use one of the following methods:

(i) EPA Method 180.1 and Standard Method 2130B;

(ii) Great Lakes Instruments Method 2; or

(iii) Hach FilterTrak Method 10133.

(B) A system monitoring the performance of individual filters with on-line turbidimeters and recorders may monitor combined filter effluent turbidity levels by either continuously monitoring turbidity levels with an on-line turbidimeter or measuring the turbidity level in grab samples with a bench-top turbidimeter.

(C) Continuous turbidity monitoring must be conducted using a continuous, on-line turbidimeter and a device that records the turbidity level reading at least once every 15 minutes.

(i) Turbidity data may be recorded electronically by a supervisory control and data acquisition system (SCADA) or on a strip chart. The recorder must be designed so that the operator can accurately determine the turbidity level readings at 15-minute intervals.

(ii) If there is a failure in the continuous turbidity monitoring equipment at a system serving 10,000 people or more, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in lieu of continuous monitoring, but for no more than five working days following the failure of the equipment.

(iii) If the continuous turbidity monitoring equipment at a system serving fewer than 10,000 people malfunctions, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in lieu of continuous monitoring, but for no more than 14 working days following the failure of the equipment.

(D) A system that monitors combined filter effluent turbidity in lieu of individual filter effluent turbidity under §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii) of this title must monitor the performance of individual filters using a bench-top turbidimeter.

(f) Filtration requirements for other filters. A system that uses cartridge filters, membrane filters, or other unconventional filtration systems to treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must meet minimum filtration requirements before the water is supplied to any consumer.

(1) Treatment technique requirements. A system that uses unconventional filtration technologies such as membrane filters or cartridge filters must meet treatment technique requirements prescribed by the executive director.

(A) The filtration facilities must meet turbidity limits established by the executive director.

(B) The filtration facilities must be operated and maintained in accordance with requirements that the executive director determines are needed to demonstrate the amount of Giardia and Cryptosporidium removal achieved.

(2) Monitoring requirements. A system must monitor the performance of its filtration facilities.

(A) A system that serves fewer than 500 people and continuously monitors the turbidity level of each individual cartridge or membrane unit must measure and record the turbidity level of the combined effluent at least once each day that the plant is in operation.

(B) A system that serves at least 500 people and continuously monitors the turbidity level of each individual cartridge or membrane unit must measure and record the turbidity level of the combined effluent at least every four hours that the system serves water to the public.

(C) A system using membranes must use a method approved by the executive director to continuously monitor the quality of the water produced by each membrane unit and record the monitoring results at least once every five minutes. The executive director may approve monitoring parameters other than turbidity and decrease the frequency to once every 15 minutes if the approved operating parameters will allow consecutive readings to be obtained between backwash or backflush cycles.

(D) A system using membranes must conduct direct integrity testing on each membrane unit using a procedure approved by the executive director.

(i) Direct integrity tests must be conducted in a manner that will detect a membrane defect of 3 microns or smaller and demonstrates a removal efficiency equal to or greater than the removal credit awarded to the membrane filtration process by the executive director.

(ii) Direct integrity test method must calculate the log removal value for a 3-micron size particle and establish an upper control limit which assures that the unit is capable of meeting the removal credit approved by the executive director.

(iii) A system that has been assigned a Bin 1 classification under the provisions of subsection (c)(3)(B) of this section must conduct direct integrity tests at least once every seven days. The executive directed may reduce the testing requirements for other membrane units.

(iv) A system that has been assigned a Bin 2, 3, or 4 classification under the provisions of subsection (c)(3)(B) of this section must conduct direct integrity tests at least once each day that the membrane unit is used for filtration. The executive director may approve less frequent testing, based on demonstrated process reliability, the use of multiple barriers effective for Cryptosporidium removal or inactivation, or reliable process safeguards.

(v) A system must immediately conduct a direct integrity test on any membrane unit that produces filtered water with turbidity level above 0.15 NTU on two consecutive readings. The executive director must establish alternate site-specific control limits for systems that use other approved technology in lieu of turbidimeters to continuously monitor the performance of membrane units.

(vi) A system must immediately remove any membrane unit that fails a direct integrity test from service until the membrane modules in that unit are inspected and, if necessary, repaired. A membrane unit that has been removed from service may not be returned to service until it has passed a direct integrity test.

(E) A system that uses cartridge filters must continuously monitor the performance of the filtration process in a manner approved by the executive director.

(3) Analytical requirements. All monitoring required by this subsection must be conducted by a facility approved by the executive director and using methods that conform to the requirements of §290.119 of this title. Equipment used for compliance measurements must be maintained and calibrated in accordance with §290.46(s) of this title.

(A) Turbidity of the combined effluent must be measured with turbidimeters that meet the requirements of subsection (e)(5)(A) of this section.

(B) The turbidity of the water produced by each membrane unit must be measured using the Hach FilterTrak Method 10133. The executive director may approve the use of alternative technology to monitor the quality of the water produced by each membrane unit.

(C) A system continuously monitoring the performance of individual cartridges or membrane units may monitor combined effluent turbidity levels by either continuously monitoring turbidity levels with an on-line turbidimeter, or by measuring the turbidity level in grab samples with a bench-top turbidimeter.

(D) Data collected from on-line instruments may be recorded electronically by a SCADA system or on a strip chart recorder. The recorder must be designed so that the operator can accurately determine the value of readings at the monitoring interval approved by the executive director.

(i) If there is a failure in the continuous monitoring equipment at a system serving 10,000 people or more, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in lieu of continuous monitoring, but for no more than five working days following the failure of the equipment.

(ii) If there is a failure in the continuous monitoring equipment at a system serving fewer than 10,000 people, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in lieu of continuous monitoring, but for no more than 14 working days following the failure of the equipment.

(E) A system that uses cartridge filters and does not continuously monitor the turbidity of each filter unit must monitor the performance of individual filters at least once each day using a bench-top turbidimeter.

(g) Other treatment credits for systems in Bins 2 through 4. The executive director may grant additional pathogen removal and inactivation credit to systems that meet enhanced design, operational, maintenance, and reporting requirements.

(1) Individual filter effluent. The executive director may approve an additional 1.0-log removal credit for Giardia and Cryptosporidium to a treatment plant that uses conventional granular media filters.

(A) The executive director will approve the additional credit for a plant if:

(i) the system continuously monitored the filtered water turbidity at the effluent of each individual filter and recorded the turbidity value every 15 minutes that the filter was sending water to the clearwell;

(ii) the turbidity level at each individual filter effluent is less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95% of the measurements recorded during the month; and

(iii) no individual filter produced water with turbidity level above 0.3 NTU in two consecutive 15-minute readings.

(B) The executive director may also approve the additional credit for a plant that does not meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph if:

(i) the executive director determines that the failure to meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph could not have been prevented through optimizing plant operations, design, or maintenance; and

(ii) the system has experienced no more than two such failures within the most recent 12 months.

(2) Combined filter effluent. The executive director may approve an additional 0.5-log removal credit for Cryptosporidium to a treatment plant that uses conventional granular media filters if:

(A) the system continuously monitored the filtered water turbidity at the effluent of each individual filter and recorded the turbidity value every 15 minutes that the filter was sending water to the clearwell;

(B) the turbidity level at the combined filter effluent is less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95% of the measurements recorded during the month; and

(C) the plant does not receive additional treatment credit under paragraph (1) of this subsection.

(3) Second stage filtration. The executive director will approve an additional 0.5-log removal credit for Giardia and Cryptosporidium to a treatment plant that uses a second, separate stage of conventional granular media filters if:

(A) the filters in both stages meet minimum design criteria approved by the executive director;

(B) all of the water produced by the plant passes through both stages of filtration;

(C) the system continuously monitored the filtered water turbidity at the effluent of each individual filter in the first stage of filtration and recorded the turbidity value every 15 minutes that the filter was sending water to the clearwell; and

(D) no individual filter in the first stage of filtration produced water with turbidity level above 1.0 NTU in two consecutive 15-minute readings.

(4) Other pathogen control strategies. The executive director may approve an additional removal or inactivation credit for other pre-filtration, filtration, or post-filtration strategies that can demonstrate effective, consistent levels of enhanced pathogen control.

(A) The alternative strategy must achieve a quantifiable reduction in the risk of waterborne disease in all of the treated water produced by the plant.

(B) The alternative strategy must conform to any applicable requirement of 40 CFR §§141.715 - 141.720.

(C) The executive director may establish minimum site-specific design, operational, maintenance, and reporting requirements for any alternative strategy used to meet minimum treatment technique requirements of subsection (c) of this section.

(D) The executive director may not approve additional removal credit under the provisions of this paragraph to any strategy that includes a treatment process has been assigned additional removal or inactivation credit under any other provision of this subsection.

(h) Reporting requirements. Public water systems must properly complete and submit periodic reports to demonstrate compliance with this section.

(1) A system that has a turbidity level exceeding 1.0 NTU in the combined filter effluent must consult with the executive director within 24 hours.

(2) A system that continuously monitors the performance of individual filters must submit a Surface Water Monthly Operating Report (commission Form 0102C) each month for each plant that treats surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water.

(3) A system that monitors combined filter effluent turbidity in lieu of individual filter effluent turbidity under §290.42(d)(11)(E)(ii) of this title must submit a Surface Water Monthly Operating Report for 2-Filter Plants (commission Form 0103) each month for each plant that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

(4) A system that must complete the additional monitoring required by subsection (e)(4)(A)(i) or (e)(4)(B)(i) of this section must submit a Filter Profile Report for Individual Filters (commission Form 10276) with its Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

(5) A system that must complete the additional monitoring required by subsection (e)(4)(A)(ii) or (e)(4)(B)(ii) of this section must submit a Filter Assessment Report for Individual Filters (commission Form 10277) with its Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

(6) A system that must complete the additional monitoring required by subsection (e)(4)(A)(iii) or (e)(4)(B)(iii) of this section must submit a Comprehensive Performance Evaluation Request Form (commission Form 10278) with its Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

(7) A system that uses membranes must submit a Membrane Monthly Operating Report (commission Form 20356) for each plant that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water. The report must accompany the plant's Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

(8) A system that uses UV disinfection to meet the minimum treatment technique requirements for surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must submit a UV Monthly Operating Report (commission Form 20357) with its Surface Water Monthly Operating Report. The report must accompany the plant's Surface Water Monthly Operating Report.

(9) A system must submit any additional reports required by the executive director to verify the level of pathogen removal or inactivation achieved by the system's treatment plants.

(10) Periodic reports required by this section must be submitted to the Water Supply Division, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, MC 155, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 by the tenth day of the month following the end of the reporting period.

(i) Compliance determination. Compliance with the requirements of this section must be determined using the criteria of this subsection.

(1) A public water system that fails to complete source water monitoring or conduct the routine monitoring tests and any applicable special investigations required by this section commits a monitoring violation.

(2) A public water system that fails to submit a report required by subsection (h) of this section commits a reporting violation.

(3) A public water system using conventional filters that has a turbidity level exceeding 5.0 NTU in the combined filter effluent commits an acute treatment technique violation.

(4) A public water system using membrane filters that has a turbidity level exceeding 1.0 NTU in the combined filter effluent commits an acute treatment technique violation.

(5) Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4) of this subsection, a public water system that violates the requirements of subsections (c), (d)(1), (e)(1), and (f)(1) of this section commits a nonacute treatment technique violation.

(6) A system that fails to correct the performance-limiting factors identified in a comprehensive performance evaluation conducted under the requirements of subsection (e)(4)(A)(iii) or (e)(4)(B)(iii) of this section commits a violation.

(7) A system that fails to properly issue a public notice required by subsection (j) of this section commits a violation.

(j) Public notification. The owner or operator of a public water system that violates the requirements of this section must notify the executive director and the people served by the system.

(1) A public water system that commits an acute treatment technique violation must notify the executive director and the water system customers of the acute violation within 24 hours in accordance with the requirements of §290.46(q) of this title and §290.122(a) of this title (relating to Public Notification).

(2) A public water system that has a turbidity level exceeding 1.0 NTU in the combined filter effluent must consult with the executive director within 24 hours of the violation.

(A) Based on the results of the consultation, the executive director will determine whether the water system must notify its customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(a) or (b) of this title.

(B) A water system that fails to consult with the executive director as required by this paragraph must notify its customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(a) of this title.

(3) Except as provided in paragraph (1) and (2) of this subsection, a public water system that fails to meet the treatment technique requirements of subsections (c),(d)(1),(e)(1), or (f)(1) must notify the executive director by the end of the next business day and the water system customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b) of this title.

(4) A public water system that fails to conduct the monitoring required by this section must notify its customers of the violation in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(c) of this title.

§290.112.Total Organic Carbon (TOC).

(a) (No change.)

(b) Treatment technique. Systems must achieve the Step 1 removal requirements in paragraph (1) of this subsection, meet one of the alternative compliance criteria described in paragraph (2) of this subsection, or apply for the alternative Step 2 removal requirements described in paragraph (3) of this subsection.

(1) Systems must determine their ability to meet the Step 1 removal requirements given in the following table. A water treatment plant's Step 1 total organic carbon (TOC) [ TOC ] required percent removal is based upon plant's source water TOC and alkalinity. Step 1 TOC percent removal requirements are indicated in the following table. Systems practicing softening are evaluated based on the Step 1 TOC removal in the far-right column (Source water alkalinity >120 milligrams per liter (mg/L) [ mg/L ]) for the specified source water TOC.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.112(b)(1) (No change.)

(2) Systems may determine their ability to meet one of the eight alternative compliance criteria listed in this paragraph.

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) A system meets alternative compliance criteria Number 3 if: the system's source water TOC level is less than 4.0 mg/L, calculated quarterly as a running annual average; the source water alkalinity is greater than 60 mg/L (as calcium carbonate (CaCO3), calculated quarterly as a running annual average; and the total trihalomethanes (TTHM) [ TTHM ] and haloacetic acid-group of five (HAA5) [ HAA5 ] running annual averages are no greater than 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L, respectively.

(D) (No change.)

(E) The system meets alternative compliance criteria Number 5 if the system's source water specific ultraviolet absorbance (SUVA) [ SUVA ], prior to any treatment, measured monthly, is less than or equal to 2.0 liters per milligram-meter (L/mg-m) [ L/mg-m ], calculated quarterly as a running annual average.

(F) (No change.)

(G) The system meets alternative compliance criteria Number 7 if the system practices softening, cannot achieve the Step 1 TOC removals required by paragraph [ (b) ](1) of this subsection, and has treated water alkalinity less than 60 mg/L (as CaCO3) and calculated quarterly as a running annual average.

(H) (No change.)

(3) (No change.)

(c) - (d) (No change.)

(e) Reporting requirements for TOC. Systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water shall properly complete and submit periodic reports to demonstrate compliance with this section.

(1) The reports must be submitted to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 by the tenth day of the month following the end of the reporting period.

(2) Public water systems must submit a Monthly Operational Report for Total Organic Carbon (commission Form 0879) [ Control ] each month.

[ (A) Systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water and serving 10,000 or more people must comply with these reporting requirements starting January 1, 2001. ]

[ (B) Systems treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water must and serving less than 10,000 people must comply with these reporting requirements starting January 1, 2003. ]

(3) A system that does not meet the Step 1 removal requirements must submit a Request for Alternate TOC Requirements at least 15 days before the end of the quarter.

(A) If the system meets alternative compliance criterion Number 3, subsection (b)(2)(C) of this section, the system must report the running annual average TTHM and HAA5 concentrations as determined under the requirements of §290.113 of this title (relating to Stage 1 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) or §290.115 of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) .

(B) If the system meets alternative compliance criterion Number 4, subsection (b)(2)(D) of this section, the system must report the running annual average TTHM and HAA5 concentrations as determined under the requirements of §290.113 of this title or §290.115 of this title [ (relating to Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) ], and report all disinfectants used by the system during last 12 months.

(C) - (F) (No change.)

(f) Compliance determination. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be based on the following criteria:

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(4) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(g) (No change.)

§290.113. Stage 1 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5).

(a) Applicability for TTHM and HAA5. All community and nontransient, noncommunity water systems shall comply with the requirements of this section.

(1) Systems must comply with the Stage 1 requirements in this section until the date shown in the table entitled "Date to Start Stage 2 Compliance."

(2) Until the date shown in the table in paragraph (1) of this subsection, systems must continue to monitor according to this section.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(a)(2)

[ (1) Effective January 1, 2002, community and nontransient, noncommunity public water systems that serve at least 10,000 people and use surface water sources or groundwater sources that are under the direct influence of surface water must comply with the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (five) (HAA5). ]

[ (2) Effective January 1, 2004, all community and nontransient, noncommunity public water systems must comply with the MCL for TTHM and HAA5. ]

[ (3) Until January 1, 2004, public water systems using groundwater as a supply source and serving at least 10,000 people will be regulated in accordance with §290.115 of this title (relating to Transition Rule for Disinfection By-products). ]

[ (4) Until January 1, 2002, public water systems using surface water sources or groundwater sources that are under the direct influence of surface water must comply with the requirements of §290.115 of this title (relating to Transition Rule for Disinfection By-products). ]

(b) Maximum contaminant level (MCL) for TTHM and HAA5. The running annual average concentration of total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (five) (HAA5) shall not exceed the maximum contaminant levels.

(1) The MCL for TTHM is 0.080 milligrams/liter (mg/L) .

(2) (No change.)

(c) Monitoring requirements for TTHM and HAA5. Systems must take all TTHM and HAA5 samples during normal operating conditions. Monitoring shall be performed at locations and frequency specified in the system's monitoring plan.

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(3) Systems must routinely sample at the frequency and locations given in the following table entitled " Stage 1 Routine Monitoring Frequency and Locations for TTHM and HAA5."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(3)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(3) ]

(4) The executive director may reduce the monitoring frequency for TTHM and HAA5 as indicated in the following table entitled " Stage 1 Reduced Monitoring Frequency and Locations for TTHM and HAA5."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(4)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.113(c)(4) ]

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(5) (No change.)

(d) (No change.)

(e) Reporting requirements for TTHM and HAA5. Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later. The copies must be mailed to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(f) - (g) (No change.)

§290.114.Other Disinfection By-products (Chlorite and Bromate).

(a) Chlorite. All community and nontransient noncommunity public water systems that use chlorine dioxide must comply with the requirements of this subsection.

(1) Maximum contaminant level (MCL) for chlorite. The chlorite concentration in the water in the distribution system shall not exceed an MCL of 1.0 milligrams per liter ( mg/L ) .

(2) Monitoring requirements for chlorite. Public water systems shall measure the chlorite concentration at locations and intervals specified in the system's monitoring plan. All samples must be collected during normal operating conditions.

(A) (No change.)

(B) Each plant using chlorine dioxide must monitor the chlorite concentration in the water within the distribution system at each of the following three locations: at a location near the first customer of a plant using chlorine dioxide; at a location representative of the average residence time in the distribution system; and at a location reflecting maximum residence time in the distribution system. The group of three samples must be collected on the same day and is called a "three-sample set."

(i) - (iii) (No change.)

[ (iv) Public water systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people are exempt from the requirements of subsection (a) of this section until January 1, 2004 if the public water system signs and complies with the requirements set forth by the executive director in a bilateral agreement. ]

[ (v) Public water systems that serve at least 10,000 people are exempt from the requirements of subsection (a) of this section until January 1, 2002 if the public water system signs and complies with the requirements set forth by the executive director in a bilateral agreement. ]

(3) Analytical requirements for chlorite. Analytical procedures required by this section shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures).

(A) (No change.)

[ (B) Before January 1, 2002, systems using chlorine dioxide in accordance with a bilateral compliance agreement with the executive director must have the chlorite concentration of the water within the distribution system analyzed using ion chromatography at a facility approved by the executive director. ]

(B) [ (C) ] The [ Beginning January 1, 2002, the ] chlorite concentration of the water within the distribution system must be analyzed using ion chromatography at a facility certified by the executive director.

(4) Reporting requirements for chlorite. Public water systems that are subject to the provisions of this subsection must provide the executive director with the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this section.

(A) (No change.)

(B) Upon the request of the executive director, systems shall provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any chlorite test, measurement, or analysis required by subsection (a)(2)(B) of this section [ §290.114(a)(2)(B) of this title ] within ten days following receipt of the results of such test, measurement, or analysis.

(C) Reports and analytical results must be mailed to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(5) Compliance determination for chlorite. Compliance with the requirements of this subsection shall be based on the following criteria.

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(6) (No change.)

(b) Bromate. Community and nontransient, noncommunity public water systems that use ozone must comply with the requirements of this subsection beginning on January 1, 2002.

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(3) Analytical requirements for bromate. Analytical procedures required by this section shall be performed in accordance with §290.119 of this title [ (relating to Analytical Procedures) ]. Testing for bromate shall be performed at a laboratory certified by the executive director [ TDH Bureau of Laboratories ].

(4) Reporting requirements for bromate. Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later. The copies must be mailed to the [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(5) Compliance determination for bromate. Compliance with the requirements of this subsection shall be determined using the following criteria.

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) A public water system that fails to do a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(6) Public notification requirements for bromate. A public water system that violates the requirements of this subsection must notify the water system's customers and the executive director.

(A) A public water system that violates the MCL for bromate shall notify the customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b) of this title [ (relating to Public Notification) ].

(B) (No change.)

§290.115.Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5).

(a) Applicability for TTHM and HAA5. All community and nontransient, noncommunity water systems shall comply with the requirements of this section for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (group of five) (HAA5).

(1) Systems must comply with the initial monitoring requirements starting on the dates given in subsection (c) of this section.

(2) Systems must comply with all of the additional requirements in this section starting on the date shown in the table entitled "Date to Start Stage 2 Compliance."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(a)(2)

(A) Systems required to conduct quarterly monitoring, must begin monitoring in the first full calendar quarter that includes the compliance date in the table titled "Date to Start Stage 2 Compliance."

(B) Systems required to conduct routine monitoring less frequently than quarterly must begin monitoring in the calendar month approved by the executive director in their IDSE report or revised monitoring plan identifying Stage 2 sample sites.

(b) Maximum contaminant levels (MCL) and operational evaluation levels (OELs) for TTHM and HAA5. Systems shall comply with MCLs and OELs.

(1) The locational running annual average (LRAA) concentration of TTHM and HAA5 shall not exceed the maximum contaminant levels. A public water system that exceeds a MCL shall determine compliance as described in subsection (f) of this section.

(A) The MCL for TTHM is 0.080 milligrams/liter (mg/L).

(B) The MCL for HAA5 is 0.060 mg/L.

(2) The OEL at any monitoring location is the sum of the two previous quarters' results plus twice the current quarter's result, divided by 4 to determine an average. A public water system that exceeds an OEL shall perform operation evaluation monitoring and reporting described in subsection (e) of this section.

(A) The OEL for TTHM is 0.080 mg/L.

(B) The OEL for HAA5 is 0.060 mg/L.

(c) Monitoring requirements for TTHM and HAA5. Monitoring shall be performed at locations and frequency specified in the system's monitoring plan as approved by the executive director.

(1) Monitoring locations. Systems must establish Stage 2 compliance monitoring sites throughout the distribution system at locations with the potential for relatively high disinfection by-product formation. Systems must determine Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations by the dates shown in the table titled "Date to Establish Stage 2 Sites."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(1)

(A) Systems that perform initial distribution system evaluation (IDSE) sampling in accordance with subsection (c)(5) of this section must use the results to set Stage 2 compliance monitoring sites.

(B) Systems that do not perform IDSE sampling must set Stage 2 compliance monitoring sites through consultation with the executive director in accordance with this subparagraph.

(i) Systems required to sample at the same number of sites under Stage 1 and Stage 2, can use the Stage 1 sites for Stage 2 compliance monitoring.

(ii) Systems required to sample at more sites under Stage 2 than Stage 1 must identify Stage 2 sites in addition to the existing Stage 1 sites. Systems must identify additional sites representing areas of the distribution system with potentially high TTHM or HAA5 levels and provide the rationale for identifying these locations as having high levels of TTHM or HAA5. The required number of compliance monitoring locations must be identified.

(iii) Systems required to sample at fewer sites under Stage 2 than Stage 1 must identify which locations will be used for Stage 2. Stage 2 sites will be selected by alternating selection of Stage 1 locations representing the highest TTHM levels and highest HAA5 levels until the required number of compliance monitoring locations have been identified.

(C) The protocol given in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) §141.605(c) for selecting Stage 2 sample sites is hereby adopted by reference.

(2) Routine sampling frequency and number of sample sites are given in the following table, titled "Routine Stage 2 Monitoring Frequency and Number of Sites." Systems must take all routine compliance TTHM and HAA5 samples during normal operating conditions.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(2)

(3) Monitoring may be reduced when the LRAA is less than or equal to 0.040 mg/L for TTHM and less than or equal to 0.030 mg/L for HAA5 at all Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations. The Stage 2 reduced sampling frequency and number of sample sites are given in the following table, titled "Reduced Stage 2 Monitoring Frequency and Number of Sites."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(3)

(A) Only data collected under the provisions of §290.113 of this title (relating to Stage 1 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)) and under this section may be used to qualify for reduced monitoring.

(B) In order to qualify for reduced monitoring, a system must meet the applicable conditions of this subparagraph.

(i) Systems with annual or less frequent routine monitoring qualify to remain on reduced monitoring as long as each TTHM sample is less than or equal to 0.060 mg/L and each HAA5 sample is less than or equal to 0.045 mg/L.

(ii) Systems on quarterly reduced monitoring qualify to remain on reduced monitoring as long as the TTHM LRAA is less than or equal to 0.040 mg/L and the HAA5 LRAA is less than or equal to 0.030 mg/L at each monitoring location.

(iii) To qualify for reduced monitoring, the source water annual average TOC level, before any treatment, must be less than or equal to 4.0 mg/L at each treatment plant treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water, based on monitoring conducted under §290.112 of this title (relating to Total Organic Carbon (TOC)).

(C) Systems will be returned to routine monitoring:

(i) if the LRAA at any monitoring location exceeds either 0.040 mg/L for TTHM or 0.030 mg/L for HAA5 based on quarterly monitoring, or

(ii) if the annual (or triennial) sample at any location exceeds either 0.060 mg/L for TTHM or 0.045 mg/L for HAA5, or

(iii) if the source water annual average TOC level, before any treatment, exceeds 4.0 mg/L at any treatment plant treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.

(D) The executive director may return a system on reduced monitoring to routine monitoring at any time.

(E) A system that is on reduced Stage 1 monitoring in accordance with §290.113(c)(4) of this title that has monitoring locations for Stage 2 different from those under Stage 1 must initiate routine monitoring in accordance with subsection (c)(2) of this section on the schedule given in subsection (a) of this section.

(F) A system that is on reduced monitoring in accordance with §290.113(c)(4) of this title may remain on reduced monitoring after the dates identified in subsection (a)(2) of this section only if the system:

(i) received a very small system (VSS) Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) waiver under subsection (c)(5)(A) of this section or received a 40/30 IDSE waiver under subsection (c)(5)(B) of this section, and

(ii) meets the reduced monitoring criteria in (c)(3)(B), and

(iii) is approved to use the same monitoring locations under Stage 1 and Stage 2.

(G) The executive director may choose to perform calculations and determine whether the system is eligible for reduced monitoring in lieu of having the system report that information.

(4) The executive director may increase monitoring in accordance with this paragraph.

(A) A system required to routinely monitor at a particular location annually or less frequently than annually under subsection (c)(2) of this section must increase monitoring to quarterly dual sample sets (every 90 days) at all locations if any TTHM compliance sample is greater than 0.080 mg/L or if any HAA5 compliance sample is greater than 0.060 mg/L at any location.

(B) The executive director may return a system on increased quarterly monitoring to routine monitoring after at least four consecutive quarters for which the LRAA for every monitoring location is less than or equal to 0.060 mg/L for TTHM and less than or equal to 0.045 mg/L for HAA5.

(C) A system that is on increased monitoring under §290.113 of this title must remain on increased monitoring until the system qualifies for a return to routine monitoring under subsection (c)(4)(B) of this section. The increased monitoring schedule must be conducted at the Stage 2 monitoring locations approved under subsection (c)(1) of this section, beginning on the date identified in subsection (a)(2) of this section.

(5) All community systems and nontransient noncommunity systems that serve at least 10,000 people must comply with these Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) requirements.

(A) The executive director may grant a VSS IDSE monitoring waiver to systems that serve fewer than 500 people. Systems that receive a VSS IDSE monitoring waiver are not required to do IDSE monitoring. Systems must be compliant with all of the Stage 1 monitoring requirements of §290.113 of this title to be eligible for a VSS IDSE waiver.

(B) The executive director may grant a 40/30 IDSE monitoring waiver to IDSE monitoring to systems with compliance samples for TTHM less than 0.040 mg/L and compliance samples for HAA5 less than 0.030 mg/L Systems that receive a 40/30 IDSE monitoring waiver are not required to do IDSE monitoring. Systems must be compliant with all of the Stage 1 monitoring requirements of §290.113 of this title to be eligible for a 40/30 IDSE waiver. The timing of samples that all need to be less than 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L respectively for TTHM and HAA5 are given in the following table, titled "Timing of Stage 1 Samples Evaluated for 40/30 Waiver."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(B)

(i) To qualify for a 40/30 IDSE waiver a system must certify to the executive director that every individual compliance sample taken under §290.113 of this title were less than 0.040 mg/L for TTHM and less than 0.030 mg/L for HAA5, and must have not had any TTHM or HAA5 monitoring violations during the period specified in subsection (a) of this section.

(ii) To qualify for a 40/30 IDSE waiver, a system must submit compliance monitoring results, distribution system schematics, and recommended Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations to the executive director upon request. The executive director may require a system that fails to submit the requested information to perform IDSE sampling.

(iii) The executive director may still require a system that meets the 40/30 IDSE waiver requirements to do IDSE sampling under subparagraph (C) of this paragraph.

(C) Systems that must perform IDSE sampling must submit any needed documentation for waivers, produce an IDSE Plan, do IDSE sampling, and report the IDSE results to the executive director on the schedule in the following table titled "IDSE Schedule."

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C)

(i) The IDSE plan has required elements.

(I) The IDSE plan must include a schematic of the distribution system (including distribution system entry points and their sources, and storage facilities), with notes indicating locations and dates of all projected standard monitoring, and also Stage 1 compliance monitoring under §290.113 of this title.

(II) The IDSE plan must include justification of IDSE monitoring location selection and a summary of data used to justify IDSE monitoring location selection.

(ii) Systems must do required IDSE sampling in accordance with this clause.

(I) Systems must monitor at the number and type of sites indicated in the following table titled "Number and Type of IDSE Sample Sites:"

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(I)

(II) Systems must collect dual sample sets at each monitoring location. One sample in the dual sample set must be analyzed for TTHM. The other sample in the dual sample set must be analyzed for HAA5.

(III) IDSE sample locations must be different than the existing Stage 1 monitoring locations established under §290.113 of this title.

(IV) IDSE sample locations must be distributed throughout the distribution system.

(V) Systems must monitor at the frequency indicated in the following table titled "Frequency of IDSE Monitoring:"

Figure: 30 TAC §290.115(c)(5)(C)(ii)(V)

(VI) The IDSE monitoring frequency and locations may not be reduced.

(iii) The IDSE report must comply with the elements in this clause.

(I) The IDSE report must include all TTHM and HAA5 analytical results from Stage 1 compliance monitoring under §290.113 of this title and all IDSE sample results and locational running annual averages presented in a tabular or spreadsheet format acceptable as described in TCEQ regulatory guidance number 384: "How to Develop a Monitoring Plan for a Public Water System."

(II) If changed from the IDSE plan submitted under clause (ii) of this subparagraph, the IDSE report must also include an updated distribution system map, documentation verifying the population served, and an updated list of sources including their water type.

(III) The IDSE report must include an explanation of any deviations from the approved IDSE plan.

(IV) The IDSE report must recommend and justify Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations consistent with subsection (c)(1) of this section. The recommended Stage 2 compliance monitoring locations must be listed in a Stage 2 sample plan as part of the system's monitoring plan.

(iv) The executive director may approve a system specific study that meets the requirements in 40 CFR §141.602 to comply with IDSE sampling requirements. The commission hereby adopts the requirements of 40 CFR §141.602 by reference.

(d) Analytical requirements for TTHM and HAA5. Analytical procedures required by this section shall be performed in accordance with §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures). Testing for TTHM and HAA5 shall be performed at a laboratory certified by the executive director.

(e) Reporting requirements for TTHM and HAA5. Public water systems must submit reports related to TTHM and HAA5 to the executive director. Reports must be mailed to the Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

(1) Upon the request of the executive director, the owner or operator of a public water system must provide the executive director with a copy of the results of any test, measurement, or analysis required by this subsection. The copies must be submitted within ten days of the request or within ten days of their receipt by the public water system, whichever is later.

(A) The owner or operator of a public water system is responsible for reporting the following information for each monitoring location to the executive director within ten days of the end of any quarter in which monitoring is required:

(i) number of samples taken during the last quarter,

(ii) date and results of each sample taken during the last quarter,

(iii) arithmetic average of quarterly results for the last four quarters for each monitoring location (LRAA), beginning at the end of the fourth calendar quarter that follows the compliance date and at the end of each subsequent quarter,

(iv) whether the MCL was violated at any monitoring location, and

(v) any OELs that were exceeded during the quarter and, if so, the location and date, and the calculated TTHM and HAA5 levels.

(B) If the LRAA based on fewer than four quarters would cause the MCL to be exceeded regardless of the monitoring results of subsequent quarters, the system must report a potential MCL violation as part of the first report due following the compliance date or anytime thereafter that this determination is made.

(C) A system that treats surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water that seeks to qualify for or remain on reduced TTHM and HAA5 monitoring must measure and report TOC monthly in accordance with §290.112 of this title (relating to Total Organic Carbon) and distribution system disinfection levels in accordance with §290.110 of this title (relating to Disinfection).

(2) A system that exceeds an OEL described in subsection (b)(2) of this section must conduct an operation evaluation and submit a written operation evaluation report that meets the requirements of this paragraph.

(A) The operation evaluation report must be submitted to the executive director no later than 90 days after being notified of the analytical result that causes the exceedance of the OEL.

(B) The operation evaluation report must document an examination of system treatment and distribution operation practices that may contribute to TTHM and HAA5 formation, including:

(i) storage tank operations;

(ii) excess storage capacity;

(iii) distribution system flushing;

(iv) changes in sources or source water quality;

(v) treatment changes or problems; and

(vi) what steps could be considered to minimize future exceedances.

(C) If the cause of the OEL exceedance is identifiable the scope of the report may be limited with the approval of the executive director. A request to limit the scope of the evaluation does not extend the schedule in paragraph (2)(A) of this subsection for submitting the written report. The executive director's approval to limit the scope of the operation evaluation report must be in writing. The system must keep a copy of the executive director's approval with the completed operation evaluation report.

(D) The operation evaluation report must be submitted and approved in writing.

(f) Compliance determination for TTHM and HAA5. Compliance with the provisions of this section shall be determined as follows.

(1) A public water system violates the MCL for TTHM if any locational running annual average for TTHM exceeds an MCL specified in subsection (b)(1)(A) of this section. A public water system violates the MCL for HAA5 if any locational running annual average for HAA5 exceeds the MCL specified in subsection (b)(1)(B) of this section.

(A) Compliance with the MCLs for TTHM and HAA5 shall be based on the LRAA of all samples collected during four consecutive quarters of monitoring. If a single quarterly sample would cause an LRAA exceedance regardless of the results of subsequent quarters, compliance may be based on fewer than four quarters of data. Should a system fail to collect all required samples, compliance will be based on the available data. All samples collected at the sampling sites designated in the public water system's monitoring plan shall be used to compute the quarterly and annual averages unless the analytical results are invalidated by the executive director for technical reasons.

(B) Stage 2 MCL compliance determination with LRAAs will start after Stage 2 samples are collected.

(i) For systems required to conduct routine quarterly monitoring, compliance calculations will be made starting at the end of the fourth calendar quarter that follows the compliance date in subsection (a)(2) of this section and at the end of each subsequent quarter.

(ii) For systems on routine quarterly monitoring, where the LRAA based on fewer than four quarters would exceed the MCL regardless of the monitoring results of subsequent quarters, compliance will be calculated beginning with the first sample that causes that exceedance.

(iii) For systems that are required to monitor less frequently than quarterly, compliance shall be calculated beginning with the first compliance sample taken after the compliance date.

(iv) For systems monitoring annually or triennially that start monitoring quarterly in the quarter following an LRAA exceedance, compliance shall be calculated based on the results of quarterly samples.

(C) If a public water system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCL for TTHM or HAA5, the system commits an MCL violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.

(D) The executive director may choose to perform calculations and determine MCL exceedances in lieu of having the system report that information.

(E) IDSE results will not be used for the purpose of determining compliance with MCLs.

(2) A system that fails to monitor in accordance with this section commits a monitoring violation. Failure to monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average. A system is in violation of the monitoring requirements for each quarter that a monitoring result would be used in calculating an LRAA if the system fails to monitor.

(3) A system that fails to perform a required operation evaluation under subsection (e)(2) of this section commits a monitoring violation.

(4) A public water system that fails to report the results of the monitoring tests required by subsection (e) of this section commits a reporting violation.

(5) A system that fails to submit an operation evaluation report as required under subsection (e)(2) of this section commits a reporting violation.

(6) A system that fails to perform a required public notification commits a public notification violation.

(g) Public Notification Requirements for TTHM and HAA5. A public water system that violates the treatment technique requirements of this section must notify the executive director and the system's customers.

(1) A public water system that commits an MCL violation described in subsection (f)(1) of this section shall report to the executive director and the water system customers in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(b) of this title (relating to Public Notification).

(2) A public water system which fails to conduct the monitoring required by subsection (c) of this section must notify its customers of the violation in accordance with the requirements of §290.122(c) of this title.

(3) Any IDSE compliance documents required under subsection (c)(5)(C) of this section must be made available to the executive director or the public upon request.

(4) Any operation evaluation report required under subsection (e)(2) of this section must be made available to the executive director or the public upon request.

§290.116.Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques.

(a) Applicability. All groundwater public water systems must comply with the treatment techniques and corrective actions of this section if a raw groundwater source sample was positive for fecal indicators or if the system is not required to conduct raw groundwater source monitoring because it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses.

(1) A groundwater system must provide written notification to the executive director before December 1, 2009, that it is not required to meet the raw groundwater source monitoring requirements under §290.109(c)(4) of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants) because it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses and begin compliance monitoring in accordance with subsection this section. The notification must include engineering, operational, and other information required by the executive director to evaluate the submission. If the system discontinues 4-log treatment of viruses before the first customer for any groundwater source, the system must conduct raw groundwater source sampling as required under §290.109(c)(4) of this title.

(2) A groundwater system that places a groundwater source in service after November 30, 2009, that is not required to meet the raw source monitoring requirements under §290.109(c)(4) of this title because the system provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses must begin compliance monitoring within 30 days of placing the source in service in accordance with subsection (c) of this section. The system must provide written notification to the executive director that it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses at or before the first customer. The notification must include engineering, operational, and other information required by the executive director to evaluate the submission. If the system discontinues 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer for a groundwater source, the system must conduct raw groundwater source sampling as required under subsection (c)(4) of this section.

(b) Groundwater corrective action plan. All public water systems using groundwater must submit a corrective action plan and implement corrective action if a raw groundwater source sample was positive for fecal indicators.

(1) If a groundwater source sample was found to be fecal indicator positive, the system must consult with the executive director regarding appropriate corrective action and have an approved corrective action plan in place within 30 days of receiving written notification from a laboratory of the fecal indicator positive source sample collected under subsection (c)(4) of this section.

(2) Within 120 days of receiving written notification from a laboratory of the fecal indicator positive source sample, the system must have completed corrective action or be in compliance with an approved corrective action plan and schedule.

(3) Any changes to the approved corrective action plan or schedule must be approved by the executive director.

(4) The executive director may require interim measures for the protection of public health pending approval of the corrective action plan. The system must comply with these interim measures as well as with any schedules specified by the executive director.

(5) Systems that are required to complete corrective action must implement one or more of the procedures in this paragraph and the details of the implementation must be specified in the approved corrective action plan.

(A) The system may disinfect the groundwater source where the fecal indicator positive source sample was collected following the American Water Works Association (AWWA) standards for well disinfection and start monthly fecal indicator sampling at that source within 30 days after well disinfection. The executive director may discontinue the monthly source sampling requirement if corrective action is sufficient.

(B) The system may eliminate the source that was found to be fecal indicator positive and provide an alternate source if necessary. Eliminated sources must be disconnected from the distribution system.

(C) The system may identify and eliminate the source of fecal contamination followed by well disinfection according to AWWA well disinfection standards and begin monthly fecal indicator sampling within 30 days after well disinfection. The executive director may allow the system to discontinue the monthly source sampling requirement after making a determination that corrective action is sufficient.

(D) The system may provide treatment that reliably achieves at least 4-log treatment of viruses using inactivation, removal or an executive director-approved combination of inactivation and removal before the first customer of the groundwater source.

(c) Microbial inactivation requirements. A system that treats groundwater in response to a fecal indicator positive source sample or in lieu of the raw groundwater source monitoring shall meet minimum disinfection requirements demonstrating at least 4-log treatment of viruses before the water is distributed.

(1) Monitoring requirements for chemical disinfectants. Groundwater systems shall monitor the performance of the disinfection facilities to ensure that appropriate disinfectant levels are maintained. All monitoring conducted pursuant to the requirements of this section must be conducted at sites designated in the system's monitoring plan.

(A) Groundwater systems serving a population greater than 3,300 must continuously monitor the residual disinfectant concentration at a location approved by the executive director and must record the lowest residual disinfectant concentration every day the groundwater source serves the public.

(B) Groundwater systems serving a population less than 3,300 must monitor the disinfectant residual in each disinfection zone at least once each day during a time when peak hourly raw water flow rates are occurring.

(C) Disinfection contact time will be based on tracer study data or a theoretical analysis submitted by the system owner or their designated agent and approved by the executive director.

(D) Groundwater treatment plants that fail to demonstrate an appropriate level of treatment must repeat these tests at four-hour or shorter intervals until compliance has been reestablished.

(2) Monitoring requirements for ultraviolet light (UV) disinfection facilities. Public water systems shall monitor the UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, lamp status, the flow rate through the unit, and other parameters prescribed by the executive director to ensure that the units are operating within validated conditions.

(3) Analytical requirements. All monitoring required by this section must be conducted at a facility approved by the executive director and using methods that conform to the requirements of §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures).

(A) The pH analysis must be conducted using a pH meter with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 pH units.

(B) The temperature of the water must be measured using a thermometer or thermocouple with a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.5 degrees Celsius.

(C) The free chlorine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titration;

(ii) DPD Ferrous titration;

(iii) a DPD method that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer; or

(iv) Springaldizine (FACTS)

(D) The chloramine residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.1 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titration;

(ii) DPD Ferrous titration; or

(iii) a DPD method that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(E) The chlorine dioxide residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using one of the following methods:

(i) Amperometric titrator with platinum-platinum electrodes; or

(ii) Lissamine Green B.

(F) The ozone residual must be measured to a minimum accuracy of plus or minus 0.05 mg/L using an indigo method that uses a colorimeter or spectrophotometer.

(d) Reporting requirements. Groundwater systems required to conduct corrective action in response to a fecal indicator positive source sample or in lieu of the raw groundwater source monitoring must report to the executive director in accordance with this subsection.

(1) A groundwater system required to conduct compliance monitoring for chemical disinfectants must submit a Groundwater Treatment Monthly Operating Report (commission Form 20362) for groundwater disinfection facilities monthly. Groundwater systems must submit the first form starting before the month of December 2009, to avoid raw groundwater source monitoring.

(2) A groundwater system must provide written notification to the executive director before December 1, 2009, that it is not required to meet the raw groundwater source monitoring requirements under paragraph §290.109(c)(4) of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants) because it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses and begin compliance monitoring in accordance with subsection §290.116(c) of this section. The notification must include engineering, operational, and other information required by the executive director to evaluate the submission.

(3) A groundwater system required to complete corrective action under subsection (b) of this section must notify the executive director within 30 days of completing the corrective action.

(4) If a groundwater system is subject to the triggered source monitoring requirements of §290.109(c)(4)(A) of this title and does not conduct source monitoring, the system must provide written documentation that it was providing 4-log treatment of viruses within 30 days of the positive distribution coliform sample.

(e) Compliance determination. The executive director shall determine compliance for groundwater systems required to conduct corrective action in response to a fecal indicator positive source sample or in lieu of the raw groundwater source monitoring in accordance with this subsection.

(1) A groundwater system is in violation of the treatment technique requirement if it does not complete corrective action in accordance with the executive director-approved corrective action plan or any interim measures required by the executive director.

(2) A groundwater system is in violation of the treatment technique requirement if it is not in compliance with the executive director-approved corrective action plan and schedule.

(3) A groundwater system subject to the requirements of subsection §290.116(c) of this title that fails to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses is in violation of the treatment technique requirement if the failure is not corrected within four hours.

(4) A groundwater system that fails to conduct the disinfectant monitoring required under subsection (c) of this section commits a monitoring violation.

(5) A groundwater system that fails to report the results of the disinfectant monitoring required under subsection (c) of this section commits a reporting violation.

(6) A groundwater system that fails to issue a required public notice or certify that the public notice has been performed commits a public notice violation.

(f) Public notification. A groundwater system that commits a treatment technique, monitoring, or reporting violation as identified in this section must notify its customers of the violation in accordance with the requirements of §290.122 of this title (relating to Public Notification).

§290.117.Regulation of Lead and Copper.

(a) General requirements.

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(3) Action levels for lead and copper are 0.015 milligrams per liter (mg/L) [ mg/L ] and 1.3 mg/L, respectively. The action levels are exceeded if the concentration of lead and/or copper in more than 10% of the first draw tap water samples collected during any monitoring period is greater that 0.015 mg/L for lead or 1.3 mg/L for copper. If collecting only five samples, the average of the two highest samples shall be used to determine compliance with the action level.

(b) Sample site selection and materials survey [ Site Selection and Materials Survey ].

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(c) Tap sampling.

(1) - (7) (No change.)

(8) A new community or nontransient noncommunity water system begins the first six-month initial monitoring period in the year following a new water system's assignment of a Public Water System identification number.

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.117(c)(8) ]

(d) Computing 90th percentile lead and copper levels [ Percentile Lead and Copper Levels ]. Determination of 90th percentile levels shall be obtained by ranking the results of lead and copper samples collected during a monitoring period in ascending order (lowest concentration equal sample Number 1; highest concentration equal sample Numbers 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, etc . ), up to the total number of samples collected. The number of samples collected during the monitoring period shall be multiplied by 0.9 and the concentration of lead and copper in the numbered sample yielded by this calculation is the 90th percentile sample contaminant level. The system is in compliance with the lead and/or copper action levels if the 90th percentile sample contaminant level is equal to or less than the action levels specified in subsection (a)(3) of this section. For water systems serving fewer than 101 people, the 90th percentile level is computed by taking the average of the highest two sample results.

(e) - (g) (No change.)

(h) Monitoring requirements for water quality parameters (WQPs) and source water.

(1) Water quality parameters.

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) Large water systems must conduct WQP monitoring at all entry points and at the number of distribution sites specified in subsection (h)(1)(D) [ (c)(8) ] of this section [ title ], Table Number 2. Small and medium water systems that are required to conduct WQP monitoring must monitor at all entry points and at the required number of distribution sites as shown in subsection (h)(1)(D) [ (c)(8) ] of this section, Table Number 2.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.117(h)(1)(D)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.117(h)(1)(D) ]

(E) (No change.)

(F) After corrosion control treatment is installed, water quality parameters shall be measured at the initial number of distribution sites as indicated in subsection (h)(1)(D) [ (c)(8) ] of this section, Table Number 2 quarterly and also at entry points biweekly (every two weeks).

(G) (No change.)

(H) Any water system that maintains the range of values for WQP's reflecting optimum corrosion control as approved by the executive director for one-year may collect quarterly distribution samples at the reduced number of distribution sites indicated in subsection (h)(1)(D) [ (c)(8) ] of this section, Table Number 2. WQP samples shall continue to be measured at entry points on a biweekly basis and results submitted to the executive director.

(I) - (L) (No change.)

(M) A water system conducting WQP monitoring may limit entry point sampling to each official entry point as designated in the database for Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) [ SDWA ] compliance sampling. The water system must monitor WQPs at all entry points regardless of whether corrosion control treatment is required at all entry points or not. The water system must inform the executive director of the identity of treated and non-treated entry points and their seasonal use, if any, and demonstrate that the WQPs represent water quality and treatment conditions throughout the system.

(N) (No change.)

(O) Large water systems shall monitor applicable WQPs every calendar quarter beginning after installation of corrosion control treatment approved by the executive director. Small and medium water systems shall monitor WQPs every calendar quarter while the system is in exceedance status. The executive director will issue a reporting waiver to small and medium systems for WQPs after the system completes two follow-up [ follow up ] rounds of tap sampling without exceeding either the lead or copper action level. The water system will continue to collect and record certain crucial parameters that will be available for inspection. If a small or medium water system exceeds the lead or copper action level during a reduced tap monitoring round (summer monitoring), the system shall conduct WQP monitoring until the exceedance status is resolved.

(P) - (Q) (No change.)

(2) Entry point water sampling.

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) The monitoring frequency for lead and copper in source water, after the executive director determines that source water treatment is not required, or after the executive director has specified the maximum permissible source water levels for lead and copper, shall be in accordance with inorganic chemical monitoring practices and procedures as stated in §290.106 of this title [ (relating to Inorganic Contaminants) ].

(E) - (F) (No change.)

(i) Public education requirements.

(1) A water system that exceeds the lead action level at the 90th percentile tap sample shall deliver to the public the public education materials listed in 40 CFR §141.85(a), and according to the requirements in paragraph (2) of this subsection shall provide copies of the public education materials to the executive director within ten days after the delivery of the materials to the public.

(2) A community water system shall, within 60 days of notification by the commission:

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) deliver pamphlets or brochures that contain the public education materials as specified in 40 CFR §141.85(a)(2) and (4) to city or county health departments, to public schools or local school boards, Women[ , ] Infants and Children (WIC) or Head Start Programs when available, public and private hospitals or clinics, pediatricians, family planning clinics, and local welfare agencies, within their service area;

(D) - (H) (No change.)

(3) - (5) (No change.)

(j) Corrosion control.

(1) All applicable water systems shall install and operate optimal corrosion control treatment, which means the corrosion control treatment that minimizes lead and copper concentrations at users' taps while insuring that the treatment does not cause the system to violate any other drinking water standard. All large water systems that exceeded 0.005 mg/L lead at the 90th percentile during initial monitoring or any system that exceeded the lead or copper action level at the 90th percentile during any tap monitoring sampling round and that has installed corrosion control treatment with approved WQP ranges, must operate and maintain optimal corrosion control within those ranges. Compliance periods for this paragraph are two six-month periods, January 1 to June 30, and July 1 to December 31. A water system is out of compliance with this subsection for a six-month period if the water system has WQP excursions for any approved range for more than nine days. An excursion occurs whenever the daily value for one or more WQPs [ WQPs's ] measured at a sampling location is below the minimum value or outside the range approved by the executive director. The executive director has the discretion to delete results of obvious sampling errors from this calculation. Daily values are calculated as follows.

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(2) - (5) (No change.)

(k) - (m) (No change.)

§290.118.Secondary Constituent Levels.

(a) - (c) (No change.)

(d) Analytical requirements for secondary constituents. All analyses for determining compliance with the provisions of this subsection shall be conducted in accordance with §290.119 of this title (relating to Analytical Procedures) at a facility certified by the executive director [ Texas Department of Health Bureau of Laboratories ].

(e) - (g) (No change.)

§290.119.Analytical Procedures.

(a) (No change.)

(b) Acceptable analytical methods. Methods of analysis shall be as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) or by any alternative analytical technique as specified by the executive director and approved by the Administrator under 40 CFR §141.27. Copies are available for review in the Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, [ Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, ] P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. The following National Primary Drinking Water Regulations set forth in Title 40 CFR are adopted by reference:

(1) - (9) (No change.)

§290.121.Monitoring Plans.

(a) (No change.)

(b) Monitoring plan requirements. The monitoring plan shall identify all sampling locations, describe the sampling frequency, and specify the analytical procedures and laboratories that the public water system will use to comply with the monitoring requirements of this subchapter.

(1) The monitoring plan shall include information on the location of all required sampling points in the system. Required sampling locations for regulated chemicals are provided in §290.106 of this title (relating to Inorganic Contaminants), §290.107 of this title (relating to Organic Contaminants), §290.108 of this title (relating to Radionuclides Other than Radon), §290.109 of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants), §290.110 of this title (relating to Disinfectant Residuals), §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment [ Turbidity ]), §290.112 of this title (relating to Total Organic Carbon (TOC)), §290.113 of this title (relating to Stage 1 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)), §290.114 of this title (relating to Other Disinfection By-products (Chlorite and Bromate)), §290.115 of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)), §290.116 of this title (Relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques), §290.117 of this title (relating to Regulation of Lead and Copper), and §290.118 of this title (relating to Secondary Constituent Levels).

(A) - (D) (No change.)

(2) - (5) (No change.)

(6) The monitoring plan shall include any groundwater source water monitoring plan developed under §290.109(c)(4) of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants) to specify well sampling for triggered coliform monitoring.

(7) The monitoring plan shall include any initial distribution system evaluation compliance documentation required by §290.115(c)(5) of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)).

(8) The monitoring plan shall include any raw surface water monitoring plan required under §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment).

(c) Reporting requirements. All public water systems shall maintain a copy of the current monitoring plan at each treatment plant and at a central location. The water system must update the monitoring plan when the water system's sampling requirements or protocols change.

(1) Public water systems that treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water [ and serve at least 10,000 people ] must submit a copy of the monitoring plan to the executive director upon development and revision. [ by January 1, 2001. ]

[ (2) Public water systems that treat surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water and serve fewer than 10,000 must submit a copy of the monitoring plan to the executive director by January 1, 2003. ]

(2) [ (3) ] Public water systems that treat groundwater that is not under the direct influence of surface water or purchase treated water from a wholesaler must develop a monitoring plan [ by January 1, 2004, ] and submit a copy of the monitoring plan to the executive director upon request.

(3) [ (4) ] All water systems must provide the executive director with any revisions to the plan upon request.

(d) Compliance determination. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be determined using the following criteria.

(1) A public water system that fails to submit an administratively complete monitoring plan by the required date or fails to submit updates to a plan when required [ upon request ] commits a reporting violation.

(2) (No change.)

(e) (No change.).

§290.122.Public Notification.

(a) Public notification requirements for acute violations. The owner or operator of a public water system must notify persons served by their system of any maximum contaminant limit (MCL), maximum residual disinfectant level (MRDL), or treatment technique violation that poses an acute threat to public health. Each notice required by this section must meet the requirements of subsection (d) of this section.

(1) Violations that pose an acute threat to public health include:

(A) (No change.)

(B) an acute turbidity issue at a treatment plant that is treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water, specifically: [ a treated water turbidity level above 5.0 Nephelometric Turbidity Unit in the combined filter effluent of a treatment plant that is treating surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water; ]

(i) a combined filter effluent turbidity level above 5.0 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU);

(ii) a combined filter effluent turbidity level above 1.0 NTU at a treatment plant using membrane filters; or

(iii) a combined filter effluent turbidity level above 1.0 NTU at a plant using other than membrane filters at the discretion of the executive director after consultation with the system; or

(iv) failure of a system with treatment other than membrane filters to consult with the executive director within 24 hours after a combined filter effluent ready of 1.0 NTU;

(C) - (D) (No change.)

(E) occurrence of a waterborne disease outbreak; [ and ]

(F) Detection of E. coli or other fecal indicators in source water samples as specified in §290.109(b)(2) of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants); and

(G) [ (F) ] other violations deemed by the executive director to pose an acute risk to human health.

(2) - (5) (No change.)

(b) Public notification requirements for other MCL, MRDL, or treatment technique violations and for variance and exemption violations. The owner or operator of a public water system must notify persons served by their system of any MCL, MRDL, or treatment technique violation other than those described in subsection (a)(1) of this section and of any violation involving a variance or exemption requirement. Each notice required by this section must meet the requirements of subsection (d) of this section.

(1) Violations that require notification under this subsection include:

(A) (No change.)

(B) failure to comply with the requirements of any variance or exemption granted under §290.102(d) of this title (relating to General Applicability); [ or ]

(C) failure for a groundwater system to take corrective action or failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal approved by the executive director) before or at the first customer under §290.116 of this title; or

(D) failure to perform any 3 months of raw surface water monitoring as required by §290.111(b) of this title; or

(E) [ (C) ] other violations deemed appropriate by the executive director that pose a non-acute risk to human health.

(2) - (4) (No change.)

(c) (No change.)

(d) Each public notice must conform to the following general requirements.

(1) - (2) (No change.)

(3) For notices required under subsections (a), (b), or (c)(1)(A) of this section, the notice must describe potential adverse health effects.

(A) - (B) (No change.)

(C) For failure to perform any 3 months of raw surface water monitoring as required by §290.111(b) of this title, the notice must contain the mandatory federal contaminant specific language contained in 40 CFR §141.211(d)(1), in addition to any language required by the executive director.

(D) [ (C) ] The notice must describe the population at risk, especially subpopulations particularly vulnerable if exposed to the given contaminant.

(4) - (9) (No change.)

(e) (No change.)

(f) Proof of public notification. A copy of any public notice required under this section must be submitted to the executive director within ten days of its distribution as proof of public notification. The copies must be mailed to the [ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, ] Water Supply Division, MC 155, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Each proof of public notification must be accompanied with a signed Certificate of Delivery.

(g) - (h) (No change.)

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 27, 2007.

TRD-200703276

Robert Martinez

Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Earliest possible date of adoption: September 9, 2007

For further information, please call: (512) 239-6087

30 TAC §290.111

(Editor's note: The text of the following section proposed for repeal will not be published. The section may be examined in the offices of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or in the Texas Register office, Room 245, James Earl Rudder Building, 1019 Brazos Street, Austin.)

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The repeal is proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC) §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 (THSC) §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; and THSC §341.0315, which requires public water systems to comply with commission rules adopted to ensure the supply of safe drinking water.

The repeal implements TWC §5.102, §5.103, §5.105, THSC §341.031, and §341.0315.

§290.111.Turbidity.

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 27, 2007.

TRD-200703277

Robert Martinez

Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Earliest possible date of adoption: September 9, 2007

For further information, please call: (512) 239-6087

30 TAC §§290.272, 290.273, 290.275

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

These amendments are proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC) §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 (THSC) §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;and THSC §341.0315, which requires public water systems to comply with commission rules adopted to ensure the supply of safe drinking water.

The proposed amendments implement TWC §5.102, §5.103, §5.105, THSC §341.031, and §341.0315.

§290.272.Content of the Report.

(a) - (b) (No change.)

(c) Information on detected contaminants.

(1) - (3) (No change.)

(4) For detected regulated contaminants listed under §290.275 of this title, the table(s) must contain:

(A) - (C) (No change.)

(D) for contaminants subject to an MCL, except turbidity and total coliforms, the highest contaminant level used to determine compliance with National Primary Drinking Water Regulations and the range of detected levels.

(i) - (ii) (No change.)

(iii) For the MCLs for trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA5), systems must include the highest locational running annual average for TTHM and HAA5 and the range of individual sample results for all monitoring locations expressed in the same units as the MCL. If more than one location exceeds the TTHM or HAA5 MCL, the system must include the locational running annual averages for all sampling points that exceed the MCL.

(iv) [ (iii) ] When compliance with any MCL is determined on a system-wide basis by calculating a running annual average of all samples at all sampling points, the table(s) must include the average and range of detections expressed in the same units as the MCL.

(v) [ (iv) ] When the executive director allows the rounding of results to determine compliance with the MCL, rounding should be done after multiplying the results by the factor listed under §290.275 of this title.

(E) When turbidity is reported under §290.111 of this title (relating to Surface Water Treatment [ Turbidity ]), the table(s) must contain the highest single measurement and the lowest monthly percentage of samples meeting the turbidity limits specified in that section for the filtration technology being used. The report should include an explanation of the reasons for measuring turbidity.

(F) - (I) (No change.)

(5) (No change.)

(d) (No change.)

(e) Compliance with NPDWR. In addition to the requirements in subsection (c)(4)(I)(ii) of this section, the report must note any violation that occurred during the year covered by the report of a requirement listed in paragraphs (1) - (8) [ (7) ] of this subsection.

(1) - (6) (No change.)

(7) For systems required to conduct initial distribution sampling evaluation (IDSE) sampling in accordance with §290.115(c)(5) of this title (relating to Stage 2 Disinfection By-products (TTHM and HAA5)), the system is required to include individual sample results for the IDSE when determining the range of TTHM and HAA5 results to be reported in the annual consumer confidence report for the calendar year that the IDSE samples were taken.

(8) [ (7) ] The report must include a clear and readily understandable explanation of each violation of the terms of a variance, exemption, administrative order, or judicial order and explain any adverse health effects and steps the system has taken to correct the violation.

(f) (No change.)

(g) Additional information.

(1) - (6) (No change.)

(7) Beginning December 1, 2009, any groundwater system that receives notice from a laboratory of a fecal indicator-positive groundwater source sample that is not invalidated by the executive director under §290.109(d) of this title (relating to Microbial Contaminants) must inform its customers of any fecal indicator-positive groundwater source sample in the next report. The system must continue to inform the public annually until the executive director determines that the fecal contamination in the groundwater source is addressed under §290.116(a) of this title (relating to Groundwater Corrective Actions and Treatment Techniques). Each report must include the following elements:

(A) the source of the fecal contamination (if the source is known) and the dates of the fecal indicator-positive groundwater source samples;

(B) actions taken to address the fecal contamination in the groundwater source as directed by §290.116 of this title and the date of such action;

(C) for each fecal contamination in the groundwater source that has not been addressed under §290.116 of this title, the plan approved by the executive director and schedule for correction, including interim measures, progress to date, and any interim measures completed; and

(D) for a fecal indicator-positive groundwater source sample that is not invalidated by the executive director under §290.109(d) of this title, the potential health effects using the health effects language of §290.275(3) of this title.

(8) Beginning December 1, 2009, any groundwater system that receives notice from the executive director of a significant deficiency must inform its customers of any significant deficiency that is uncorrected at the time of the next report. The system must continue to inform the public annually until the executive director determines that particular significant deficiency is corrected under §290.116 of this title. Each report must include the following elements:

(A) the nature of the particular significant deficiency and the date the significant deficiency was identified by the executive director;

(B) for each significant deficiency, the plan approved by the executive director and schedule for correction, including interim measures, progress to date, and any interim measures completed; and

(C) if corrected before the next report, the nature of the significant deficiency, how the deficiency was corrected, and the date of the corrections.

§290.273.Required Additional Health Information.

(a) (No change.)

(b) A system that detects arsenic levels above 5 micrograms per liter but below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) shall include in its report a short informational statement about arsenic using the following language: "While your drinking water meets EPA's standard for arsenic, it does contain low levels of arsenic. EPA's standard balances the current understanding of arsenic's possible health effects against the costs of removing arsenic from drinking water. EPA continues to research the health effects of low levels of arsenic, which is a mineral known to cause cancer in humans at high concentrations and is linked to other health effects such as skin damage and circulatory problems." [ Beginning in the report that is due by July 1, 2002, and ending January 22, 2006, a system that detects arsenic above 0.010 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and up to and including 0.05 mg/L must include the arsenic health effects language of §290.275(3) of this title (relating to Appendices A - D), Appendix C, paragraph (10). ]

(c) - (f) (No change.)

§290.275.Appendices A - D.

The following appendices are integral components of the subchapter.

(1) Appendix A--Converting MCL Compliance Values for Consumer Confidence Reports.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(1)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(1) ]

(2) Appendix B--Sources of Regulated Contaminants.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(2)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(2) ]

(3) Appendix C--Health Effects Language.

Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(3)

[ Figure: 30 TAC §290.275(3) ]

(4) (No change.)

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 27, 2007.

TRD-200703278

Robert Martinez

Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Earliest possible date of adoption: September 9, 2007

For further information, please call: (512) 239-6087