Current through September 24, 2024
(1) General
requirements.
(a) The requirements of this
rule are national primary drinking water regulations. The regulations establish
or extend treatment technique requirements in lieu of maximum contaminant
levels for Cryptosporidium. These requirements are in addition to requirements
for filtration and disinfection in Rule 0400-45-01-.31.
(b) Applicability. The requirements of this
rule apply to all subpart H systems, which are public water systems supplied by
a surface water source and public water systems supplied by a ground water
source under the direct influence of surface water (GWUDI).
1. Wholesale systems, as defined in Rule
0400-45-01-.04, must comply with the requirements of this rule based on the
population of the largest system in the combined distribution system.
2. The requirements of this rule for filtered
systems apply to systems required by National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations to provide filtration treatment, whether or not the system is
currently operating a filtration system.
3. The requirements of this rule for
unfiltered systems apply only to unfiltered systems that timely met and
continue to meet the filtration avoidance criteria in Rule 0400-45-01-.31, as
applicable.
(c)
Requirements. Systems subject to this rule must comply with the following
requirements:
1. Systems must conduct an
initial and a second round of source water monitoring for each plant that
treats a surface water or GWUDI source. This monitoring may include sampling
for Cryptosporidium, E. coli, and turbidity as described in
paragraphs (2) through (7) of this rule, to determine what level, if any, of
additional Cryptosporidium treatment they must provide.
2. Systems that plan to make a significant
change to their disinfection practice must develop disinfection profiles and
calculate disinfection benchmarks, as described in paragraphs (9) through (10)
of this rule.
3. Filtered systems
must determine their Cryptosporidium treatment bin classification as described
in paragraph (11) of this rule and provide additional treatment for
Cryptosporidium, if required, as described in paragraph (12) of this rule. All
unfiltered systems must provide treatment for Cryptosporidium as described in
paragraph (13) of this rule. Filtered and unfiltered systems must implement
Cryptosporidium treatment according to the schedule in paragraph (14) of this
rule.
4. Systems with uncovered
finished water storage facilities must comply with the requirements to cover
the facility or treat the discharge from the facility as described in paragraph
(15) of this rule.
5. Systems
required to provide additional treatment for Cryptosporidium must implement
microbial toolbox options that are designed and operated as described in
paragraphs (16) through (21) of this rule.
6. Systems must comply with the applicable
recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in paragraphs (22) through
(23) of this rule.
7. Systems must
address significant deficiencies identified in sanitary surveys performed by
the Department or EPA as described in paragraph (24) of this rule.
(2) Source water
monitoring.
(a) Initial round of source water
monitoring. Systems must conduct the following monitoring on the schedule in
subparagraph (c) of this paragraph unless they meet the monitoring exemption
criteria in subparagraph (d) of this paragraph.
1. Filtered systems serving at least 10,000
people must sample their source water for Cryptosporidium, E. coli, and
turbidity at least monthly for 24 months.
2. Unfiltered systems serving at least 10,000
people must sample their source water for Cryptosporidium at least monthly for
24 months.
3.
(i) Filtered systems serving fewer than
10,000 people must sample their source water for E. coli at least once every
two weeks for 12 months.
(ii) A
filtered system serving fewer than 10,000 people may avoid E. coli monitoring
if the system notifies the Department that it will monitor for Cryptosporidium
as described in part 4 of this subparagraph. The system must notify the
Department no later than 3 months prior to the date the system is otherwise
required to start E. coli monitoring under subparagraph (c) of this
paragraph.
4. Filtered
systems serving fewer than 10,000 people must sample their source water for
Cryptosporidium at least twice per month for 12 months or at least monthly for
24 months if they meet one of the following, based on monitoring conducted
under part 3 of this subparagraph:
(i) For
systems using lake/reservoir sources, the annual mean E. coli concentration is
greater than 10 E. coli/ 100 mL.
(ii) For systems using flowing stream
sources, the annual mean E. coli concentration is greater than 50 E. coli/ 100
mL.
(iii) The system does not
conduct E. coli monitoring as described in part 3 of this
subparagraph.
(iv) Systems using
ground water under the direct influence of surface water (GWUDI) must comply
with the requirements of this part based on the E. coli level that applies to
the nearest surface water body. If no surface water body is nearby, the system
must comply based on the requirements that apply to systems using
lake/reservoir sources.
5. For filtered systems serving fewer than
10,000 people, the Department may approve monitoring for an indicator other
than E. coli under part 3 of this subparagraph. The Department also may approve
an alternative to the E. coli concentration in subpart 4(i), (ii) or (iv) of
this subparagraph to trigger Cryptosporidium monitoring. This approval by the
Department must be provided to the system in writing and must include the basis
for the Department's determination that the alternative indicator and/or
trigger level will provide a more accurate identification of whether a system
will exceed the Bin 1 Cryptosporidium level in paragraph (11) of this
rule.
6. Unfiltered systems serving
fewer than 10,000 people must sample their source water for Cryptosporidium at
least twice per month for 12 months or at least monthly for 24
months.
7. Systems may sample more
frequently than required if the sampling frequency is evenly spaced throughout
the monitoring period.
(b) Second round of source water monitoring.
Systems must conduct a second round of source water monitoring that meets the
requirements for monitoring parameters, frequency, and duration described in
subparagraph (a) of this paragraph, unless they meet the monitoring exemption
criteria in subparagraph (d) of this paragraph. Systems must conduct this
monitoring on the schedule in subparagraph (c) of this paragraph.
(c) Monitoring schedule. Systems must begin
the monitoring required in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this paragraph no later
than the month beginning with the date listed in this table:
SOURCE WATER
MONITORING STARTING DATES TABLE
Systems that serve | Must begin the first round
of source water monitoring no later than the month beginning . . . | And must begin the second round of source water monitoring no
later than the month beginning . . . |
(1) At
least 100,000 people | (i) October 1, 2006 | (ii) April 1, 2015. |
(2) From
50,000 to 99,999 people | (i) April 1, 2007 | (ii) October 1, 2015 |
(3) From
10,000 to 49,999 people | (i) April 1, 2008 | (ii) October 1, 2016. |
(4) Fewer
than 10,000 and monitor for E. colia | (i) October 1, 2008 | (ii) October 1,
2017. |
(5) Fewer than 10,000 and monitor for
Cryptosporidiumb | (i) April 1,
2010 | (ii) April 1, 2019 |
a Applies only to filtered systems.
b Applies to filtered systems that meet the
conditions of paragraph (a)4 and unfiltered systems.
(d) Monitoring avoidance.
1. Filtered system are not required to
conduct source water monitoring under this rule if the system will provide a
total of at least 5.5-log of treatment for Cryptosporidium,
equivalent to meeting the treatment requirements of Bin 4 in paragraph (12) of
this rule.
2. Unfiltered systems
are not required to conduct source water monitoring under this rule if the
system will provide a total of at least 3-log Cryptosporidium inactivation,
equivalent to meeting the treatment requirements for unfiltered systems with a
mean Cryptosporidium concentration of greater than 0.01 oocysts/L in paragraph
(13) of this rule.
3. If a system
chooses to provide the level of treatment in part 1 or 2 of this subparagraph,
as applicable, rather than start source water monitoring, the system must
notify the Department in writing no later than the date the system is scheduled
for monitoring under paragraph (3) of this rule. Alternatively, a system may
choose to stop sampling at any point after it has initiated monitoring if it
notifies the Department in writing that it will provide this level of
treatment. Systems must install and operate technologies to provide this level
of treatment by the applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of
this rule.
(e) Plants
operating only part of the year. Systems with subpart H plants that operate for
only part of the year must conduct source water monitoring in accordance with
this rule, but with the following modifications:
1. Systems must sample their source water
only during the months that the plant operates unless the Department specifies
another monitoring period based on plant operating practices.
2. Systems with plants that operate less than
six months per year and that monitor for Cryptosporidium must collect at least
six Cryptosporidium samples per year during each of two years of monitoring.
Samples must be evenly spaced throughout the period the plant
operates.
(f)
1. New sources. A system that begins using a
new source of surface water or GWUDI after the system is required to begin
monitoring under subparagraph (c) of this paragraph must monitor the new source
on a schedule the Department approves. Source water monitoring must meet the
requirements of this rule. The system must also meet the bin classification and
Cryptosporidium treatment requirements of paragraphs (11) and (12) or (13) of
this rule, as applicable, for the new source on a schedule the Department
approves.
2. The requirements of
this paragraph apply to subpart H systems that begin operation after the
monitoring start date applicable to the system's size under subparagraph (c) of
this paragraph.
3. The system must
begin a second round of source water monitoring no later than 6 years following
initial bin classification under paragraph (11) of this rule or determination
of the mean Cryptosporidium level under paragraph (13) of this rule, as
applicable.
(g) Failure
to collect any source water sample required under this paragraph in accordance
with the sampling schedule, sampling location, analytical method, approved
laboratory, and reporting requirements of paragraphs (3) through (7) of this
rule is a monitoring violation.
(h)
Grandfathering monitoring data. Systems may use (grandfather) monitoring data
collected prior to the applicable monitoring start date in subparagraph (c) of
this paragraph to meet the initial source water monitoring requirements in
subparagraph (a) of this paragraph. Grandfathered data may substitute for an
equivalent number of months at the end of the monitoring period. All data
submitted under this paragraph must meet the requirements in paragraph (8) of
this rule.
(3) Sampling
schedules.
(a) Systems required to conduct
source water monitoring under paragraph (2) of this rule must submit a sampling
schedule that specifies the calendar dates when the system will collect each
required sample.
1. Systems must submit
sampling schedules no later than 3 months prior to the applicable date listed
in subparagraph (2)(c) of this rule for each round of required
monitoring.
2.
(i) Systems serving at least 10,000 people
must submit their sampling schedule for the initial round of source water
monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule to the Department and to the
EPA electronically at https://intranet.epa.gov/lt2/.
(ii) If a system is unable to submit the
sampling schedule electronically, the system may use an alternative approach
for submitting the sampling schedule that EPA approves.
3. Systems serving fewer than 10,000 people
must submit their sampling schedules for the initial round of source water
monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule to the Department.
4. Systems must submit sampling schedules for
the second round of source water monitoring under subparagraph (2)(b) of this
rule to the Department.
5. If EPA
or the Department does not respond to a system regarding its sampling schedule,
the system must sample at the reported schedule.
(b) Systems must collect samples within two
days before or two days after the dates indicated in their sampling schedule
(i.e., within a five-day period around the schedule date) unless one of the
conditions of part 1 or 2 of this subparagraph applies.
1. If an extreme condition or situation
exists that may pose danger to the sample collector, or that cannot be avoided
and causes the system to be unable to sample in the scheduled five-day period,
the system must sample as close to the scheduled date as is feasible unless the
Department approves an alternative sampling date. The system must submit an
explanation for the delayed sampling date to the Department concurrent with the
shipment of the sample to the laboratory.
2
(i) If a
system is unable to report a valid analytical result for a scheduled sampling
date due to equipment failure, loss of or damage to the sample, failure to
comply with the analytical method requirements, including the quality control
requirements in paragraph (5) of this rule, or the failure of an approved
laboratory to analyze the sample, then the system must collect a replacement
sample.
(ii) The system must
collect the replacement sample not later than 21 days after receiving
information that an analytical result cannot be reported for the scheduled date
unless the system demonstrates that collecting a replacement sample within this
time frame is not feasible or the Department approves an alternative resampling
date. The system must submit an explanation for the delayed sampling date to
the Department concurrent with the shipment of the sample to the laboratory.
(c) Systems
that fail to meet the criteria of subparagraph (b) of this paragraph for any
source water sample required under paragraph (2) of this rule must revise their
sampling schedules to add dates for collecting all missed samples. Systems must
submit the revised schedule to the Department for approval prior to when the
system begins collecting the missed samples.
(4) Sampling locations.
(a) Systems required to conduct source water
monitoring under paragraph (2) of this rule must collect samples for each plant
that treats a surface water or GWUDI source. Where multiple plants draw water
from the same influent, such as the same pipe or intake, the Department may
approve one set of monitoring results to be used to satisfy the requirements of
paragraph (2) of this rule for all plants.
(b)
1.
Systems must collect source water samples prior to chemical treatment, such as
coagulants, oxidants and disinfectants, unless the system meets the condition
of part 2 of this subparagraph.
2.
The Department may approve a system to collect a source water sample after
chemical treatment. To grant this approval, the Department must determine that
collecting a sample prior to chemical treatment is not feasible for the system
and that the chemical treatment is unlikely to have a significant adverse
effect on the analysis of the sample.
(c) Systems that recycle filter backwash
water must collect source water samples prior to the point of filter backwash
water addition.
(d) Bank
filtration.
1. Systems that receive
Cryptosporidium treatment credit for bank filtration under subparagraph (4)(b)
or (d) of Rule 0400-45-01-.31, as applicable, must collect source water samples
in the surface water prior to bank filtration.
2. Systems that use bank filtration as
pretreatment to a filtration plant must collect source water samples from the
well (i.e., after bank filtration). Use of bank filtration during monitoring
must be consistent with routine operational practice. Systems collecting
samples after a bank filtration process may not receive treatment credit for
the bank filtration under subparagraph (18)(c) of this rule.
(e) Multiple sources. Systems with
plants that use multiple water sources, including multiple surface water
sources and blended surface water and ground water sources, must collect
samples as specified in part 1 or 2 of this subparagraph. The use of multiple
sources during monitoring must be consistent with routine operational practice.
1. If a sampling tap is available where the
sources are combined prior to treatment, systems must collect samples from the
tap.
2. If a sampling tap where the
sources are combined prior to treatment is not available, systems must collect
samples at each source near the intake on the same day and must follow either
subpart (i) or (ii) of this part for sample analysis.
(i) Systems may composite samples from each
source into one sample prior to analysis. The volume of sample from each source
must be weighted according to the proportion of the source in the total plant
flow at the time the sample is collected.
(ii) Systems may analyze samples from each
source separately and calculate a weighted average of the analysis results for
each sampling date. The weighted average must be calculated by multiplying the
analysis result for each source by the fraction the source contributed to total
plant flow at the time the sample was collected and then summing these
values.
(f)
Additional Requirements. Systems must submit a description of their sampling
location(s) to the Department at the same time as the sampling schedule
required under paragraph (3) of this rule. This description must address the
position of the sampling location in relation to the system's water source(s)
and treatment processes, including pretreatment, points of chemical treatment,
and filter backwash recycle. If the Department does not respond to a system
regarding sampling location(s), the system must sample at the reported
location(s).
(6) Approved laboratories.
(a) Cryptosporidium. Systems must have
Cryptosporidium samples analyzed by a laboratory that is approved under EPA's
Laboratory Quality Assurance Evaluation Program for Analysis of Cryptosporidium
in Water or a laboratory that has been certified for Cryptosporidium analysis
by an equivalent State laboratory certification program.
(b)E. coli. Any laboratory certified by the
EPA, the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference or the
Department for total coliform or fecal coliform analysis under Rule
0400-45-01-.31 is approved for E. coli analysis under this rule when the
laboratory uses the same technique for E. coli that the laboratory uses to
count the number of e-coli colonies under Rule 0400-45-01-.31. The alternative
testing method of E. coli under this rule is Standard Method 9222 D/9222 G.
Membrane Filtration, Two Step Methodology from Standard Method
20th edition.
(c) Turbidity. Measurements of turbidity must
be made by a party approved by the Department.
(7) Reporting source water monitoring
results.
(a) Systems must report results from
the source water monitoring required under paragraph (2) of this rule no later
than 10 days after the end of the first month following the month when the
sample is collected.
(b)
1. All systems serving at least 10,000 people
must report the results from the initial source water monitoring required under
subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule to EPA electronically at
https://intranet.epa.gov/lt2/.
2.
If a system is unable to report monitoring results electronically, the system
may use an alternative approach for reporting monitoring results that EPA
approves.
(c) Systems
serving fewer than 10,000 people must report results from the initial source
water monitoring required under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule to the
Department.
(d) All systems must
report results from the second round of source water monitoring required under
paragraph (2) of this rule to the Department.
(e) Systems must report the applicable
information in parts 1 and 2 of this subparagraph for the source water
monitoring required under paragraph (2) of this rule.
1. Systems must report the following data
elements for each Cryptosporidium analysis: PWSID, Facility ID, Sample
collection date, Sample type (field or matrix spike), Sample volume filtered
(L), to nearest 0.25 L. Was 100% of filtered volume examined, Number of oocysts
counted.
(i) For matrix spike samples, systems
must also report the sample volume spiked and estimated number of oocysts
spiked. These data are not required for field samples.
(ii) For samples in which less than 10 L is
filtered or less than 100% of the sample volume is examined, systems must also
report the number of filters used and the packed pellet volume.
(iii) For samples in which less than 100% of
sample volume is examined, systems must also report the volume of resuspended
concentrate and volume of this resuspension processed through immunomagnetic
separation.
2. Systems
must report the following data elements for each E. coli analysis: PWSID,
Facility ID, Sample collection date, Analytical method number, Method type,
Source type (flowing stream, lake/reservoir, GWUDI), E. coli/100 mL,
Turbidity.. Systems serving fewer than 10,000 people
that are not required to monitor for turbidity under paragraph (2) of this rule
are not required to report turbidity with their E. coli results.
(8) Grandfathering
previously collected data.
(a)
1. Systems may comply with the initial source
water monitoring requirements of subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule by
grandfathering sample results collected before the system is required to begin
monitoring (i.e., previously collected data). To be grandfathered, the sample
results and analysis must meet the criteria in this paragraph and the
Department must approve.
2. A
filtered system may grandfather Cryptosporidium samples to meet the
requirements of subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule when the system does not have
corresponding E. coli and turbidity samples. A system that grandfathers
Cryptosporidium samples without E. coli and turbidity samples is not required
to collect E. coli and turbidity samples when the system completes the
requirements for Cryptosporidium monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this
rule.
(b)E. coli sample
analysis. The analysis of E. coli samples must meet the analytical method and
approved laboratory requirements of paragraphs (5) through (6) of this rule.
(c) Cryptosporidium sample
analysis. The analysis of Cryptosporidium samples must meet the criteria in
this subparagraph.
1. Laboratories analyzed
Cryptosporidium samples using one of the analytical methods in subparts (i)
through (vi) of this part, which are incorporated by reference. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy of these methods
on-line from the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water, 1201 Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, DC
20460 (Telephone: 800-426-4791). You may inspect a copy at the Water Docket in
the EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC, (Telephone:
202-566- 2426) or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
202-741-6030, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
(i) Method 1623:
Cryptosporidium and Giardia in Water by Filtration/IMS/ FA,
2005, United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-815-R-05-
002.
(ii) Method
1622: Cryptosporidium in Water by
Filtration/IMS/FA, 2005, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA-815-R-05-001.
(iii) Method 1623: Cryptosporidium and
Giardia in Water by Filtration/IMS/ FA, 2001, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-821-R-01- 025.
(iv) Method 1622:
Cryptosporidium in Water by Filtration/IMS/FA, 2001, United
States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-821--R-01-026.
(v) Method 1623:
Cryptosporidium and Giardia in Water by Filtration/IMS/ FA,
1999, United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-821-R-99-
006.
(vi) Method
1622: Cryptosporidium in Water by
Filtration/IMS/FA, 1999, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA-821-R-99-001.
2. For each Cryptosporidium sample, the
laboratory analyzed at least 10 L of sample or at least 2 mL of packed pellet
or as much volume as could be filtered by 2 filters that EPA approved for the
methods listed in part 1 of this subparagraph.
(d) Sampling location.The sampling location
must meet the conditions in paragraph (4) of this rule.
(e) Sampling frequency. Cryptosporidium
samples were collected no less frequently than each calendar month on a regular
schedule, beginning no earlier than January 1999. Sample collection intervals
may vary for the conditions specified in parts (3)(b)1 and 2 of this rule if
the system provides documentation of the condition when reporting monitoring
results.
1. The Department may approve
grandfathering of previously collected data where there are time gaps in the
sampling frequency if the system conducts additional monitoring the Department
specifies to ensure that the data used to comply with the initial source water
monitoring requirements of subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule are seasonally
representative and unbiased.
2.
Systems may grandfather previously collected data where the sampling frequency
within each month varied. If the Cryptosporidium sampling frequency varied,
systems must follow the monthly averaging procedure in part (11)(b)5 or
(13)(a)3 of this rule, as applicable, when calculating the bin classification
for filtered systems or the mean Cryptosporidium concentration for unfiltered
systems.
(f) Reporting
monitoring results for grandfathering. Systems that request to grandfather
previously collected monitoring results must report the following information
by the applicable dates listed in this subparagraph. Systems serving at least
10,000 people must report this information to EPA unless the Department
approves reporting to the Department rather than EPA. Systems serving fewer
than 10,000 people must report this information to the Department.
1. Systems must report that they intend to
submit previously collected monitoring results for grandfathering. This report
must specify the number of previously collected results the system will submit,
the dates of the first and last sample, and whether a system will conduct
additional source water monitoring to meet the requirements of subparagraph
(2)(a) of this rule. Systems must report this information no later than the
date the sampling schedule under paragraph (3) of this rule is
required.
2. Systems must report
previously collected monitoring results for grandfathering, along with the
associated documentation listed in subparts (i) through (iv) of this part, no
later than two months after the applicable date listed in subparagraph (2)(c)
of this rule.
(i) For each sample result,
systems must report the applicable data elements in paragraph (7) of this
rule.
(ii) Systems must certify
that the reported monitoring results include all results the system generated
during the time period beginning with the first reported result and ending with
the final reported result. This applies to samples that were collected from the
sampling location specified for source water monitoring under this rule, not
spiked, and analyzed using the laboratory's routine process for the analytical
methods listed in this paragraph.
(iii) Systems must certify that the samples
were representative of a plant's source water(s) and the source water(s) have
not changed. Systems must report a description of the sampling location(s),
which must address the position of the sampling location in relation to the
system's water source(s) and treatment processes, including points of chemical
addition and filter backwash recycle.
(iv) For Cryptosporidium samples, the
laboratory or laboratories that analyzed the samples must provide a letter
certifying that the quality control criteria specified in the methods listed in
part (c)1 of this paragraph were met for each sample batch associated with the
reported results. Alternatively, the laboratory may provide bench sheets and
sample examination report forms for each field, matrix spike, IPR, OPR, and
method blank sample associated with the reported results.
(g) If the Department determines
that a previously collected data set submitted for grandfathering was generated
during source water conditions that were not normal for the system, such as a
drought, the Department may disapprove the data. Alternatively, the Department
may approve the previously collected data if the system reports additional
source water monitoring data, as determined by the Department, to ensure that
the data set used under paragraph (11) or (13) of this rule represents average
source water conditions for the system.
(h) If a system submits previously collected
data that fully meet the number of samples required for initial source water
monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule and some of the data are
rejected due to not meeting the requirements of this paragraph, systems must
conduct additional monitoring to replace rejected data on a schedule the
Department approves. Systems are not required to begin this additional
monitoring until two months after notification that data have been rejected and
additional monitoring is necessary.
(9) Requirements when making a significant
change in disinfection practice.
(a) Following
the completion of initial source water monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of
this rule, a system that plans to make a significant change to its disinfection
practice, as defined in subparagraph (b) of this paragraph, must develop
disinfection profiles and calculate disinfection benchmarks for Giardia lamblia
and viruses as described in paragraph (10) of this rule. Prior to changing the
disinfection practice, the system must notify the Department and must include
in this notice the information in parts 1 through 3 of this subparagraph.
1. A completed disinfection profile and
disinfection benchmark for Giardia lamblia and viruses as described in
paragraph (10) of this rule.
2. A
description of the proposed change in disinfection practice.
3. An analysis of how the proposed change
will affect the current level of disinfection.
(b) Significant changes to disinfection
practice are defined as follows:
1. Changes to
the point of disinfection;
2.
Changes to the disinfectant(s) used in the treatment plant;
3. Changes to the disinfection process;
or
4. Any other modification
identified by the Department as a significant change to disinfection
practice.
(10) Developing the disinfection profile and
benchmark.
(a) Systems required to develop
disinfection profiles under paragraph (9) of this rule must follow the
requirements of this paragraph. Systems must monitor at least weekly for a
period of 12 consecutive months to determine the total log inactivation for
Giardia lamblia and viruses. If systems monitor more frequently, the monitoring
frequency must be evenly spaced. Systems that operate for fewer than 12 months
per year must monitor weekly during the period of operation. Systems must
determine log inactivation for Giardia lamblia through the entire plant, based
on CT99.9 values in Tables 1.1 through 1.6, 2.1 and 3.1
of subparagraph (5)(b) of Rule 0400-45-01-.31 as applicable. Systems must
determine log inactivation for viruses through the entire treatment plant based
on a protocol approved by the Department.
(b) Systems with a single point of
disinfection application prior to the entrance to the distribution system must
conduct the monitoring in parts 1 through 4 of this subparagraph. Systems with
more than one point of disinfection application must conduct the monitoring in
parts 1 through 4 of this subparagraph for each disinfection segment. Systems
must monitor the parameters necessary to determine the total inactivation
ration, using analytical methods in paragraph (10) of Rule 0400-45-01-.14.
1. For systems using a disinfectant other
than UV, the temperature of the disinfected water must be measured at each
residual disinfectant concentration sampling point during peak hourly flow or
at an alternative location approved by the Department.
2. For systems using chlorine, the pH of the
disinfected water must be measured at each chlorine residual disinfectant
concentration sampling point during peak hourly flow or at an alternative
location approved by the Department.
3. The disinfectant contact time(s) (T) must
be determined during peak hourly flow.
4. The residual disinfectant concentration(s)
(C) of the water before or at the first customer and prior to each additional
point of disinfectant application must be measured during peak hourly
flow.
(c) In lieu of
conducting new monitoring under subparagraph (b) of this paragraph, systems may
elect to meet the requirements of part 1 or 2 of this subparagraph.
1. Systems that have at least one year of
existing data that are substantially equivalent to data collected under the
provisions of subparagraph (b) of this paragraph may use these data to develop
disinfection profiles as specified in this paragraph if the system has neither
made a significant change to its treatment practice nor changed sources since
the data were collected. Systems may develop disinfection profiles using up to
three years of existing data.
2.
Systems may use disinfection profile(s) developed under Rule 0400-45-01-.31 in
lieu of developing a new profile if the system has neither made a significant
change to its treatment practice nor changed sources since the profile was
developed. Systems that have not developed a virus profile under Rule
0400-45-01-.31 must develop a virus profile using the same monitoring data on
which the Giardia lamblia profile is based.
(d) Systems must calculate the total
inactivation ratio for Giardia lamblia as specified in parts 1 through 3 of
this subparagraph.
1. Systems using only one
point of disinfectant application may determine the total inactivation ratio
for the disinfection segment based on either of the methods in subpart (i) or
(ii) of this part.
(i) Determine one
inactivation ratio (CTcalc/CT99.9) before or at the
first customer during peak hourly flow.
(ii) Determine successive
CTcalc/CT99.9 values, representing sequential
inactivation ratios, between the point of disinfectant application and a point
before or at the first customer during peak hourly flow. The system must
calculate the total inactivation ratio by determining
(CTcalc/CT99.9) for each sequence and then adding the
(CTcalc/ CT99.9) values together to determine ([SIGMA]
(CTcalc/CT99.9)).
2. Systems using more than one point of
disinfectant application before the first customer must determine the CT value
of each disinfection segment immediately prior to the next point of
disinfectant application, or for the final segment, before or at the first
customer, during peak hourly flow. The (CTcalc/CT99.9)
value of each segment and ([SIGMA] (CTcalc/CT99.9)) must
be calculated using the method in subpart 1(ii) of this subparagraph.
3. The system must determine the total logs
of inactivation by multiplying the value calculated in part 1 or 2 of this
subparagraph by 3.0.
4. Systems
must calculate the log of inactivation for viruses using a protocol approved by
the Department.
(e)
Systems must use the procedures specified in parts 1 and 2 of this subparagraph
to calculate a disinfection benchmark.
1. For
each year of profiling data collected and calculated under subparagraphs (a)
through (d) of this paragraph, systems must determine the lowest mean monthly
level of both Giardia lamblia and virus inactivation. Systems must determine
the mean Giardia lamblia and virus inactivation for each calendar month for
each year of profiling data by dividing the sum of daily or weekly Giardia
lamblia and virus log inactivation by the number of values calculated for that
month.
2. The disinfection
benchmark is the lowest monthly mean value (for systems with one year of
profiling data) or the mean of the lowest monthly mean values (for systems with
more than one year of profiling data) of Giardia lamblia and virus log
inactivation in each year of profiling data.
(11) Bin classification for filtered systems.
(a) Following completion of the initial round
of source water monitoring required under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule,
filtered systems must calculate an initial Cryptosporidium bin concentration
for each plant for which monitoring was required. Calculation of the bin
concentration must use the Cryptosporidium results reported under subparagraph
(2)(a) of this rule and must follow the procedures in parts (b)1 through 5 of
this paragraph.
(b)
1. For systems that collect a total of at
least 48 samples, the bin concentration is equal to the arithmetic mean of all
sample concentrations.
2. For
systems that collect a total of at least 24 samples, but not more than 47
samples, the bin concentration is equal to the highest arithmetic mean of all
sample concentrations in any 12 consecutive months during which Cryptosporidium
samples were collected.
3. For
systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people and monitor for Cryptosporidium for
only one year (i.e., collect 24 samples in 12 months), the bin concentration is
equal to the arithmetic mean of all sample concentrations.
4. For systems with plants operating only
part of the year that monitor fewer than 12 months per year under subparagraph
(2)(e) of this rule, the bin concentration is equal to the highest arithmetic
mean of all sample concentrations during any year of Cryptosporidium
monitoring.
5. If the monthly
Cryptosporidium sampling frequency varies, systems must first calculate a
monthly average for each month of monitoring. Systems must then use these
monthly average concentrations, rather than individual sample concentrations,
in the applicable calculation for bin classification in parts 1 through 4 of
this subparagraph.
(c)
Filtered systems must determine their initial bin classification from the
following table and using the Cryptosporidium bin concentration calculated
under subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this paragraph:
BIN CLASSIFICATION
TABLE FOR FILTERED SYSTEMS
For systems that are: | With a Cryptosporidium
binconcentration of1 | The bin
classification is |
required to monitor for
Cryptosporidium under paragraph (2) of this rule. | Cryptosporidium <0.075 oocysts/L | Bin
1 |
| 0.075
oocysts/L <1.0 oocysts/L | Bin 2. |
1.0 oocysts/L <3.0 oocysts/L | Bin 3. |
Greater than or equal to 3.0 oocysts/L | Bin
4. |
serving fewer than 10,000 people and NOT
required to monitor for Cryptosporidium under part (2)(a)4 of this
rule. | NA | Bin 1 |
1 Based on calculations in
subparagraph (a) or (d) of this paragraph, as applicable.
(d) Following completion of the second round
of source water monitoring required under subparagraph (2)(b) of this rule,
filtered systems must recalculate their Cryptosporidium bin concentration using
the Cryptosporidium results reported under subparagraph (2)(b) of this rule and
following the procedures in parts (b)1 through 4 of this paragraph. Systems
must then redetermine their bin classification using this bin concentration and
the table in subparagraph (c) of this paragraph.
(e)
1.
Filtered systems must report their initial bin classification under
subparagraph (c) of this paragraph to the Department for approval no later than
6 months after the system is required to complete initial source water
monitoring based on the schedule in subparagraph (2)(c) of this rule.
2. Systems must report their bin
classification under subparagraph (d) of this paragraph to the Department for
approval no later than 6 months after the system is required to complete the
second round of source water monitoring based on the schedule in subparagraph
(2)(c) of this rule.
3. The bin
classification report to the Department must include a summary of source water
monitoring data and the calculation procedure used to determine bin
classification.
(f)
Failure to comply with the conditions of subparagraph (e) of this paragraph is
a violation of the treatment technique requirement.
(12) Filtered system additional
Cryptosporidium treatment requirements.
(a)
Filtered systems must provide the level of additional treatment for
Cryptosporidium specified in this paragraph based on their bin classification
as determined under paragraph (11) of this rule and according to the schedule
in paragraph (14) of this rule.
If the system bin classification is | And the system uses the following filtration treatment
in full compliance with Rule 0400-45-01-.31 (as applicable), then the
additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements are . . . |
Conventional filtration treatment ( including softening) | Direct filtration | Slow sand or diatomaceous
earth filtration | Alternative filtration technologies |
Bin 1 | No additional
treatment | No additional treatment | No
additional treatment | No additional treatment. |
Bin 2 | 1-log treatment | 1.5-log treatment | 1-log treatment | (1) |
Bin
3 | 2-log treatment | 2.5-log
treatment | 2-log treatment | (2) |
Bin
4 | 2.5-log treatment | 3-log
treatment | 2.5-log treatment | (3) |
1 As determined by the Department such that
the total Cryptosporidium removal and inactivation is at least 4.0-log.
2 As determined by the Department such that
the total Cryptosporidium removal and inactivation is at least 5.0-log.
3 As determined by the Department such that
the total Cryptosporidium removal and inactivation is at least 5.5-log.
(b)
1. Filtered systems must use one or more of
the treatment and management options listed in paragraph (16) of this rule,
termed the microbial toolbox, to comply with the additional Cryptosporidium
treatment required in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph.
2. Systems classified in Bin 3 and Bin 4 must
achieve at least 1-log of the additional Cryptosporidium treatment required
under subparagraph (a) of this paragraph using either one or a combination of
the following: bag filters, bank filtration, cartridge filters, chlorine
dioxide, membranes, ozone, or UV, as described in paragraphs (17) through (21)
of this rule.
(c)
Failure by a system in any month to achieve treatment credit by meeting
criteria in paragraphs (17) through (21) of this rule for microbial toolbox
options that is at least equal to the level of treatment required in
subparagraph (a) of this paragraph is a violation of the treatment technique
requirement.
(d) If the Department
determines during a sanitary survey or an equivalent source water assessment
that after a system completed the monitoring conducted under subparagraph
(2)(a) or (b) of this rule, significant changes occurred in the system's
watershed that could lead to increased contamination of the source water by
Cryptosporidium, the system must take actions specified by the
Department to address the contamination. These actions may include additional
source water monitoring and/or implementing microbial toolbox options listed in
paragraph (16) of this rule.
(13) Unfiltered system Cryptosporidium
treatment requirements.
(a) Determination of
mean Cryptosporidium level.
1. Following
completion of the initial source water monitoring required under subparagraph
(2)(a) of this rule, unfiltered systems must calculate the arithmetic mean of
all Cryptosporidium sample concentrations reported under subparagraph (2)(a) of
this rule. Systems must report this value to the Department for approval no
later than 6 months after the month the system is required to complete initial
source water monitoring based on the schedule in subparagraph (2)(c) of this
rule.
2. Following completion of
the second round of source water monitoring required under subparagraph (2)(b)
of this rule, unfiltered systems must calculate the arithmetic mean of all
Cryptosporidium sample concentrations reported under subparagraph (2)(b) of
this rule. Systems must report this value to the Department for approval no
later than 6 months after the month the system is required to complete the
second round of source water monitoring based on the schedule in subparagraph
(2)(c) of this rule.
3. If the
monthly Cryptosporidium sampling frequency varies, systems must first calculate
a monthly average for each month of monitoring. Systems must then use these
monthly average concentrations, rather than individual sample concentrations,
in the calculation of the mean Cryptosporidium level in part 1 or 2 of this
subparagraph.
4. The report to the
Department of the mean Cryptosporidium levels calculated under parts 1 and 2 of
this subparagraph must include a summary of the source water monitoring data
used for the calculation.
5.
Failure to comply with the conditions of this subparagraph is a violation of
the treatment technique requirement.
(b) Cryptosporidium inactivation
requirements. Unfiltered systems must provide the level of inactivation for
Cryptosporidium specified in this paragraph, based on their mean
Cryptosporidium levels as determined under subparagraph (a) of this paragraph
and according to the schedule in paragraph (14) of this rule.
1. Unfiltered systems with a mean
Cryptosporidium level of 0.01 oocysts/L or less must provide at least 2-log
Cryptosporidium inactivation.
2.
Unfiltered systems with a mean Cryptosporidium level of greater than 0.01
oocysts/L must provide at least 3-log Cryptosporidium inactivation.
(c) Inactivation treatment
technology requirements. Unfiltered systems must use chlorine dioxide, ozone,
or UV as described in paragraph (21) of this rule to meet the Cryptosporidium
inactivation requirements of this paragraph.
1. Systems that use chlorine dioxide or ozone
and fail to achieve the Cryptosporidium inactivation required in subparagraph
(b) of this paragraph on more than one day in the calendar month are in
violation of the treatment technique requirement.
2. Systems that use UV light and fail to
achieve the Cryptosporidium inactivation required in subparagraph (b) of this
paragraph by meeting the criteria in subpart (21)(d)3(ii) of this rule are in
violation of the treatment technique requirement.
(d) Use of two disinfectants. Unfiltered
systems must meet the combined Cryptosporidium inactivation requirements of
this paragraph and Giardia lamblia and virus inactivation requirements of Rule
0400-45-01-.31 using a minimum of two disinfectants, and each of two
disinfectants must separately achieve the total inactivation required for
either Cryptosporidium, Giardia lamblia, or viruses.
(14) Schedule for compliance with
Cryptosporidium treatment requirements.
(a)
Following initial bin classification under subparagraph (11)(c) of this rule,
filtered systems must provide the level of treatment for Cryptosporidium
required under paragraph (12) of this rule according to the schedule in
subparagraph (c) of this paragraph.
(b) Following initial determination of the
mean Cryptosporidium level under part (13)(a)1 of this rule, unfiltered systems
must provide the level of treatment for Cryptosporidium required under
paragraph (13) of this rule according to the schedule in subparagraph (c) of
this paragraph.
(c) Cryptosporidium
treatment compliance dates.
CRYPTOSPORIDIUM TREATMENT COMPLIANCE DATES
TABLE
| Must comply with Systems that serve Cryptosporidium treatment
requirements no later thana |
(1)
At least 100,000 | (i) April 1, 2012 |
(2) From 50,000 to 99,999 people | (i) October
1, 2012 |
(3) From 10,000 to 49,999
people | (i) October 1, 2013 |
(4). Fewer than 10,000 people | (i) October 1,
2014 |
a The
Department may allow up to an additional two years for complying with the
treatment requirement for systems making capital improvements.
(d) If the bin classification for a filtered
system changes following the second round of source water monitoring, as
determined under subparagraph (11)(d) of this rule, the system must provide the
level of treatment for Cryptosporidium required under paragraph (12) of this
rule on a schedule the Department approves.
(e) If the mean Cryptosporidium level for an
unfiltered system changes following the second round of monitoring, as
determined under part (13)(a)2 of this rule, and if the system must provide a
different level of Cryptosporidium treatment under paragraph (13) of this rule
due to this change, the system must meet this treatment requirement on a
schedule the Department approves.
(15) Requirements for uncovered finished
water storage facilities.
(a) Systems using
uncovered finished water storage facilities must comply with the conditions of
this paragraph.
(b) Systems must
notify the Department of the use of each uncovered finished water storage
facility no later than April 1, 2008.
(c) Systems must meet the conditions of part
1 or 2 of this subparagraph for each uncovered finished water storage facility
or be in compliance with a Department-approved schedule to meet these
conditions no later than April 1, 2009.
1.
Systems must cover any uncovered finished water storage facility.
2. Systems must treat the discharge from the
uncovered finished water storage facility to the distribution system to achieve
inactivation and/or removal of at least 4-log virus, 3-log Giardia lamblia, and
2-log Cryptosporidium using a protocol approved by the Department.
(d) Failure to comply with the
requirements of this paragraph is a violation of the treatment technique
requirement.
(16)
Microbial toolbox options for meeting Cryptosporidium treatment requirements.
(a)
1.
Systems receive the treatment credits listed in the table in subparagraph (b)
of this paragraph by meeting the conditions for microbial toolbox options
described in paragraphs (17) through (21) of this rule. Systems apply these
treatment credits to meet the treatment requirements in paragraph (12) or (13)
of this rule, as applicable.
2.
Unfiltered systems are eligible for treatment credits for the microbial toolbox
options described in paragraph (21) of this rule only.
(b) The following table summarizes options in
the microbial toolbox:
MICROBIAL TOOLBOX SUMMARY TABLE: OPTIONS,
TREATMENT CREDITS AND CRITERIA
Toolbox Option | Cryptosporidium treatment
credit with design and implementation criteria |
Source Protection and Management Toolbox Options
(1) Watershed control
program. | 0.5-log credit for Department-approved program
comprising required elements, annual program status report to Department, and
regular watershed survey. Unfiltered systems are not eligible for credit.
Specific criteria are in subparagraph (17)(a) of this rule. |
(2) Alternative source/intake management | No
prescribed credit. Systems may conduct simultaneous monitoring for treatment
bin classification at alternative intake locations or under alternative intake
management strategies. Specific criteria are in subparagraph (17)(b) of this
rule. |
Pre Filtration Toolbox
Options
(3)
Presedimentation basin with coagulation. | 0.5-log credit
during any month that presedimentation basins achieve a monthly mean reduction
of 0.5-log or greater in turbidity or alternative Department-approved
performance criteria. To be eligible, basins must be operated continuously with
coagulant addition and all plant flow must pass through basins. Specific
criteria are in subparagraph (18)(a) of this rule. |
(4) Two-stage lime softening | 0.5-log credit
for two-stage softening where chemical addition and hardness precipitation
occur in both stages. All plant flow must pass through both stages.
Single-stage softening is credited as equivalent to conventional treatment.
Specific criteria are in subparagraph (18)(b) of this rule. |
(5) Bank filtration | 0.5-log credit for
25-foot setback; 1.0-log credit for 50-foot setback; aquifer must be
unconsolidated sand containing at least 10 percent fines; average turbidity in
wells must be less than 1 NTU. Systems using wells followed by filtration when
conducting source water monitoring must sample the well to determine bin
classification and are not eligible for additional credit. Specific criteria
are in subparagraph (18)(c) of this rule. |
Treatment Performance Toolbox Options
(6) Combined filter performance | 0.5-log credit for combined filter effluent turbidity less than or
equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95 percent of measurements each month. Specific
criteria are in subparagraph (19)(a) of this rule. |
(7) Individual filter performance | 0.5-log
credit (in addition to 0.5-log combined filter performance credit) if
individual filter effluent turbidity is less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at
least 95 percent of samples each month in each filter and is never greater than
0.3 NTU in two consecutive measurements in any filter. Specific criteria are in
subparagraph (19)(b) of this rule. |
(8)
Demonstration of performance | Credit awarded to unit
process or treatment train based on a demonstration to the Department with a
Department- approved protocol. Specific criteria are in subparagraph (19)(c) of
this rule. |
Additional Filtration
Toolbox Options
(9) Bag or cartridge filters (individual filters) | Up to 2-log credit based on the removal efficiency demonstrated
during challenge testing with a 1.0-log factor of safety. Specific criteria are
in subparagraph (20)(a) of this rule. |
(10) Bag
or cartridge filters (in series) | Up to 2.5-log credit
based on the removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing with a
0.5-log factor of safety. Specific criteria are in subparagraph (20)(a) of this
rule. |
(11) Membrane filtration | Log credit equivalent to removal efficiency demonstrated in
challenge test for device if supported by direct integrity testing. Specific
criteria are in subparagraph (20)(b) of this rule. |
(12) Second stage filtration | 0.5-log credit
for second separate granular media filtration stage if treatment train includes
coagulation prior to first filter. Specific criteria are in subparagraph
(20)(c) of this rule. |
(13) Slow sand
filters | 2.5-log credit as a secondary filtration step;
3.0-log credit as a primary filtration process. No prior chlorination for
either option. Specific criteria are in subparagraph (20)(d) of this rule. |
Inactivation Toolbox Options
(14) Chlorine dioxide | Log credit based on measured CT in relation to CT table. Specific
criteria in subparagraph (21)(b) of this rule. |
(15) Ozone | Log credit based on measured CT in
relation to CT table. Specific criteria in subparagraph (21(b) of this
rule. |
(16) UV | Log credit
based on validated UV dose relation to UV dose table; reactor validation
testing required to establish UV dose and associated |
| operating conditions. Specific criteria in
subparagraph (21)(d) of this rule. |
(17) Source toolbox components.
(a) Watershed control program. Systems
receive 0.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment credit for implementing a watershed
control program that meets the requirements of this paragraph.
1. Systems that intend to apply for the
watershed control program credit must notify the Department of this intent no
later than two years prior to the treatment compliance date applicable to the
system in paragraph (14) of this rule.
2. Systems must submit to the Department a
proposed watershed control plan no later than one year before the applicable
treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. The Department must
approve the watershed control plan for the system to receive watershed control
program treatment credit. The watershed control plan must include the elements
in subparts (i) through (iv) of this part.
(i)
Identification of an ''area of influence'' outside of which the likelihood of
Cryptosporidium or fecal contamination affecting the treatment plant intake is
not significant. This is the area to be evaluated in future watershed surveys
under subpart 5(ii) of this subparagraph.
(ii) Identification of both potential and
actual sources of Cryptosporidium contamination and an assessment of the
relative impact of these sources on the system's source water
quality.
(iii) An analysis of the
effectiveness and feasibility of control measures that could reduce
Cryptosporidium loading from sources of contamination to the system's source
water.
(iv) A statement of goals
and specific actions the system will undertake to reduce source water
Cryptosporidium levels. The plan must explain how the actions are expected to
contribute to specific goals, identify watershed partners and their roles,
identify resource requirements and commitments, and include a schedule for plan
implementation with deadlines for completing specific actions identified in the
plan.
3. Systems with
existing watershed control programs (i.e., programs in place
on January 5, 2006) are eligible to seek this credit. Their watershed control
plans must meet the criteria in part 2 of this subparagraph and must specify
ongoing and future actions that will reduce source water Cryptosporidium
levels.
4. If the Department does
not respond to a system regarding approval of a watershed control plan
submitted under this subparagraph and the system meets the other requirements
of this subparagraph, the watershed control program will be considered approved
and 0.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment credit will be awarded unless and until
the Department subsequently withdraws such approval.
5. Systems must complete the actions in
subparts (i) through (iii) of this subparagraph to maintain the 0.5-log credit.
(i) Submit an annual watershed control
program status report to the Department. The annual watershed control program
status report must describe the system's implementation of the approved plan
and assess the adequacy of the plan to meet its goals. It must explain how the
system is addressing any shortcomings in plan implementation, including those
previously identified by the Department or as the result of the watershed
survey conducted under subpart (ii) of this part. It must also describe any
significant changes that have occurred in the watershed since the last
watershed sanitary survey. If a system determines during implementation that
making a significant change to its approved watershed control program is
necessary, the system must notify the Department prior to making any such
changes. If any change is likely to reduce the level of source water
protection, the system must also list in its notification the actions the
system will take to mitigate this effect.
(ii) Undergo a watershed sanitary survey
every three years for community water systems and every five years for
noncommunity water systems and submit the survey report to the Department. The
survey must be conducted according to Department guidelines and by persons the
Department approves.
(I) The watershed
sanitary survey must meet the following criteria: encompass the region
identified in the Department-approved watershed control plan as the area of
influence; assess the implementation of actions to reduce source water
Cryptosporidium levels; and identify any significant new sources of
Cryptosporidium.
(II) If the
Department determines that significant changes may have occurred in the
watershed since the previous watershed sanitary survey, systems must undergo
another watershed sanitary survey by a date the Department requires, which may
be earlier than the regular date in subpart (ii) of this part.
(iii) The system must make the
watershed control plan, annual status reports, and watershed sanitary survey
reports available to the public upon request. These documents must be in a
plain language style and include criteria by which to evaluate the success of
the program in achieving plan goals. The Department may approve systems to
withhold from the public portions of the annual status report, watershed
control plan, and watershed sanitary survey based on water supply security
considerations.
6. If
the Department determines that a system is not carrying out the approved
watershed control plan, the Department may withdraw the watershed control
program treatment credit.
(b) Alternative source.
1. A system may conduct source water
monitoring that reflects a different intake location (either in the same source
or for an alternate source) or a different procedure for the timing or level of
withdrawal from the source (alternative source monitoring). If the Department
approves, a system may determine its bin classification under paragraph (11) of
this rule based on the alternative source monitoring results.
2. If systems conduct alternative source
monitoring under part 1 of this subparagraph, systems must also monitor their
current plant intake concurrently as described in paragraph (2) of this
rule.
3. Alternative source
monitoring under part 1 of this subparagraph must meet the requirements for
source monitoring to determine bin classification, as described in paragraphs
(2) through (7) of this rule. Systems must report the alternative source
monitoring results to the Department, along with supporting information
documenting the operating conditions under which the samples were
collected.
4. If a system
determines its bin classification under paragraph (11) of this rule using
alternative source monitoring results that reflect a different intake location
or a different procedure for managing the timing or level of withdrawal from
the source, the system must relocate the intake or permanently adopt the
withdrawal procedure, as applicable, no later than the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule.
(18) Pre-filtration treatment toolbox
components.
(a) Presedimentation. Systems
receive 0.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment credit for a presedimentation basin
during any month the process meets the criteria in this paragraph.
1. The presedimentation basin must be in
continuous operation and must treat the entire plant flow taken from a surface
water or GWUDI source.
2. The
system must continuously add a coagulant to the presedimentation
basin.
3. The presedimentation
basin must achieve the performance criteria in subpart (i) or (ii) of this
subparagraph:
(i) Demonstrates at least
0.5-log mean reduction of influent turbidity. This reduction must be determined
using daily turbidity measurements in the presedimentation process influent and
effluent and must be calculated as follows: log10
(monthly mean of daily influent turbidity) minus log10
(monthly mean of daily effluent turbidity).
(ii) Complies with Department-approved
performance criteria that demonstrate at least 0.5-log mean removal of
micron-sized particulate material through the presedimentation
process.
(b)
Two-stage lime softening. Systems receive an additional 0.5-log Cryptosporidium
treatment credit for a two-stage lime softening plant if chemical addition and
hardness precipitation occur in two separate and sequential softening stages
prior to filtration. Both softening stages must treat the entire plant flow
taken from a surface water or GWUDI source.
(c) Bank filtration. Systems receive
Cryptosporidium treatment credit for bank filtration that serves as
pretreatment to a filtration plant by meeting the criteria in this
subparagraph. Systems using bank filtration when they begin source water
monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule must collect samples as
described in subparagraph (4)(d) of this rule and are not eligible for this
credit.
1. Wells with a ground water flow path
of at least 25 feet receive 0.5-log treatment credit; wells with a ground water
flow path of at least 50 feet receive 1.0-log treatment credit. The ground
water flow path must be determined as specified in part 4 of this
subparagraph.
2. Only wells in
granular aquifers are eligible for treatment credit. Granular aquifers are
those comprised of sand, clay, silt, rock fragments, pebbles or larger
particles, and minor cement. A system must characterize the aquifer at the well
site to determine aquifer properties. Systems must extract a core from the
aquifer and demonstrate that in at least 90 percent of the core length, grains
less than 1.0 mm in diameter constitute at least 10 percent of the core
material.
3. Only horizontal and
vertical wells are eligible for treatment credit.
4. For vertical wells, the ground water flow
path is the measured distance from the edge of the surface water body under
high flow conditions (determined by the 100 year floodplain elevation boundary
or by the floodway, as defined in Federal Emergency Management Agency flood
hazard maps) to the well screen. For horizontal wells, the ground water flow
path is the measured distance from the bed of the river under normal flow
conditions to the closest horizontal well lateral screen.
5. Systems must monitor each wellhead for
turbidity at least once every four hours while the bank filtration process is
in operation. If monthly average turbidity levels, based on daily maximum
values in the well, exceed 1 NTU, the system must report this result to the
Department and conduct an assessment within 30 days to determine the cause of
the high turbidity levels in the well. If the Department determines that
microbial removal has been compromised, the Department may revoke treatment
credit until the system implements corrective actions approved by the
Department to remediate the problem.
6. Springs and infiltration galleries are not
eligible for treatment credit under this subparagraph, but are eligible for
credit under subparagraph (19)(c) of this rule.
7. Bank filtration demonstration of
performance. The Department may approve Cryptosporidium treatment credit for
bank filtration based on a demonstration of performance study that meets the
criteria in this subparagraph. This treatment credit may be greater than
1.0-log and may be awarded to bank filtration that does not meet the criteria
in parts 1 through 5 of this subparagraph.
(i)
The study must follow a Department-approved protocol and must involve the
collection of data on the removal of Cryptosporidium or a surrogate for
Cryptosporidium and related hydrogeologic and water quality parameters during
the full range of operating conditions.
(ii) The study must include sampling both
from the production well(s) and from monitoring wells that are screened and
located along the shortest flow path between the surface water source and the
production well(s).
(19) Treatment performance toolbox
components.
(a) Combined filter performance.
Systems using conventional filtration treatment or direct filtration treatment
receive an additional 0.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment credit during any month
the system meets the criteria in this paragraph. Combined filter effluent (CFE)
turbidity must be less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95 percent of the
measurements. Turbidity must be measured as described in Rule
0400-45-01-.31.
(b) Individual
filter performance. Systems using conventional filtration treatment or direct
filtration treatment receive 0.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment credit, which
can be in addition to the 0.5-log credit under subparagraph (a) of this
paragraph, during any month the system meets the criteria in this subparagraph.
Compliance with these criteria must be based on individual filter turbidity
monitoring as described in Rule 0400-45-01-.31, as applicable.
1. The filtered water turbidity for each
individual filter must be less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95 percent
of the measurements recorded each month.
2. No individual filter may have a measured
turbidity greater than 0.3 NTU in two consecutive measurements taken 15 minutes
apart.
3. Any system that has
received treatment credit for individual filter performance and fails to meet
the requirements of part 1 or 2 of this subparagraph during any month does not
receive a treatment technique violation under subparagraph (12)(c) of this rule
if the Department determines the following:
(i) The failure was due to unusual and
short-term circumstances that could not reasonably be prevented through
optimizing treatment plant design, operation, and maintenance.
(ii) The system has experienced no more than
two such failures in any calendar year.
(c) Demonstration of performance. The
Department may approve Cryptosporidium treatment credit for drinking water
treatment processes based on a demonstration of performance study that meets
the criteria in this subparagraph. This treatment credit may be greater than or
less than the prescribed treatment credits in paragraph (12) or paragraphs (18)
through (21) of this rule and may be awarded to treatment processes that do not
meet the criteria for the prescribed credits.
1. Systems cannot receive the prescribed
treatment credit for any toolbox box option in paragraphs (18) through (21) of
this rule if that toolbox option is included in a demonstration of performance
study for which treatment credit is awarded under this subparagraph.
2. The demonstration of performance study
must follow a Department-approved protocol and must demonstrate the level of
Cryptosporidium reduction the treatment process will achieve under the full
range of expected operating conditions for the system.
3. Approval by the Department must be in
writing and may include monitoring and treatment performance criteria that the
system must demonstrate and report on an ongoing basis to remain eligible for
the treatment credit. The Department may designate such criteria where
necessary to verify that the conditions under which the demonstration of
performance credit was approved are maintained during routine
operation.
(20) Additional filtration toolbox
components.
(a) Bag and cartridge filters.
Systems receive Cryptosporidium treatment 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 parts 1 through 10 of
this subparagraph. To be eligible for this credit, systems must report the
results of challenge testing that meets the requirements of parts 2 through 9
of this subparagraph to the Department. The filters must treat the entire plant
flow taken from a subpart H source.
1. The
Cryptosporidium treatment credit awarded to bag or cartridge filters must be
based on the removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing that is
conducted according to the criteria in parts 2 through 9 of this subparagraph.
A factor of safety equal to 1-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. Systems may use results from
challenge testing conducted prior to January 5, 2006 if the prior testing was
consistent with the criteria specified in parts 2 through 9 of this
subparagraph.
2. 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. 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.
3.
Challenge testing must be conducted using Cryptosporidium or a surrogate that
is removed no more efficiently than Cryptosporidium. The microorganism or
surrogate used during challenge testing is referred to as the challenge
particulate. The concentration of the challenge particulate must be determined
using a method capable of discreetly quantifying the specific microorganism or
surrogate used in the test; gross measurements such as turbidity may not be
used.
4. The maximum feed water
concentration that can be used during a challenge test must be based on the
detection limit of the challenge particulate in the filtrate (i.e., filtrate
detection limit) and must be calculated using the following equation:
Maximum Feed Concentration=1 × 104
× (Filtrate Detection Limit)
5. Challenge testing must be conducted at the
maximum design flow rate for the filter as specified by the
manufacturer.
6. Each filter
evaluated must be tested for a duration sufficient to reach 100 percent of the
terminal pressure drop, which establishes the maximum pressure drop under which
the filter may be used to comply with the requirements of this
subparagraph.
7. Removal efficiency
of a filter must be determined from the results of the challenge test and
expressed in terms of log removal values using the following equation:
LRV=LOG10(Cf)-LOG10(Cp)
Where:
LRV=log removal value demonstrated during challenge
testing; Cf=the feed concentration measured during the
challenge test; and Cp=the filtrate concentration measured during the challenge
test. In applying this equation, the same units must be used for the feed and
filtrate concentrations. If the challenge particulate is not detected in the
filtrate, then the term Cp must be set equal to the detection limit.
8. Each filter tested must be
challenged with the challenge particulate during three periods over the
filtration cycle: within two hours of start-up of a new filter; when the
pressure drop is between 45 and 55 percent of the terminal pressure drop; and
at the end of the cycle after the pressure drop has reached 100 percent of the
terminal pressure drop. An LRV must be calculated for each of these challenge
periods for each filter tested. The LRV for the filter
(LRVfilter) must be assigned the value of the minimum
LRV observed during the three challenge periods for that filter.
9. If fewer than 20 filters are tested, the
overall removal efficiency for the filter product line must be set equal to the
lowest LRVfilter among the filters tested. If 20 or more
filters are tested, the overall removal efficiency for the filter product line
must be set equal to the 10th percentile of the set of
LRVfilter values for the various filters tested. The
percentile is defined by (i/(n+1)) where i is the rank of n individual data
points ordered lowest to highest. If necessary, the 10th percentile may be
calculated using linear interpolation.
10. If a previously tested filter is modified
in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the filter product
line, challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of the modified
filter must be conducted and submitted to the Department.
(b) Membrane filtration.
1. Systems receive Cryptosporidium treatment
credit for membrane filtration that meets the criteria of this subparagraph.
Membrane cartridge filters that meet the definition of membrane filtration in
Rule 0400-45-01-.04 are eligible for this credit. The level of treatment credit
a system receives is equal to the lower of the values determined under subparts
(i) and (ii) of this part.
(i) The removal
efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing conducted under the conditions
in part 2 of this subparagraph.
(ii) The maximum removal efficiency that can
be verified through direct integrity testing used with the membrane filtration
process under the conditions in part 3 of this subparagraph.
2. Challenge Testing. The membrane
used by the system must undergo challenge testing to evaluate removal
efficiency, and the system must report the results of challenge testing to the
Department. Challenge testing must be conducted according to the criteria in
subparts (i) through (vii) of this subparagraph. Systems may use data from
challenge testing conducted prior to January 5, 2006, if the prior testing was
consistent with the criteria in subparts (i) through (vii) of this part.
(i) Challenge testing must be conducted on
either a full-scale membrane module, identical in material and construction to
the membrane modules 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. A module is defined as the smallest
component of a membrane unit in which a specific membrane surface area is
housed in a device with a filtrate outlet structure.
(ii) Challenge testing must be conducted
using Cryptosporidium oocysts or a surrogate that is removed no more
efficiently than Cryptosporidium oocysts. The organism or surrogate used during
challenge testing is referred to as the challenge particulate. The
concentration of the challenge particulate, in both the feed and filtrate
water, must be determined using a method capable of discretely quantifying the
specific challenge particulate used in the test; gross measurements such as
turbidity may not be used.
(iii)
The maximum feed water concentration that can be used during a challenge test
is based on the detection limit of the challenge particulate in the filtrate
and must be determined according to the following equation: Maximum Feed
Concentration=3.16 × 106
× (Filtrate
Detection Limit)
(iv) Challenge
testing must be conducted under representative hydraulic conditions at the
maximum design flux and maximum design process recovery specified by the
manufacturer for the membrane module. Flux is defined as the throughput of a
pressure driven membrane process expressed as flow per unit of membrane area.
Recovery is defined as the volumetric percent of feed water that is converted
to filtrate over the course of an operating cycle uninterrupted by events such
as chemical cleaning or a solids removal process (i.e.,
backwashing).
(v) Removal
efficiency of a membrane module must be calculated from the challenge test
results and expressed as a log removal value according to the following
equation: LRV=LOG10(Cf) ×
LOG10(Cp)
Where:
LRV=log removal value demonstrated during the challenge test;
Cf=the feed concentration measured during the challenge
test; and Cp=the filtrate concentration measured during
the challenge test. Equivalent units must be used for the feed and filtrate
concentrations. If the challenge particulate is not detected in the filtrate,
the term Cp is set equal to the detection limit for the
purpose of calculating the LRV. An LRV must be calculated for each membrane
module evaluated during the challenge test.
(vi) The removal efficiency of a membrane
filtration process demonstrated during challenge testing must be expressed as a
log removal value (LRVC-Test). If fewer than 20 modules
are tested, then LRVC-Test is equal to the lowest of the
representative LRVs among the modules tested. If 20 or more modules are tested,
then LRVC-Test is equal to the 10th percentile of the representative LRVs among
the modules tested. The percentile is defined by (i/(n+1)) where i is the rank
of n individual data points ordered lowest to highest. If necessary, the 10th
percentile may be calculated using linear interpolation.
(vii) The challenge test must establish a
quality control release value (QCRV) for a non-destructive performance test
that demonstrates the Cryptosporidium removal capability of the membrane
filtration module. This performance test must be applied to each production
membrane module used by the system that was not directly challenge tested in
order to verify Cryptosporidium removal capability. Production modules that do
not meet the established QCRV are not eligible for the treatment credit
demonstrated during the challenge test.
(viii) If a previously tested membrane is
modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the membrane
or the applicability of the nondestructive performance test and associated
QCRV, additional challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of,
and determine a new QCRV for, the modified membrane must be conducted and
submitted to the Department.
3. Direct integrity testing. Systems must
conduct direct integrity testing in a manner that demonstrates a removal
efficiency equal to or greater than the removal credit awarded to the membrane
filtration process and meets the requirements described in subparts (i) through
(vi) of this subparagraph. A direct integrity test is defined as a physical
test applied to a membrane unit in order to identify and isolate integrity
breaches (
i.e., one or more leaks that could result in
contamination of the filtrate).
(i) The direct
integrity test must be independently applied to each membrane unit in service.
A membrane unit is defined as a group of membrane modules that share common
valving that allows the unit to be isolated from the rest of the system for the
purpose of integrity testing or other maintenance.
(ii) The direct integrity method must have a
resolution of 3 micrometers or less, where resolution is defined as the size of
the smallest integrity breach that contributes to a response from the direct
integrity test.
(iii) The direct
integrity test must have a sensitivity sufficient to verify the log treatment
credit awarded to the membrane filtration process by the Department, where
sensitivity is defined as the maximum log removal value that can be reliably
verified by a direct integrity test. Sensitivity must be determined using the
approach in either item (I) or (II) of this subpart as applicable to the type
of direct integrity test the system uses.
(I)
For direct integrity tests that use an applied pressure or vacuum, the direct
integrity test sensitivity must be calculated according to the following
equation: LRVDIT=LOG10 (Qp /(VCF
× Qbreach)) Where: LRVDIT=the sensitivity of the
direct integrity test; Qp=total design filtrate flow
from the membrane unit; Qbreach=flow of water from an
integrity breach associated with the smallest integrity test response that can
be reliably measured, and VCF=volumetric concentration factor. The volumetric
concentration factor is the ratio of the suspended solids concentration on the
high pressure side of the membrane relative to that in the feed
water.
(II) For direct integrity
tests that use a particulate or molecular marker, the direct integrity test
sensitivity must be calculated according to the following equation:
LRVDIT=LOG10(Cf)-LOG10(Cp)
Where:
LRVDIT=the sensitivity of the direct integrity test;
Cf=the typical feed concentration of the marker used in
the test; and Cp=the filtrate concentration of the
marker from an integral membrane unit.
(iv) Systems must establish a control limit
within the sensitivity limits of the direct integrity test that is indicative
of an integral membrane unit capable of meeting the removal credit awarded by
the Department.
(v) If the result
of a direct integrity test exceeds the control limit established under subpart
(iv) of this part, the system must remove the membrane unit from service.
Systems must conduct a direct integrity test to verify any repairs, and may
return the membrane unit to service only if the direct integrity test is within
the established control limit.
(vi)
Systems must conduct direct integrity testing on each membrane unit at a
frequency of not less than once each day that the membrane unit is in
operation. The Department may approve less frequent testing, based on
demonstrated process reliability, the use of multiple barriers effective for
Cryptosporidium, or reliable process safeguards.
4. Indirect integrity monitoring. Systems
must conduct continuous indirect integrity monitoring on each membrane unit
according to the criteria in subparts (i) through (v) of this part. Indirect
integrity monitoring is defined as monitoring some aspect of filtrate water
quality that is indicative of the removal of particulate matter. A system that
implements continuous direct integrity testing of membrane units in accordance
with the criteria in subparts 3(i) through (vi) of this subparagraph is not
subject to the requirements for continuous indirect integrity monitoring.
Systems must submit a monthly report to the Department summarizing all
continuous indirect integrity monitoring results triggering direct integrity
testing and the corrective action that was taken in each case.
(i) Unless the Department approves an
alternative parameter, continuous indirect integrity monitoring must include
continuous filtrate turbidity monitoring.
(ii) Continuous monitoring must be conducted
at a frequency of no less than once every 15 minutes.
(iii) Continuous monitoring must be
separately conducted on each membrane unit.
(iv) If indirect integrity monitoring
includes turbidity and if the filtrate turbidity readings are above 0.15 NTU
for a period greater than 15 minutes (i.e., two consecutive 15-minute readings
above 0.15 NTU), direct integrity testing must immediately be performed on the
associated membrane unit as specified in subparts 3(i) through (vi) of this
subparagraph.
(v) If indirect
integrity monitoring includes a Department-approved alternative parameter and
if the alternative parameter exceeds a Department-approved control limit for a
period greater than 15 minutes, direct integrity testing must immediately be
performed on the associated membrane units as specified in subparts 3(i)
through (vi) of this subparagraph.
(c) Second stage filtration. Systems receive
0.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment credit for a separate second stage of
filtration that consists of sand, dual media, GAC, or other fine grain media
following granular media filtration if the Department approves. To be eligible
for this credit, the first stage of filtration must be preceded by a
coagulation step and both filtration stages must treat the entire plant flow
taken from a surface water or GWUDI source. A cap, such as GAC, on a single
stage of filtration is not eligible for this credit. The Department must
approve the treatment credit based on an assessment of the design
characteristics of the filtration process.
(d) Slow sand filtration (as secondary
filter). Systems are eligible to receive 2.5-log Cryptosporidium treatment
credit for a slow sand filtration process that follows a separate stage of
filtration if both filtration stages treat entire plant flow taken from a
surface water or GWUDI source and no disinfectant residual is present in the
influent water to the slow sand filtration process. The Department must approve
the treatment credit based on an assessment of the design characteristics of
the filtration process. This subparagraph does not apply to treatment credit
awarded to slow sand filtration used as a primary filtration process.
(21) Inactivation toolbox
components.
(a) Calculation of CT values.
1. CT is the product of the disinfectant
contact time (T, in minutes) and disinfectant concentration (C, in milligrams
per liter). Systems with treatment credit for chlorine dioxide or ozone under
subparagraph (b) or (c) of this paragraph must calculate CT at least once each
day, with both C and T measured during peak hourly flow as specified in Rule
0400-45-01-.31.
2. Systems with
several disinfection segments in sequence may calculate CT for each segment,
where a disinfection segment is defined as a treatment unit process with a
measurable disinfectant residual level and a liquid volume. Under this
approach, systems must add the Cryptosporidium CT values in each segment to
determine the total CT for the treatment plant.
(b) CT values for chlorine dioxide and ozone.
1. Systems receive the Cryptosporidium
treatment credit listed in this table by meeting the corresponding chlorine
dioxide CT value for the applicable water temperature, as described in
subparagraph (a) of this paragraph.
CT VALUES (MG·MIN/L) FOR
CRYPTOSPORIDIUM INACTIVATION BY CHLORINE DIOXIDE
1
Water Temperature in °C |
Log Credit | <=0.5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 |
(i) 0.25........ | 159 | 153 | 140 | 128 | 107 | 90 | 69 | 45 | 29 | 19 | 12 |
(ii) 0.5 ......................... | 319 | 305 | 279 | 256 | 214 | 180 | 138 | 89 | 58 | 38 | 24 |
(iii) 1.0 ..................... | 637 | 610 | 558 | 511 | 429 | 360 | 277 | 179 | 116 | 75 | 49 |
(iv)
1.5........ | 956 | 915 | 838 | 767 | 643 | 539 | 415 | 268 | 174 | 113 | 73 |
(v) 2.0........ | 1275 | 1220 | 1117 | 1023 | 858 | 719 | 553 | 357 | 232 | 150 | 98 |
(vi) 2.5....... | 1594 | 1525 | 1396 | 1278 | 1072 | 899 | 691 | 447 | 289 | 188 | 122 |
(vii)
3.0.... | 1912 | 1830 | 1675 | 1534 | 1286 | 1079 | 830 | 536 | 347 | 226 | 147 |
1 Systems may
use this equation to determine log credit between the indicated values: Log
credit=(0.001506 × (1.09116) Temp) ×
CT.
2. Systems receive the
Cryptosporidium treatment credit listed in this table by meeting the
corresponding ozone CT values for the applicable water temperature, as
described in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph.
CT VALUES
(MG·MIN/L) FOR Cryptosporidium INACTIVATION BY OZONE
1
Water Temperature in °C |
Log Credit | <=0.5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 |
(i) 0.25........ | 6.0 | 5.8 | 5.2 | 4.8 | 4.0 | 3.3 | 2.5 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.39 |
(ii)
0.5 ......................... | 12 | 12 | 10 | 9.5 | 7.9 | 6.5 | 4.9 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 0.78 |
(iii) 1.0
..................... | 24 | 23 | 21 | 19 | 16 | 13 | 9.9 | 6.2 | 3.9 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
(iv) 1.5........ | 36 | 35 | 31 | 29 | 24 | 20 | 15 | 9.3 | 5.9 | 3.7 | 2.4 |
(v) 2.0......... | 48 | 46 | 42 | 38 | 32 | 26 | 20 | 12 | 7.8 | 4.9 | 3.1 |
(vi)
2.5......... | 60 | 58 | 52 | 48 | 40 | 33 | 25 | 16 | 9.8 | 6.2 | 3.9 |
(vii) 3.0........ | 72 | 69 | 63 | 57 | 47 | 39 | 30 | 19 | 12 | 7.4 | 4.7 |
1 Systems may use this equation to determine
log credit between the indicated values: Log credit=(0.0397 ×
(1.09757)Temp) × CT.
(c) Site-specific study. The
Department may approve alternate chlorine dioxide or ozone CT values to those
listed in subparagraph (b) of this paragraph on a site-specific basis. The
Department must base this approval on a site-specific study a system conducts
that follows a Department approved protocol.
(d) Ultraviolet light. Systems receive
Cryptosporidium, Giardia lamblia
, and virus treatment credits
for ultraviolet (UV) light reactors by achieving the corresponding UV dose
values shown in part 1 of this subparagraph. Systems must validate and monitor
UV reactors as described in parts 2 and 3 of this subparagraph to demonstrate
that they are achieving a particular UV dose value for treatment credit.
1. The treatment credits listed in this table
are for UV light at a wavelength of 254 nm as produced by a low pressure
mercury vapor lamp. To receive treatment credit for other lamp types, systems
must demonstrate an equivalent germicidal dose through reactor validation
testing, as described in part 2 of this subparagraph. The UV dose values of
this table are applicable only to post-filter applications of UV in filtered
systems and to unfiltered systems.
UV DOSE TABLE FOR CRYPTOSPORIDIUM,
GIARDIA LAMBLIA, AND VIRUS INACTIVATION CREDIT
Log Credit | Cryptosporidium UV dose
(mJ/cm2) | Giardia lamblia UV
dose(mJ/cm2) | Virus UV
dose(mJ/cm2) |
(i) 0.5
. | 1.6 | 1.5 | 39 |
(ii) 1.0 | 2.5 | 2.1 | 58 |
(iii) 1.5 | 3.9 | 3.0 | 79 |
(iv)
2.0 | 5.8 | 5.2 | 100 |
(v) 2.5 | 8.5 | 7.7 | 121 |
(vi) 3.0 | 12 | 11 | 143 |
(vii)
3.5 | 15 | 15 | 163 |
(viii) 4.0 | 22 | 22 | 186 |
2.
Reactor validation testing. Systems must use UV reactors that have undergone
validation testing to determine the operating conditions under which the
reactor delivers the UV dose required in part 1 of this subparagraph (i.e.,
validated operating conditions). These operating conditions must include flow
rate, UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, and UV lamp status.
(i) When determining validated operating
conditions, systems must account for 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 or other critical system components; and inlet and outlet
piping or channel configurations of the UV reactor.
(ii) Validation testing must include the
following: Full scale testing of a reactor that conforms uniformly to the UV
reactors used by the system and inactivation of a test microorganism whose dose
response characteristics have been quantified with a low pressure mercury vapor
lamp.
(iii) The Department may
approve an alternative approach to validation testing.
3. Reactor monitoring.
(i) Systems must monitor their UV reactors to
determine if the reactors are operating within validated conditions, as
determined under part 2 of this subparagraph. This monitoring must include UV
intensity as measured by a UV sensor, flow rate, lamp status, and other
parameters the Department designates based on UV reactor operation. Systems
must verify the calibration of UV sensors and must recalibrate sensors in
accordance with a protocol the Department approves.
(ii) To receive treatment credit for UV
light, systems must treat at least 95 percent of the water delivered to the
public during each month by UV reactors operating within validated conditions
for the required UV dose, as described in parts 1 and 2 of this subparagraph.
Systems must demonstrate compliance with this condition by the monitoring
required under subpart (i) of this part.
(22) Reporting requirements.
(a) Systems must report sampling schedules
under paragraph (3) of this rule and source water monitoring results under
paragraph (7) of this rule unless they notify the Department that they will not
conduct source water monitoring due to meeting the criteria of subparagraph
(2)(d) of this rule.
(b) Systems
must report the use of uncovered finished water storage facilities to the
Department as described in paragraph (15) of this rule.
(c) Filtered systems must report their
Cryptosporidium bin classification as described in paragraph (11) of this
rule.
(d) Unfiltered systems must
report their mean source water Cryptosporidium level as described in paragraph
(13) of this rule.
(e) Systems must
report disinfection profiles and benchmarks to the Department as described in
paragraphs (9) and (10) of this rule prior to making a significant change in
disinfection practice.
(f) Systems
must report to the Department in accordance with the following table for any
microbial toolbox options used to comply with treatment requirements under
paragraph (12) or (13) of this rule. Alternatively, the Department may approve
a system to certify operation within required parameters for treatment credit
rather than reporting monthly operational data for toolbox options.
MICROBIAL TOOLBOX REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Toolbox option | Systems must submit the following information | On the following schedule |
(1)
Watershed control program (WCP) | (i) Notice of intention to
develop a new or continue an existing watershed control program. | No later than two years before the applicable treatment compliance
date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
| (ii) Watershed control plan. | No later than
one year before the applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of
this rule. |
| (iii) Annual
watershed control program status report. | Every 12 months,
beginning one year after the applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph
(14) of this rule. |
| (iv)
Watershed sanitary survey report. | For community water
systems, every three years beginning three years after the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. For noncommunity water systems,
every five years beginning five years after the applicable treatment compliance
date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(2)
Alternative source/intake | Verification that system has
relocated | No later than the applicable treatment |
management | the intake or
adopted the intake withdrawal procedure reflected in monitoring
results. | compliance date in paragraph (14) of this
rule. |
(3) Presedimentation | Monthly verification of the following: (i) Continuous basin
operation; (ii) Treatment of 100% of the flow; (iii) Continuous addition of a
coagulant; and (iv) At least 0.5-log mean reduction of influent turbidity or
compliance with alternative Department-approved performance criteria. | Monthly reporting within 10 days following the month in which the
monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment compliance date
in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(4) Two-stage
lime softening | Monthly verification of the following: (i)
Chemical addition and hardness precipitation occurred in two separate and
sequential softening stages prior to filtration; and (ii) Both stages treated
100% of the plant flow. | Monthly reporting within 10 days
following the month in which the monitoring was conducted, beginning on the
applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(5) Bank filtration | (i) Initial
demonstration of the following: (A) Unconsolidated, predominantly sandy
aquifer; (B) Setback distance of at least 25 ft. (0.5-log credit) or 50 ft.
(1.0-log credit); and (ii) If monthly average of daily max turbidity is greater
than 1 NTU then system must report result and submit an assessment of the
cause. | No later than the applicable treatment compliance
date in paragraph (14) of this rule. Report within 30 days following the month
in which the monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(6) Combined filter performance | Monthly
verification of combined filter effluent (CFE) turbidity levels less than or
equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95 percent of the 4 hour CFE measurements taken
each month. | Monthly reporting within 10 days following the
month in which the monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable
treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(7) Individual filter performance | Monthly
verification of the following: (i) Individual filter effluent (IFE) turbidity
levels less than or equal to 0.15 NTU in at least 95 percent of samples each
month in each filter; and (ii) No individual filter greater than 0.3 NTU in two
consecutive readings 15 minutes apart. | Monthly reporting
within 10 days following the month in which the monitoring was conducted,
beginning on the applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this
rule. |
(8) Demonstration of performance | (i) Results from testing following a Department approved
protocol. (ii) As required by the Department, monthly verification of operation
within conditions of Department approval for demonstration of performance
credit. | No later than the applicable treatment compliance
date in paragraph (14) of this rule. Within 10 days following the month in
which monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(9) Bag filters and cartridge | (i)
Demonstration that the following criteria are met: (A) filters. Process meets
the definition of bag or cartridge filtration; | No later
than the applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this
rule. |
| (B) Removal
efficiency established through challenge testing that meets criteria in this
subpart. (ii) Monthly verification that 100% of plant flow was
filtered. | Within 10 days following the month in which
monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment compliance date
in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(10) Membrane
filtration | (i) Results of verification testing
demonstrating the following: | No later than the applicable
treatment compliance date in paragraph (14). |
| (A) Removal efficiency established through
challenge testing that meets criteria in this subpart; (B) Integrity test
method and parameters, including resolution, sensitivity, test frequency,
control limits, and associated baseline. | |
| (ii) Monthly report summarizing the
following: (A) All direct integrity tests above the control limit; (B) If
applicable, any turbidity or alternative Department-approved indirect integrity
monitoring results triggering direct integrity testing and the corrective
action that was taken. | Within 10 days following the month
in which monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(11) Second stage filtration | Monthly
verification that 100% of flow was filtered through both stages and that first
stage was preceded by coagulation step. | Within 10 days
following the month in which monitoring was conducted, beginning on the
applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
12) Slow sand filtration (as secondary filter) | Monthly verification that both a slow sand filter and a preceding
separate stage of filtration treated 100% of flow from subpart H
sources. | Within 10 days following the month in which
monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment compliance date
in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(13) Chlorine
dioxide | Summary of CT values for each day as described in
paragraph (21) of this rule. | Within 10 days following the
month in which monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment
compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(14) Ozone | Summary of CT values for each day
as described in paragraph (21) of this rule. | Within 10
days following the month in which monitoring was conducted, beginning on the
applicable treatment compliance date in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(15) UV | (i) Validation test results
demonstrating operating conditions that achieve required UV dose. (ii) Monthly
report summarizing the percentage of water entering the distribution system
that was not treated by UV reactors operating within validated conditions for
the required dose as specified in subparagraph (21)(d) of this rule. | No later than the applicable treatment compliance date in
paragraph (14) of this rule. Within 10 days following the month in which
monitoring was conducted, beginning on the applicable treatment compliance date
in paragraph (14) of this rule. |
(23) Recordkeeping requirements.
(a) Systems must keep results from the
initial round of source water monitoring under subparagraph (2)(a) of this rule
and the second round of source water monitoring under subparagraph (2)(b) of
this rule until 3 years after bin classification under paragraph (11) of this
rule for filtered systems or determination of the mean Cryptosporidium level
under paragraph (11) of this rule for unfiltered systems for the particular
round of monitoring.
(b) Systems
must keep any notification to the Department that they will not conduct source
water monitoring due to meeting the criteria of subparagraph (2)(d) of this
rule for 3 years.
(c) Systems must
keep the results of treatment monitoring associated with microbial toolbox
options under paragraphs (17) through (21) of this rule and with uncovered
finished water reservoirs under paragraph (15) of this rule, as applicable, for
3 years.
(24)
Requirements to respond to significant deficiencies identified in sanitary
surveys performed by the Department or EPA.
(a) A sanitary survey is an onsite review of
the water source (identifying sources of contamination by using results of
source water assessments where available), facilities, equipment, operation,
maintenance, and monitoring compliance of a PWS to evaluate the adequacy of the
PWS, its sources and operations, and the distribution of safe drinking
water.
(b) For the purposes of this
paragraph, a significant deficiency includes a defect in design, operation, or
maintenance, or a failure or malfunction of the sources, treatment, storage, or
distribution system that EPA determines to be causing, or has the potential for
causing the introduction of contamination into the water delivered to
consumers.
(c) For sanitary surveys
performed by the Department or EPA, systems must respond in writing to
significant deficiencies identified in sanitary survey reports no later than 45
days after receipt of the report, indicating how and on what schedule the
system will address significant deficiencies noted in the survey.
(d) Systems must correct significant
deficiencies identified in sanitary survey reports according to the schedule
approved by the Department or EPA, or if there is no approved schedule,
according to the schedule reported under subparagraph (c) of this paragraph if
such deficiencies are within the control of the system.
Authority:
T.C.A. §§
68-221-701 et seq. and 4-5-201 et
seq.