DRAFT
v>EPA The Ground Water Rule
(GWR) Implementation
Guidance
-------
Office of Water (4606M)
EPA816-D-07-001
www.epa.gov/safewater
November 2007 Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Disclaimer
This document provides guidance to states, tribes, and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Regions exercising primary enforcement responsibility under the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and contains EPA's current policy recommendations for
complying with the Ground Water Rule (GWR). Throughout this document, the terms
"state" and "states" are used to refer to all types of primacy agencies including U.S.
territories, Indian tribes, and EPA Regions.
The statutory provisions and EPA regulations described in this document contain legally
binding requirements. This document is not a regulation itself, nor does it change or
substitute for those provisions and regulations. Thus, it does not impose legally binding
requirements on EPA, states, or public water systems. This guidance does not confer legal
rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public.
While EPA has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in this
guidance, the obligations of the regulated community are determined by statutes,
regulations, or other legally binding requirements. In the event of a conflict between the
discussion in this document and any statute or regulation, this document would not be
controlling.
The general description provided here may not apply to a particular situation based upon
the circumstances. Interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the
substance of this guidance and the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a
particular situation. EPA and other decision makers retain the discretion to adopt
approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in this guidance,
where appropriate.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for their use.
This is a living document and may be revised periodically without public notice. EPA
welcomes public input on this document at any time. Guidance provided in this document
reflects provisions published on November 8, 2006 at 71 FR 65574.
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations ix
Introduction xi
Section 1 Rule Requirements 1
1.1 Introduction 3
1.1.1 History 3
1.1.2 Development of the Ground Water Rule 4
1.1.3 Benefits of the Ground Water Rule 5
1.1.3.1 Quantifiable Health Benefits 5
1.1.3.2 Non-Quantifiable Health Benefits 5
1.2 Requirements of the Rule: Public Water Systems 6
1.2.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates 6
1.2.1.1 To Whom Does The Rule Apply? 6
1.2.1.2 What Are The Compliance Dates? 6
1.2.2 Sanitary Surveys for GWSs [40 CFR 141.401] 7
1.2.3 Ground Water Source Microbial Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402] 7
1.2.3.1 Triggered Source Water Monitoring 8
1.2.3.2 Additional Source Water Sampling 8
1.2.3.3 Assessment Source Water Monitoring 8
1.2.4 Treatment Technique Requirements For GWSs [40 CFR 141.403] 8
1.2.4.1 Treatment Technique Compliance Monitoring [40 CFR 141.403(b)] 9
1.2.5 Public Water System Reporting Requirements [40 CFR 141.405(c)] 10
1.2.6 Public Water System Recordkeeping Requirements [40 CFR 141.405(b)] 10
1.2.7 Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations [40 CFR 141.402(a) and 40 CFR
141.403(a)] 11
1.2.8 CCR Requirements [40 CFR 141.153] 12
1.2.9 Special Notice Requirements [40 CFR 141.403(a)(7)] 12
1.3 Requirements of the Rule: States or Other Primacy Agencies 13
1.3.1 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16(o)] 13
1.3.2 Records Kept by States [40 CFR 142.14(d)(17)] 14
1.3.3 State Reporting Requirements [40 CFR 142.15(c)(7)] 14
1.4 Summary of Requirements 15
1.4.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates 15
Section 2 Resources and Guidance 19
2.1 Technical Guidance Manuals 21
2.2 Rule Presentation 23
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance i November 2007
-------
2.3 Fact Sheet and Quick Reference Guide 23
2.4 Questions & Answers 23
Section 3 State Implementation 25
3.1 Overview of Implementation 27
3.2 Identify Affected Systems 27
3.2.1 General Provisions [40 CFR 141.400(b)] 27
3.2.2 Sanitary Surveys [40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)(i)] 28
3.2.3 Triggered Source Water Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402(a)] 29
3.2.4 Treatment Technique Requirements [40 CFR 141.403(a)] 33
3.2.5 Compliance Monitoring [40 CFR 141.403(b)] 33
3.2.6 Optional Assessment Source Water Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402(b)] 34
3.3 Communicate GWR Requirements to Affected Systems 34
3.3.1 Requirements and Target Notification Time Frames 34
3.3.2 Methods of Communication 36
3.4 Data Management Systems 39
3.5 Address Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR 40
3.6 State Practices or Procedures for Sanitary Surveys 41
3.6.1 Sanitary Surveys for CWSs 41
3.6.2 Sanitary Surveys for NCWSs 42
3.6.3 Significant Deficiencies [ 42
3.7 State Practices or Procedures for Source Water Microbial Monitoring 43
3.7.1 Triggered Source Water Monitoring 43
3.7.2 Assessment Source Water Monitoring 44
3.7.3 Laboratory Methods 45
3.7.4 Invalidation of a Fecal Indicator-Positive Ground Water Source Sample 46
3.8 Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements 46
3.8.1 Public Notification Requirements 47
3.8.2 Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Requirements 48
3.8.3 Special Notice Requirements 48
3.9 State Practices and Procedures for Treatment Technique Requirements 49
3.9.1 Corrective Action Alternatives 50
3.9.2 Process for Determining 4-log Treatment of Viruses 50
3.9.3 Process for Determining Minimum Residual Disinfectant Concentration Prior to First
User 51
3.9.4 Alternative Technologies for Achieving 4-log Treatment of Viruses 51
3.9.5 Membrane Filtration Requirements to Demonstrate Virus Removal 51
3.9.6 Monitoring and Compliance Requirements for Systems Providing 4-log Treatment of
Viruses 51
3.9.6.1 PWSs Using a Chemical Disinfectant and Serving More than 3,300 People 52
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance ii November 2007
-------
3.9.6.2 PWSs Using a Chemical Disinfectant and Serving 3,300 People or Fewer 52
3.9.6.3 PWSs Using Membrane Filtration 53
3.9.6.4 PWSs Using State-Alternative Treatment 53
3.9.7 Criteria for Discontinuing 4-log Treatment of Viruses 58
3.9.8 Treatment Technique Violations 58
3.9.9 Monitoring Violations 59
Section 4 State Primacy Revision Application 61
4.1 State Primacy Program Revision 63
4.1.1 The Revision Process 64
4.1.2 The Final Review Process 64
4.2 State Primacy Program Revision Extensions 65
4.2.1 The Extension Process 65
4.2.2 Extension Request Criteria 66
4.2.3 Conditions of the Extension 66
4.3 State Primacy Package 70
4.3.1 The State Primacy Revision Checklist [40 CFR 142.12(c)(l)] 70
4.3.2 Text of the State's Regulation 71
4.3.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk 71
4.3.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist [40 CFR 142.14 and 40 CFR 142.15] 71
4.3.5 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16] 72
4.3.6 Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability [40 CFR 142.12(c)(2)] 72
4.3.6.1 Guidance for States on Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws 74
4.4 Guidance for the Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR 74
4.4.1 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Conduct
Source Water Monitoring 74
4.4.2 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Address
Significant Deficiencies 75
4.4.3 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Address
Source Water Fecal Contamination 76
4.4.4 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Consult with
the State Prior to Implementing Corrective Action 76
4.4.5 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Sanitary Surveys 77
4.4.5.1 Frequency and scope of sanitary surveys 77
4.4.5.2 Phased sanitary survey process 79
4.4.5.3 Reduced frequency of sanitary surveys for CWSs 80
4.4.5.4 What constitutes a significant deficiency 81
4.4.5.5 Notice to system of significant deficiencies 84
4.4.6 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Routine Source Water Microbial Monitoring85
4.4.6.1 Extending 24-hour time limit to collect triggered source water sample 86
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance iii November 2007
-------
4.4.6.2 Total coliform-positive sample solely the result of a distribution system deficiency
86
4.4.6.3 Invalidation of fecal indicator-positive samples 87
4.4.6.4 Monitoring at a Location After Treatment 87
4.4.7 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Treatment Technique Requirements 88
4.4.7.1 Confirmation of system achieving at least 4-log treatment of viruses 88
4.4.7.2 Determine the minimum residual disinfectant concentration 94
4.4.7.3 State-approved alternative technologies 95
4.4.7.4 Monitoring and compliance criteria 95
4.4.7.5 Monitoring, compliance, and membrane integrity testing requirements 99
4.4.7.6 Discontinuation of 4-log virus inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination of these technologies 100
Section 5 SDWIS Reporting and SNC Definitions „.... 103
Section 6 Public Notification, Consumer Confidence Report, and Special Notice Examples 105
Appendices
Appendix A: Primacy Revision Crosswalk
Appendix B: Rule Requirements
Appendix C: Rule Factsheets and Quick Reference Guide
Appendix D: Flowcharts
Appendix E: Guidance for Reviewing Extension Requests under Section 1412(b)(10) of the SDWA
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance iv November 2007
-------
List of Tables
Table 1-1. Sanitary Survey Requirements by System Type 7
Table 1-2. GWS Requirements for Reporting to the State Under the GWR 10
Table 1-3. GWS Recordkeeping Requirements Underthe GWR 10
Table 1-4. GWS Public Notification Requirements Underthe GWR 11
Table 1-5. State Recordkeeping Requirements 14
Table 1-6. State Requirements for Reporting to EPA 15
Table 1-7. Summary of Action Dates for the Ground Water Rule 16
Table 3-1. GWR Requirements Applying To Different Categories of Water Systems 35
Table 3-2. Laboratory Methods 46
Table 3-3. Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements 47
Table 4-1. State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for the GWR 63
Table 4-2. State Primacy Revision Checklist ^i^k.....^jF. 70
Table 4-3. Example Sanitary Survey Deficiencies 82
Table 4-4. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Free Chlorine, pH 6.0-9.0 90
Table 4-5. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Chlorine Dioxide, pH 6.0-9.0 90
Table 4-6. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Ozone 90
Table 4-7. Virus Inactivation from UV dose (mJ/cm2) : 93
Table 6-1. Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements 107
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance v November 2007
-------
List of Examples
Example 3-1. Example State Correspondence and Form for GWSs to Notify State if they Provide 4-log
Treatment of Viruses 30
Example 3-1. Example State Correspondence and Form for GWSs to Notify State if they Provide 4-log
Treatment of Viruses (cont.) 31
Example 3-2. Example System Notification Letter 38
Example 3-2. Example Monthly Operations Report for GWSs Serving More Than 3,300 People 54
Example 3-3. Example Monthly Operation Report for GWSs Serving 3,300 People or Fewer 56
Example 4-1. Example Extension Request Checklist 68
Example 4-2. Example of Attorney General's Statement 73
Example 4-3. Example Significant Deficiency Notification Letter 85
Example 4-4. Example Summary Monthly Report for a GWS Disinfecting with Ultraviolet Radiation... 97
Example 4-5. Example Daily Operating Log for Calculated Dose Approach 98
Example 4-6. Example Daily Operating Log for UV Intensity Setpoint Approach 99
Example 6-1. Example Tier 1 Public Notification for a Fecal Indicator-Positive Triggered Source Water
Sample ^^^ .^^^. Ill
Example 6-2. Example of Regulated Contaminant Table and Special Notice in the CCR for Source Water
Fecal Contamination 112
Example 6-3. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Comply With State Corrective Action
Plan or Schedule 114
Example 6-4. Example of a Special Notice Regarding a Significant Deficiency 115
Example 6-5. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Take Corrective Action 117
Example 6-6. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Corrective Action 118
Example 6-7. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log Treatment of
Viruses 120
Example 6-8. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log Treatment of
Viruses 121
Example 6-9. Example Tier 3 Public Notification for Failure to Collect Source Water Sample(s)
Following a Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result 123
Example 6-10. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Source Water Sample(s) Following
a Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result 124
Example 6-11. Example Tier 3 Public Notification for Failure to Conduct Compliance Monitoring 126
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance vi November 2007
-------
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Ground Water Rule Requirements 18
Figure 4-1. Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of Program Revisions 65
Figure 4-2. Example Pump Curve for A Ground Water Well 91
Figure 4-3. Schematic of Hydropneumatic System 92
Figure 4-4. Five Pressure Vessels in Series 93
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance vii November 2007
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance viii November 2007
-------
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ASDWA
CCR
CDC
CFR
CT
CWSs
DBFs
EPA
FR
gpm
GWR
GWS
GWUDI
HQ
HSA
MCL
MCLG
M-DBP Cluster
MMWR
MRDL
MWCO
NCWS
NF
NIPDWR
NPDWR
NRC
NTNCWS
O&M
OECA
OGC
OGWDW
ORC
psi
PWS
PWSS
Q&A
RO
SBREFA
SDWA
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
Consumer Confidence Report
Centers for Disease Control
Code of Federal Regulations
The Residual Concentration of Disinfectant (mg/L) Multiplied by the Contact Time
(in minutes)
Community Water Systems
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Register
Gallon Per Minute
Ground Water Rule
Ground Water System
Ground Water Under the Direct Influence
Headquarters
Hydrogeologic Sensitivity Assessment
Maximum Contaminant Level
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
Microbial-Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Cluster
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
Maximum Residual Detection Level
Molecular Weight Cut-Off
Noncommunity Water System
Nanofiltration
National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulation
National Primary Drinking Water Regulation
National Research Council
Nontransient Noncommunity Water System
Operations and Maintenance
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Office of General Counsel
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Office of Regional Counsel
Pound-force Per Square Inch
Public Water System
Public Water System Supervision
Question and Answer
Reverse Osmosis
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
IX
November 2007
-------
SDWIS
SNC
Stage 1 DBPR
Stage 2 DBPR
SWAP
SWTR
TCR
TNCWS
TT
UV
WHPP
Safe Drinking Water Information System
Significant Non-complier
Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
Source Water Assessment Program
Surface Water Treatment Rule
Total Conform Rule
Transient Noncommunity Water System
Treatment Technique
Ultraviolet
Wellhead Protection Program
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
Introduction
This document provides guidance to EPA regions and states exercising primary enforcement
responsibility under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) concerning how the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) interprets the Ground Water Rule (GWR) under the SDWA. It also provides
guidance to the public and the regulated community on how EPA intends to exercise its discretion in
implementing the statute and regulations. This guidance is designed to implement national policy on these
issues. Throughout this document, the terms "state" and "states" are used to refer to all types of primacy
agencies including U.S. territories, Indian tribes, and EPA Regions.
The SDWA provision and EPA regulations described in this document contain legally binding
requirements. This document does not substitute for those requirements, nor is it a regulation itself. It
does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, states, or the regulated community and may not
apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. EPA and state decision makers retain the
discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from this guidance, where appropriate.
Any decisions regarding a particular facility will be made based on the applicable statutes and regulations.
Therefore, interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the appropriateness of the
application of this draft guidance to a particular situation. EPA will then consider whether or not the
recommendations or interpretations in the draft guidance are appropriate in that situation based on the law
and regulations. EPA may change this guidance in the future.
This manual contains the following sections:
$ Section 1 summarizes the rule requirements of the GWR and presents a timetable of
important dates.
$ Section 2 lists the "stand-alone" guidance materials that will help states and public water
systems (PWSs) adopt each new requirement.
$ Section 3 discusses state implementation activities.
$ Section 4 covers state primacy revision requirements, including a detailed time frame for
application review and approval. This section also contains guidance and references to
help states adopt each new special primacy requirement included in the GWR.
$ Section 5 addresses violation determinations and associated reporting requirements to
assist states in their compliance activities.
$ Section 6 provides examples of scenarios requiring public notification and/or special
notices, and includes sample language to include in public notifications, special notices
and Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs).
The appendices of this document also provide information that will be useful to states and EPA Regions
throughout the primacy revision application process.
$ Appendix A contains the primacy revision application crosswalk for the GWR.
$ Appendix B contains a copy of the final GWR.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance xi November 2007
-------
$ Appendix C contains fact sheets and a quick reference guide for the GWR.
$ Appendix D presents flowcharts to help states and systems implement the GWR.
$ Appendix E contains guidance for reviewing extension requests under SDWA Section
Please note that, in several sections, the guidance makes suggestions and offers alternatives that go
beyond the minimum requirements indicated. EPA does this to provide information and/or suggestions
that may be helpful to implementation efforts. Such suggestions are prefaced by "may" or "should" and
are to be considered advisory. They are not required elements of the GWR.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance xii November 2007
-------
Section 1
Rule Requirements
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
1.1 Introduction
EPA published the Ground Water Rule (GWR) in the Federal Register (FR) on November 8, 2006
(Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216, 65574, available at: www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
WATER/2006/November/Dav-08/w8763.pdf). This rule is part of a series of rules, the "Microbial-
Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Cluster" (M-DBP Cluster), which is intended to improve control of
microbial pathogens while minimizing public health risks of disinfectants and disinfection byproducts
(DBPs). The GWR builds upon the Total Coliform Rule (TCR) by addressing the health risks of fecal
contamination in community water systems (CWSs) and noncommunity water systems (NCWSs) (e.g.,
nontransient noncommunity water systems [NTNCWSs] and transient noncommunity water systems
[TNCWSs]) that use ground water. The GWR does not apply, however, to public water systems (PWSs)
that combine all of their ground water with surface water before the treatment. These systems must
comply instead with requirements for surface water systems and systems using ground water under the
direct influence of surface water (Subpart H systems).
Key provisions of the GWR include:
• Periodic on-site reviews and inspections of ground water systems (GWSs) requiring evaluation of
eight specific sanitary survey elements and identification of significant deficiencies.
• Requirements to correct significant deficiencies and eliminate fecal contamination through
specified actions.
• Triggered source water monitoring to test for the presence of fecal indicators (E. coli,
enterococci, or coliphage) in the sample.
• Compliance monitoring to ensure that treatment technologies installed to treat drinking water
reliably achieve at least 99.99 percent (4-log) inactivation or removal of viruses.
Section 1 of this guidance manual also offers suggestions and alternatives that go beyond the minimum
primacy agency requirements specified in the GWR. Such suggestions are prefaced by "may" or "should"
and are to be considered advisory.
1.1.1 History
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) maintain a database of information on waterborne
disease outbreaks in the United States. The CDC defines a waterborne disease outbreak as occurring when
at least two persons experience a similar illness after ingesting drinking water from the same source or
system.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 3 November 2007
-------
The CDC reports1 that between 1991 (the year in which the TCR went into effect) and 2000, GWSs (both
CWSs and NCWSs) were associated with 68 outbreaks that caused 10,926 illnesses. These accounted for
51 percent of all waterborne disease outbreaks in the United States. The major deficiency in GWSs was
source water contamination, which is either untreated or inadequately treated ground water. Contaminated
source water (classified by the CDC as outbreaks caused by untreated ground water and treatment
deficiencies) was the cause of 79 percent of the outbreaks in GWSs (63 percent of CWS outbreaks and 86
percent of NCWS outbreaks).
Of the 68 outbreaks in GWSs, 14 (21 percent) were associated with specific bacterial pathogens. The
fecal bacterial pathogen, Shigella, caused more reported outbreaks (7 percent) than any other identifiable
agent. Identified viral pathogens were associated with four (6 percent) reported outbreaks. Etiologic
agents were not identified in 39 (57 percent) outbreaks; however, EPA suspects that many of these
outbreaks were caused by viruses, given that it is generally more difficult to analyze for viral pathogens
than bacterial pathogens.
Despite the data, the National Research Council (NRC) believes that the waterborne disease outbreaks in
the CDC database (for both surface and ground waters) represent a small percentage of the actual number.
In practice, most waterborne outbreaks in water systems are not recognized until a sizable proportion of
the population is ill.
EPA estimates that approximately 70 percent of GWSs provide either untreated ground water or provide
treatment of less than 4-log virus inactivation or removal.2 Approximately 18 percent (20 million) of
people served by PWSs that use ground water sources receive water that has not been disinfected, while
over 60 percent (70 million) receive either water that has not been disinfected or water treated to less than
4-log inactivation or removal of viruses. EPA also recognizes that existing outbreak and source water
fecal contamination occurrence data do not appear to support mandatory disinfection of all GWSs. But
despite the potential for under-reporting, the data indicate that outbreaks in GWSs are a problem, and
source contamination and inadequate treatment (or treatment failures) are responsible for the great
majority of outbreaks.
1.1.2 Development of the Ground Water Rule
The Agency's goal in developing the GWR is to reduce the risk of illness caused by microbial
contamination in PWSs relying on ground water. As part of the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA), Congress directed EPA to promulgate a National Primary Drinking Water
Regulation (NPDWR) requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all PWSs, including those
served by surface water and ground water. In 1987, EPA began developing a rule to cover GWSs. From
1 The data in this and the subsequent two paragraphs are reported in the following sources:
Barwick, R.S., D.A. Levy, G.F. Craun, M.J. Beach, and R.L. Calderon. 2000. Surveillance for waterborne-disease outbreaks—United
States, 1997-1998. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 49(SS04):l-35.
Kramer, M.H., B.L. Herwaldt, G.F. Craun, R.L. Calderon, and D.D. Juranek. 1996. Waterborne disease: 1993-1994. Journal AWWA.
88(3):66-80.
Lee, S.H., D.A Levy, G.F. Craun, M.J. Beach, and R.L. Calderon. 2002. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks-United States,
1999-2000. MMWR. 51(SS08):l-28.
Levy, D.A., M.S. Bens, G.F. Craun, R.L. Calderon, and B.L. Herwaldt. 1998. Surveillance for Waterborne-Disease Outbreaks—United
States, 1995-1996. MMWR. 47(SS-5):l-34.
Moore, A.C., B.L. Herwaldt, G.F. Craun, R. L. Calderon, A.K. Highsmith, and D.D. Juranek. 1993. Surveillance for waterborne disease
outbreaks—United States, 1991-1992 MMWR. Surveillance Summary SS-5, U.S. CDC. 42(SS-05):l-22.
2 USEPA, 2006d. Economic Analysis for the Final Ground Water Rule. EPA 815-R-06-014
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 4 November 2007
-------
1990 to 1997, EPA conducted technical discussions on a number of issues, primarily to establish a
reasonable means of determining whether a ground water source was vulnerable to fecal contamination
and, thus, pathogens. This effort was accomplished through ad hoc working groups with the participation
of EPA Headquarters and regional offices, states, local governments, academicians, and trade
associations.
The SDWA was amended in August 1996 and, as a result, several statutory provisions were added
establishing new drinking water requirements. Specifically, Congress required under section 1412(b)(8)
that EPA develops regulations specifying the use of disinfectants for GWSs "as necessary." These
amendments established a new regulatory framework that required EPA to set criteria for states to
determine whether GWSs need to disinfect.
EPA held a series of stakeholder meetings to present a summary of the findings resulting from technical
discussions held since 1990 and from information generated by internal EPA working groups with the
intention of developing disinfection criteria for GWSs. The purpose of these meetings was to engage all
interested stakeholders in the analysis of data to develop the GWR. In addition, EPA received valuable
input from small system operators as part of an Agency outreach initiative under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA).
In addition to stakeholder input, EPA has used the results of numerous field and laboratory studies
conducted over the past 20 years to characterize the epidemiologic, hydrogeologic, well construction,
microbial-source attributes, and treatment technology considerations in the development of the GWR.
1.1.3 Benefits of the Ground Water Rule
1.1.3.1 Quantifiable Health Benefits
The primary benefits of the GWR come from reductions in the risk of microbial illness from drinking
water. In particular, the GWR focuses on reducing illness and death associated with viral infection. It is
likely that the value estimated in the illness calculations used to estimate the benefits of this rule
underestimate the true benefit because they do not include pain and suffering associated with viral and
bacterial illnesses. According to the risk assessment performed for the Economic Analysis,3 the
annualized present value of the GWR is $19.7 million, with a 90-percent confidence interval of $6.5 to
$45.4 million. This result is based on the number of endemic viral illnesses and deaths avoided
attributable to this rule. The GWR will also decrease bacterial illness and death associated with fecal
contamination of ground water.
1.1.3.2 Non-Quantifiable Health Benefits
By reducing bacterial illnesses and deaths, as well as illnesses and deaths associated with viruses, the
GWR provides significant health benefits beyond the quantifiable health benefit estimates. The GWR will
also result in non-health benefits, such as avoided outbreak response costs and increased information that
will provide added benefits to the systems and their customers, by providing information to the system
operator to ensure the system continues to provide safe drinking water. The GWR will also provide the
benefit of reducing uncertainty regarding drinking water safety, which may lead to reduced costs
associated with individuals seeking alternative drinking water sources or auxiliary treatment for their
existing sources.
3 USEPA, 2006d. Economic Analysis for the Final Ground Water Rule. EPA 815-R-06-014
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 5 November 2007
-------
1.2 Requirements of the Rule: Public Water Systems
The following rule requirements are from the GWR published in the Federal Register on November 8,
2006 (Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216, 65574, available at: www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
WATER/2006/November/Dav-08/w8763 .pdf V
For a copy of the actual rule language, see Appendix B, or visit EPA's Web site at
www. epa. gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/regulation .html.
This section provides a brief summary of the rule requirements. GWR requirements are explained in more
detail in section 3.
1.2.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates
For more detailed information about to whom this rule applies and the applicable compliance dates, see
section 1.4 of this document.
1.2.1.1 To Whom Does The Rule Apply?
The GWR addresses fecal contamination in systems that use wells or other ground water sources. The
rule applies to CWSs and NCWSs, regardless of size. The GWR applies to all PWSs that:
• Rely entirely on one or more ground water sources;
• Are consecutive systems that receive finished ground water; or,
• Mix surface and ground water, where ground water is added directly to the distribution system
and provided to consumers without treatment equivalent to the treatment provided for surface
water.
For the purposes of this document, the term "ground water system" (or GWS) will be used to refer to a
system to which the GWR applies.
1.2.1.2 What Are The Compliance Dates?
Most of the GWR requirements take effect December 1, 2009. These requirements include:
• GWSs will be subject to triggered source water monitoring.
• Corrective action if a significant deficiency is identified.
• Corrective action if ground water source samples test positive for fecal contamination.
• Written notification from GWSs providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses that demonstrates
the treatment effectiveness.
GWSs bringing a new ground water source into service after November 30, 2009 must either meet the
triggered source water monitoring requirements of the GWR or provide 4-log treatment of viruses. After
that date, new systems with 4-log treatment of viruses must provide written notification to the state that
they are providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 6 November 2007
-------
States must complete all initial sanitary surveys for CWSs by December 31, 2012. NCWSs (and CWSs
that qualify to have sanitary surveys conducted once every 5 years) must complete initial surveys by
December 31,2014.
1.2.2 Sanitary Surveys for GWSs [40 CFR 141.401]
GWSs must provide, at the state's request, any existing information that would allow the state to perform
a sanitary survey. Examples of existing information that may be necessary to perform the survey include
past survey reports, source water vulnerability assessments, monitoring and maintenance records,
construction details of system infrastructure components, and operations and management-related records.
As Table 1-1 summarizes, the state is required to perform a sanitary survey for CWSs every 3 years
(except for CWSs that meet certain conditions outlined in section 3.6.1 of this guidance manual) and for
NCWSs (and CWSs that meet the conditions outlined in section 3.6.1) every 5 years. See section 3.6.1 for
more information on sanitary survey schedules.
Table 1-1. Sanitary Survey Requirements by System Type
System Type
CWSs
CWSs providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the
first user for all its ground water sources or if it has an outstanding
performance record, as determined by the state.1
NCWSs
Timeframe
Every 3 years
Every 5 years
All Initial Sanitary
Surveys Completed by
12/31/2012
12/31/2014
1. The GWR allows states to define outstanding performance.
The GWR specifies eight elements integral to an effective sanitary survey. These elements are taken from
the EPA and Association of State Drinking Water Administrators' (ASDWA's) guidance for conducting
sanitary surveys (Guidance Manual for Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems; Surface
Water and Ground Water Under the Direct Influence [GWUDI]. April 1999 EPA 815-R-99-016). This
document is available at www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/pdf/sansurv/sansurv.pdfand from the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline (800) 426-4791). The eight elements are:
• Source (protection, physical components, and condition).
• Treatment.
• Distribution System.
• Finished Water Storage.
• Pumps, Pump Facilities, and Controls.
• Monitoring, Reporting, and Data Verification.
• Water System Management and Operations.
• Operator Compliance with State Requirements.
1.2.3 Ground Water Source Microbial Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402]
The GWR has three general categories of ground water source microbial monitoring requirements: 1)
triggered source water monitoring, 2) additional source water sampling, and 3) assessment source water
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
monitoring. This section provides a brief summary of ground water source microbial monitoring
requirements. Monitoring requirements are explained in more detail in section 3.
1.2.3.1 Triggered Source Water Monitoring
Any GWS that does not provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer and is
notified of a total coliform-positive sample collected in compliance with the TCR (40 CFR 141.21), must
conduct triggered source water monitoring.
Systems providing 4-log treatment of viruses must notify their state that they provide treatment and must
conduct compliance monitoring (see section 1.2.4.1), or they will also be required to conduct triggered
source water monitoring if they are notified of a total coliform-positive sample collected in compliance
with the TCR. Systems providing 4-log treatment (who are not providing that treatment as a result of a
corrective action) can opt to conduct triggered source water monitoring instead of compliance monitoring,
as long as the state allows it.
When a system is notified of a total coliform-positive sample, the system must collect at least one ground
water source sample from each source in use at the time the total coliform-positive sample was collected.
The triggered source water sample must be analyzed for the presence of a state-approved fecal indicator.
If the triggered source water sample is fecal indicator-positive, the GWS must either take corrective
action, as directed by the state, or if corrective action is not required by the state and the sample is not
invalided by the state the system must collect five additional source water samples and analyze them for
the presence of a state-approved fecal indicator.
The GWR allows states to determine that the cause of a total coliform-positive sample collected in
compliance with the TCR is directly related to the distribution system and should therefore not trigger
fecal indicator source water monitoring. States may also invalidate a fecal indicator-positive ground water
source sample under conditions specified in the GWR. If a fecal indicator-positive source sample is
invalidated, the system must collect another source water sample within 24 hours of being notified by the
state of its invalidation decision and have it analyzed for the same fecal indicator that was tested for in the
invalidated sample.
1.2.3.2 Additional Source Water Sampling
If the state does not require corrective action in response to a fecal indicator-positive triggered source
water sample, the system must collect five additional source water samples (from the same source) within
24 hours of being notified of the fecal indicator-positive sample. These additional source water samples
should be analyzed for the same fecal indicator as was analyzed in the triggered source water sample. If
any of the five additional source water samples are fecal indicator-positive, the GWS must take corrective
action.
1.2.3.3 Assessment Source Water Monitoring
As a complement to the triggered source water monitoring provision, states may require GWSs to conduct
assessment source water monitoring, as needed. This flexible provision gives states the opportunity to
target high risk systems for additional source water monitoring and require corrective action, if necessary.
1.2.4 Treatment Technique Requirements For GWSs [40 CFR 141.403]
GWSs must take corrective action if a significant deficiency is identified, or if the initial source sample (if
required by the state) or one of the five additional ground water source samples has tested positive for
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 8 November 2007
-------
fecal contamination. A "significant deficiency" is defined as a defect in design, operation, or
maintenance, or a failure or malfunction of the sources, treatment, storage, or distribution system that the
state determines to be causing, or has potential for causing, the introduction of contamination into the
water delivered to consumers.
The system must implement at least one of the following corrective actions:
• Correct all significant deficiencies.
• Provide an alternate source of water.
• Eliminate the source of contamination.
• Provide treatment that reliably achieves at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation,
removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the
first customer for the ground water source.
1.2.4.1 Treatment Technique Compliance Monitoring [40 CFR 141.403(b)]
In order not to be subject to triggered source water monitoring, a GWS must notify the state that it
provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses using virus inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal before or at the first customer by December 1, 2009
and is therefore not subject to the triggered source water monitoring requirements. The system must then
begin compliance monitoring designed to show the efficacy of their treatment processes by December 1,
2009. GWSs that provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer on or after
December 1, 2009 must notify the state that they provide treatment and conduct compliance monitoring,
or they must comply with the GWR's triggered source water monitoring requirements.
Compliance Monitoring
Systems that use chemical disinfection and serve more than 3,300 people must continuously monitor their
disinfectant concentration. Systems must maintain the minimum disinfectant residual concentration
determined by the state. If continuous monitoring equipment fails, systems must take grab samples every
4 hours until the equipment is repaired. The equipment must be repaired within 14 days.
Systems that use chemical disinfection and serve 3,300 people or fewer must take daily grab samples or
meet the continuous monitoring requirements described above for systems serving more than 3,300
people. If any daily grab sample measurement falls below the minimum state-required residual
disinfectant concentration, the system must take follow-up samples every 4 hours until the residual is
restored to the required level.
Systems using membrane filtration for 4-log treatment of viruses must monitor the membrane filtration
process according to state-specified monitoring requirements and must operate the membrane filtration
according to all state-specified compliance requirements. States can refer to EPA's Membrane Filtration
Guidance Manual (November 2005 EPA 815-R-06-009) for information on membrane filtration system
design and operation, membrane filtration testing requirements, and startup and implementation
considerations.
Systems may use alternative treatment technologies (e.g., ultraviolet radiation [UV]) approved by the
state, if the alternative treatment technology, alone or in combination (e.g., filtration with UV, filtration
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 9 November 2007
-------
with chlorination) can reliably provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses. Systems must monitor the
alternative treatment according to state-specified monitoring requirements, and must operate the
alternative treatment according to compliance requirements established by the state.
1.2.5 Public Water System Reporting Requirements [40 CFR 141.405(c)]
Table 1-2. GWS Requirements for Reporting to the State Under the GWR
GWS Requirements for Reporting to the State
Rule Cite
In addition to the requirements of 40 CFR 141.31, GWSs must provide the following
information to the state:
40 CFR 141.405(a)
GWSs conducting compliance monitoring under 40 CFR 141.403(b):
Must notify the state any time they fail to meet any state-specified
requirements including, but not limited to: minimum residual disinfectant
concentration; membrane operating criteria or membrane integrity; and,
alternative treatment operating criteria, if operation in accordance with the
criteria or requirements is not restored within 4 hours. The system must notify
the state as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the next business day.
40 CFR 141.405(a)(l)
GWSs after completing any corrective action:
40 CFR 141.405(a)(2)
Must notify the state within 30 days of completion of the corrective action.
GWSs subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 141.402(a) that do not conduct source
water monitoring under 40 CFR 141.402(a)(5)(ii):
Must provide documentation to the state within 30 days of the total coliform-
positive sample that the system has met the state criteria.
40 CFR 141.405(a)(3)
1.2.6 Public Water System Recordkeeping Requirements [40 CFR 141.405(b)]
Table 1-3. GWS Recordkeeping Requirements Under the GWR
GWS Recordkeeping Requirements
In addition to the requirements of 40 CFR 141.33, GWSs must maintain the
following information in their records:
GWSs must maintain:
Documentation of corrective actions. Documentation shall be kept for a period
of not less than 10 years.
GWSs must maintain:
Documentation of notice to the public. Documentation shall be kept for a
period of not less than 3 years.
Rule Cite
40 CFR 141.405(b)
40 CFR 141.405(b)(l)
40 CFR 141.405(b)(2)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
10
November 2007
-------
GWS Recordkeeping Requirements
Rule Cite
GWSs must maintain:
Records of decision and records of invalidation of fecal indicator-positive
ground water source samples. Documentation shall be kept for a period of not
less than 5 years.
40 CFR 141.405(b)(3)
Consecutive GWSs must maintain:
Documentation of notification to the wholesale system(s) of total coliform-
positive samples that are not invalidated. Documentation shall be kept for a
period of not less than 5 years.
40 CFR 141.405(b)(4)
GWSs (including wholesale systems) that are required to perform compliance
monitoring must maintain:
Records of the state-specified minimum disinfectant residual. Documentation
shall be kept for a period of not less than 10 years.
40 CFR 141.405(b)(5)(i)
GWSs (including wholesale systems) that are required to perform compliance
monitoring must maintain:
Records of the lowest daily disinfectant residual concentration and records of
the date and duration of any failure to maintain the state-prescribed minimum
residual disinfectant concentration for a period of more than 4 hours.
Documentation shall be kept for a period of not less than 5 years.
40 CFR 141.405(b)(5)(ii)
GWSs (including wholesale systems) that are required to perform compliance
monitoring must maintain:
Records of state-specific compliance requirements for membrane filtration and
of parameters specified by the state for state-approved alternative treatment
and records of the date and duration of any failure to meet the membrane
operating, membrane integrity, or alternative treatment operation requirements
for more than 4 hours. Documentation shall be kept for a period of not less
than 5 years.
40 CFR 141.405(b)(5)(iii)
1.2.7 Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations [40 CFR 141.402(a) and 40 CFR
141.403(a)]
Table 1-4. GWS Public Notification Requirements Under the GWR
GWS Public Notification Requirements
GWSs that detect E. coli, enterococci, or coliphage in a source water sample, as
specified in 40 CFR141.402(a) and 40 CFR141.402(b) except when the state has
invalidated the sample as specified in 40 CFR141.402(d), must provide Tier 1 public
notice.
Rule Cite
40CFR141.202(a)Table
1(8)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
11
November 2007
-------
GWS Public Notification Requirements
Rule Cite
GWSs that fail to take corrective action within 120 days following a significant
deficiency or fecal indicator-positive source water sample or fail to maintain at least
4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer
under 40 CFR 141.403(a) must provide Tier 2 public notice.
40 CFR 141.203(a) Table
1(4)
GWSs that fail to comply with a state-approved schedule and plan, including state-
specified interim measures, to correct a significant deficiency and/or eliminate fecal
contamination in a ground water source at any time after state approval or state
direction pursuant to 40 CFR 141.403(a)(2) must provide Tier 2 public notice.
40 CFR 141.203(a) Table
1(4)
GWSs that fail to conduct required ground water source monitoring, including
compliance monitoring, triggered source water monitoring when a system has a total
coliform-positive sample in the distribution system (40 CFR 141.402(a)(2)),
additional source water monitoring following a fecal indicator-positive source water
sample(if the state does not require corrective action) (40 CFR 141.402(a)(3)), and, if
required by the state, assessment source water monitoring (40 CFR 141.402(b)), must
provide Tier 3 public notice.
40 CFR141.203(a) Table
1(4)
1.2.8 CCR Requirements [40 CFR 141.153]
CWSs are required to report GWR treatment technique violations and monitoring violations in their
Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs). In addition, the GWR has special notice requirements for CWS
requiring them to report additional information in their CCRs. These special notice requirements are
summarized in section 1.2.9 and described in more detail in section 3.8.2. More information on general
CCR requirements can be found at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccrl.html.
1.2.9 Special Notice Requirements [40 CFR 141.403(a)(7)]
The GWR requires special notice under specific circumstances. Special notice is a separate requirement
from public notification and CCR requirements. For CWSs, special notice is made in the CCR. NCWSs
will be required to prepare and distribute special notice in a manner approved by their state. For some of
the circumstances requiring special notice, systems will not have committed a violation. Circumstances
that require special notice differ for CWSs and NCWSs.
Community Water Systems
A CWS that receives notice from the state of a significant deficiency or notification of a fecal indicator-
positive source water sample that is not invalidated by the state must inform its customers of the fecal
indicator-positive ground water sample or of any significant deficiency that is uncorrected in their next
CCR. CWSs with a fecal indicator-positive ground water sample must include certain mandatory
elements in their special notice, including new health effects language for fecal indicators. More details
about these requirements are provided in section 3.8 and an example of a CWS special notice is provided
in section 6.
The system must continue to inform the public with a special notice annually until the state determines
the particular significant deficiency is corrected or the fecal contamination in the ground water source is
addressed.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
12
November 2007
-------
Noncommunity Water Systems
NCWSs must inform the public served by their water systems in a manner approved by the state of any
significant deficiency that has not been corrected within 12 months of being notified by the state (or
earlier if directed by the state). The system must continue to inform the public annually until the
significant deficiency is corrected.
1.3 Requirements of the Rule: States or Other Primacy Agencies
The following rule requirements are from the GWR published in the Federal Register on November 8,
2006 (Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216, 65574, available at:
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2006/November/Dav-08/w8763.pdf).
For a copy of the actual rule language, see Appendix B, or visit EPA's Web site at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/regulation.html.
Section 4 of this guidance manual provides a more detailed discussion of the GWR's primacy
requirements.
In order to receive primacy for the GWR, states must adopt regulations no less stringent than the GWR
requirements. States must submit revisions to their programs, regulations, or authorities no later than
November 22, 2008, although states can request an extension of up to 2 years (i.e., until November 22,
2010). Guidance on primacy requirements is provided in Section 4.
The GWR gives states latitude to define several GWR requirements, including some monitoring
requirements, definitions of significant deficiencies, and design and operating criteria. As a result, states
will need to address numerous special primacy requirements in their primacy packages. Section 4
provides guidance to states on preparing primacy materials for the GWR.
Primacy requirements of the GWR include:
• Legal authority to ensure that GWSs conduct source water monitoring, including determination of
the appropriate fecal indicators to use for source water monitoring.
• Legal authority to require correction of significant deficiencies and source water fecal
contamination.
• Legal authority to require source water monitoring, and adoption and implementation of adequate
procedures for sanitary surveys.
• Legal authority to ensure that GWSs consult with the state regarding corrective action(s).
1.3.1 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16(o)]
In addition to adopting basic primacy requirements specified in 40 CFR 142, states are required to adopt
primacy provisions pertaining to specific regulations where implementation of the rule involves activities
beyond general primacy provisions. States must include these rule-distinct provisions in an application for
approval or revision of their programs.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 13 November 2007
-------
1.3.2 Records Kept by States [40 CFR 142.14(d)(17)]
Table 1-5. State Recordkeeping Requirements
State Recordkeeping Requirements
Records of the currently applicable or most recent state determinations, including all
supporting information and an explanation of the technical basis for each decision,
made under the following provisions of the GWR:
Section 142.16(o)(2)(v) - Records of written notices of significant
deficiencies
Section 141.403(a)(5)(ii) - Records of corrective action plans and schedule
approval and/or state-specified interim measures.
Section 142.16(o)(4) - Records of confirmation that a significant deficiency
has been corrected or source water fecal contamination has been addressed.
Section 141.402(a)(5) - Records of state determinations and records of
GWS's documentation for not conducting triggered source water monitoring.
Section 141.402(d) - Records of state determination to invalidate fecal
indicator- positive source water samples.
Section 141.402(a)(2)(ii) - Records of state approval of source water
monitoring plans.
Section 142.16(o)(4)(ii) - Records of notices of the minimum residual
disinfection concentration (when using chemical disinfection) needed to
achieve at least 4-log virus inactivation before or at the first customer.
Sections 142.16(o)(4)(iv) and 142.16(o)(4)(v) - Records of notices of state-
specified monitoring and compliance requirements (when using membrane
filtration or alternative treatment) needed to achieve at least 4-log treatment of
viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log
inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer.
Sections 141.403(b)(l) and 141.403(b)(2) - Records of written notice from a
GWS that provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation,
removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log inactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer for a ground water source.
Section 142.16(o)(4)(vi) - Records of written determinations that a GWS may
discontinue 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of 4-log inactivation and removal).
Rule Cite
40CFR142.14(d)(17)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(i)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(ii)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(iii)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(iv)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(v)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(vi)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(vii)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(viii)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(ix)
40CFR142.14(d)(17)(x)
1.3.3 State Reporting Requirements [40 CFR 142.15(c)(7)]
Under 40 CFR 142.15, EPA currently requires states to report to EPA information such as violations,
variance and exemption status, and enforcement actions. Table 1-6 describes the additional reporting
requirements for states under the GWR.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
14
November 2007
-------
Table 1-6. State Requirements for Reporting to EPA
State Requirements for Reporting to EPA
Rule Cite
For sanitary surveys:
The month and year in which the most recent sanitary survey was
completed or, for a state that uses a phased review process, the date the
last element of the applicable eight elements was evaluated under 40
CFR 142.16(o)(2) for each GWS.
40CFR142.15(c)(7)(i)
For corrective action requirements:
For any corrective action taken under 40 CFR 141.403(a), the date the
GWS completed corrective action.
40CFR142.15(c)(7)(ii)
For compliance monitoring:
All GWSs providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus
inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for any ground
water source(s).
40CFR142.15(c)(7)(iii)
1.4 Summary of Requirements
1.4.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates
The GWR addresses fecal contamination in systems that use ground water sources. The rule applies to
both CWSs and NCWSs, regardless of size. The GWR applies to all PWSs that:
• Rely entirely on one or more ground water sources;
• Are consecutive systems that receive finished ground water; or,
• Mix surface and ground water, where ground water is added directly to the distribution system
and provided to consumers without treatment equivalent to the treatment provided for surface
water.
The GWR does not apply, however, to PWSs that combine all of their ground water with surface water
before the treatment required for surface water systems is applied.
GWSs must comply with the requirements of the GWR beginning December 1, 2009 unless otherwise
indicated. States must complete initial sanitary surveys for CWSs by December 31, 2012 or December 31,
2014 (based on rule requirements), and for NCWSs by December 31, 2014. The GWR also requires
systems to be subject to triggered source water monitoring, beginning no later than December 1, 2009.
There are additional treatment technique requirements if a significant deficiency is identified or if the
initial source sample (at state discretion) or one of the five additional ground water source samples has
tested positive for fecal contamination, also beginning no later than December 1, 2009.
The GWR requires GWSs that provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses using chemical disinfection,
membrane filtration, or a state-approved alternative treatment technology to provide written notification
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
15
November 2007
-------
that demonstrates the treatment effectiveness, no later than December 1, 2009. The written notification
must include engineering, operational and other information requested by the state so that the state can
evaluate the submission.
GWSs that bring a new ground water source in service after November 30, 2009 must meet the triggered
source water monitoring requirements or provide 4-log treatment of viruses. If directed by the state, a
system placing anew ground water source into service after November 30, 2009 must also conduct
assessment source water monitoring. The state will direct the system whether source water assessment
monitoring must begin before the ground water source is used to provide water to the public. For more
information on source water monitoring, refer to EPA's Ground Water Rule Source Water Monitoring
Methods Guidance Manual (July 2007 EPA 815-R-07-019).
If the system provides 4-log treatment of viruses, it must provide written notification to the state that they
are providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses—using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination of 4-log inactivation and removal—before or at the first customer. The written notification
must include engineering, operational and other information requested by the state so that the state can
evaluate the submission. The system must conduct compliance monitoring before or at the first customer
in order to demonstrate the effectiveness and reliability of the treatment source within 30 days of placing
the source in service. If the system discontinues 4-log treatment of viruses the system is subject to the
source water monitoring and analytical methods requirements of 40 CFR 141.402.
More information can be obtained from:
A. The GWR published on November 8, 2006 (71 FR 65574 and available at:
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2006/November/Dav-08/w8763.pdf
B. The EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline, Telephone: (800) 426-4791
The GWR published in the Federal Register on November 8, 2006 at 71 FR 65574, becomes effective on
January 8, 2007. This rule contains no early implementation requirements. The timetable for the GWR is
presented below in Table 1-7. Table 1-7 summarizes key compliance dates required (bold) by the GWR
as well as suggested action dates (shaded).
Table 1-7. Summary of Action Dates for the Ground Water Rule
Key Dates of Rule
November 8, 2006
November 22, 2006
August 8, 2008
November 8, 2008
November 30, 2009
GWR Requirements
GWR published in Federal Register
GWR promulgated
States are encouraged to submit final primacy applications or extension requests
to EPA.
Final primacy revision applications for GWR must be submitted to the
EPA regional administrator, unless state is granted an extension.
New ground water sources put in place after this date must meet triggered
source water monitoring requirements or provide 4-log treatment of
viruses.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
16
November 2007
-------
Key Dates of Rule
December 1, 2009
Augusts, 2010
November 8, 2010
December 31, 2012
December 31, 2014
GWR Requirements
GWR compliance date - all GWSs must comply.
GWSs providing at least 4-log virus inactivation, removal, or a
state-approved combination of these technologies before or at the
first customer must notify the state.
GWSs providing at least 4-log virus inactivation, removal, or a
state-approved combination of these technologies before or at the
first customer must begin compliance monitoring to demonstrate
treatment effectiveness.
GWSs for which the state has identified a significant deficiency
(during a sanitary survey) and GWSs at which at least one of the
five additional ground water source samples (or at state discretion,
the initial source sample) has tested positive for fecal
contamination must comply with the treatment technique
requirements.
GWSs must conduct triggered source water monitoring if the
system does not provide at least 4-log virus inactivation, removal,
or a state-approved combination of these technologies before or at
the first customer and the system is notified that a sample collected
for the TCR is total coliform-positive.
GWSs providing 4-log treatment of viruses must notify the state in
writing of the effectiveness and reliability of the treatment. The
written notification must include engineering, operational, and
other information the state requests.
States with approved extension agreements are encouraged to submit final
primacy applications to EPA.
Final primacy applications must be submitted to the EPA regional
administrator for systems with a full 2 year extension. [40 CFR
142.12(b)(l)]
State must complete first round of sanitary surveys for CWSs (with the
exception, if the state decides, of CWSs that provide at least 4-log treatment
of viruses — using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of
4-log inactivation and removal — before or at the first customer for all its
ground water sources or that have an outstanding performance record, as
determined by the state).
State must complete first round of sanitary surveys for NCWSs and any
CWSs that have qualified to have surveys conducted at a frequency of once
every 5 years.
The following flowchart depicts the general requirements of the rule for all systems (Figure 1.1).
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
17
November 2007
-------
Figure 1-1. Ground Water Rule Requirements
All CWSs and NCWSs, regardless of size that:
• Rely entirely on one or more ground water sources;
• Are consecutive systems that receive finished ground water; or,
• Mix surface and ground water, where ground water is added directly to the distribution system and provided to
consumers without treatment equivalent to the treatment provided for surface water.
Ground water systems must provide the state, at the state's
request, information to allow the state to conduct a sanitary
survey every 3 or 5 years
NO
Did the state
identify any significant
deficiency ?
Eliminate the source of
contamination, correct
the significant
deficiency, or
provide an alternate
water source
Provide treatment that
reliably achieves 4-log
inactivation or removal
of viruses
System must perform
compliance monitoring to
demonstrate 4-log inactivation
or removal of viruses
Does the system
disinfect prior to the
first customer?
Does the entry point
achieve 4-log inactivation or
removal of viruses?
Did the system
collect 5 additional source
water samples?
Has the system
detected fecal contamination
through triggered source
water monitoring?
Was a fecal
indicator detected?
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
18
November 2007
-------
Section 2
Resources and Guidance
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
In addition to this Implementation Guidance Manual, a variety of resource materials and technical
guidance documents have been prepared by EPA to facilitate understanding and implementing the GWR.
This section is an overview of each of these resources and includes instructions on how to obtain the
documents.
2.1 Technical Guidance Manuals
The following six technical guidance manuals have been or are being developed to support the GWR.
These manuals will aid EPA, state agencies, and affected PWSs in implementing this rule and will help
ensure that the implementation among these groups is consistent.
• Source Water Assessment Guidance Manual (under development). The objective of this guidance
manual is to provide states, tribes, and other primacy agencies with a brief review of
hydrogeologic sensitivity assessments, an overview of the characteristics of a sensitive aquifer,
information about how source water assessments may be used, and how to determine if a
sensitive aquifer has a hydrogeologic barrier.
• Ground Water Rule Source Water Monitoring Methods Guidance Manual. July 2007. EPA 815-
R-07-019. The objective of this guidance document is to provide ground water systems, states,
tribes, and other primacy agencies with a brief review of the source water monitoring provisions.
Since the primacy agencies may select one of three fecal indicators (e.g., E. coll, enterococci,
coliphage) that the system would be required to test for in the ground water source sample, the
source water monitoring guidance manual provides criteria to assist primacy agencies in their
determination of which fecal indicator is most appropriate. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/pdfs/guide_gwr_sourcewatermonitoring.pdf
• Complying with the Ground Water Rule: Small Entity Compliance Guide One of the Simple Tools
for Effective Performance (STEP) Guide Series. July 2007. EPA 815-R-07-018. This guidance
document is intended to be an official compliance guide to the GWR for small public water
systems, as required by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This
guide contains a general introduction and background for the GWR, describes the specific
requirements of the GWR and provides information on how to comply with those requirements.
Available at www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/pdfs/guide_gwr_secg_may 11 .pdf
• Consecutive System Guide for the Ground Water Rule. July 2007. EPA 815-R-07-020. The
consecutive system guidance manual describes the regulatory requirements of the GWR as it
applies to wholesale ground water systems and to the consecutive ground water systems that
receive and distribute that ground water supply. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/pdfs/guide gwr consecutive-guidance.pdf
• Corrective Action Guidance Manual (under development). The objective of the corrective action
guidance manual is to provide states, tribes, other primacy agencies and ground water systems
with an overview of the treatment technique requirements of the GWR. The guidance manual will
provide assistance with determining the information that should be included in a systems
corrective action plan.
• Ground Water Sanitary Survey Guidance Manual (under development). The objective of the
sanitary survey guidance manual is to provide states, tribes, and other primacy agencies with a
brief review of the sanitary survey regulatory provisions, give specific examples of what
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 21 November 2007
-------
constitutes a significant deficiency, and provide a checklist of elements that should be evaluated
during the course of a sanitary survey inspection.
In addition to the technical guidance manuals developed to support the GWR, EPA has developed other
guidance manuals that may help states agencies and affected PWSs with implementing the GWR.
• Guidance Manual for Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems; Surface Water and
Ground Water Under the Direct Influence (GWUDI). April 1999. EPA 815-R-99-016. Available
atwww.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/pdf/sansurv/sansurv.pdf
• Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public
Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. October 1990. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/guidsws.pdf
• Alternative Disinfectants andOxidants Guidance Manual. April 1999. EPA 815-R-99-014.
Available at www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/mdbptg.htmltfdisinfect.
• Disinfection Profiling and Benchmarking Guidance Manual. August 1999. EPA-815 -R-99-013.
Available at www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/mdbptg .html#bench.
• Disinfection profile/CT spreadsheet. April 2001. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/mdbptg.htmltfctspreadsheet.
• Revised Public Notification Handbook. March 2007. EPA 816-R-07-003. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/publicnotification/pdfs/guide_publicnotification_pnhandbook.pdf
• Revised State Implementation Guidance for the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule.
January 2001. EPA 816-R-01-002. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html.
• Preparing Your Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report Revised Guidance for Water
Suppliers. April 2005. EPA 816-R-05-002. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/pdfs/guide ccr forwatersuppliers.pdf
• Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing Drinking Water. 5th ed. January 2005.
EPA 815-R-05-004. Available at www.epa.gov/safewater/labcert/pdfs/manual labcert 2005.pdf
• Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct Rules Simultaneous Compliance Guidance Manual.
August 1999. EPA-815-R-99-015. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/mdbptg.htmltfsimult.
• Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual for the Final Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule. November 2006. EPA 815-R-06-007. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/lt2/pdfs/guide_lt2_uvguidance.pdf
• Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual: Overview and Summary Factsheet. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/lt2/pdfs/guide It2membranefiltrationfsfinal.pdf
• Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual. November 2005. EPA 815-R-06-009. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/lt2/pdfs/guide It2 membranefiltration final.pdf.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 22 November 2007
-------
For more information, contact EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791, or see the Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water Web page. The GWR and guidance documents are located at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/index.html.
2.2 Rule Presentation
Presentations that can be used for workshops on the GWR will be available in PowerPoint format on
EPA's Web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr.
2.3 Fact Sheet and Quick Reference Guide
Two Fact Sheets and a Quick Reference Guide for the GWR may be useful for conveying basic
information about the rule to water systems, new personnel, and stakeholders. These stand alone
documents are included in Appendix C of this guidance. They are:
• Ground Water Rule Factsheet: General Rule Requirements
• Ground Water Rule Factsheet: Monitoring Requirements
• Ground Water Rule: A Quick Reference Guide
2.4 Questions & Answers
Questions and Answers (Q&As) on the GWR will be provided in this section. These questions have been
asked of EPA through the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, implementation training, or other means.
[To be inserted]
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 23 November 2007
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 24 November 2007
-------
Section 3
State Implementation
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
3.1 Overview of Implementation
Ground Water Systems (GWSs) are required to take specific actions to comply with the Ground Water
Rule (GWR). Primacy agencies should clearly define the monitoring, reporting, performance, and follow-
up requirements of the GWR to help systems understand how the rule will affect them and what they must
do to comply. To meet this goal, primacy agencies are expected to carry out numerous implementation
activities, including:
• Identifying affected systems and their system-specific requirements.
• Communicating requirements to the affected systems.
• Updating data management systems.
• Performing sanitary surveys at prescribed intervals for community water systems (CWSs) and
noncommunity water systems (NCWSs).
• Notifying systems of significant deficiencies or source water fecal contamination in a timely
manner and explaining the schedule and steps a system should follow in response.
• Tracking regulated system compliance progress and implementing enforcement action as needed.
• Having the authority to designate an appropriate fecal indicator for use in identifying fecal
contamination after a positive total coliform sample under triggered monitoring or optional
assessment monitoring provisions.
• Directing systems to conduct assessment source water monitoring, in accordance with state-
determined requirements for such monitoring.
• Consulting with systems regarding any system changes.
This section discusses each of these items. To help state implementation efforts, Sections 3 and 4 of this
guidance manual offer suggestions and alternatives that go beyond the minimum primacy agency
requirements specified in the subsections of 40 CFR 142.16. Such suggestions are prefaced by "may" or
"should" and are to be considered advisory. They are not required elements of state applications for
program revision.
3.2 Identify Affected Systems
Different provisions of the GWR apply to different types (i.e., CWS, NCWS) and sizes of GWSs. In
addition, some requirements have different compliance deadlines based on system type. This section
summarizes how different types and sizes of GWS are affected by the various provisions of the GWR.
3.2.1 General Provisions [40 CFR 141.400(b)]
The GWR applies to public water systems (PWSs) that use ground water, except for PWSs that combine
all of their ground water with surface water or with ground water under the direct influence (GWUDI) of
surface water before the water is treated. These systems must comply instead with requirements for
surface water systems and systems using GWUDI of surface water (Subpart H systems). Consecutive
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 27 November 2007
-------
systems that receive finished ground water are also considered GWSs and must comply with the
requirements of the GWR. States may wish to query or sort their databases or other inventory information
to list all PWSs that use ground water (and do not combine it with surface water or GWUDI of surface
water before treatment).
As mentioned, systems using both surface water and ground water, often referred to as "mixed systems",
may have to comply with GWR requirements. If a PWS does not combine all its ground water with
surface water and treat all of that water according to the treatment requirements for surface water systems,
the system will have to comply with the requirements of the GWR. For example, if a PWS has a ground
water supply that enters the distribution system at a different entry point than the entry point where its
surface water is entering the distribution system, the PWS will have to comply with GWR requirements.
As another example, if a PWS' surface water and ground water supplies enter the distribution system via
a common entry point but some or all of the ground water bypasses the surface water treatment plant, the
system has to comply with the GWR. Those systems that use ground water sources seasonally (and do not
treat all of the ground water as if it were a surface water supply) have to comply with GWR requirements
while the ground water source is in use.
3.2.2 Sanitary Surveys [40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)(i)]
The GWR has minimum primacy requirements that apply to states for the frequency and content of
sanitary surveys of CWSs and NCWSs. Since these are minimum requirements, the state may conduct
more frequent sanitary surveys for any system, and may choose not to limit their sanitary surveys to the
general requirements that are provided in 40 CFR 142.16(o)(2). Note that compliance with the Total
Coliform Rule (TCR) sanitary survey requirements may not meet the revised scope and frequency of
sanitary survey requirements stated here.
Community GWSs
States are required to conduct sanitary surveys of community GWSs at least once every 3 years unless
either of the following conditions applies:
• The system provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of 4-log inactivation and removal) before or at the first user for all its
ground water sources and conducts state required monitoring to ensure continuous compliance.
• It has an outstanding performance record, as determined by the state and documented in previous
sanitary surveys and has no history of total coliform maximum contaminant level (MCL) or
monitoring violations under the TCR since the last sanitary survey.
If one of these conditions applies, the state may conduct a sanitary survey of the community GWS once
every 5 years instead of once every 3 years.
The state must conduct the first sanitary survey, to meet the revised sanitary survey scope, for all
community GWSs by December 31, 2012, unless the system has been put on a survey schedule of once
every 5 years, as described above. For such systems, the state must complete all of the first sanitary
surveys by December 31, 2014.
Noncommunity GWSs
States are required to conduct sanitary surveys of noncommunity GWSs at least once every 5 years. The
GWR does not allow additional time between surveys based on whether the NCWS has treatment in place
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 28 November 2007
-------
or has demonstrated outstanding performance. The state must conduct the first sanitary surveys, to meet
the revised sanitary survey scope, for all NCWSs by December 31, 2014.
3.2.3 Triggered Source Water Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402(a)]
Triggered source water monitoring is required for all GWSs that do not provide at least 4-log treatment of
viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and
removal) before or at the first customer for each ground water source. Triggered monitoring must be
carried out if one of these systems is notified that a sample the system collected for compliance with the
TCR is total-coliform positive. When this happens, the system must collect at least one sample from each
ground water source in use when the coliform-positive sample was collected. Samples must be collected
within 24 hours of notification of the total coliform-positive sample. States can, however, extend the 24
hour limit on a case-by-case basis. If approved by the state, systems with more than one ground water
source may sample a representative ground water source(s). These triggered source water samples must
be analyzed for a fecal indicator identified by the state.
If a triggered source water sample tests positive for a fecal indicator, the state may require corrective
action. If the state does not require corrective action at that point, the GWS must collect five additional
samples from the same source within 24 hours of being notified that the triggered source water sample
was fecal indicator-positive. In accordance with 40 CFR 141.403(a)(l), if one or more of the five
additional samples are fecal indicator-positive, the system must take corrective action. The GWR gives
states the latitude to decide whether a GWS will be required to take corrective action after the first
triggered source water sample tests positive for a fecal indicator or if the GWS will then be required to
collect five additional source water samples.
A GWS that is not required to meet the triggered source water monitoring requirements because it
provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer, must notify the state in writing
before December 1, 2009 that it provides treatment and is therefore not required to conduct triggered
source water monitoring. The system must also by December 1, 2009, begin compliance monitoring
designed to show the efficacy of their treatment processes.. Compliance monitoring requirements are
described in section 3.2.5.
Many GWSs have not documented or do not know if they provide 4-log treatment of viruses. Those
systems should notify the state that they provide treatment and submit supporting information, but they
should conduct triggered source water monitoring until the state has accepted information confirming that
the system provides 4-log treatment of viruses. An example of a letter and form that states could use to
help treated GWSs submit the necessary information to meet this reporting requirement is provided in
Example 3-1. States may want to provide additional factors (e.g., baffling) into their direction to systems.
The GWR has additional triggered source water monitoring requirements that apply to consecutive
systems and their wholesale GWSs. If a consecutive system is notified that a sample it collected for
compliance with the TCR is total-coliform positive, that consecutive system is required to notify its
wholesale system of the positive sample. The wholesale system is then required to perform triggered
source water monitoring, as described above. If a triggered source water sample collected by the
wholesale system is positive for a fecal indicator, the wholesale system must notify all consecutive
systems served by that ground water source of the fecal indicator source water positive result. For more
information and guidance on the GWR requirements for consecutive systems, refer to EPA's Consecutive
System Guide for the Ground Water Rule (EPA 815-R-07-020, July 2007) available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/pdfs/guide_gwr_consecutive-guidance.pdf GWSs must comply
with the triggered source water monitoring requirement beginning December 1, 2009.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 29 November 2007
-------
Example 3-1. Example State Correspondence and Form for GWSs to Notify State if they
Provide 4-log Treatment of Viruses
State Letterhead
Steven Smith, Director
Aquifer Water Company, PWSID XXXXXXX
Anywhere, USA
RE: Ground water treatment notification
Dear Mr. Smith:
The Ground Water Rule was published on November 8, 2006 to provide increased protection against pathogens in
public water systems that use ground water sources. One requirement of the rule is that public water systems using
ground water as their source must notify the state if they are currently providing 4-log treatment of viruses. This
treatment can be achieved using inactivation (disinfection), removal (filtration), or a combination of inactivation and
removal that has been approved by the state. If you are one of these systems, you are required to notify us by
December 1, 2009.
We have included a form with this letter to help you comply with this requirement. If you have more than one
ground water source, make copies of the form before filling it out and submit one completed copy for each source.
Please complete a copy of the form for each ground water source your utility uses.
An explanation of what constitutes 4-log treatment of viruses is provided on the form. If you are not sure how to
determine how much virus treatment your system has, call us at XXX XXX-1234 and we will help you make that
determination. If you understand how to make the determination but do not have the necessary information, check
the box that says "We do not know if our ground water system provides 4-log treatment of viruses." A
representative from our office will call you and advise you how to proceed.
Completed forms should be mailed to us at the health department address on the form. We appreciate your prompt
attention and reply.
Sincerely,
Your Regulator
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 30 November 2007
-------
Example 3-1. Example State Correspondence and Form for GWSs to Notify State if they
Provide 4-log Treatment of Viruses (cont.)
PWSID Number:
System Name:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Does Your System Provide 4-log Treatment of Viruses?
If your system disinfects with gaseous or liquid chlorine, use the table below to determine the CT that is provided for your
ground water. The CT required will depend on your ground water source's temperature and the free chlorine residual
concentration in your water at the first user. "CT" is an abbreviation for chlorine Concentration multiplied by Time.
To calculate your system's CT, multiply the free chlorine residual (in mg/L) at your first user's service connection by the
shortest amount of time (in minutes) water is coming into contact with the chlorine.
1. System's free chlorine residual (in mg/L) at first user's service connection:
2. Shortest amount of time (in minutes) water is coming into contact with the chlorine:
3. Multiply number and enter result: Min-mg/L (Total CT)
X
4. System's ground water source's coldest water temperature:
In Degrees C
On Line A in the table below circle the value that most closely relates to the temperature recorded on line 4 above.
On Line B in the table circle the 4-log inactivation value that is associated with the temperature you circled on line A.
Compare your CT value from Line 3 above with the value you circled in Line B of the table below. If your CT is a
number larger than the number you circled in Line B then your system probably provides at least 4-log treatment of
viruses.
CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Free Chlorine, pH 6.0-9.0
A.
B
Degrees C
4-los
Inactivation
1
11 6
2
107
3
98
4
89
5
80
6
76
7
79
8
68
9
64
10
60
11
S6
12
S9
13
4 8
14
44
15
40
16
3 8
17
36
18
34
19
39
20
30
CT values provided in the tables are modified by linear interpolation between 5°C increments.
If your system uses a different kind of disinfection (e.g., UV, ozone, chloramines) and/or filters its ground water, call
Susan Jones at the Green County Health Department at XXX-123-4567. She will work with you to determine how many
logs of virus treatment your system provides.
Check the line below that applies to your ground water system:
Our ground water system probably does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses
Our ground water system probably provides 4-log treatment of viruses
We do not know if our ground water system provides 4-log treatment of viruses
The following is an example calculation:
1. System's free chlorine residual (in mg/L) at first user's service connection:
0.5 mg/L
X
2. Shortest amount of time (in minutes) water is coming into contact with the chlorine:
10 minutes
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
3. Multiply number and enter result:
(0.5 X 10) =
4. System's ground water source's coldest water temperature:
Min-mg/L (Total CT)
10 In Degrees C
On Line A in the table below circle the value that most closely relates to the temperature recorded on line 4 above.
On Line B in the table circle the 4-log inactivation value that is associated with the temperature you circled on line A.
Compare your CT value from Line 3 above with the value you circled in Line B of the table below. If your CT is a
number larger than the number you circled in Line B then your system probably provides at least 4-log treatment of
viruses.
This system does not achieve 4-log inactivation of viruses because the value from Line 3 is smaller than the value
circled on Line B.
CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Free Chlorine, pH 6.0-9.0
A.
B
Degrees C
4-los
Inactivation
1
11 6
2
10.7
3
98
4
89
5
80
6
76
7
11
8
68
9
64
' S
k10,
60
11
56
12
59
13
W
o
14
44
15
40
16
38
17
36
18
34
19
39
20
30
CT values provided in the tables are modified by linear interpolation between 5°C increments.
Please complete this form and mail it to
Susan Jones
Green County Health Department
123 Main Street
Anywhere, USA
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
3.2.4 Treatment Technique Requirements [40 CFR 141.403(a)]
The GWR treatment technique requirements apply to all GWSs when a significant deficiency is identified
or when a source water sample indicates that a ground water source is fecal indicator-positive. The GWR
requires these systems to consult with the state within 30 days of receiving written notice of the
significant deficiency or written notice of the fecal indicator-positive result. As part of their consultation
with the state, the systems must address the appropriate corrective action they should take in response to
the deficiency or positive sample.
A GWS must respond within 120 days (or earlier, if directed to do so by the state) if it receives any of the
three types of notification listed below:
• Written notification from the state of a significant deficiency.
• Written notice from a laboratory that a source water sample collected in response to a fecal
indicator-positive triggered source water sample was also found to be fecal indicator-positive.
• Direction from the state that a fecal indicator-positive sample requires corrective action.
Within these 120 days (or the time period specified by the state), the system must either:
• Have completed corrective action according to the applicable state guidance, direction, and plan
review process.
• Be in compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule.
In addition to the treatment technique requirements, CWSs with source water fecal contamination and
CWSs and NCWSs with significant deficiencies are required to provide special notification (in addition to
associated public notification requirements) to the public annually until appropriate corrective action has
been taken. See section 3.9 of this guidance manual for a more detailed discussion of corrective action
plans, corrective action alternatives, and related notification requirements.
3.2.5 Compliance Monitoring [40 CFR 141.403(b)]
The GWR's compliance monitoring requirements apply to all community and noncommunity GWSs that
provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination
of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for each ground water source.
Existing GWSs must notify the state if they provide 4-log treatment of viruses and begin compliance
monitoring by December 1, 2009. New ground water sources placed in service after November 30, 2009
and providing at least 4-log virus treatment must begin compliance monitoring within 30 days of placing
the source in service.
GWSs serving more than 3,300 people conducting compliance monitoring must monitor the residual
disinfectant concentration continuously, record the lowest daily residual disinfectant concentration, and
maintain the state-determined minimum disinfectant residual concentration for each day the water is
served to the public. If the continuous monitoring equipment fails, the system must collect grab samples
every 4 hours until the continuous monitoring equipment is returned to service. Continuous monitoring
must be resumed within 14 days.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 33 November 2007
-------
Systems serving 3,300 or fewer people conducting compliance monitoring are required to monitor and
record, during peak hourly flow or another time designated by the state, the residual disinfectant
concentration daily for each day that water from the ground water source is served to the public. If the
disinfectant residual falls below the state-determined minimum concentration, the system must collect
follow-up samples every 4 hours until the minimum residual disinfectant concentration has been reached.
Systems using membrane filtration for 4-log treatment of viruses must monitor the membrane filtration
process according to state-specified monitoring requirements and must operate the membrane filtration
according to all state-specified compliance requirements.
Systems may use alternative treatment technologies (e.g., ultraviolet radiation [UV]) approved by the
state, if the alternative treatment technology, alone or in combination (e.g., filtration with UV, filtration
with chlorination) can reliably provide at least 4-log treatment of viruses. Systems must monitor the
alternative treatment according to state-specified monitoring requirements, and must operate the
alternative treatment according to compliance requirements established by the state.
3.2.6 Optional Assessment Source Water Monitoring [40 CFR 141.402(b)]
The GWR provides states with the option to require systems to conduct assessment source water
monitoring at any time and require systems to take corrective action. EPA believes that this optional
provision is an important tool for states that elect to require assessment source water monitoring on a
case-by-case basis. EPA recommends that states require GWSs that are most susceptible to fecal
contamination to conduct assessment monitoring. States may use hydrogeologic sensitivity assessments
(HSAs) as a tool to identify high risk systems for assessment source water monitoring. States also have
other information available to them to target high risk systems, such as source water assessments,
wellhead protection plans, and historical monitoring data. Previous data indicating source water fecal
contamination, particularly from TCR monitoring, in combination with GWR triggered source water
monitoring results, can be another important tool. The GWR suggests state-determined assessment source
water monitoring requirements that might be appropriate. These are discussed in more detail in section
3.7.2.
3.3 Communicate GWR Requirements to Affected Systems
States should identify what actions they plan on taking and develop a schedule for carrying out those
actions, in order to implement the GWR in a timely and effective manner. One key step for states
implementing the GWR should be communicating with those PWSs affected by the rule and preparing
them to comply with the relevant provisions. Systems should be notified of new requirements early
enough to ensure their ability to budget for and schedule their compliance actions. The more this is done,
the more prepared states and systems will be as compliance dates approach.
This section provides guidance to states on notifying affected PWSs of GWR requirements. This guidance
includes suggestions for organizing outreach efforts based on the provisions and compliance dates that
apply to different categories of systems.
3.3.1 Requirements and Target Notification Time Frames
States often notify systems of upcoming requirements using a form letter that may or may not be tailored
to some degree. Based on the GWR's provisions and different compliance schedules, states may find it
useful to draft and send out different form letters to different categories of systems. States should consider
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 34 November 2007
-------
categorizing systems early on in their GWR communication efforts so that each system is provided only
with the provisions and deadlines that apply to them.
Some system categories that may be effective for drafting form letters regarding the GWR are:
• CWSs.
NCWSs.
• Consecutive systems using ground water.
• GWSs serving more than 3,300 people that are likely to already provide at least 4-log treatment
of viruses.
• GWSs serving 3,300 or fewer people that are likely to already provide at least 4-log treatment of
viruses.
• Systems required by the state to conduct assessment source water monitoring.
Additional requirements specific to different categories of systems are provided in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1. GWR Requirements Applying To Different Categories of Water Systems
PWS Category
All GWSs
CWSs
NCWSs
GWR Requirement
Provide information to the state as needed for sanitary surveys.
Provide information requested by the state for conducting a hydrogeologic
sensitivity assessment (except consecutive systems)
Conduct triggered source water monitoring if 4-log treatment is not in place
(except consecutive systems).
Address significant deficiencies.
Address fecally contaminated source water (except consecutive systems).
• Conduct compliance monitoring if a chemical disinfectant is being used and
triggered source water monitoring requirements are not being met (except
^H^ consecutive systems).
Participate in sanitary surveys every 3 years (or every 5 years under certain
criteria).
Provide Special Notification of fecal contamination and any uncorrected
significant deficiencies (requirements are specific to CWSs).1
Participate in sanitary surveys every 5 years.
Provide Special Notification of any uncorrected significant deficiencies
(requirements are specific to NCWSs).1
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
PWS Category
GWR Requirement
Consecutive Systems
Using Ground Water
If a sample collected in the consecutive system's distribution system for
compliance with the TCR is total coliform-positive, the consecutive system is
required to notify its wholesale system of the positive sample.
Wholesale GWSs
If a sample collected in the distribution system of a consecutive system for
compliance with the TCR is total coliform-positive, the wholesale system
providing water to the consecutive system must collect a sample from its
ground water source(s) and analyze it for a state-designated fecal indicator.
Notify consecutive systems within 24 hours of learning of fecal indicator-
positive result.
GWSs Serving More than
3,300 People that Already
Provide at Least 4-log
Treatment of Viruses
Notify state in writing that system provides 4-log treatment of viruses in order
to conduct compliance monitoring instead of triggered source water
monitoring.
To satisfy compliance monitoring requirements, continuously monitor
residual disinfectant concentration and record the lowest residual
concentration every day that water from ground water source is served to
public.
For alternative or membrane filtration systems, comply with state-specified
monitoring requirements.
GWSs Serving 3,300 or
Fewer People that Already
Provide at Least 4-log
Treatment of Viruses
Notify the state in writing that system provides 4-log treatment of viruses in
order to conduct compliance monitoring instead of triggered source water
monitoring.
Monitor and record the residual disinfectant concentration, at time designated
by the state, from ground water source every day it produces water that is
served to the public.
For alternative or membrane filtration systems, comply with state-specified
monitoring requirements.
Systems Required by the
State to Conduct
Assessment Source Water
Monitoring
Meet state-determined requirements for assessment source water monitoring.
1. See section 3.8.3 for more information on special notice requirements for CWSs and NCWSs.
3.3.2 Methods of Communication
Written Notice
Providing written notice of a final rule to GWSs serves two purposes: (1) the recipient system obtains a
formal notice of upcoming regulatory requirements and a time line for compliance (in addition to EPA's
publication of the rule in the Federal Register), and (2) the primacy agency has a hard-copy document
that it may file and use in subsequent compliance tracking efforts.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
November 2007
-------
Written notification can be in the form of a letter from the state to affected systems. The letter should
include a summary of rule requirements and timeframes and direct the reader to an appropriate contact if
questions arise. States should consider including fact sheets or other summary materials with the letter.
Appendix C of this guidance includes additional draft publications that are intended to be distributed to
water systems through mailings, training sessions, and other educational forums. These publications (also
available at www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr.html) provide overviews of the GWRto help
systems understand the provisions of the rule and determine which provisions apply. They also describe
the benefits of the rule. Although valuable, these resources do not substitute for official rule language.
States should consider mailing official rule language with the letter or including in the letter the Web site
address where the regulatory language can be accessed.
A sample letter is provided in Example 3-2. In this example, the letter is tailored to systems based on their
compliance deadlines. As described earlier, states may wish to further tailor the letter to accommodate
systems for which the provisions are either limited or unique. Note that some of the requirements listed in
the letter (i.e., corrective action, testing for E. coll) may vary from state to state depending on which
GWR options a state chooses to adopt in its regulation.
Slide Presentation
For some GWSs, written communication alone will not result in full comprehension of the GWR
requirements. Slide presentations can be used by state staff and other training providers to present the
background of the rule, its benefits, and its requirements.
The EPA's Drinking Water Academy is developing a training session on the GWR (available in
Microsoft PowerPoint format). Copies of the presentation may be used to train other state personnel,
technical assistance providers, water system personnel, and the public. EPA's Drinking Water Academy
slides will be available electronically on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/dwa.html.
Guidance Documents
Technical guidance documents developed for the GWR are useful for explaining rule requirements and
specific aspects of rule implementation to system operators, including monitoring and compliance
determination. The guidance documents can be used as stand-alone references or as supporting materials
in GWR training events. See Section 2 for more information on these references.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 37 November 2007
-------
Example 3-2. Example System Notification Letter
State Letterhead
John Smith, Supt.
Town Water System, PWSID XXXXXXX
Town, ST 12345
RE: Ground Water Rule
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is to notify you that your public water system (PWS) will be affected by the Ground Water Rule (GWR).
The GWR applies to all PWSs that use ground water as their source of water and do not combine their ground water
with surface water prior to treatment. The requirements of the GWR will take effect December 1, 2009. You are
receiving this letter because our data show your system is a PWS that uses ground water.
Our records show that you do not treat your ground water source before the water is delivered to your customers.
Our records also show that your system is a community water system serving 750 people. Please let us know if this
information is not accurate and our records need to be updated.
Based on these characteristics of your water system, the GWR will affect you in the following ways:
If your monthly routine bacteriological sample is total coliform-positive, you must collect at least one
sample from each ground water source in use at the time the total coliform-positive sample was collected.
This follow-up sample, referred to as a triggered source water sample, must be tested for a state-approved
fecal indicator. For our state, the fecal indicator that has been approved is E. coli.
If your triggered source water sample tests positive for E. coli, you must collect five additional samples
from the source that tested positive and have them analyzed for E. coli.
Since your system serves fewer than 1,000 people, you may use the triggered source water sample collected
from a ground water source (as described above) to meet both the requirements of the GWR and part of the
requirements for repeat sampling under the Total Conform Rule (TCR) when you have a conform positive-
sample in the distribution system.
In the future, your system will be receiving a sanitary survey by the state every 3 years instead of every 5
years.
If your system has an E. coli positive triggered source water sample or if a significant deficiency is
identified at your system and not addressed, you will be required to make special notice to the public that
your source water tested E. coli positive or that an uncorrected significant deficiency exists at your system.
A Quick Reference Guide and two Factsheets on the GWR are enclosed. The Quick Reference Guide provides more
information on this regulation, and the Fact Sheet explains the monitoring and corrective actions in more detail. In
addition to these materials, please refer to the final rule language on EPA's Web site at
www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/regulation.html. We will be notifying you of upcoming training
opportunities within the next month.
Please contact Ann Smith at this office at XXX-XXXX if you have any questions about this letter or the GWR and
its effect on your system. We appreciate your attention to this request.
Sincerely,
Enclosures: GWR Quick Reference Guide, GWR Factsheets, [list other enclosures]
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 38 November 2007
-------
3.4 Data Management Systems
Although state data management systems vary to suit state-specific requirements and needs, EPA
recommends that all states ensure that their data management systems are capable of efficiently tracking
affected PWSs, compliance status, and other information needed to implement the GWR. States using
SDWIS/State should see the module incorporated in version [X].
Under GWR recordkeeping requirements, states are required to keep any currently applicable or most
recent state determinations, along with all supporting information and explanations of the technical basis
of each decision, for the following:
• Written notice of significant deficiencies.
• Corrective action plans, schedule approvals, and state-specified interim measures.
• Confirmation that a significant deficiency has been corrected or the fecal contamination in the
ground water source has been addressed.
• State determinations and records of a GWS' documentation for not conducting triggered source
water monitoring.
• State approvals of source water monitoring plans.
• Notices of the minimum residual disinfection concentration (when using chemical disinfection)
needed to achieve at least 4-log virus inactivation before or at the first customer.
• Notices of the state-specified monitoring and compliance requirements (when using membrane
filtration or alternative treatment) needed to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or
at the first customer.
• Written notice from the GWS that it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the
first customer for a ground water source.
• Written determinations that the GWS may discontinue 4-log treatment of viruses.
A state may have information in its data system about the application of a disinfectant to the ground water
source. The state may not, however, actually track whether this treatment meets the 4-log inactivation
standard. In some data systems, it may not be possible to tell which disinfecting systems actually provide
4-log inactivation. As a result, there may need to be a separate water system-by-water system review to
determine whether there is adequate inactivation to identify a system as providing 4-log treatment of
viruses. The state's database system may need to be modified to capture this distinction.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 39 November 2007
-------
3.5 Address Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR
States must provide EPA with specific information in their primacy packages in order to obtain federal
approval of their program revisions adopting the provisions of the GWR. Some primacy conditions
address the need for a state to have sufficient legal authority to enforce the GWR's requirements. In
addition, some provisions of the GWR allow state discretion in establishing decision-making criteria.
States will need to explain their intended procedures for implementing those provisions. The special
primacy requirements are listed in 40 CFR 142.16(o) and are discussed in more detail in Section 4.4, and
include but are not limited to the following:
• The state must have the appropriate rules or other legal authority to ensure that GWSs:
Conduct source water monitoring. (See Section 4.4.1)
- Take the appropriate corrective actions including interim measures, if necessary, needed
to address significant deficiencies. (See Section 4.4.2)
- Take the appropriate corrective actions including interim measures, if necessary, to
address any source water fecal contamination identified during source water monitoring.
(See Section 4.4.3)
Consult with the state regarding corrective action(s). (See Section 4.4.)
• The state must describe how it will implement a sanitary survey program that includes the
components of, and meets the survey frequencies required by, the GWR. (See Section 4.4.5)
• The state must describe the criteria that will be used for the following issues related to source
water monitoring: (See Section 4.4.6)
Extending the 24-hour time limit for a system to collect a ground water sample to comply
with the source water monitoring requirements.
- Determining whether the cause of a total-coliform positive sample taken under the TCR
is directly related to the distribution system.
- Determining whether to invalidate a fecal-indicator positive ground water source sample.
Conditions that would allow source water microbial monitoring at a location after
treatment.
• The state must explain the practices and procedures that will be used to enforce the treatment
technique requirements of the GWR, including: (See Section 4.4.7)
How the state will determine whether a system is achieving at least 4-log treatment of
viruses.
How the state will determine the minimum residual disinfectant concentration the system
must provide before the first customer, for systems using chemical disinfection.
Alternative technologies GWSs can use to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 40 November 2007
-------
- Monitoring and compliance requirements required for systems using state-approved
alternative technologies to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses.
- Monitoring, compliance, and membrane integrity testing requirements that will be used to
demonstrate virus removal for GWSs using membrane filtration.
- Criteria the state will use to determine if a GWS may discontinue 4-log treatment of
viruses.
3.6 State Practices or Procedures for Sanitary Surveys
The state must perform sanitary surveys for community and noncommunity GWSs at prescribed time
intervals. These surveys must address the following eight elements:
• Source.
• Treatment.
• Distribution System.
• Finished Water Storage.
• Pumps, Pump Facilities, and Controls.
• Monitoring and Reporting and Data Verification.
• System Management and Operation.
• Operator Compliance with State Requirements.
States should ensure resources are adequate to meet the sanitary survey requirements given the number of
affected GWSs, anticipated follow-up technical assistance and enforcement needs, and other program
demands. Note that compliance with only the TCR sanitary survey criteria may not be adequate to meet
the revised scope and frequency of sanitary survey requirements required under the GWR.
The state may conduct the sanitary surveys in stages or phases if all the applicable elements are evaluated
within the required timeframe. For example, states may opt to use data collected during site visits for
other programs such as the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), Wellhead Protection Program
(WHPP), Operator Training and Certification Program, and other technical assistance programs. The state
may also use the results of applicable sanitary survey elements conducted before November 22, 2006 to
satisfy the initial sanitary survey requirements for that element as long as subsequent reviews are
conducted within the required timeframe. Note that compliance with only the TCR sanitary survey
requirements may not meet the revised scope and frequency of sanitary survey requirements stated here.
3.6.1 Sanitary Surveys for CWSs
Sanitary surveys must be completed by the state for CWSs every 3 years. The state may reduce the
frequency of sanitary surveys of a CWS to every 5 years if the system either provides at least 4-log
treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of virus inactivation
and removal) before or at the first customer for each ground water source, or if it has an outstanding
performance record that was documented during previous inspections and no history of total coliform
maximum contaminant level (MCL) or monitoring violations under 40 CFR 141.21 since the previous
sanitary survey. If a state intends to use this provision, it must describe in its primacy package how it will
determine whether a CWS has an outstanding performance record. Guidance on determining outstanding
performance is provided in Section 4.4.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 41 November 2007
-------
The first sanitary survey for a CWS required to comply with the requirements of the GWR must be
conducted by December 31, 2012, unless the system has been put on a survey schedule of once every 5
years, as described above. For such systems, the first sanitary survey must be completed by December 31,
2014.
3.6.2 Sanitary Surveys for NCWSs
States are required to conduct sanitary surveys of noncommunity GWSs at least once every 5 years. The
GWR does not allow additional time between surveys based on whether the NCWS has treatment in place
or has demonstrated outstanding performance. The first sanitary survey for a NCWS required to comply
with the requirements of the GWR must be conducted by December 31, 2014.
3.6.3 Significant Deficiencies
The state must provide GWSs with written notification specifying and describing any significant
deficiencies. Notification must be provided no later than 30 days after identifying the deficiencies. The
notice may specify corrective actions and deadlines the system must meet for implementing the corrective
actions.
Once the system receives written notice of a significant deficiency, the system has up to 30 days to
consult with the state regarding the appropriate corrective action it should take. Within 120 days from the
time the system receives written notice of the significant deficiency, the system must either:
• Complete corrective action according to any applicable state plan review processes or state
guidance and direction, or
• Be in compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule.
The state must confirm that the significant deficiency has been addressed through either written
confirmation from the GWS or a site visit by the state. The site visit must occur within 30 days after the
system meets the treatment technique requirements under 40 CFR 141.404(a),. The state must maintain a
record of the confirmation that a significant deficiency was corrected and will be required to report this
information to EPA.
In its primacy application, the state must define and describe at least one specific significant deficiency in
each of the eight sanitary survey elements. These should take into account:
• A defect in design, operation, or maintenance.
• A failure or malfunction of the sources, treatment, storage, or distribution system that may be
causing, or has the potential to cause, the introduction of contamination into the water delivered
to consumers.
• The state's ability to ensure GWSs take appropriate corrective actions, including interim
measures, to address the significant deficiency.
Guidance on defining significant deficiencies is provided in section 4.4.5.4.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 42 November 2007
-------
3.7 State Practices or Procedures for Source Water Microbial Monitoring
The GWR requires that GWSs conduct triggered source water monitoring as described below. States also
have the option of directing systems to conduct assessment source water monitoring. While there are no
federal requirements for assessment source water monitoring, the GWR offers some guidelines for states
on the other monitoring requirements.
EPA believes that the most appropriate fecal indicator may vary from state to state or site to site. This
may be due to regional or site-specific differences or other reasons that may be identified by the state.
More information and guidance on this topic is provided in EPA's Source Water Monitoring Guidance
for Public Water Systems (EPA 815-R06-005, February 2006).
3.7.1 Triggered Source Water Monitoring
The GWR requires systems performing triggered source water monitoring to monitor their ground water
sources for one of three fecal indicators (E. coll, enterococci, or coliphage). The state must demonstrate in
its primacy package it has the legal authority to require GWSs to monitor for the fecal indicator(s) that the
state has selected. The state should specify which fecal indicator(s) GWSs will be required to test for in
their ground water sources. States can approve more than one fecal indicator to be used (e.g. E. coll
and/or enterococci). EPA recommends that states use the same requirements for GWSs performing
assessment source water monitoring.
Triggered source water monitoring must be conducted by a GWS if the system does not provide at least 4-
log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of inactivation and
removal) before or at the first customer for each ground water source, and it is notified of a total coliform-
positive result for a sample collected under the TCR (40 CFR 141.21). Systems providing 4-log treatment
of viruses must notify their state that they provide treatment and must conduct compliance monitoring, or
they will also be required to conduct triggered source water monitoring if they are notified of a total
coliform-positive sample collected in compliance with the TCR.
Within 24 hours of notification of the total coliform-positive sample, the system must collect at least one
source water sample from each ground water source in use at the time the total coliform-positive sample
was collected. The state may extend the 24-hour limit on a case-by-case basis if the system cannot collect
the source water sample within 24 hours due to circumstances beyond its control. In the case of an
extension, the state must specify how much time the system has to collect the sample.
EPA recognizes that some water systems that use untreated ground water already have sample taps
located at or near the source and prior to the first customer and include raw water monitoring with their
routine TCR monitoring of the distribution system. If a PWS collects a source water sample as part of its
TCR sampling, and the source water sample is analyzed using an approved method that includes the state-
approved fecal indicator, and a distribution system sample collected at the same time is total coliform-
positive, the PWS can use the concurrent source water sample to satisfy the triggered source water
monitoring requirement.
Systems with multiple sources may, if approved by the state, collect samples from representative
source(s) for any total coliform-positive sample. The state may require systems with multiple sources to
submit for approval a triggered source water monitoring plan. A triggered source water monitoring plan
may evaluate each sample site in the system's TCR sample siting plan and identify sources that are
representative of each TCR monitoring site. All water systems are encouraged to include a procedure for
triggered source water monitoring in their standard operating procedures (SOPs). Larger systems with
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 43 November 2007
-------
multiple sources may want to include in their SOPs a triggered source water sampling plan that identifies
which sources are representative of which TCR monitoring sites.
If the state allows the system to use E. coll as a fecal indicator for GWR triggered source water
monitoring, systems serving 1,000 people or fewer that detect a total coliform-positive sample during
their TCR monitoring can use the triggered source water sample collected in response to the coliform-
positive sample to satisfy both the GWR triggered monitoring requirement and one of the repeat samples
required by the TCR,.
In addition to public notification requirements, CWSs are required to provide special notice to the state
and the public if a triggered source water sample is fecal indicator-positive. Guidance on public notice
and special notice is provided in section 3.8.
If a triggered source water sample is fecal indicator-positive, states may require corrective action for the
ground water source where the fecal indicator-positive sample was collected. If the state does not require
corrective action based on the initial indicator-positive sample, the system must collect five additional
source water samples from the same source within 24 hours of being notified of the fecal indicator-
positive sample. The samples must be tested for the same fecal indicator for which the initial triggered
source water sample tested positive. If one or more of these additional source water samples is fecal
indicator-positive, the system must take corrective action.
Consecutive system triggered source -water monitoring
In addition to all other triggered source water monitoring requirements, a consecutive system that has a
total coliform-positive sample collected under 40 CFR 141.21 must notify the wholesale system within 24
hours of being notified of the total coliform-positive sample.
Wholesale system triggered source -water monitoring
In addition to all other triggered source water monitoring requirements, if a wholesale system receives
notice from a consecutive system that a sample collected under 40 CFR 141.21 is total coliform-positive,
the wholesale system must, within 24 hours of being notified, collect a sample from every one of its
ground water sources (unless the system has multiple sources and has been approved by the state to
collect samples from representative source[s] for any total coliform-positive). The samples collected must
be tested for a fecal indicator required by the state. If the sample is fecal indicator-positive, the wholesale
system must notify any consecutive systems served by that source in accordance with 40 CFR 141.202
(Public Notifications of Drinking Water Violations).
Triggered source -water monitoring positive sample invalidation
If a state determines and documents in writing that the total coliform-positive sample was solely a result
of a documented distribution system deficiency, the state may invalidate the positive triggered source
water monitoring sample. The state must maintain records of invalidation determinations. See section
4.4.6.2 for further discussion of sample invalidation and situations when it may be appropriate.
3.7.2 Assessment Source Water Monitoring
The GWR gives states the authority to direct GWSs to conduct assessment source water monitoring at the
states' discretion. If a state intends to require assessment source water monitoring, it will need to specify
in its state regulation the pertinent monitoring requirements, including sampling frequency and analytical
methods.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 44 November 2007
-------
EPA recommends that states require GWSs that are most susceptible to fecal contamination to conduct
assessment monitoring. States may use hydrogeologic sensitivity assessments (HSAs) as a tool to identify
high risk systems for assessment source water monitoring. HSAs can be an effective screening tool to
identify sensitive hydrogeological settings that transmit water, and any pathogens in the water, quickly
from the surface to the aquifer. Where the type of aquifer is unknown, states should consider conducting
an HSA to identify sensitive aquifers and determine if assessment source water monitoring is appropriate.
States also have other information available to them to target high risk systems, such as source water
assessments, wellhead protection plans, and historical monitoring data. Data indicating past episodes of
source water fecal contamination, particularly from TCR monitoring, in combination with GWR triggered
source water monitoring results, can be another important tool.
The GWR provides the following general suggestions to states requiring assessment source water
monitoring:
• Collect a total of 12 ground water source samples that represent each month the system provides
ground water to the public.
• Collect samples from each well unless the system obtains written state approval to conduct
monitoring at one or more wells within the PWS that are representative of multiple wells used by
the system and that draw water from the same hydrogeological setting.
• Collect a standard sample volume of at least 100 mL for fecal indicator analysis, regardless of the
fecal indicator or analytical method used.
• Analyze all ground water source samples for the presence of E. coli, enterococci, or coliphage
using one of the analytical methods listed in the GWR.
• Collect ground water source samples at a location prior to any treatment of the ground water
source unless the state approves a sampling location after treatment.
• Collect ground water samples at the well itself unless the system's configuration does not allow
for such sampling and the state approves an alternate sampling location that is representative of
the water quality of that well.
Positive source water samples taken under assessment monitoring are subject to the same requirements
for additional sampling and/or subsequent corrective action as described above under triggered
monitoring requirements.
3.7.3 Laboratory Methods
All triggered source water samples must be collected using a standard sample volume of at least 100 mL,
regardless of fecal indicator or analytical method used. GWSs must test source water samples for the
presence of E. coli, enterococci, or somatic coliphage, depending on which fecal indicator is specified by
the state, and the state must require that laboratories use one of the analytical methods listed in Table 3-2.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 45 November 2007
-------
Table 3-2. Laboratory Methods
Fecal Indicator
E. coli
Enterococci
Coliphage
Methodology
Colilert
Colisure
Membrane Filter Method with MI Agar
m-ColiBlue24 Test
E*Colite Test
EC-MUG
NA-MUG
Multiple-Tube Technique
Membrane Filter Technique
Enterolert
Two-Step Enrichment Presence-Absence
Procedure
Single Agar Layer Procedure
Method Name
9223 B
9223 B
EPA Method 1604
9221 F
9222 G
9230 B
9230C, EPA Method 1600
EPA Method 1601
EPA Method 1602
Analysis must be conducted in accordance with the documents listed in the final GWR promulgated
November 8, 2006.
3.7.4 Invalidation of a Fecal Indicator-Positive Ground Water Source Sample
The state can invalidate a fecal indicator-positive triggered source water sample if the system provides the
state with written notice from the laboratory that improper sample analysis occurred, or the state
determines and documents in writing that there is substantial evidence a fecal indicator-positive sample is
due to a circumstance that does not reflect source water quality.
If the state invalidates a fecal indicator-positive ground water source sample, the state must require the
system to collect another source water sample within 24 hours of being notified of sample invalidation.
The system must have the follow-up sample analyzed for the same fecal indicator as the invalidated
sample.
The state may extend the 24-hour limit on a case-by-case basis if the system cannot collect the source
water sample within 24 hours due to circumstances beyond its control. In the case of an extension, the
state must specify how much time the system has to collect the sample. The state must maintain records
of all invalidated fecal indicator-positive ground water source samples.
3.8 Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements
Several general categories of notification are required by the GWR:
Tier 1, 2, or 3 public notification
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Special Notice (for CWSs)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
46
November 2007
-------
• Special Notice (for NCWSs)
• CCR other notice
The type of notification required depends on the violation or scenario that has occurred at the PWS. The
table 3-3 summarizes public notification, CCR and Special Notice requirements of the GWR. Note that
Special Notice requirements for CWSs require notification to be included in the system's CCR. NCWSs
that are required to make Special Notice must inform the public served by the water system in a manner
approved by the state. See section 3.8.3 for a more detailed explanation of the GWR's Special Notice
requirements.
Table 3-3. Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements
Issue
Unconnected significant deficiency - CWSs1
Unconnected significant deficiency - NCWSs1
Fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - CWSs2
Fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - NCWS2
Unaddressed fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - CWSs
Failure to take corrective action - CWSs
Failure to take corrective action - NCWS
Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses - CWSs
Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses - NCWS
Failure to meet monitoring requirements - CWSs
Failure to meet monitoring requirements - NCWS
Notification Required
Special Notice in CCR
Special Notice
Tier 1 public notification, Special
Notice in CCR, and CCR
Tier 1 public notification
Special Notice in CCR
Tier 2 public notification, CCR
Tier 2 public notification
Tier 2 public notification, CCR
Tier 2 public notification
Tier 3 public notification, CCR
Tier 3 public notification
1. Systems must continue to notify the public annually until the significant deficiency has been corrected.
2. Consecutive systems served by the ground water source must also notify the public.
3.8.1 Public Notification Requirements
If a ground water source sample collected as a triggered source water sample or collected in response to
the state's direction to conduct source water assessment monitoring is fecal indicator-positive and is not
invalidated, then the PWS must conduct public notification under 40 CFR 141.202. Public notification
must also be made by consecutive systems served by the fecal indicator-positive ground water source.
This Tier 1 notification requirement is regardless of whether the system is a CWS or a NCWS.
For this Tier 1 public notice, systems must use the following standard health effects language for their
public notifications:
Fecal indicators are microbes whose presence indicates that the water may be
contaminated with human or animal wastes. Microbes in these wastes can cause short-
term health effects, such as diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms.
They may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, some of the elderly, and
people with severely compromised immune systems.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
47
November 2007
-------
The GWR also requires Tier 2 public notification when PWSs have one of the following violations:
• Failure to take corrective action.
• Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses.
The GWR also requires systems to make Tier 3 notification if that have failed to meet the GWR's
monitoring requirements. Examples of Tier 2 and 3 public notification under these circumstances are
provided in Section 6 of this guidance manual.
3.8.2 Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Requirements
The GWR requires two general categories of notice to be included in the CCR. Community GWSs with
uncorrected significant deficiencies and/or a fecal indicator-positive source water sample must inform
their customers of any significant deficiency that is uncorrected and any fecal-indicator positive source
water sample result in the CCR addressing the appropriate year. Section 3.8.3 describes this Special
Notice requirement in more detail.
Community GWSs that fail to meet the treatment technique requirements of the GWR are also required to
inform their customers of their treatment technique violations in the CCR. The GWR treatment technique
violations that community GWSs are required to inform their customers of in their CCRs are:
• Failure to take corrective action.
• Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses.
3.8.3 Special Notice Requirements
Community GWSs must inform customers in the appropriate year's CCR of any uncorrected significant
deficiencies and any fecal-indicator positive source water sample results. For example:
• A community GWS receives notification from the state of a fecal indicator-positive source water
sample. The system must inform its customers of positive sample in the CCR that addresses the
year in which the sample was taken.
• A community GWS with an uncorrected significant deficiency must inform its customers of the
uncorrected significant deficiency in that year's CCR.
- In a situation where a system had a significant deficiency in the same calendar year (e.g.,
2011) in which a CCR is being published (e.g., published in 2011 but addressing 2010),
and that significant deficiency has not been corrected, the community GWS does not
have to inform its customers until the following CCR (e.g., published in 2012 but
addressing 2011). However, the system needs only to inform its customers of that
significant deficiency if the deficiency remains uncorrected at the time of the following
year's CCR publication and release. The system must continue to notify the public
annually until the state determines that the deficiency or contamination has been
addressed.
In addition to the Tier 1 public notification requirement associated with a fecal indicator-positive
triggered source water sample, noncommunity GWSs must also provide special notice within 12 months
of the system being notified by the state of the deficiency, in a manner approved by the state, of any
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 48 November 2007
-------
significant deficiency that has not been corrected. The state may direct the system to provide this
notification earlier than the 12 months required by the GWR. The system must continue to notify the
public annually until the significant deficiency is corrected.
The noncommunity GWS notification must include:
• The nature of the significant deficiency and the date it was identified by the state.
• The state-approved plan and schedule for correction of the significant deficiency, including
interim measures, progress to date, and any interim measures completed.
• For systems with a large proportion of non-English speaking consumers, as determined by the
state, information in the appropriate language(s) regarding the importance of the notice or a
telephone number or address where consumers may contact the system to obtain a translated copy
of the notice or assistance in the appropriate language.
If directed by the state, a NCWS with significant deficiencies that have been corrected may be required to
inform its customers how the significant deficiencies were corrected and the date they were corrected.
3.9 State Practices and Procedures for Treatment Technique Requirements
The GWR identifies four possible corrective action options. The state must require systems that need to
take corrective actions to take one or more of the following:
• Correct all significant deficiencies.
• Provide an alternate source of water.
• Eliminate the source of contamination.
• Install technologies that reliably achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation,
removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the
first customer for each ground water source.
The state must report the date the GWS completed the required corrective action. The state must also
maintain:
• Records of written notices from GWSs that document the system is providing at least 4-log
treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus
inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for each ground water source.
• Records of notices sent to systems identifying the residual disinfection concentrations (when
using chemical disinfection) needed to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer for each ground water source.
• Notices sent to systems identifying the state-specified monitoring and compliance criteria (when
using membrane filtration or alternative treatment) needed to achieve at least 4-log treatment of
virus before or at the first customer.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 49 November 2007
-------
3.9.1 Corrective Action Alternatives
The GWR gives states the option to prescribe specific corrective actions depending on the nature of the
significant deficiency. There may be a number of corrective action alternatives that could be applied to
correct the significant deficiency effectively. The state may choose not to specify corrective action, but
rather allow the system to select the most appropriate corrective action and ultimately be responsible for
the choice.
Two basic approaches that can be taken to ensure significant defects are corrected include:
• Correction of problems by the water system staff, their consulting engineers, and/or contractor.
- Many deficiencies can be addressed by water system staff and their consultants.
However, the state should assess whether the water system has trained and competent
staff before suggesting approaches that involve water system personnel. The state should
consider the cause of the deficiency (how and why it developed) and judge whether it is
reasonable to expect the water system operator or manager to correct the problem.
anager to correct tne proc
mire the oversight of a lie
- Other deficiencies may be of a nature that would require the oversight of a licensed
professional engineer and may have to go through the state's plan and specification
review and approval (or permitting) processes.
• Technical assistance to the water utility by the regulatory agency, organizations that specialize in
training and technical assistance, and/or peers at other water systems.
- Many water systems may need assistance to eliminate significant deficiencies. The state
may be able to offer the system approaches and resources to assess and address problems.
Assistance may result in training; onsite system specific technical assistance; and
referrals to other available resources at the state, other organizations (e.g., local Rural
Water Associations), and state environmental training centers.
A combination of these approaches may be appropriate, based on the type of significant deficiency. The
SDWA Section 1412(b)(10) allows states to grant systems an additional 2 years to comply with the
corrective action requirement when capital investments are necessary (refer to Appendix E for guidance).
3.9.2 Process for Determining 4-log Treatment of Viruses
The state must explain the criteria that it will use to determine when a GWS has met the requirements for
4-log treatment of viruses. Criteria may include determination of the appropriate treatment technology,
treatment design and specifications constituting sufficient inactivation and or removal, the minimum
contact time (in minutes) required for compliance to be achieved at the minimum disinfectant residual (in
mg/L), and submission of records of CT (contact time in minutes X residual disinfectant in mg/L,
measured as mg/L-minutes) calculations or records documenting maintenance of a minimum disinfectant
residual.
EPA recommends that states consider using the applicable EPA-developed virus CT tables provided in
section 4 of this Guidance (Tables 4-4 through 4-6) to determine the concentration and contact time
requirements necessary to achieve 4-log virus inactivation using chemical disinfection. If alternative
criteria will be used by GWSs for compliance, the state must describe the treatment and compliance
monitoring basis for the specified 4-log virus inactivation method. The description should include how
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 50 November 2007
-------
the state will factor into its determination contact time correction factors (e.g., baffling factors), pH,
temperature, flow, and minimal residuals. Section 4.4.7 provides more guidance on determining 4-log
treatment of viruses.
3.9.3 Process for Determining Minimum Residual Disinfectant Concentration Prior to
First User
Systems conducting compliance monitoring and providing chemical disinfection must maintain a
minimum residual disinfectant concentration at or before the first customer. Residual disinfectant
concentration is the concentration of the disinfectant (in milligrams per liter, or mg/L) at a point before or
at the first customer.
The state primacy application must include an explanation and rationale for how the state will decide
what that minimum residual disinfectant concentration will be for each system. If the state sets the
minimum residual disinfectant concentration level on a system-by-system basis, the application should
explain the rationale for this approach and the information required from the systems to be used in the
determination.
3.9.4 Alternative Technologies for Achieving 4-log Treatment of Viruses
States should identify alternative technologies that a GWS may use alone or in combination with other
approved technologies to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses, removal, or a state-approved
combination of these technologies before or at the first customer. A state's primacy application should
include a list of the approved alternative technologies.
3.9.5 Membrane Filtration Requirements to Demonstrate Virus Removal
Criteria should ensure maintenance of the integrity of the membrane to prevent passage of virus particles.
Criteria may include routine pressure testing and reporting of the results as prescribed by the membrane
manufacturer, turbidity monitoring, monitoring of an associated chemical parameter (e.g., total dissolved
solids, total organic carbon), and other site-specific variables.
3.9.6 Monitoring and Compliance Requirements for Systems Providing 4-log Treatment
of Viruses
Compliance monitoring must be conducted by a GWS that does not conduct source water monitoring
under 40 CFR 141.403 (a) because the system is providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or
at the first customer for each ground water source. A GWS not required to conduct source water
monitoring must notify the state that it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation,
removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the first
customer for each ground water source and must begin compliance monitoring. Compliance monitoring
requires the system to monitor the effectiveness and reliability of its treatment before or at the first
customer.
The state must report all GWSs that are providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation,
removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the first
customer for each ground water source. Section 4.4 provides additional guidance on compliance
monitoring and on the establishment of compliance monitoring requirements.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 51 November 2007
-------
Under 40 CFR 141.405(a), PWSs that are conducting compliance monitoring must notify the state any
time they fail to meet any state-specified compliance criteria. These state-specified compliance criteria
may include, but are not limited to, minimum residual disinfectant concentration, membrane operating
criteria or membrane integrity, and alternative treatment operating criteria. In addition, some PWSs will
need to report that they did not conduct compliance monitoring according to their requirements or did not
restore monitoring within 4 hours of a problem being identified. The PWS must notify the state as soon as
possible, but in no case later than the end of the next business day. PWSs that must implement a
corrective action must notify the state within 30 days of the completion of state-specified corrective
actions.
3.9.6.1 PWSs Using a Chemical Disinfectant and Serving More than 3,300 People
A GWS that serves more than 3,300 people must monitor the residual disinfectant concentration
continuously. The residual disinfectant concentration must be monitored at a location approved by the
state, and the system must record the lowest level of residual disinfectant concentration for each day that
it is in operation. Every day the GWS serves water to the public, the system must maintain the minimum
state-determined residual disinfectant concentration. If the continuous monitoring equipment fails, the
system must conduct grab sampling every 4 hours until the continuous monitoring equipment is back on
line. The system has 14 days to resume continuous monitoring before a violation is incurred.
States are encouraged to provide GWSs with a form that facilitates compliance with chemical disinfectant
residual monitoring and reporting requirements. Example 3-2 provides a form that could be adapted to
state requirements and distributed to systems serving more than 3,300 people. Some states may wish to
require GWSs to provide all the monitoring data required to calculate daily CTs. If so, the reporting forms
should be modified and additional authority for requiring the necessary monitoring and reporting should
be incorporated into the state's rules.
3.9.6.2 PWSs Using a Chemical Disinfectant and Serving 3,300 People or Fewer
A GWS that serves 3,300 or fewer people must:
• Monitor the residual disinfectant concentration during peak hourly flow or another time
designated by the state, at a location approved by the state
• Record the level of residual disinfectant concentration for each day it is in operation.
• Take a daily grab sample during the hour of peak flow or at another time specified by the state. If
any daily grab sample measurement falls below the minimum state-determined residual
disinfectant concentration, the GWS must take follow-up samples every 4 hours until the residual
disinfectant concentration returns to above the minimum state-determined level.
• Maintain the minimum state-determined residual disinfectant concentration every day the GWS
serves water to the public.
A PWS using ground water and serving fewer than 3,300 people may also meet the compliance
monitoring requirements by monitoring the chemical disinfectant residual continuously in accordance
with the requirements for systems serving 3,300 or more people.
Example 3-3 provides a form that could be adapted and used by systems serving 3,300 people or fewer.
Some states may wish to require GWSs to provide all the monitoring data required to calculate daily CTs.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 52 November 2007
-------
If so, the reporting forms should be modified and additional authority for requiring the necessary
monitoring and reporting should be incorporated into the state's rules.
3.9.6.3 PWSs Using Membrane Filtration
A GWS that uses membrane filtration to meet the treatment technique requirements must monitor the
membrane filtration process in accordance with state-specified monitoring requirements. A GWS that
uses membrane filtration is in compliance with the treatment requirement to achieve at least 4-log
removal of viruses when:
• The membrane has an absolute molecular weight cut-off or an alternate parameter that describes
the exclusion characteristics of the membrane and can reliably achieve at least 4-log removal of
viruses.
• The membrane process is operated in accordance with state-specified compliance requirements;
and
• The integrity of the membrane is intact.
3.9.6.4 PWSs Using State-Alternative Treatment
A GWS that uses a state-approved alternative treatment to meet the treatment technique requirements
must monitor the alternative treatment in accordance with any state-specified monitoring requirements. A
system that uses a state-approved alternative treatment must operate the alternative treatment in
accordance with any compliance criteria that the state determines to be necessary to demonstrate 4-log
virus inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of these technologies.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 53 November 2007
-------
Example 3-2. Example Monthly Operations Report for GWSs Serving More Than 3,300
People
Public Water System Name
Public Water System ID
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Time
Source(s) in
use
Lowest free chlorine
residual at entry
point to distribution
system (mg/1)
Reporting Month/Year
County
For systems using
chlorine dioxide,
lowest chlorine
dioxide residual at
entry point (mg/L)
Town, Village, or City
Additional or Other
Treatment
(define here)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
54
November 2007
-------
Public Water System Name
Public Water System ID
Date
29
30
31
Did contin
time this n
If so, were
until the c(
returned tc
Attach gra
Time
uous monitor
sporting mont
grab samples
jntinuous moi
service?
Source(s) in
use
ing equipment
h?
Lowest free chlorine
residual at entry
point to distribution
system (mg/1)
fail at any
collected every four hours
tutoring equipment was
3 sample results and submit
Reported by:
Signature:
with this form.
Reporting Month/Year
County
For systems using
chlorine dioxide,
lowest chlorine
dioxide residual at
entry point (mg/L)
Date continuous monitoring equipm
Date it was returned to service
Town, Village, or City
Additional or Other
Treatment
(define here)
snt failed
Title: Operator Certification Number:
Date: Operator Grade Level:
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
55
November 2007
-------
Example 3-3. Example Monthly Operation Report for GWSs Serving 3,300 People or
Fewer
Public Water System Name
Public Water System ID
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 ^
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Time
Source(s) in
use
Free chlorine
residual at entry
point to distribution
system (mg/1)
Reporting Month/Year
County
For systems using
chlorine dioxide,
lowest chlorine
dioxide residual at
entry point (mg/L)
Town, Village, or City
Additional or Other
Treatment
(define here)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
56
November 2007
-------
Public Water System Name
Public Water System ID
Date
29
30
31
Time
Source(s) in
use
Was the chlorine residual ever less tha
Free chlorine
residual at entry
point to distribution
system (mg/1)
Reporting Month/Year
County
For systems using
chlorine dioxide,
lowest chlorine
dioxide residual at
entry point (mg/L)
Town, Village, or City
Additional or Other
Treatment
(define here)
n ms/L?
If so, did you monitor every four hours un
Attach those results and submit them with
Reported by:
Signature:
til it returned to ms/L?
this form.
Title: Operator Certification Number:
Date: Operator Grade Level:
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
57
November 2007
-------
3.9.7 Criteria for Discontinuing 4-log Treatment of Viruses
A GWS may discontinue providing 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) if the state determines that 4-log treatment
of viruses is no longer necessary. In order for a system to discontinue treatment, the state must make a
determination that the system has met the necessary criteria for discontinuing treatment. The state must
document its determination in writing and maintain a record of the determination.
A system that discontinues 4-log virus treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) is subject to triggered source water
microbial monitoring and analytical methods requirements of the GWR.
3.9.8 Treatment Technique Violations
The following treatment technique violations require Tier 2 notice to be given be given to the public [40
CFR subpart Q (Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations)].
• A GWS that has a significant deficiency is in violation of the treatment technique requirement if,
within 120 days (or earlier if directed by the state) of receiving written notice from the state of the
significant deficiency, the system:
Does not complete corrective action in accordance with applicable state plan review
processes or other state guidance and direction, including state specified interim actions
and measures; or,
- Is not in compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule.
• Unless the state invalidates a fecal indicator-positive ground water source sample, a GWS is in
violation of the treatment technique requirement if, within 120 days of receiving notice (or earlier
if directed by the state) the system:
Does not complete corrective action in accordance with any applicable state plan review
processes or other state guidance and direction, including state specified interim
measures; or,
- Is not in compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule.
• A GWS that collects compliance monitoring samples and fails to maintain at least 4-log treatment
of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus
inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for a ground water source, is in violation
of the treatment technique requirement if the failure is not corrected within 4 hours of
determining the system is not maintaining at least 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first
customer.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 58 November 2007
-------
3.9.9 Monitoring Violations
Any GWS that fails to meet the ground water source microbial monitoring and analytical methods under
40 CFR 141.402 (a) - (f) or fails to meet the compliance monitoring requirements under 40 CFR
141.403(b) is in violation of the monitoring requirements of the GWR. These monitoring violations
require Tier 3 notice to be given to the public pursuant to 40 CFR subpart Q (Public Notification of
Drinking Water Violations).
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 59 November 2007
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 60 November 2007
-------
Section 4
State Primacy Revision
Application
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
40 CFR Part 142 sets out requirements for states to obtain and/or retain primary enforcement
responsibility (primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program as authorized by
Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The 1996 SDWA Amendments updated the
process for states to obtain and/or retain primacy. On April 28, 1998, EPA promulgated the Primacy Rule
to reflect these statutory changes (63 FR 23361).
4.1 State Primacy Program Revision
Pursuant to 40 CFR142.12, complete and final requests for approval of program revisions to adopt new or
revised EPA regulations must be submitted to the EPA Administrator no later than 2 years after
promulgation of new or revised federal regulations. Until EPA approves those applications, EPA regions
have responsibility for directly implementing the new or revised regulations although the state and EPA
can agree to implement a rule together during this period.
States that have primacy for all existing National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) are
considered to have interim primacy for any new or revised regulation. If a state is eligible for interim
primacy, it will have full implementation and enforcement authority. Interim primacy for the Ground
Water Rule (GWR) would begin on the date the state submits it's final and complete primacy revision
application or the effective date of the new state regulation (whichever is later), and ends when EPA
makes a final determination (see Table 4-1).
A state may be granted an extension of up to 2 years to submit its application package. During any
extension period, an extension agreement outlining the state's and EPA's responsibilities is required.
Table 4-1. State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for the GWR
EPA/State Action
GWR promulgated
State and region establish a process and agree upon a schedule for
application review and approval (optional)
State, at its option, submits draft program revision package to region
including: Preliminary Approval Request, Draft State Regulations and/or
Statutes, Regulation Crosswalk
Regional (and Headquarters if necessary) review of draft
State submits final program revision package to region including:
Adopted State Regulations
Regulation Crosswalk
40 CFR 142. 10 Primacy Update Checklist
• 40 CFR 142. 14 and 142. 15 Reporting and Recordkeeping
• 40 CFR 142.16 Special Primacy Requirements
Attorney General's Enforceability Certification
Rule compliance date
States with approved extensions submit complete and final program revision
package
Time Frame
November 8, 2006
January 8, 2007
May 8, 2007
Completed within 90 days of state
submittal of draft (suggested)
November 8, 20081
December 1, 2009
Novembers, 20 102
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
63
November 2007
-------
EPA final review and determination:
Regional review [program and Office of Regional Counsel (ORC)]
Headquarters concurrence and waivers [Office of Ground Water
and Drinking Water (OGWDW) and Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assistance (OECA)]
Public notice
Opportunity for hearing
EPA's determination
Completed within 90 days of state
submittal of final program revision
package
45 days region
45 days Headquarters(HQ)3
1. EPA suggests submitting an application by August 8, 2008 to ensure timely approval. EPA regulations allow
states until November 8, 2008 for this submittal. An extension of up to 2 years may be requested by the state.
2. EPA suggests submitting an application by August 8, 2010 for states with approved extensions to ensure timely
approval.
3. At least one state per region.
4.1.1 The Revision Process
EPA recommends a two-step process for approval of state program revisions. The steps consist of
submission of a draft request (optional) and submission of a complete and final request for program
approval. Figure 4-1 diagrams these processes and their timing.
Draft Request—The state may submit a draft request for EPA review and tentative determination. The
request should contain drafts of all required primacy application materials (with the exception of a draft
Attorney General's Statement). A draft request should be submitted as soon as practicable; EPA
recommends submitting it within 6 months of rule promulgation. EPA will make a tentative determination
as to whether the state program meets the applicable requirements. EPA intends to make a tentative
determination within 90 days.
Complete and Final Request—This submission must be in accordance with 40 CFR 142.12(c)(l) and
(2) and include the Attorney General's statement. The state should also include its response to any
comments or program deficiencies identified in the tentative determination (if applicable). Submission of
only a final request may make it more difficult for states to address any necessary changes within the
allowable time for state rule adoption.
EPA recommends that states submit their complete and final revision package within 21 months of rule
promulgation (or by August 8, 2008 for the GWR). This will ensure that states will have interim primacy
as soon as possible and will prevent backlogs of revision applications to adopt future federal
requirements.
The state and region should agree to a plan and timetable for submitting the state primacy revision
application as soon as possible after rule promulgation—ideally within 2 months of promulgation.
4.1.2 The Final Review Process
Once a state application is complete and final, EPA has a regulatory (and statutory) deadline of 90 days to
review, and approve or disapprove the revised program. OGWDW will conduct a detailed concurrent
review of the first state package from each region. The regional office should submit its comments with
the state's package within 45 days for review by HQ. When the region has identified all significant issues,
OGWDW waives concurrence on all other state programs in that region, although EPA HQ retains the
option to review additional state programs as appropriate. The Office of General Counsel (OGC) has
delegated its review and approval to the ORC.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
64
November 2007
-------
In order to meet the 90-day deadline for packages undergoing review by HQ, the review period is equally
split by giving the regions and HQ 45 days each to conduct their respective reviews. For the first package
in each region, regions should forward copies of the primacy revision applications and their evaluations to
the Drinking Water Protection Division Director in OGWDW no later than 45 days after state submittal.
The Drinking Water Protection Division Director takes the lead on the HQ review process.
Figure 4-1. Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of Program
Revisions
Timeline
EPA Promulgates the GWR
Establish Process and Tentative
Schedule for State Rule
Approval
State Submits Draft Primacy
Revision Application to EPA
(optional)
40CFR142.12(d)(l)(i)
EPA Review andTentative
Determination (suggested within
90 days)
40CFR142.12(d)(l)(ii)
State Submits Complete and
Final Primacy Revision
Application to EPA
40CFR142.12(d)(2)
EPA Review and Determination
(withinSO days)
40CFR142.12(d)(3)
Start
November 8, 2006
Januarys, 2007
MayS, 2007 -4
Novembers, 2008
2 Months
By24Months '
1 Anexten
e requested by the state.
4.2 State Primacy Program Revision Extensions
4.2.1 The Extension Process
Under 40 CFR 142.12(b), a state may request that the 2 year deadline for submitting the complete and
final program revision package be extended for up to 2 additional years. The extension request must be
submitted to EPA within 2 years of the date that EPA published the regulation. The Regional
Administrator has been delegated authority to approve extension applications. Concurrence by HQ on
extensions is not required.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
65
November 2007
-------
Therefore, the state must either adopt regulations pertaining to the GWR and submit a complete and final
primacy revision application by November 8, 2008 or request an extension of up to 2 years by that date.
4.2.2 Extension Request Criteria
For an extension to be granted under 40 CFR 142.12(b), the state must demonstrate that it is requesting
the extension because it cannot meet the original deadline for reasons beyond its control and despite a
good faith effort to do so. A critical part of the extension application is the state's proposed schedule for
submission of its complete and final request for approval of a revised primacy program. The application
must also demonstrate at least one of the following:
(i) That the state currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised
requirements;
(ii) That the state currently lacks the program capability adequate to implement the new or revised
requirements; or,
(iii) That the state is requesting the extension to group two or more program revisions in a single
legislative or regulatory action.
In addition, the state must be implementing the EPA requirements to be adopted in its program revision
within the scope of its current authority and capabilities.
4.2.3 Conditions of the Extension
Until the State Primacy Revision Application has been submitted, the state and EPA regional office will
share responsibility for implementing the primary program elements as indicated in the extension
agreement. The state and the EPA regional office should discuss these elements and address terms of
responsibility in the agreement. PWSs should be notified of a contact person at the EPA Region if they
want to ask questions or obtain information about the GWR before the state has primacy.
These conditions will be determined during the extension approval process and are decided on a case-by-
case basis. The conditions must be included in an extension agreement between the state and the EPA
regional office.
Conditions of an extension agreement may include:
• Informing PWSs of the new EPA (and upcoming state) requirements and the fact that the region
will be overseeing implementation of the requirements until they approve the state program
revisions or until the state submits a complete and final revision package if the state qualifies for
interim primacy.
• Collecting, storing, and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance and
operation data required by the EPA regulations.
• Assisting the region in the development of the technical aspects of enforcement actions and
conducting informal follow-up on violations (e.g., telephone calls, letters).
• Providing technical assistance to PWSs.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 66 November 2007
-------
• For states whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program capability
adequate to implement the new requirements, taking steps agreed to by the region and the state to
remedy the deficiency during the extension period.
• Providing the region with all the information required under 40 CFR 142.15 for state reporting.
Example 4-1 provides a checklist the region can use to review state extensions or to create an extension
agreement.
Until states have primacy, EPA is the primary enforcement authority; however, states historically have
played a role in implementation for various reasons—most important because states have local
knowledge, expertise, and established relationships with their systems.
The state and EPA should be viewed as partners in this effort, working towards two very specific goals.
The first goal is to achieve a high level of compliance with the regulation. The second goal is to facilitate
successful implementation of the regulation during the transition period between when EPA has primacy
and when the state has primacy, including interim primacy, for the rule. In order to accomplish these
goals and to ensure proper health protection, education, training, and technical assistance will need to be
provided to water suppliers explaining their responsibilities under the GWR. Water suppliers are also
encouraged to refer to the GWR guidance materials, reference guide, and fact sheets listed in section 2.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 67 November 2007
-------
Example 4-1. Example Extension Request Checklist
{Regional Administrator}
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA Region {Region}
{Street Address}
fCitv. State. Zint
RE: Request/approval for an Extension Agreement
DearjRegional Administrator}.:
The State of ISlatel is requesting an extension to the date that final primacy revisions are due to EPA for
the Ground Water Rule (GWR) until {insert date - no later than November 8T 2010}, as allowed by 40 CFR
142.12, and would appreciate your approval. Staff of the {State Department/Agency} have conferred with your
staff and have agreed to the requirements listed below for this extension. This extension is being requested because
the State of {State}:
D Is planning to group two or more program revisions into a single legislative or regulatory action.
D Currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised requirements.
D Currently lacks adequate program capability to implement the new or revised requirements.
{State Department/Agency} will be working with EPA to implement the GWR within the scope of its
current authority and capability, as outlined in the six areas identified in 40 CFR 142.12(b)(3)(i-vi):
i) Informing public water systems (PWSs) of the new EPA (and upcoming state) requirements and the fact that
EPA will be overseeing implementation of the requirements until EPA approves the state revision.
State EPA
Provide copies of regulation and guidance to other state agencies, PWSs, technical assistance
providers, associations, or other interested parties.
Educate and coordinate with state staff, PWSs, the public, and other water associations about the
requirements of this regulation.
Notify affected systems of their requirements under the GWR.
Other:
ii) Collecting, storing, and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance and operation data
required by the EPA regulations.
State EPA
Devise a tracking system for PWS reporting pursuant to the GWR.
Keep PWSs informed of reporting requirements during development and implementation.
Report GWR violation and enforcement information to SDWIS as required.
Other:
iii) Assisting EPA in the development of the technical aspects of the enforcement actions and conducting informal
follow-up and violations (telephones calls, letters, etc.).
State EPA
Issue notices of violation (NOVs) for treatment technique, maximum contaminant level (MCL),
and monitoring/ reporting violations of the GWR.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 68 November 2007
-------
Provide immediate technical assistance to PWSs with treatment technique, MCL and/or
monitoring/reporting violations to try to bring them into compliance.
Refer all violations to EPA for enforcement if they have not been resolved within 60 days of the
incident that triggered the violation. Provide information as requested to conduct and complete any
enforcement action referred to EPA.
Other:
iv) Providing technical assistance to PWSs.
State EPA
Conduct training within the state for PWSs on GWR requirements.
Provide technical assistance through written and/or verbal correspondence with PWSs.
Provide on-site technical assistance to PWSs as requested and needed to ensure compliance with
this regulation.
Coordinate with other technical assistance providers and organizations to provide accurate
information and aid in a timely manner.
Other:
v) Providing EPA with all information prescribed by the State Reporting Requirements in 40 CFR 142.15.
State EPA
Report any violations incurred by PWSs for this regulation each quarter.
Report any enforcement actions taken against PWSs for this regulation each quarter.
Report any variances or exemptions granted for PWSs for this regulation each quarter.
Other:
vi) For states whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program capability to implement the new
or revised requirements, taking the following steps to remedy the capability deficiency.
State EPA
Acquire additional resources to implement these regulations (list of specific steps being taken
attached as {List A}).
Provide quarterly updates describing the status of acquiring additional resources.
Other:
I affirm that the {State Department/Agency} will implement provisions of the GWR as outlined above.
{Agency Director or Secretary} Date
{Name of State Agency}
I have consulted with my staff and approve your extension for the aforementioned regulation. I affirm that EPA
Region {Region} will implement provisions of the GWR as outlined above.
Regional Administrator Date
EPA Region.
This Extension Agreement will take effect upon the date of the last signature.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 69 November 2007
-------
4.3 State Primacy Package
The Primacy Revision Application package should consist of the following sections:
D State Primacy Revision Checklist
D Text of the State's Regulations
D Primacy Revision Crosswalk
D State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist
D Special Primacy Requirements
D Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability
4.3.1 The State Primacy Revision Checklist [40 CFR 142.12(c)(l)]
This section is a checklist of general primacy requirements, as shown in Table 4-2. In completing this
checklist, the state must identify the program elements that it has revised in response to new federal
requirements. If an element has been revised, the state should indicate a "Yes" answer in the
"Revision to State Program" column and should submit appropriate documentation. For elements
that did not require revision, the state need only list the citation and date of adoption in the "Revision to
State Program" column. During the application review process, EPA will insert findings and comments in
the final column.
The 1996 SDWA Amendments include new provisions for PWS definition and administrative penalty
authority. States must adopt provisions at least as stringent as these new provisions, now codified at 40
CFR 142.2 and 40 CFR 142.10. Failure to revise these elements can affect primacy for the GWR.
States must have primacy or interim primacy for all existing regulations before they can receive primacy
for this regulation. States may bundle the primacy revision packages for multiple rules. If states choose to
bundle requirements, the Attorney General's Statement should reference all of the rules included.
Table 4-2. State Primacy Revision Checklist
Required Program Elements
40 CFR 141.2
40CFR142.10(b)(6)(iii)
40CFR142.10(b)(6)(iv)
40CFR142.10(b)(6)(v)
40CFR142.10(b)(6)(vi)
40CFR142.10(b)(6)(vii)
40CFR142.10(c)
Definitions
Right of entry
Authority to require records
Authority to require public
notification
Authority to assess civil and
criminal penalties
Authority to require consumer
confidence reports (CCRs)
Maintenance of records
Revision to State
Program
EPA
Findings/Comments
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
70
November 2007
-------
Required Program Elements
40CFR142.10(d)
40CFR142.10(e)
40CFR142.10(f)
Variance/exemption conditions (if
applicable)1
Emergency plans
Administrative penalty authority2
Revision to State
Program
EPA
Findings/Comments
1. Regulations published in the August 14, 1998 Federal Register.
2. Requirement from the 1996 SDWA Amendments. Regulations published in the April 28, 1998 Federal Register.
4.3.2 Text of the State's Regulation
Each primacy application package should include the appropriate text of the state's regulations.
4.3.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk
The Primacy Revision Crosswalk, in Appendix A, should be completed by states in order to identify state
statutory or regulatory provisions that correspond to each federal requirement. If the state's provisions
differ from federal requirements, the state should explain how its requirements are "no less stringent."
4.3.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist [40 CFR 142.14 and 40 CFR 142.15]
The GWR adds 10 new state recordkeeping requirements and three new state reporting requirements.
The state should use the Primacy Revision Crosswalk in Appendix A to demonstrate that state reporting
and recordkeeping requirements are no less stringent than federal requirements. If state requirements are
not the same as federal requirements, the state must explain how its requirements are "no less stringent"
as required under 40 CFR 142.10.
The Primacy Revision Crosswalk includes state recordkeeping requirements [40 CFR 142.14(d)(17)(i) -
(d)(17)(x)] indicating that the state must maintain:
• Records of written notice of significant deficiencies. [40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)(v)]
• Records of corrective action plans and schedule approval or state-specified interim measures. [40
CFR141.403(a)(5)(ii)]
• Records of confirmation under 40 CFR 141.403(a) that a significant deficiency has been
corrected or the fecal contamination in the ground water source has been addressed. [40 CFR
142.16(o)(4)]
• Records of state determinations and records of GWSs' documentation for not conducting
triggered source water monitoring. [40 CFR 141.402(a)(5)]
• Records of invalidation of fecal indicator-positive source water samples. [40 CFR 141.402(d)]
• Records of state approvals of source water monitoring plans. [40 CFR 141.402(a)(2)(ii)]
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
71
November 2007
-------
• Records of notices of the minimum residual disinfection concentration (when using chemical
disinfection) needed to achieve at least 4-log virus inactivation before or at the first customer. [40
CFR142.16(o)(4)(ii)]
• Records of notice of the state-specified monitoring and compliance criteria (when using
membrane filtration or alternative treatment) needed to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses
(using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log inactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer. [40 CFR 142.16(o)(4)(iv) and 40 CFR 142.16(o)(4)(v)]
• Records of written notices from the GWS that it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer for a ground water source. [40 CFR 141.403 (b)( 1) and 40 CFR
141.403(b)(2)]
• Records of written determination that a GWS may discontinue 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of 4-log inactivation and removal). [40
CFR142.16(o)(4)(vi)]
The Primacy Revision Crosswalk includes requirements [40 CFR 142.15(c)(7)(i) - (c)(7)(iii)] indicating
that the state must report:
• For each GWS, the month and year in which the most recent sanitary survey was completed or,
for a state that uses a phased review process, the date the last element of the eight elements was
evaluated. [40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)]
• For GWSs that must meet a treatment technique requirement, the date the system completed the
corrective action. [40 CFR 141.403(a)]
• All GWSs providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of 4-log virus inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for
any ground water source(s). [40 CFR 141.403(b)]
4.3.5 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16]
Special primacy conditions pertain to specific regulations where implementation of the rule involves
activities beyond general primacy provisions. States must include these rule-distinct provisions in a
application for approval or revision of their program. The Special Primacy Requirements section of the
crosswalk is where the state has the opportunity to describe how it will satisfy these provisions. Section
4.4 provides guidance on how states may choose to meet the Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR.
4.3.6 Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability [40 CFR 142.12(c)(2)]
The complete and final primacy revision application must include an Attorney General's Statement
certifying that the state regulations were duly adopted and are enforceable (unless EPA has waived this
requirement by letter to the state). The Attorney General's Statement should also certify that the state
does not have any audit privilege or immunity laws or, if it has such laws, that these laws do not prevent
the state from meeting the requirements of the SDWA. If a state has submitted this certification with a
previous revision package, then the state should indicate the date of submittal and the Attorney General
need only certify that the status of the audit laws has not changed since the prior submittal. An example of
an Attorney General's Statement is presented in Example 4-2.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 72 November 2007
-------
Example 4-2. Example of Attorney General's Statement
Model Language
I hereby certify, pursuant to my authority as (1) and in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act as amended,
and (2). that in my opinion the laws of the [State/Commonwealth of (3)1 [or tribal ordinances of (4)1 to carry out
the program set forth in the "Program Description" submitted by the (5) have been duly adopted and are
enforceable. The specific authorities provided are contained in statutes or regulations that are lawfully adopted at
the time this Statement is approved and signed and will be fully effective by the time the program is approved.
I. For States with No Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws
Furthermore, I certify that [State/Commonwealth of £3}] has not enacted any environmental audit privilege and/or
immunity laws.
II. For States with Audit Laws that do Not Apply to the State Agency Administering the Safe Drinking
Water Act
Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the [State/Commonwealth
of (3)1 does not affect the ability of £3} to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act because the [audit privilege and/or immunity law] does not apply to the program set forth in
the "Program Description." The Safe Drinking Water Act program set forth in the "Program Description" is
administered by (5); the [audit privilege and/or immunity law] does not affect programs implemented by (5). thus
the program set forth in the "Program Description" is unaffected by the provisions of [State/Commonwealth of (3)1
[audit privilege and/or immunity law].
III. For States with Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws that Worked with EPA to Satisfy Requirements
for Federally Authorized, Delegated, or Approved Environmental Programs
Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the [State/Commonwealth
of (3)1 does not affect the ability of £3} to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act because [State/Commonwealth of (3)1 has enacted statutory revisions and/or issued a
clarifying Attorney General's Statement to satisfy requirements for federally authorized, delegated, or approved
environmental programs.
Seal of Office
Signature
Name and Title
Date
(1) State Attorney General or attorney for the primacy agency if it has independent legal counsel.
(2) 40 CFR 142.1 l(a)(6)(i) for initial primacy applications or 40 CFR 142.12(c)(l)(iii) for primacy program
revision applications.
(3) Name of state or commonwealth.
(4) Name of tribe.
(5) Name of primacy agency.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 73 November 2007
-------
4.3.6.1 Guidance for States on Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws
In order for EPA to properly evaluate the state's request for approval, the State Attorney General or
independent legal counsel should certify that the state's environmental audit immunity and/or privilege
and immunity law does not affect its ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements
under SDWA. This certification should be reasonably consistent with the wording of the state audit laws
and should demonstrate how state program approval criteria are satisfied.
EPA will apply the criteria outlined in its "Statement of Principles" memo issued on February 14, 1997,
(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/state/policy/policies.htm) to determine whether states with audit laws
have retained adequate enforcement authority for any authorized federal programs. The principles
articulated in the guidance are based on the requirements of federal law, specifically the enforcement and
compliance and state program approval provisions of environmental statutes and their corresponding
regulations. The Principles provide that if provisions of state law are ambiguous, it will be important to
obtain opinions from the State Attorney General, or independent legal counsel, interpreting the law as
meeting specific federal requirements. If the law cannot be so interpreted, changes to state laws may be
necessary to obtain federal program approval. Before submitting a package for approval, states with audit
privilege and/or immunity laws should initiate communications with appropriate EPA regional offices to
identify and discuss the issues raised by the state's audit privilege and/or immunity law.
The guidance for states on Audit Law Privilege and/or Immunity Laws is currently under review. If
amended, EPA will issue an addendum to this document with the revised guidance.
4.4 Guidance for the Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR
In addition to adopting basic primacy requirements specified in 40 CFR 142, states are required to adopt
primacy provisions pertaining to specific regulations where implementation of the rule involves activities
beyond general primacy provisions. The purpose of these provisions is to allow state flexibility in
implementing a regulation that: (1) applies to specific system configurations within the particular state;
and, (2) can be integrated with a state's existing PWSS Program. States must include these rule-distinct
provisions in an application for approval or revision of their programs. This section contains information
and guidance that states can use when addressing the Special Primacy Requirements of the GWR. The
guidance addresses Special Primacy Conditions in the same order that they occur in the rule. In the state
primacy revision application packages, the state must explain how it intends to accomplish the
requirements of 40 CFR 142.16.
Note: EPA has included the appropriate text from the GWR at the beginning of each subsection.
4.4.1 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Conduct
Source Water Monitoring
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements, (o) (1) Legal authority. The application for primacy must
demonstrate the State has: (i) The authority contained in statute or regulation to ensure that GWSs
conduct source water monitoring under 40 CFR 141.402(a) (2), 40 CFR 141.402(a) (3) and 40 CFR
141.402(a)(4)(H)(A).
Guidance
This Special Primacy Requirement addresses a state's rules or other authority to ensure a GWS conducts
monitoring at its ground water source(s) for a fecal indicator in response to a total coliform-positive
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 74 November 2007
-------
sample result obtained in compliance with the TCR. This requirement also addresses the state's authority
to require a GWS to collect five additional source water samples from a ground water source that has a
fecal indicator-positive test result. In addition, this primacy requirement addresses the state's authority to
require a wholesale system to test its ground water source(s) for a fecal indicator in response to a total
coliform-positive result obtained in compliance with the TCR by a consecutive system that receives water
from that wholesale system.
In response to this primacy requirement the state should demonstrate it has the authority to require GWSs
to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR 141.402(a)(2), 40 CFR 141.402(a)(3) and 40 CFR
141.402(a)(4)(ii)(A). States that adopt the federal GWRby reference can make this demonstration by
showing they have adopted the federal rule. In addition, the state should provide an explanation for its
choice of fecal indicator. States may want to refer to regional groundwater occurrence studies or
applicable studies comparing the presence of indicators under various wellhead or hydrogeological
conditions. States should also consider the availability of laboratories that can perform the EPA-approved
analytical method for the fecal indicator that is selected.
For those states that do not adopt the federal GWR by reference, this primacy requirement may be
satisfied by a description of statutes, rules, and other authorities the state can use to ensure GWSs collect
the necessary samples in accordance with 40 CFR 141.402(a)(2), 40 CFR 141.402(a)(3) and 40 CFR
141.402(a)(4)(ii)(A). States must also have the authority to specify the microbial methods listed in 40
CFR 141.402(c). The appropriate section(s) of each source of authority must be cited and copies of the
written documents must be included in the program revision application package.
4.4.2 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Address
Significant Deficiencies
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements, (o) (1) Legal authority. The application for primacy must
demonstrate the State has: (ii) The authority contained in statute and regulation to ensure that GWSs take
the appropriate corrective actions including interim measures, if necessary, needed to address significant
deficiencies.
Guidance
States that adopt the federal GWR by reference can make this demonstration by showing they have
adopted the federal rule (i.e., 40 CFR 141.403). For those not adopting by reference, this Special Primacy
Requirement may be satisfied by a description of statutes, rules, and other authority the state can use to
ensure GWSs take action necessary to address significant deficiencies as required in 40 CFR 141.403.
The appropriate section(s) of each source of authority must be cited and copies of the written documents
must be included in the revision application package.
In addition, states may wish to address their authority to take administrative or legal actions and assess
penalties. Also, states may wish to include a description of how the appropriate rules or other authority,
including formal enforcement actions, will be used to ensure that the GWSs take the steps necessary to
correct significant deficiencies.
EPA believes many states have existing authorities that are adequate to comply with the intent of this
Special Primacy Requirement. These authorities can often be found in broad statutory language designed
to provide public health protection. However, EPA does not believe that the state's existing authority to
address imminent and substantial endangerment is sufficient to meet this Special Primacy Requirement.
The authority must be specific enough to allow the state to require correction of conditions that have the
potential for causing the introduction of contamination into the water delivered to consumers.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 75 November 2007
-------
Some states may wish, in the rule-making process, to specifically identify significant deficiencies and
provide authority to require correction of each. This has the added benefit of establishing a transparent
process that ensures the state's administrative procedures requirements are met.
4.4.3 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Address
Source Water Fecal Contamination
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements, (o) (1) Legal authority. The application for primacy must
demonstrate the State has: (Hi) The authority contained in statute and regulation to ensure that GWSs
take the appropriate corrective actions, including interim measures, if necessary, to address any source
water fecal contamination identified during routine or triggered source water monitoring.
Guidance
This Special Primacy Requirement addresses a state's rules or other authority to ensure a GWS responds
to fecal contamination (identified during source water monitoring that has been triggered by a total
coliform-positive sample result obtained in compliance with the TCR or additional source water
monitoring).
States that adopt the federal GWR by reference, can make this demonstration by showing they have
adopted the federal rule (i.e., 40 CFR 141.403). For others, this primacy requirement can be satisfied by a
description of statutes, rules, and other authorities the state can use to ensure PWSs take the necessary
actions appropriate for the nature and severity of the problem. The appropriate section(s) of each source
of authority must be cited, copies of the written documents must be included in the program revision
application package, and the authority must be equivalent to that provided in 40 CFR 141.403 of the
GWR.
In their applications, states may also wish to address their authority to take administrative or legal actions
and assess penalties. In addition, states may want to include a description of how they will use their
appropriate rules or other authorities to achieve the desired actions on the part of GWSs.
4.4.4 Special Primacy Requirement Regarding Legal Authority to Ensure GWSs Consult
with the State Prior to Implementing Corrective Action
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements, (o) (1) Legal authority. The application for primacy must
demonstrate the State has: (iv) The authority contained in statute or regulation to ensure that GWSs
consult with the State regarding corrective action(s).
Guidance
This Special Primacy Requirement addresses a state's rules or other authority to ensure a system with
significant deficiencies or source water fecal contamination consults with the state prior to taking
corrective action as required by 141.403(4). Systems and states should have the flexibility and authority
to determine and require the most appropriate corrective action to address site-specific conditions.
This consultation is intended to allow the state the ability to provide an initial review and engage in a
discussion with the system to ensure that, when appropriate, state plan review/permitting requirements are
met and corrective actions are conducted that are appropriate and protective of public health.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 76 November 2007
-------
States that adopt the federal GWR by reference can demonstrate authority to require consultation by
showing they have adopted the federal rule (i.e., 141.403). For others, this primacy requirement can be
satisfied by a description of statutes, rules, and other authorities the state can use to ensure GWSs consult
with the state before implementing corrective actions. The appropriate section(s) of each source of
authority must be cited and copies of the written documents must be included in the program revision
application package. States should also determine if they have existing authority to require GWSs to, not
only consult, but to make corrective actions deemed appropriate by the state. If they do not have such
authority, they should address it in their rule-making process.
In their applications, states may also wish to address their authority to take administrative or legal actions
and assess penalties. In addition, states may include a description of the plan for using their appropriate
rules or other authority to achieve the desired actions on the part of PWSs.
4.4.5 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Sanitary Surveys
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements, (o) (2) State practices or procedures for sanitary surveys.
In addition to the general requirements for sanitary surveys contained in 40 CFR 142.10(b)(2) a primacy
application must describe how the State will implement a sanitary survey program that meets the
requirements of paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section.
Guidance
The Special Primacy Requirements of 40 CFR 142.16(o)(2) describe several additional provisions states
must apply to their sanitary survey programs for GWSs. These provisions address the aspects of GWSs
that must be evaluated during the sanitary survey, minimum frequencies for conducting the sanitary
surveys, and identification of "significant deficiencies" that require immediate corrective action. It also
offers states the flexibility to reduce the frequency of sanitary surveys necessary for CWSs with 4-log
virus treatment or those deemed by the state to have outstanding performance and to conduct sanitary
surveys in a phased or staged manner.
The following guidance addresses each subsection of 40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)(i) through (v) in order;
however, the arrangement and structure of the state's description are discretionary provided the state
gives sufficient detail to demonstrate that its strategy and capacity are adequate for meeting the Special
Primacy Conditions. For more detailed guidance see Guidance Manual for Conducting Sanitary Surveys
of Public Water Systems; Surface Water and Ground Water Under the Direct Influence (GWUDI). April
1999 (EPA 815-R-99-016). Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/pdf/sansurv/sansurv.pdfand from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800)
426-4791.
4.4.5.1 Frequency and scope of sanitary surveys
(i): The state must conduct sanitary surveys for all GWSs that address the eight sanitary
survey components listed in this section no less frequently than every 3 years for
community water systems and every 5 years for non-community water systems. The state
may conduct more frequent sanitary surveys for any system. The initial sanitary survey
for community water systems must be conducted by December 31, 2012 and the initial
sanitary survey for non-community water systems must be conducted by December 31,
2014. For the purposes of this paragraph, a "sanitary survey, " as conducted by the state,
includes but is not limited to an onsite review of the water source (identifying sources of
contamination by using results of source water assessments or other relevant information
where available), facilities, equipment, operation, maintenance, and monitoring
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 77 November 2007
-------
compliance of a public water system to evaluate the adequacy of the system, its sources
and operations and the distribution of safe drinking water. The sanitary survey
components are listed in (A)-(H).
(A) Source.
(B) Treatment.
(C) Distribution system.
(D) Finished water storage.
(E) Pumps, pump facilities, and controls.
(F) Monitoring, reporting, and data verification.
(G) System management and operation.
(H) Operator compliance with state requirements.
Guidance
This Special Primacy Requirement addresses the scope of the state's sanitary surveys (eight components
must be included), the minimum frequency for conducting surveys, and the capacity of the state to
conduct these required surveys. States should have adequate resources to comply with these requirements.
States must address scope and frequency of sanitary surveys in their primacy revision application and are
encouraged to address capacity and implementation as well. Some states may have already adopted
relevant authority for these requirements when they adopted the Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule (IESWTR).
Frequency of sanitary surveys
In a state's description of how it will implement a sanitary survey program, the state should demonstrate
that sanitary surveys will address, at a minimum, the eight components listed above. In cases where the
state is currently performing sanitary surveys that meet these minimum requirements, example sanitary
survey forms and completed reports can be used to demonstrate that all eight elements are addressed. If
the state does not believe that it currently performs sanitary surveys that meet the minimum requirements,
the revision application should include details of a plan for upgrading the state's procedures, as necessary,
including examples of sanitary survey forms that will be used and a description of training for staff
performing sanitary surveys.
The state must show that sanitary surveys will be conducted no less frequently than every 3 years for
CWSs that are not providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses and have not been determined by the state
to have an outstanding performance record. The state must show that sanitary surveys will be conducted
no less frequently than every 5 years for NCWSs and CWSs providing at least 4-log treatment of viruses
or that have been determined by the state to have an outstanding performance record. (See section
4.4.5.3.)
In order to ensure these surveys will be an effective preventive tool for identifying and correcting water
system deficiencies that could pose a threat to public health, states should conduct surveys 3 (or 5) years
from the year the survey was last conducted. Thus, if a sanitary survey for a system on a 3-year cycle is
conducted on June 11, 2008, the next survey should be completed by December 2011. EPA encourages
more frequent sanitary surveys than stated if that is the current practice, or requirement of the state.
Capacity
The state's revision application should address capacity for conducting appropriate sanitary surveys at, or
in excess of, the frequency outlined in 40 CFR 142.16(o)(2)(i). When such capacity exists and the above
requirements are being met or exceeded by an existing program, a summary of the state's sanitary survey
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 78 November 2007
-------
program, including a brief description of past and future schedules, should be sufficient to demonstrate
adequate capacity. The state should also demonstrate that personnel performing the sanitary surveys will
have the professional qualifications and training necessary to assure sanitary surveys are conducted by
appropriately skilled and adequately trained professionals.
A state that does not have an existing sanitary survey program that meets these requirements should
describe its proposed program and estimate the resources directed toward sanitary surveys. The state
should explain how the new requirements will affect its program and whether existing resources will be
adequate. When existing resources are clearly inadequate, the state should provide EPA with a plan for
obtaining additional support before the compliance dates of the rule.
Implementation
Finally, the state should provide EPA with a brief description of its plan for meeting the requirements of
40 CFR 142. 16(o)(2)(i) given existing or planned resources, the number of affected GWSs, anticipated
follow-up technical assistance and enforcement needs, and other program demands.
4.4.5.2 Phased sanitary survey process
(Hi): The state may use a phased review process to meet the requirements of(o)(2)(i) of this
section if all the applicable elements of(o)(2)(i)(A) through (H) are evaluated within the
required interval. States may use the results of reviews of components listed in
paragraphs (o)(2)(i)(A) through (H) of this section conducted prior to November 11,
2006 to satisfy the initial sanitary survey requirements for that component. Subsequent
reviews of that component must be conducted with the frequency required in paragraph
Guidance
In view of the fact that states often conduct inspections of one or more of the eight components of a
sanitary survey as part of program efforts separate from the sanitary surveys, the rule allows for those
evaluations and inspections to be used in a staged or phased review process as long as all eight
components are addressed within the required frequency. Other programs whose activities may serve to
address one or more of the components include:
• Source Water Assessment and Protection Program
• Wellhead Protection Program
• Operator Training and Certification Program
• Technical Assistance Programs
• Capacity Development Programs
In addition, some systems are too large or complex to complete a sanitary survey in a single visit. If a
state wishes to conduct sanitary surveys in a staged or phased process, the primacy revision application
should contain a description of relevant programs and activities, how they will be coordinated, the
timeframe, and who the responsible parties will be for follow-up enforcement in response to deficiencies.
A justification is not required if a state chooses not to use the phased approach.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 79 November 2007
-------
4.4.5.3 Reduced frequency of sanitary surveys for CWSs
(iv): The state may reduce the sanitary survey frequency for a community water system from
once every three years to no less frequently than every five years if the community water
system either provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or
state-approved combination of these technologies) before or at the first customer for all
its ground water sources, or has an outstanding performance record documented in
previous inspections and has no history of total coliform MCL or monitoring violations
under 40 CFR 141.21 (Total Coliform Rule) since the last sanitary survey. In its primacy
application the state must describe how it will decide whether a community water system
has an outstanding performance record.
Guidance
This Special Primacy Requirement allows the state to decrease the frequency of sanitary surveys for some
community GWSs from once every 3 years to once every 5 years. The provision is designed to allow
states to direct their limited resources toward systems that have the greatest potential for posing public
health risks, i.e., those not achieving outstanding performance. States must have a procedure for
determining whether a system should be considered to have outstanding performance. States should also
consider integrating this procedure into the sanitary survey process. The procedure and policy for making
these determinations should provide inspectors with enough direction to ensure consistent
implementation. The policy should also describe who will make the final decision to reduce survey
frequency.
In general, outstanding performance means that a system is well-operated and managed, has a good
record of performance in past sanitary surveys, and has not had any violations in recent years. A state's
specifications for outstanding performance may include factors such as the following:
• No violations of MCLs since the last sanitary survey.
• No violations of monitoring and reporting requirements since the last sanitary survey.
• No violations of primary drinking water regulations during the past 5 years (or similar time
period).
• No waterborne disease outbreaks attributable to the water system during a specified period.
• The last sanitary survey contained no significant deficiencies.
• Existence of emergency preparedness measures and backup facilities.
• Expert management of system (e.g., managers are knowledgeable about providing quality
drinking water; low staff turnover and positive staff morale; well-established water quality goals).
• Expert operation of the system (e.g., skilled, certified personnel in adequate numbers).
• Existence of quality operations and maintenance (O&M) manuals that are used by the staff.
• Adequate budget and revenues.
• Development and implementation of an effective cross-connection control program.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 80 November 2007
-------
• Active public outreach programs (e.g., citizen participation committees).
• Stable water source (no interruptions in supply).
• Source water supply drawn from well(s) with sanitary construction, available documentation (e.g.
driller's logs), and protected wellhead areas.
• No identified significant risk of future violations or problems (e.g., equipment past its service
life).
• System capacity sufficient to meet anticipated growth.
As noted above, each state should have its own specifications for determining if a system has outstanding
performance. The state may choose to use some or all of the above factors, different factors that have
been developed by the state, or a combination of both.
4.4.5.4 What constitutes a significant deficiency
(v): The state must describe in its primacy application what constitutes a significant
deficiency in each of the eight sanitary survey elements in paragraphs (o)(2)(i)(A)
through (H) of this section.
Guidance
During sanitary surveys, inspectors often discover a wide range of deficiencies. Some are minor and have
little near-term potential to pose risks to public health or safety. At the other end of the spectrum are
deficiencies that provide the near-term potential for drinking water to be unsafe or the water system to be
operated in a manner that threatens the safety of operators or the public. States must establish procedures
for inspectors to use to determine the point at which deficiencies become "significant."
The first step in this process is to define what characteristics constitute "significant deficiencies." Many
public health professionals believe that any aspect of a GWS (source, transmission, pumping, treatment,
storage, distribution, operation, maintenance, management, etc.) that may cause, or have potential to
cause, risks to public health or safety should be considered a significant deficiency. EPA does not specify
the definition that a state must use; rather, the Agency suggests that states use their best professional
judgment and expertise to develop and apply their own definitions.
The second step is for the state to develop a procedure whereby inspectors can evaluate system defects
and determine their significance (i.e., whether it meets the state definition of significant deficiency). The
procedure could begin with questions to be asked about each defect. As much as possible, states are
encouraged to develop technically specific definitions of significant deficiencies. A few more general
examples (not intended to be complete) of questions that may help inspectors in making determinations
are the following:
• Is there the potential for contaminants to be introduced to the drinking water due to the
deficiency?
• Would the conditions causing the deficiency be a violation of current state design, construction,
treatment, or operating standards?
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 81 November 2007
-------
• If left uncorrected will the deficiency cause the potential for the introduction of contaminants at
some point in the future?
• Does the deficiency affect treatment in an unacceptable manner?
• Does the deficiency pose risks to the safety of the public or operators?
States are encouraged to go beyond the minimum Special Primacy Requirement of providing at least one
specific significant deficiency in each of the eight sanitary survey elements, and develop a more
comprehensive list of deficiencies that meet the definition of "significant" that require immediate
corrective actions. Such a list may be modified over time based upon state experience, and it is not likely
that all deficiencies will be identified. By establishing its own definition of a significant deficiency and a
list of what deficiencies it considers significant, a state provides consistency throughout all surveys and
among inspectors.
Table 4-3 illustrates one possible approach to categorizing some of the common deficiencies by the
degree of their threat to public health. The list below includes examples of deficiencies that may be
considered significant public health issues. This list is not intended to be comprehensive, but serves as a
guide to states for categorizing significant deficiencies. Other deficiencies could be deemed significant
public health issues.
Table 4-3. Example Sanitary Survey Deficiencies
(This table is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent federal or state policy)
Finding
No approved construction drawings
Failure to update the water distribution map
Stopping work on system improvements (when stopping work is
not the prudent and reasonable approach)
Loss of distribution system pressure for an extended period of
time
Failure to meet water treatment requirements
Failure to meet water quality MCLs
System continues to operate in a noncompliance mode
Operating in excess of the maximum number of service
connections allowed
System not operating in compliance with water system plan
System violated coliform or volatile organic contaminant (VOC)
MCLs
Minor
X
Moderate
X
X
X
X
Significant
X
X
X
X
X
The following are examples, organized by each of the eight sanitary survey elements, of system defects
that states may consider to be significant and require immediate corrective action. (The list is not intended
to be complete.)
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
82
November 2007
-------
• Source
- Not having a secured protective radius around a well.
Wells of improper construction.
• Treatment
- Chemical feed rates not adjusted for changes in flow rate.
Inadequate disinfection CT.
Inadequate application of treatment chemicals.
• Distribution Systems
TCR sampling plan not representative of distribution system.
Negative pressures at any time.
- Inadequate cross connection controls, either at the treatment facility or in the distribution
system (or failure to have a cross connection control program, when one is required).
- Unacceptable system leakage that could result in entrance of contaminants.
• Finished Water Storage
Inadequate internal cleaning and maintenance of storage tank.
- Improper venting of tank.
Lack of proper screening of overflow pipe and drain.
Inadequate roofing (e.g., holes in the storage tank, improper hatch construction).
- Uncovered finished water reservoir.
• Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls i
- Ponding of water in pump housing.
- Inadequate pump capacity.
• Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
Failure to properly monitor water quality.
- TCR sampling plan not available or not being followed.
Chronic TCR coliform detections with inadequate remediation.
• Water System Management/Operation
- Lack of properly trained or licensed staff as required by the state.
Lack of approved emergency response plan.
Failure to meet water supply demands/interruptions to service (inadequate pump
capacity, unreliable water source, lack of auxiliary power).
Inadequate follow-up to deficiencies noted in previous inspection/sanitary surveys.
• Operator Compliance with State Requirements
- Operator does not have the correct level of certification as required by the state.
States should make this information available to inspectors performing the sanitary surveys so they can
have guidelines available on which deficiencies meet the state's definition of significant. Inspectors can
also use their state's definition of "significant deficiency" as guidance when they encounter other
deficiencies that may pose a serious public health threat.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 83 November 2007
-------
If the state determines that a significant public health issue exists, corrective action must be required.
State inspectors may judge other problems as significant enough from a public health viewpoint to require
establishment of a compliance schedule with follow-up action.
References for more detailed guidance
Guidance Manual for Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems; Ground Water. [Under
Development]
Guidance Manual for Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems; Surface Water and Ground
Water Under the Direct Influence (GWUDI) of Surface Water. April 1999 (EPA 815-R-99-016).
Available at www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/pdf/sansurv/sansurv.pdf and from the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline. (800)426-4791.
How to Conduct a Sanitary Survey of Small Water Systems, University of Florida Training, Research and
Education for Environmental Occupations Center (developed under EPA Training Grant T902854), 1998.
Available from the National Environmental Training Association, (602) 956-6099.
State Sanitary Survey Resource Directory, AKA EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys,
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, 1995. Available from the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline, (800)426-4791.
4.4.5.5 Notice to system of significant deficiencies
(vi): The state must provide GWSs with written notice describing any significant deficiencies
no later than 30 days after the state identifies the significant deficiency. The notice may
specify corrective actions and deadlines for completion of corrective actions.
Guidance
States must describe their process of how they will inform systems of identified significant deficiencies.
The GWR requires states to provide GWSs with written notice describing any significant deficiencies no
later than 30 days after the state identifies the significant deficiency. If the significant deficiency is
identified during a sanitary survey, the state may provide the written notice at the time of the sanitary
survey. For example, some states use forms that are completed during the sanitary survey identifying
significant deficiencies found during the survey. The forms can be carbon copies; the state inspector and
water system representative should both sign the form at the end of the sanitary survey, and each person
should receive a copy of the signed form. EPA believes such an approach would qualify as written
notification for the state and satisfy this notification requirement.
The state may want to notify systems of significant deficiencies in a very brief letter. An example of a
letter format that could be used to make this notification is provided in Example 4-3. Since significant
deficiencies may present a public health risk to consumers, EPA encourages states to notify systems of a
significant deficiency as soon as possible within the allotted 30-day notification period.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 84 November 2007
-------
Example 4-3. Example Significant Deficiency Notification Letter
State Letterhead
February 17,2010
John Smith, Supt.
Town Water System, PWSID XXXXXXX
Town, ST 12345
RE: Significant Deficiency Notification
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is to notify you that a significant deficiency was found at your public water system on February 8, 2010.
The significant deficiency was:
Improper well construction: The well cap was not secure and did not provide a sanitary seal; the well
casing extended 4 inches above the ground but is required by state code to extend at least 18 inches above the
ground; the well was located in a sunken area and standing water was pooled around the casing.
You must contact us by March 22, 2010 regarding the appropriate corrective action that will be taken to correct this
significant deficiency. If you do not contact us by then, you will be in violation of the state drinking water code and
the state may take other enforcement action deemed appropriate. Please contact this office at XXX-XXXX to
discuss this deficiency. We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Regulator
4.4.6 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Routine Source Water Microbial
Monitoring
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements. (o)(3) State practices or procedures for source water
microbial monitoring. The state's primacy application must include a description of the following:
Guidance
The Special Primacy Requirements of 40 CFR 142.16(o)(3) address the rationales the state used when
determining source water monitoring criteria.
The following guidance addresses each subsection of 40 CFR 142.16(o)(3)(i) through (iv) in order;
however, the arrangement and structure of the state's description are discretionary provided the state
gives sufficient detail to demonstrate that its strategy and capacity are adequate for meeting the Special
Primacy Conditions.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 85 November 2007
-------
4.4.6.1 Extending 24-hour time limit to collect triggered source water sample
(i): Criteria that will be used under 40 CFR 141.403(a)(2)(i) and 141.402(d)(2)for extending
the 24-hour time limit for a system to collect a ground water source sample to comply
with the source water monitoring requirements.
Guidance
In this Special Primacy Requirement, states must address allowable situations that would prevent a GWS
from collecting a required triggered source water sample within the 24-hour time limit. Factors may
include lab availability (e.g., lab closed on the weekend) and mail service. States may allow a delay in
triggered source water sampling when an extreme condition or circumstance would put the sample
collector in danger (e.g., severe weather conditions) or the delay cannot be avoided. If additional time is
allowed for sampling, the system should sample as close to the 24-hour window as possible. EPA
suggests that states require systems to call for pre-approval of the delay.
4.4.6.2 Total coliform-positive sample solely the result of a distribution system deficiency
(ii): Criteria that will be used under 40 CFR I4l.402(a)(5) and I4l.402(a)(5)(ii) to determine
whether the cause of a total coliform-positive sample taken under 40 CFR 141.21 (Total
Coliform Rule) is directly related to the distribution system.
Guidance
Triggered source water monitoring is required after a total coliform-positive sample is collected from the
distribution system in compliance with the TCR. The state may waive the triggered source water
monitoring requirement if the state determines and documents, in writing, that the total coliform-positive
sample is solely a result of a documented distribution system deficiency. To meet this Special Primacy
Requirement, states must describe how a determination to waive triggered source monitoring would be
made. States may consider that samples constitute documentation of a distribution system deficiency. For
example, follow-up distribution sampling or system repair records may be useful.
Some examples are:
• If the water system is known to have recurring documented biofilm problems and the total
coliform-positive sample is convincingly related to biofilm growth in the distribution system;
• After a storage tank inspection where contamination is evident;
• After main repair or repair of a storage tank;
• In a zone of the distribution system where water pressure is negative or low (e.g., less than 20
psi); or,
• When it is likely that contamination is the result of a cross connection in the distribution system.
The reasons for triggered source water samples not being taken should be valid and defensible, and past
distribution system problems supporting the total coliform-positive result should have been documented
before the positive coliform sample result was received.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 86 November 2007
-------
4.4.6.3 Invalidation of fecal indicator-positive samples
(Hi): Criteria for determining whether to invalidate a fecal indicator-positive sample under 40
CFR141.402(d)(l).
Guidance
For this Special Primacy Requirement, states must describe criteria they will use to determine whether a
fecal indicator-positive sample does not reflect the true source water quality and should therefore be
invalidated. Criteria may not be based solely on a belief that improper sample collection procedures were
used. Suspected improper sample collection procedures are not considered adequate cause because
sample collector handling error is rarely a cause of fecal contamination.
States must use the provisions for sample invalidation criteria reported in the TCR at 40 CFR 141.21(c).
In summary, these criteria are:
• If the laboratory establishes that improper sample analysis caused the fecal indicator-positive
result.
• If the state has substantial grounds to believe that a fecal indicator-positive result is due to a
circumstance or condition that does not reflect water quality in the ground water source. In this
case, the system must collect another source water sample within 24 hours of being notified by
the state of its invalidation decision, and have that sample analyzed for the same fecal indicator
that was analyzed in the invalidated sample. The state may extend the 24-hour time limit on a
case-by-case basis if the system cannot collect the source water sample within 24 hours due to
circumstances beyond its control. In the case of an extension, the state must specify how much
time the system has to collect the sample.
• The state should document its decision to invalidate a sample, along with the rationale for the
decision, in writing. The decision should be approved and signed by the supervisor or the state
official who recommended the decision, and the document should be made available to EPA and
the public. The written documentation should state the specific cause of the fecal indicator-
positive sample, and what action was taken by the system in response.
• The state should not invalidate a fecal indicator-positive sample solely on the grounds that repeat
samples were fecal indicator negative.
4.4.6.4 Monitoring at a Location After Treatment
(iv): Criteria the State will use to allow source water microbial monitoring at a location after
treatment under 40 CFR 141.402(e)(l).
Guidance
Systems must collect source water samples at a location prior to any treatment. The state may, however,
allow systems to collect samples after chemical treatment if the state determines that collecting a sample
before treatment is not feasible and if the treatment is unlikely to have an adverse effect on sample
analysis. In general, any preceding treatment should not interfere with the analytical method used to
measure the fecal indicator, nor should the treatment provide any inactivation or removal of the fecal
indicator being tested. For example, ground water treatment with greensand filters frequently uses
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 87 November 2007
-------
potassium permanganate to oxidize iron and manganese before filtering those metals out. Potassium
permanganate may provide some inactivation of, and filtration is likely to remove, viruses and bacteria.
Therefore, it would not be appropriate for a system to collect a triggered source water sample after its
greensand filters. On the other hand, wells that pump sand are often equipped with sand separators that
are unlikely to have an impact on the microbial quality of the water.
States could meet this requirement by stating that sampling locations after treatment will only be allowed
if a system meets two conditions are shown to be met: 1) the treatment will have no impact on microbial
quality of the water, and 2) it is not possible to directly sample the untreated water.
4.4.7 Special Primacy Requirements Regarding Treatment Technique Requirements
40 CFR 142.16 Special primacy requirements. (o)(4) State practices or procedures for treatment
technique requirements. As a condition of primacy, the State must verify that significant deficiencies or
source water fecal contamination have been addressed. The State must verify within 30 days after the
GWS has reported to the State that it has completed corrective action. The State must verify either
through written confirmation from the GWS or a site visit by the State. Written notice from the GWS
under 141.405 (a) (2) of this chapter may serve as this verification. The State's primacy application must
include the following:
The following guidance addresses each subsection of 40 CFR 142.16(o)(4)(i) through (vi) in order;
however, the arrangement and structure of the state's description are discretionary, provided the state
gives sufficient detail to demonstrate that its strategy and capacity are adequate for meeting the Special
Primacy Conditions.
4.4.7.1 Confirmation of system achieving at least 4-log treatment of viruses
(i): The process the state will use to determine that a GWS achieves at least a 4-log treatment
of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a combination of inactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer for a ground water source for systems that are not subject
to the source water monitoring requirements of 141.402(a) because the GWS has
informed the State that it provides at least 4-log treatment of viruses.
Guidance
The state must explain the criteria that will be used for determining when a GWS has met the 4-log
inactivation requirements. The state should be explicit in its explanation as to how it will confirm that
systems are achieving 4-log treatment of viruses. Criteria may include determination of the appropriate
treatment technology, treatment design and specifications constituting sufficient inactivation and or
removal, the minimum contact time required for compliance to be achieved at the minimum disinfectant
residual, and submission of records of contact time calculations or records documenting maintenance of a
minimum disinfectant residual.
EPA recommends that the state use applicable EPA-developed virus CT (the product of disinfection
concentration in mg/L and time in minutes) tables to determine the concentration and contact time
requirements necessary to achieve 4-log virus inactivation using chemical disinfection. If alternative
criteria will be used by GWSs for compliance, the state must describe the treatment and compliance
monitoring basis for the specified 4-log virus inactivation method. The description should include how
the state will factor into its determination contact time correction factors (e.g., baffling factors), pH,
temperature, flow, and minimal residuals.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 88 November 2007
-------
While the GWR does not include CT tables for 4-log inactivation of viruses, states are encouraged to
consider CT tables developed for the Surface Water Treatment Rule as helpful references when
developing minimum disinfection requirements. Table 4-4 provides CT values for inactivation of viruses
by free chlorine in waters with pH values falling within the range of 6.0 to 9.0. Table 4-5 provides CT
values for inactivation of viruses by chlorine dioxide in waters with pH values falling between 6.0 and
9.0. Table 4-6 provides CT values for inactivation of viruses by ozone. The CT tables provided in Tables
4-4 through 4-6 have been adapted from tables provided in EPA's Guidance Manual for Compliance with
the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources,
March 1991 Edition. No CT table is provided for chloramines because EPA anticipates that CT values
needed to achieve 4-log virus inactivation using chloramines will be prohibitively high for most GWSs.
States should describe criteria for determining effective contact times provided by typical configurations
for hydropneumatic tanks and other storage facilities that GWSs will use to obtain disinfectant contact
time. For example, hydropneumatic pressure tanks and storage tanks that "ride" or "float" on the
distribution system should not typically be considered for provision of contact time because the
chemically treated water is not obliged to pass through them under all conditions of flow. States should
also explain their approach to making baffling factor determinations. Larger GWSs with gravity storage
can obtain guidance for determining the effectiveness of chemical disinfection in EPA's 1991 edition of
Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water
Systems Using Surface Water Sources. Also, Appendix D in EPA's Disinfection Profiling and
Benchmarking Guidance Manual (EPA-815-R-99-013, August 1999) provides information on baffling
factors, tracer studies and other issues related to determining the amount of disinfectant contact time
provided by water systems.
While the above referenced guidance manuals are especially helpful to surface water systems, they should
not be expected to provide all the information necessary for GWSs. This is true for a few reasons. First,
while both ground and surface water systems are most likely to use free chlorine as a chemical
disinfectant, the target organisms of most concern are very different. In the case of surface water systems,
the target organism is Giardia lamblia. GWSs, on the other hand, target viruses. In comparing the
disinfection requirements for two systems with the same temperature (15 degrees C), pH (7) and chlorine
residual (1.0 mg/L), the respective CT requirements can be very different. For the surface water system
the requirements would be 25 mg/L-min. for 1-log and 75 mg/L-min. for 3-log Giardia lamblia
inactivation; therefore requiring 25 minutes contact time in one case and 75 minutes in the other. For the
GWS the requirement would be 4 mg/L-min. for 4-log virus inactivation. Thus, 4 minutes of contact time.
Therefore, while the surface water guidance recommends consideration of a worst-case scenario at daily
peak hourly flow, this may not be appropriate for all GWSs.
The second major difference between ground and surface water systems is also related to water
production rates. While most surface water plants generally produce water at constant rates and have
clearwells to provide contact time, this is not true for many GWSs, particularly the smaller GWSs (i.e.,
those serving less than 100 people). Small GWSs typically have wells that pump into the distributions
system and are equipped with hydropneumatic tanks intended to limit the cycling of the well pumps. For
these systems a pressure switch turns the well pump on at a minimum distribution system pressure (e.g.,
35 psi), then the well pumps water until an upper pressure is reached, perhaps 65 psi, and the pressure
switch turns the pump off. As shown by the example pump curve in Figure 4-2, the flow rate from the
well varies greatly as the pressure changes during the pump cycle. At the turn-on pressure of 35 psi, the
well production rate is 58 gpm or about 145% of the flow rate at shut-off pressure (65 psi). In atypical
small hydropneumatic tank system, the well may often pump at this higher rate for several minutes during
peak demand periods. Therefore, it is appropriate for states to consider these momentary peaks in water
demand for determining the provisions necessary to ensure adequate contact time.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 89 November 2007
-------
Table 4-4. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Free Chlorine, pH 6.0-9.0
Degrees C
Inactivation
(log)
2
o
j
4
1
58
87
116
2
53
80
107
3
49
73
98
4
44
67
89
5
40
60
80
6
3 8
56
76
7
36
59
79
8
34
48
68
9
3 9
44
64
10
30
40
60
11
9 8
3 8
56
12
96
36
59
13
94
34
48
14
9 9
3 9
44
15
90
30
40
16
1 8
9 8
3 8
17
1 6
96
36
18
1 4
94
34
19
12
22
32
20
1 0
90
30
21
1 0
1 8
9 8
22
1 0
1 6
96
23
1 0
1 4
94
24
1 0
1 9
9 9
25
10
10
20
CT values provided in the tables are modified by linear interpolation between 5°C increments.
Table 4-5. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Chlorine Dioxide, pH 6.0-9.0
Degrees C
Inactivation
(log)
2
3
4
1
8.4
25.6
50.1
2
7.7
23.5
45.9
3
7.0
21.4
41.8
4
6.3
19.2
37.6
5
5.6
17.1
33.4
6
5.3
16.2
31.7
7
5.0
15.4
30.1
8
4.8
14.5
28.4
9
4.5
13.7
26.8
10
4.2
12.8
25.1
11
3.9
12.0
23.4
12
3.6
11.1
21.7
13
3.4
10.3
20.1
14
3.1
9.4
18.4
15
2.8
8.6
16.7
16
2.7
8.2
15.9
17
2.5
7.7
15.0
18
2.4
7.3
14.2
19
2.2
6.8
13.3
20
2.1
6.4
12.5
21
2.0
6.0
11.7
22
1.8
5.6
10.9
23
1.7
5.1
10.0
24
1.5
4.7
9.2
25
1.4
4.3
8.4
CT values provided in the tables are modified by linear interpolation between 5°C increments.
Table 4-6. CT Values for Inactivation of Viruses by Ozone
Degrees C
Inactivation
(log)
2
3
4
1
090
1 40
1 80
2
083
1 98
1 65
3
075
1 15
1 50
4
068
1 03
1 35
5
060
090
1 90
6
058
088
1 16
7
056
086
1 19
8
054
084
1 08
t
059
089
1 04
10
050
080
1 00
11
046
074
099
12
049
068
084
13
038
069
076
14
034
056
068
15
030
050
060
16
090
048
058
17
098
046
056
18
097
044
0 54
19
096
049
0 59
20
095
040
0 50
21
09S
037
046
22
09]
034
049
23
0 19
031
038
24
0 17
098
034
25
0 15
025
030
CT values provided in the tables are modified by linear interpolation between 5°C increments.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
90
November 2007
-------
Figure 4-2. Example Pump Curve for A Ground Water Well
Pressure
40 GPM
Q (Flow in GPM)
Figure 4-3 shows a schematic drawing of atypical small GWS well equipped with a shallow well pump
and a hydropneumatic tank for limiting the pump's cycling. As shown, the chlorine solution is injected
into the discharge line ahead of the hydropneumatic tank. However, the volume of the tank cannot be
considered for contact time because, when turn-on pressure occurs, the tank is effectively empty. At this
point the pump is producing 58 gpm and, during peak demand times, all water will be bypassing the
hydropneumatic tank and entering the distribution system to satisfy demand. Therefore, there should be
provisions to provide the minimum contact time between the point of chlorine injection and the first
customer. In this example, that means a minimum effective volume of 232 gallons (58 gpm X 4 min. =
232 gallons). Assuming the pipe between the discharge chlorine injection point and the first customer is
all 2-inch diameter, 1,422 feet of pipe would be necessary to provide 4 minutes of contact time at 58 gpm
(i.e., n (2/12')2/4 X 1,422' X 7.48 gallons/ft3 = 232 gallons). For most small systems, it is unlikely that
there is that much pipe between the well and the first customer. As a result, provisions for contact time
will often have to be added to ensure 4-log virus inactivation.
mtact1
There are a variety of ways contact time can be added in small GWSs. Where possible, it is best and least
expensive to try and add the contact time without the need for re-pumping the treated water. In this
example, one could put 40 feet of 12-inch water main between the chlorine injection point and the first
customer (i.e., FI (l')2/4 X 40' X 7.48 gallons/ft3 = 235 gallons) and, assuming plug flow, there would be
a minimum of 4 minutes contact time at 58 gpm, thus, a CT of 4 mg/L-min. with a free chlorine residual
of l.Omg/L.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
91
November 2007
-------
Figure 4-3. Schematic of Hydropneumatic System
• i L .1: .(:' i' i •
-------
Figure 4-4. Five Pressure Vessels in Series
Unlike chemical disinfectants, UV leaves no residual that can be monitored to determine UV dose and
inactivation credit. The UV dose depends on UV intensity (measured by UV sensors), flow rate, and UV
transmittance (UVT). UV intensity measurements may account for UVT depending on sensor locations.
For systems using UV, a relationship between the required UV dose and these parameters should be
established and then monitored at the water treatment plant to ensure sufficient disinfection. Section
4.4.7.4 discusses monitoring of UV treatment in more detail.
EPA has developed a UV dose table for inactivation of viruses (Table 4-7). Data published subsequent to
the GWR proposal has indicated that some viruses, particularly adenoviruses, are more resistant than
other viruses to UV light. Therefore, the final GWR does not include an explicit reference to UV as a
stand-alone technology to achieve 4-log virus inactivation. EPA is concerned that fecally-contaminated
ground water may contain adenoviruses, or other viruses, that are resistant to UV inactivation.
Table 4-7. Virus Inactivation from UV dose (mJ/cm2) l
Target
Pathogen
Viruses
Log Inactivation
0.5
39
1.0
58
1.5
79
2.0
100
2.5
121
3.0
143
3.5
163
4.0
186
1. 40 CFR 141.720(d)(l).^
Any UV reactors used for virus inactivation should undergo challenge testing to validate the dose level
delivered so that effective public health protection is provided by systems using UV disinfection. At
present, EPA is unaware of available challenge testing procedures that can be used to validate the
performance of UV reactors at dose levels needed for a 4-log inactivation of adenovirus.
The UV technology can, however, be used in a series configuration or in combination with other
inactivation or removal technologies to provide a total 4-log treatment of viruses to meet the GWR's
requirements. EPA believes that a UV reactor dose verification procedure for 4-log inactivation of a range
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
93
November 2007
-------
of viruses may be developed in the future. With the future development of UV validation procedures, it
may become feasible for systems to demonstrate that they can achieve 4-log inactivation of viruses with a
single UV light reactor. Therefore, the GWR allows states to approve and set compliance monitoring and
performance parameters for any alternative treatment, including UV light or UV light in combination with
another treatment technology that will ensure that systems continuously meet the 4-log virus treatment
requirements.
The UV doses provided in Table 4-7 account for uncertainty in the UV dose-response relationships of
viral pathogens but do not address other significant sources of uncertainty in full-scale UV disinfection
applications. These other sources of uncertainty are due to the hydraulic effects of the UV installation, the
UV reactor equipment (e.g., UV sensors), and the monitoring approach. Due to these factors, GWSs
installing UV should use UV reactors that have undergone validation testing. This validation testing
should determine the operating conditions under which the reactor delivers the required UV dose for
treatment credit. Operating conditions should include flow, UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor,
and UV lamp status. For more information on UV validation testing, refer to EPA's Ultraviolet
Disinfection Guidance Manual Final (EPA 815-R-06-007, November 2006).
To receive inactivation credit, the UV reactors should be operated within the validated limits. When a UV
reactor is operating outside of these limits, the UV reactor is operating off-specification. Ground water
systems that use UV disinfection to provide inactivation of viruses for GWR compliance should
demonstrate that at least 95 percent of the water delivered to the public during each month is treated by
UV reactors operating within validated limits. Guidance on determining validated operating conditions is
provided in EPA's Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual Final (EPA 815-R-06-007, November
2006).
4.4.7.2 Determine the minimum residual disinfectant concentration
(ii): The process the state will use to determine the minimum residual disinfectant
concentration the system must provide prior to the first customer for systems using
chemical disinfection.
Guidance
Residual disinfectant concentration is the concentration of the disinfectant (in mg/L) at a point before or
at the first customer. Systems conducting compliance monitoring and providing chemical disinfection
must maintain a minimum residual disinfectant concentration at or before the first customer. The state
primacy application must include an explanation and rationale for how the state will decide what that
minimum residual disinfectant concentration will be for each system. If the state sets the minimum
residual disinfectant concentration level on a system-by-system basis, the application will need to explain
the rationale and information that will be required from systems in order to make the determination.
States may consider setting minimum residual disinfectant concentrations on a system-by-system basis in
accordance with CT requirements. Systems with substantial contact time before their first customers can
achieve the required CT at a lower disinfectant residual concentration than systems with limited contact
time. Therefore, states may determine it is appropriate to have different minimum residual disinfectant
concentrations depending on the contact time available before the first customer. Alternatively, states may
decide to require a uniform minimum residual disinfectant concentration that will apply to all systems
using chemical disinfectant. In this case, states would have to take measures in their permitting process to
ensure that adequate contact is available in each system to achieve 4-log virus inactivation. For either
requirement, the state must explain in its primacy application the basis for its approach.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 94 November 2007
-------
One approach for meeting this primacy requirement would be to point out that the state through its
permitting (plant and specification approval) process, would address each system's specific configuration,
water quality (e.g., temperature, pH), and require conditions of chlorine residual and contact time at peak
momentary demand that would result in a minimum CT capable of inactivating 4-log viruses in
accordance with EPA's CT tables.
4.4.7.3 State-approved alternative technologies
(Hi): The state-approved alternative technologies that GWSs may use alone or in combination
with other approved technologies to achieve at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using
inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination ofinactivation and removal)
before or at the first customer for a ground water source.
Guidance
Under this Special Primacy Requirement states must identify the state-approved alternative technologies
that the GWS may use alone or in combination with other approved technologies to achieve at least 4-log
virus inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of these technologies before or at the first
customer. The application should include a list of the approved alternative technologies and the rationale
for allowing the use of the alternative technologies.
States may want to allow themselves flexibility to address technologies that may emerge in the future by
obtaining the authority to review and approve all treatment/disinfection technologies that have potential to
be applied for removal and inactivation of microbial contaminants. If they do this, they should ensure in
their permitting/approval process that there is adequate evidence confirming the long-term ability of the
process(s) to achieve at least 4-log virus treatment.
Systems may claim credit for UV processes for inactivation of viruses. Section 4.4.7.1 explains EPA's
concerns about current limitations of challenge testing of UV reactors with respect to adenoviruses (and
perhaps other viruses) and EPA's recommendations to states regarding the application of UV treatment.
4.4.7.4 Monitoring and compliance criteria
(iv): The monitoring and compliance requirements the state will require for GWSs treating to
at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination ofinactivation and removal) before or at the first customer for state-
approved alternative treatment technologies.
Guidance
State primacy applications should include an explanation of the monitoring requirements and compliance
criteria the state will require for systems using alternative treatment technologies. This includes an
explanation of the types of monitoring and reporting that systems will have to complete and submit to the
state.
For example, EPA recommends that PWSs check their UV units daily to ensure they are operating
properly. PWSs should monitor their UV reactors to determine if the reactors are operating within
validated conditions. This monitoring should include UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, flow rate,
lamp status, and other parameters designated by the state. UV reactors should also be regularly monitored
to diagnose operating problems, determine when maintenance is necessary, and maintain safe operation.
In addition to monitoring operational parameters, PWSs should verify the calibration of UV sensors in
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 95 November 2007
-------
accordance with a protocol that the state approves. States are encouraged to refer to EPA's Ultraviolet
Disinfection Guidance Manual Final (EPA 815-R-06-007, November 2006) for more information on
routine monitoring and calibration of UV units.
States are encouraged to require GWSs using UV to prepare and submit monthly reports to the state. The
monthly report should include the percentage of off-specification water for the UV facility and the UV
sensor calibration monitoring. The percentage of UV sensors checked for calibration should also be
reported monthly. All UV sensors in operation that month should be checked. Additionally, the daily low
validated dose or daily low UV intensity, depending on the dose-monitoring strategy, should be reported
to the state monthly.
Example 4-4 provides an example of a summary report that could be completed by the PWS and
submitted to the state on a monthly basis. Examples 4-5 and 4-6 are example operating logs that would
be completed on a daily basis for the calculated dose and UV Intensity Setpoint Approach, respectively.
The forms would be used to record the operating status of the UV equipment and to record the volume of
water discharged during off-specification operation each day. Additional examples of operating logs for
UV are provided in EPA's Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-06-007, November
2006).
Additional items states may want systems using UV disinfection to report on periodically include:
• Date the UV tube was last replaced;
• If UV unit is preceded by filtration (e.g. a 5-micron cartridge filter), date the filter was last
changed;
• If additional water quality monitoring is required (e.g. turbidity, coliform, iron, manganese), most
recent analytical results; and,
• Whether a spare UV tube and other necessary equipment are available on site.
States may want to consider each technology, or combination of technologies, on a case-by-case basis and
require appropriate monitoring for ensuring that a minimum of 4-log virus removal/inactivation would be
achieved during peak momentary demand.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 96 November 2007
-------
Example 4-4. Example Summary Monthly Report for a GWS Disinfecting with Ultraviolet
Radiation
Reporting Period:
System/Treatment Plant:
PWSID:
Signature of Principal Executive:
Officer or Authorized Agent:
Date:
Date:'
Unit Number
Total
Total Run Time
(hrs)
Total Production
(MG)
Off-Specification Data
Number of Off-
Specification Events
Total Off-Specification
Volume
(MG)
Compliance Certification
Total Volume of Off-Specification Water Produced (MG) [A]
Total Volume of Water Produced (MG) [B]
Total Off-Specification Water Produced (% of Volume of Water Produced) ([A]/[B]*100)
Facility Meets Off-Specification Requirement (< 5% of Volume on a Monthly Basis) (Y/N)
Of the sensors, have been checked for calibration and were within the acceptable range of tolerance.
The Following Reactors had a Sensor Correction Factor
Reactor Number
Sensor Correction Factor
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
97
November 2007
-------
Example 4-5. Example Daily Operating Log for Calculated Dose Approach
Reporting Period:
System/Treatment Plant:
PWSID:
UV Reactor:
Process Train:
Operator Signature:
Date:
Operational Data
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Min
Max
RunTime (hrs)
Total Production
(MG)
Maximum Validated Flow Rate:
Min mum Validated UVT:
Target Log Inactivation:
Target Pathogen:
Dose Required (Drec|'d):
Validation Factor (VF):
Calculated Dose
VFxCF
Calculated Dose =Dose that is calculated by validated PLC algorithm
VF= Validation factor
CF = UV intensity sensor correction factor.
The CF is only applied if sensors do not meet recommended criteria
(NOTE - a CF will not be needed in most cases)
Dose Requirements
Dreq'd
(mJ/cm2)
[A]
Data at Daily Minimum Validated Dose
Sensor Correction
Factor2
[B]
Calculated Dose3
(mJ/cm2)
[C]
Daily Minimum
Validated Dose4
([CMVFHB])
(mJ/cm2)
[D]
Flow Rate
(MOD)
UVT
UV Dose Adequacy
Determination
Validated Dose >
Dreq'd
(Y/N)
^m
Total Off-
Specification
Total Off-
Specification Volume
(MG)
^H
1 Dreq.d is the dose required for the target log inactivation without a VF or Sensor CF applied and can be found in the UVDGM Table 1 .4.
2 Sensor CF will be 1 is no CF is used
3 Calculated dose is calculated using the dose algorithm in the PLC.
4 The Validated Dose is the dose based on the calculated dose that is normalized on the Validation Factor and Correct on Factor
5 Off-specification worksheet (Figure 6.5) should be used to ca culate daily off-specification volume. If UVT, flowrate, and/or Validated Dose off-specification occur simultaneously, the off-specification t me should only be counted once
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
98
November 2007
-------
Example 4-6. Example Daily Operating Log for UV Intensity Setpoint Approach
Reporting Period:
System/Treatment Plant:
PWSID:
UV Reactor:
Process Train:
Operator Signature:
Date:
Operational Data
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Min
Max
Run
Time
(hrs)
Total
Production
(MG)
Flow Rate
Min (mgd)
Ave (mgd)
Max (mgd)
Maximum Validated Flow Rate:
Minimum Validated UVT:
Target Log Inactivation:
Target Pathogen:
Intensity Setpoint:
Intensity Requirements
Intensity Setpoint
(W/m2)
[A]
Sensor Correction
Factor1
[B]
Adjusted Intensity
Setpoint
(W/m2)
([A] ' [B])
[C]
Daily Minimum Intensity
Daily Minimum
Intensity
(W/m2)
[D]
Minimum Daily
Intensity >
Adjusted Intensity
Setpoint
([D] > [C])
(Y/N)
^m
Total Flow Off-
Specification
Total Flow Off-
Specification3
(MG)
^
1 Sensor CF will be 1 islwCF Istised.
2 UVT measurements are not requ red but could be useful in addressing operational ssues.
3 Off-specification worksheet (Figure 6.5) should be used to calculate daily off-specification volume. If UV intensity or flowrate off-specification occur simultaneously, the off-specificat on time should only be
counted once
4.4.7.5 Monitoring, compliance, and membrane integrity testing requirements
(v): The monitoring, compliance and membrane integrity testing requirements the state will
require to demonstrate virus removal for GWSs using membrane filtration technologies.
A GWS that uses membrane filtration to meet the treatment technique requirements must monitor the
membrane filtration process in accordance with state-specified monitoring requirements. A GWS that
uses membrane filtration is in compliance with the treatment requirement to achieve at least 4-log
removal of viruses when:
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
99
November 2007
-------
• The membrane has an absolute molecular weight cut-off or an alternate parameter that describes
the exclusion characteristics of the membrane and can reliably achieve at least 4-log removal of
viruses;
• The membrane process is operated in accordance with state-specified compliance requirements;
and,
• The integrity of the membrane is intact.
Because removal of viruses by membrane filtration does not enable measurement of a residual or
measurable turbidity breakthrough to ensure treatment performance, states must provide alternative
compliance monitoring criteria. Criteria must ensure maintenance of the integrity of the membrane to
prevent passage of virus particles. Criteria may include routine pressure testing and reporting of the
results as prescribed by the membrane manufacturer, turbidity monitoring, monitoring of an associated
chemical parameter, or other site-specific variables.
To grant removal credit to systems using membrane filtration, states should ensure that the membrane
technology is a pressure- or vacuum-driven separation process in which particulate matter is rejected by a
nonfibrous, engineered barrier, primarily through a size exclusion mechanism. The membrane technology
should also allow for routine direct integrity testing while in operation, to verify that the removal
efficiency demonstrated through challenge testing is being achieved.
The removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing establishes the maximum removal credit
that a membrane filtration process is eligible to receive, provided this value is less than or equal to the
maximum log removal value that can be verified by the direct integrity test (a physical test applied to a
membrane unit to identify and isolate integrity breaches such as leaks). The state may use its discretion
when considering data from challenge studies conducted prior to promulgation of the GWR in lieu of
requiring additional testing. Additional requirements and guidance on membrane filtration is provided in
EPA's Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual: Overview and Summary Factsheet and EPA's Membrane
Filtration Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-06-009, November 2005).
4.4.7.6 Discontinuation of 4-log virus inactivation, removal, or a state-approved combination of
these technologies
(vi): The criteria, including public health-based considerations and incorporating on-site
investigations and source water monitoring results, the state will use to determine if a
GWS may discontinue 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-
approved combination of inactivation and removal) before or at the first customer.
Guidance
A GWS may discontinue 4-log treatment of viruses if the state determines and documents in writing that
4-log treatment of viruses is no longer necessary for that ground water source. The state primacy
application must include an explanation of what criteria the state will use to determine whether a water
system may discontinue its 4-log treatment of viruses. These criteria should be strict enough to not
compromise public health protection if the 4-log treatment were to be discontinued. EPA encourages
states to set rigorous requirements for discontinuing treatment. Criteria may include results of on-site
investigations, source water monitoring, and documentation of well rehabilitation.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 100 November 2007
-------
Examples of when it may be appropriate to discontinue treatment are:
• The previous source is replaced by a source that has been shown to be less sensitive
hydrogeologically and free from contamination based on source water monitoring;
• A well with structural conditions resulting in impairment of its water quality (e.g., not terminated
above grade, inadequate well cap, lack of sanitary seal, improper grouting) is rehabilitated and
conditions no longer exist; and,
• A year of monthly source water monitoring for a fecal indicator and detailed evidence that the
well is drawing water from a protected confined or semi-confined aquifer.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 101 November 2007
-------
This page intentionally left blank
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 102 November 2007
-------
Section 5
SDWIS Reporting and SNC
Definitions
Note: This section is under development.
-------
This page intentionally left blank
-------
Section 6
Public Notification, Consumer
Confidence Report, and
Special Notice Examples
-------
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
-------
Several general categories of notification are required by the Ground Water Rule (GWR):
• Tier 1, 2, or 3 public notification
• Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Special Notice (for community water systems [CWSs])
• Special Notice (for noncommunity water systems [NCWSs])
• CCR other notice
The type of notification required depends on the violation or scenario that has occurred at the public water
system (PWS). The table below summarizes public notification, CCR and Special Notice requirements of
the GWR. Note that Special Notice requirements for CWSs require notification to be included in the
system's CCR. NCWSs that are required to make Special Notice must inform the public served by the
water system in a manner approved by the state. Section 3.8 of this guidance manual addresses the
GWR's public notice requirements in more detail.
Table 6-1. Public Notification, CCR, and Special Notice Requirements
Issue
Uncorrected significant deficiency - CWSs1
Unconnected significant deficiency - NCWSs1
Fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - CWSs2
Fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - NCWS2
Unaddressed fecal indicator positive ground water source sample - CWSs
Failure to take corrective action - CWSs
Failure to take corrective action - NCWS
Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses - CWSs
Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses - NCWS
Failure to meet monitoring requirements - CWSs
Failure to meet monitoring requirements - NCWS
Notification Required
Special Notice in CCR
Special Notice
Tier 1 public notification, Special
Notice in CCR, and CCR
Tier 1 public notification
Special Notice in CCR
Tier 2 public notification, CCR
Tier 2 public notification
Tier 2 public notification, CCR
Tier 2 public notification
Tier 3 public notification, CCR
Tier 3 public notification
1. Systems must continue to notify the public annually until the significant deficiency has been corrected.
2. Consecutive systems served by the ground water source must also notify the public.
This section provides examples of public notifications, CCR excerpts and Special Notices that satisfy
notification requirements of the GWR. In the examples provided, language in italics is required by 40
CFR Appendix A to Subpart O of Part 141 or by 40 CFR Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 141. The
following scenarios are addressed:
Scenario 1: Source Water Sample is Positive for a Fecal Coliform Indicator - CWS
Scenario 2: System Fails to Comply With a State Corrective Action Plan or Schedule - NCWS
Scenario 3: System Fails to Take Corrective Action Following a Significant Deficiency - CWS
Scenario 4: System Fails to Maintain at Least 4-log Treatment of Viruses - CWS
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
107
November 2007
-------
• Scenario 5: System Fails to Collect a Source Water Sample - CWS
• Scenario 6: System Fails to Conduct Compliance Monitoring - NCWS
The organization of the templates provided here follows the organization of the templates for other
notification requirements that are currently available in EPA's:
• Revised Public Notification Handbook - EPA 816-R-07-003, March 2007. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/publicnotification/pdfs/guide_publicnotification_pnhandbook.pdf.
• Public Notification Handbook for Transient Non-community Water Systems - EPA 816-R-07-
004, March 2007. Available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/publicnotification/pdfs/guidejublicnotificationjnhandbook tncws.pdf.
Readers are encouraged to refer to these manuals for additional public notification guidance. Systems
with a large proportion of non-English speaking consumers should refer to these manuals for examples of
notices that use language other than English to provide key information.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 108 November 2007
-------
Scenario 1: A Source Water Sample is Positive for a Fecal Coliform Indicator
System Description - System A
System A is a community GWS serving 1,500 people. The system has two wells in use year-round and
does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.
Situation
On April 2, 2010, the system collects its two routine monthly TCR samples for April. The system is
notified by the laboratory on the afternoon of April 4 that one of its routine samples is total-coliform
positive. On the morning of April 5, the system collects samples from both wells and delivers the samples
to the laboratory for analysis. The analysis shows that one of the two source water samples is positive for
E. coli.
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
System A has detected a fecal indicator (i.e., E. coli) in its source water sample. While the system has not
had a violation, it must provide Tier 1 public notification as soon as practical but no later than 24 hours of
learning that the source water sample was E. co//-positive (i.e., no later than April 6, 2010). Notification
can be made via radio, TV, hand delivery, posting, or other method specified by the state, along with
other methods if needed to reach persons served. The system must initiate consultation with the state
within 24 hours of learning of the E. co//-positive sample result (or by April 6, 2010). An example of a
public notice that fulfills the Tier 1 public notification requirement for this scenario is shown in Example
6-1.
Special Notice in the CCR
A CWS that receives notice of a fecal indicator-positive ground water source sample must provide
Special Notice in the CCR addressing that year, informing the public served by the water system of the
fecal indicator-positive source sample. The system must continue to inform the public annually (as
Special Notice in the CCR) until the state determines that the fecal contamination in the ground water
source has been corrected. In order to address this Special Notice requirement, the following elements
must be included in the CCR:
• The nature of the source of the fecal contamination (if the source is known) and the dates of the
fecal indicator positive ground water source sample(s).
• If the fecal contamination in the ground water source has been addressed.
• For fecal contamination in the ground water source that has not been addressed, the state-
approved plan and schedule for correction, including interim measures, progress to date, and any
interim measures completed.
• The potential health effects using the health effects language of 40 CFR Appendix A of Subpart
O.
Example 6-2 provides an example that fulfills this Special Notice requirement for this scenario.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 109 November 2007
-------
CCR
In addition to the Special Notice requirements, a CWS must also include the fecal indicator-positive result
in the Regulated Contaminant table in the CCR addressing that year. Example 6-2 provides an example
that fulfills this CCR requirement for this scenario.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 110 November 2007
-------
Example 6-1. Example Tier 1 Public Notification for a Fecal Indicator-Positive Triggered
Source Water Sample
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DRINKING WATER
System A Well 1 Tested Positive for Fecal Contamination
Our water system detected fecal indicators (E. coli) in one of our two wells. As our customers, you have a right to
know what happened and what we are doing to correct this situation. On April 4, we learned that one of our routine
samples collected April 2 was total conform positive. As required by EPA's Ground Water Rule, one of our follow-
up steps was to collect samples from both of our wells. The sample from Well 1 collected on April 5 tested positive
for a fecal indicator (E. coli). We are now conducting additional sampling of the well to determine the extent of the
problem and are conducting a thorough investigation to determine the source of the contamination.
What should I do?
DO NOT DRINK THE WATER WITHOUT BOILING IT FIRST. Bring all water to a rolling boil, let it boil for one
minute, and let it cool before using it. Boiling kills bacteria and other organisms in the water. You may also use
bottled water. Use boiled or bottled water for drinking, making ice, preparing food, and washing dishes until further
notice.
Also, if you have a severely compromised immune system, have an infant, or are elderly, you may be at increased
risk and should seek advice about drinking water from your health care providers. General guidelines on ways to
lessen the risk of infection by microbes are available from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791. If
you have specific health concerns, consult your doctor. We are also providing regular updates on this situation on
Channel 22 or Radio Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What does this mean?
Inadequately treated or inadequately protected water may contain disease-causing organisms. These organisms can
cause symptoms such as diarrhea, nausea, cramps, and associated headaches. Fecal indicators are microbes whose
presence indicates that the water may be contaminated with human or animal wastes. Microbes in these wastes can
cause short-term health effects, such as diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. They may pose a
special health risk for infants, young children, some of the elderly, and people with severely compromised immune
systems. These symptoms are not caused only by organisms in drinking water. If you experience any of these
symptoms and they persist, you may want to seek medical advice.
What is being done?
We are conducting a thorough investigation to determine the source of the contamination and will be working with
the State Department of Public Health to implement corrective actions to ensure that our water supplies are protected
against contamination. We will keep you informed of the steps we are taking to protect your drinking water and will
provide information on any steps you should be taking, until this problem is corrected.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System A, at 555-1234 or write to 2600
Winding Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice is being sent to you by System A.
State Water System ID# TM 1234582. Sent: 4/6/2010
Draft GWRImplementation Guidance 111 November 2007
-------
Example 6-2. Example of Regulated Contaminant Table and Special Notice in the CCR for
Source Water Fecal Contamination
Source Water Quality Data
Contaminant
Fecal indicators (E.
coli)
MCL/MRDL/TT
TT
MCLG
N/A
Value
Positive
(E. coli)
Date
Aprils, 2010
Violation
No
Typical
Sources
Human and
animal fecal
waste
*System A detected E. coli in their source water sample; the sample was collected in response to a total coliform-
positive routine sample collected on April 2, 2010. More information about this situation is provided in the Situation
section.
Situation
• On April 4, 2010 we were informed that one of our routine total coliform samples collected on April 2 was
total coliform-positive. As required by the Ground Water Rule, we collected samples from both of our
sources, Wells 1 and 2, and had them analyzed for fecal contamination. The sample for Well 1 was positive
for fecal contamination (E. coli).
Inadequately treated or inadequately protected water may contain disease-causing organisms. These
organisms can cause symptoms such as diarrhea, nausea, cramps, and associated headaches. Fecal indicators
are microbes whose presence indicates that the water may be contaminated with human or animal wastes.
Microbes in these wastes can cause short-term health effects, such as diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches,
or other symptoms. They may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, some of the elderly, and
people with severely compromised immune systems.
In response, we sent notices to all of our customers within 24 hours of learning of this positive sample. We
carefully considered our options and developed a plan with the State Department of Public Health to extend
the well's casing higher above the ground, replace the well cap, and install treatment (chlorination). As we
stated in the most recent update on this issue, treatment was installed on June 1, 2010.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance
112
November 2007
-------
Scenario 2: A System Fails to Comply With a State Corrective Action Plan or Schedule
System Description - System B
System B is a noncommunity GWS serving 800 people. The system has one well in use year-round and
does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before the first customer.
Situation
During a sanitary survey on September 1, 2013, the state identifies a significant deficiency—two leaking
septic tanks close to the system's well. The system is notified of the deficiency in a letter from the state
on September 14, 2013. The letter does not indicate a specific corrective action that the system is required
to take. As required, the system contacts the state within 30 days of receiving written notice of the
significant deficiency and the system and the state develop a plan for implementing corrective action. The
first step of the corrective action plan is scheduled to be completed by December 1, 2013.The system,
however, does not begin implementing the plan until February 25, 2014 and completes the plan's steps on
October 20, 2014. In waiting so long to begin implementing its corrective action plan, the system failed to
be in compliance with its state-approved corrective action plan and schedule. The system is notified of
this treatment technique violation on March 1, 2014. i
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
Although System B contacts the state regarding the significant deficiency within the 30-day timeframe,
the system is required to be in compliance with its corrective action plan and schedule within 120 days of
receiving written notice from the state of the significant deficiency. Failure to do this is a treatment
technique violation and requires Tier 2 public notification. The system must provide public notification
within 30 days of learning of the violation. Notification must be provided by mail or other direct delivery
method (such as hand delivery), and any other reasonable method to reach affected individuals who
would not have received the information by mail or the direct delivery method may be used. For any
unresolved violation following an initial Tier 2 notice, notice must be repeated every 3 months for as long
as the violation persists. The system is notified of the violation on March 1, 2014 and therefore must
provide Tier 2 public notice by March 31, 2010. Since corrective action is not back on schedule within 3
months of that date, the system has to repeat public notice. An example of a public notice that fulfills the
Tier 2 public notification requirements for this violation is shown in Example 6-3.
Special Notice
Noncommunity GWSs that receive notice from the state of a significant deficiency must also provide
special notice to customers of any deficiencies that have not been corrected within 12 months of being
notified by the state (or earlier, if directed by the state). System B does not complete corrective action
until October 20, 2014, which is more than 12 months after the system had been notified of the significant
deficiency (September 14, 2013). Example 6-4 provides sample Special Notice language for this scenario.
Since System B is a NCWS and does not distribute a CCR, Special Notice will be provided in a manner
approved by the state.
CCR
Since System B is a NCWS, it does not have any CCR requirements.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 113 November 2007
-------
Example 6-3. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Comply With State
Corrective Action Plan or Schedule
DRINKING WATER NOTICE
System B Failed to Comply With the Established Corrective Action Plan and Schedule after Identification of
a Significant Deficiency
On September 1, 2013 the State Department of Public Health performed a detailed inspection and engineering
evaluation of our water system called a sanitary survey. During this sanitary survey, they identified two leaking
septic tanks close to our well. Because of the high potential for contamination of our well by these tanks, the state
considered this a "significant deficiency" and directed us to correct the problem. As our customers, you have a right
to know what happened and what we are doing to correct this situation. As required by EPA's Ground Water Rule,
we worked with the State to develop a plan to correct this deficiency. However, we failed to implement this
corrective action plan within the established deadline and have violated a requirement of the Ground Water Rule.
What does this mean?
This is not an emergency. If it had been an emergency, you would have been notified within 24 hours.
This significant deficiency has the potential to cause source water contamination. Leaking septic tanks are a
potential source of fecal contamination. Inadequately treated or inadequately protected water may contain disease-
causing organisms. These organisms can cause symptoms such as diarrhea, nausea, cramps, and associated
headaches. Failure to correct the deficiency according to the established schedule prolonged the risk of fecal
contamination of our source water. While we have not detected any evidence of fecal contamination in our source
water, we are committed to correcting the deficiency to eliminate the threat of contamination.
What should I do?
There is nothing you need to do unless you have a severely compromised immune system, have an infant, or are
elderly. These people may be at increased risk and should seek advice about drinking water from their health care
providers. General guidelines on ways to lessen the risk of infection by microbes are available from EPA's Safe
Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791. If you have specific health concerns, consult your doctor.
You do not need to boil your water or take other corrective actions. If a situation arises where the water is no longer
safe to drink, you will be notified within 24 hours. We will announce any emergencies on Channel 22 or Radio
Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What is being done?
Since being informed of the deficiency, we have been conducting regular testing of our source water and we are
implementing the corrective action plan established by the State Department of Public Health. Under this plan, the
leaking tanks will be replaced by October 20, 2014.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System B, at 555-1234 or write to 2600
Winding Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice is being posted by System B.
State Water System ID# TM1234583. Sent: 3/10/2014
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 114 November 2007
-------
Example 6-4. Example of a Special Notice Regarding a Significant Deficiency
Violation
On September 14, 2013, we were informed by the State Department of Public Health that a significant deficiency—
two leaking septic tanks near our source water supply—had been identified during a September 1, 2013 sanitary
survey.
As required, we contacted the State Department of Public Health and were directed to make arrangements to replace
the tanks with the owner of the property on which the septic tanks are located and to have the tanks replaced. We did
not do so within the established deadline. Since being informed of the deficiency, we have been conducting regular
testing of our source water and we are implementing the corrective action plan established by the Department of
Public Health. Under this plan, the leaking tanks will be replaced by October 20, 2014.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 115 November 2007
-------
Scenario 3: A System Fails to Take Corrective Action Following a Significant Deficiency
System Description - System C
System C is a community GWS serving 1,500 people. The system has one well in use year-round and
does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.
Situation
During a sanitary survey on June 1, 2013, the state identifies a significant deficiency—the system
operator's certification has lapsed. The system is notified of the deficiency in a letter from the state on
June 10, 2013. The state directs System C to take immediate corrective action by bringing on a new,
certified operator or having the current operator take all necessary steps to renew certification as soon as
possible. The system is told it must complete corrective action within 120 days of receiving written
notification from the state of the significant deficiency, or by October 8, 2013. By October 8th, the system
operator has still not been recertified and the system has not hired a new certified operator. The system is
notified of its violation on November 15, 2013, for failure to take corrective action within 120 days of
receiving written notice. System C finally hires a certified operator in December 2013.
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
Failure to correct a significant deficiency is a treatment technique violation and requires Tier 2 public
notification. The system must provide public notification within 30 days of learning of the violation, or by
December 14 2013. Notification must be provided by mail or other direct delivery method (such as hand
delivery), and any other reasonable method to reach affected individuals that would not have received the
information by mail or the direct delivery method may be used. For any unresolved violation following an
initial Tier 2 notice, notice must be repeated every 3 months for as long as the violation persists. The
system will therefore have to repeat public notice until corrective action is taken.
An example of a public notice that fulfills the public notification and special notification requirements for
this violation is shown in Example 6-5.
Special Notice
Since the significant deficiency was addressed (System C hires a certified operator in December 2013),
there is no special notice requirement.
CCR
All treatment technique violations must also be included in the CCR. An explanation of how the system
returned to compliance could also be included.
An example of a report of this violation that could be used in the system's CCR is shown in Example 6-6.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 116 November 2007
-------
Example 6-5. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Take Corrective Action
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DRINKING WATER
System C Failed to Take Corrective Action Following Identification of a Significant Deficiency
On June 1, 2013 the State Department of Public Health performed a detailed inspection and engineering evaluation
of our water system called a sanitary survey. During this sanitary survey, they identified a significant deficiency in
our system (our water system operator's certification had lapsed). As our customers, you have a right to know what
happened and what we are doing to correct this situation. As required by EPA's Ground Water Rule, we worked
with the State to develop a plan to correct this deficiency. However, we failed to implement this plan before the
established deadline and have violated a requirement of the Ground Water Rule.
What should I do?
There is nothing you need to do unless you have a severely compromised immune system, have an infant, or are
elderly. These people may be at increased risk and should seek advice about drinking water from their health care
providers. General guidelines on ways to lessen the risk of infection by microbes are available from EPA's Safe
Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791. If you have specific health concerns, consult your doctor.
You do not need to boil your water or take other corrective actions. If a situation arises where the water is no longer
safe to drink, you will be notified within 24 hours. We will announce any emergencies on Channel 22 or Radio
Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What does this mean?
This is not an emergency. If it had been an emergency, you would have been notified within 24 hours.
This significant deficiency has the potential to result in lack of proper treatment and oversight of the water system.
Inadequately treated or inadequately protected water may contain disease-causing organisms. These organisms can
cause symptoms such as diarrhea, nausea, cramps, and associated headaches. While we have not detected any
evidence of contamination or other health threats related to our source water, we are still committed to correcting the
deficiency to eliminate the threat of contamination.
What is being done?
The Townsville Utilities Board is in the process of identifying a new certified operator for our water system. We
will provide notice to you as soon as we hire a new, certified operator.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System C, at 555-1234 or write to 2600
Winding Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice is being sent to you by System C.
State Water System ID# TM 1234583. Sent: 12/13/2013
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 117 November 2007
-------
Example 6-6. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Corrective Action
Violation
On June 10, 2013, we were informed by the State Department of Public Health that a significant deficiency—lack of
a properly certified operator—had been identified during a June 1, 2013 sanitary survey.
We were directed by the Department of Public Health to take immediate action to correct this deficiency by ensuring
that our current operator took all necessary steps to be recertified or by hiring a new, properly certified operator. We
did not do so within the required deadline.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 118 November 2007
-------
Scenario 4: A System Fails to Maintain at Least 4-log Treatment of Viruses
System Description - System D
System D is a community GWS serving 8,500 people. The system has two wells in use year-round and
notifies the state in March 2009 that it provides 4-log treatment of viruses before the first customer.
Situation
During a sanitary survey on January 10, 2011, the state determines that due to a malfunctioning chlorine
pump, the system has not been providing 4-log treatment of viruses at one of its wells for at least 2 weeks.
The problem is identified during the sanitary survey and the system is officially notified of its failure to
consistently provide 4-log treatment in a letter from the state on February 1, 2011. The state also directs
System D to take corrective action to restore 4-log treatment as soon as possible.
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
A ground water system subject to the compliance monitoring requirements under 40 CFR 141.403(b)(3)
that fails to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses (using inactivation, removal, or a state-approved
combination of 4-log virus activation and removal) before or at the first customer for a ground water
source has committed a treatment technique violation and must provide Tier 2 public notification. The
system must provide public notification within 30 days of learning of the violation. Notification must be
provided by mail or other direct delivery method (such as hand delivery), and any other reasonable
method to reach affected individuals that would not have received the information by mail or the direct
delivery method may be used. For any unresolved violation following an initial Tier 2 notice, notice must
be repeated every 3 months for as long as the violation persists.
An example of a public notice that fulfills the public notification requirements for this violation is shown
in Example 6-7.
Special Notice
No special notice is required for this scenario.
CCR
All treatment technique violations must also be included in the CCR. An explanation of how the system
returned to compliance could also be included.
An example of a report of this violation that could be used in the system's CCR is shown in Example 6-8.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 119 November 2007
-------
Example 6-7. Example Tier 2 Public Notification for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log
Treatment of Viruses
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DRINKING WATER
System D Failed to Maintain Required Treatment of Viruses at Well 1
From December 27, 2010 to January 12, 2011, our water system did not provide chlorine in the water being used
from Well 1 due to a malfunctioning chlorine feed pump. As a result, our water was not as disinfected as the state
requires it to be. Our water system violated a treatment technique standard for maintaining adequate disinfection for
water delivered to customers from Well 1. As our customers, you have a right to know what happened and what we
are doing to correct this situation. After this problem was identified during a state inspection of our treatment
facilities, we took immediate steps to repair the malfunctioning chlorine pump.
What should I do?
There is nothing you need to do unless you have a severely compromised immune system, have an infant, or are
elderly. These people may have been at increased risk when our system failed to provide adequate disinfection and
should seek advice about drinking water from their health care providers. General guidelines on ways to lessen the
risk of infection by microbes are available from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791. If you have
specific health concerns, consult your doctor.
You do not need to boil your water or take other corrective actions. If a situation arises where the water is no longer
safe to drink, you will be notified within 24 hours. We will announce any emergencies on Channel 22 or Radio
Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What does this mean?
This is not an emergency. If it had been an emergency, you would have been notified within 24 hours.
Inadequately treated or inadequately protected water may contain disease-causing organisms. These organisms can
cause symptoms such as diarrhea, nausea, cramps, and associated headaches. While we have not detected any
evidence of contamination in, or other health threats to, our source water, we are still committed to restoring the
required level of treated of water from Well 1 to eliminate the threat of contamination.
What is being done?
We have replaced the malfunctioning chlorine pump and regular sampling has shown that we are once again
providing adequate disinfection of water from Well 1.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System D, at 555-1234 or write to 2600
Winding Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice is being sent to you by System D.
State Water System ID# TM 1234584. Sent: 2/10/2011
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 120 November 2007
-------
Example 6-8. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log
Treatment of Viruses
Violation
On January 10, 2011 state inspection of our water system identified a malfunctioning chlorine pump. As a result, the
water from one of our wells (Well 1) was not adequately disinfected for 2 weeks.
As directed by the Department of Public Health, we took immediate action to resolve this problem by repairing the
malfunctioning chlorine pump. Regular testing since the pump was repaired has demonstrated that we are once again
providing water that meets the State's standards for disinfection to our customers.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 121 November 2007
-------
Scenario 5: A System Fails to Collect a Source Water Sample
System Description - System E
System E is a community GWS serving 10,000 people. The system has four wells in use year-round and
does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.
Situation
On December 15, 2011, the system is notified by the laboratory that one of its routine monthly total
coliform samples is total-coliform positive. The system collects three repeat samples as required under the
TCR, but does not collect any source water samples. The state notifies the system that it is in violation of
the GWR requirements on January 2, 2012. System E collects samples from all four wells to have them
tested for fecal indicators on January 4, 2012. None of the samples is positive for fecal indicators.
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
System E has committed a monitoring violation. It is required to collect samples from each water source
in use at the time the total coliform-positive sample was collected, within 24 hours of learning of the total
coliform-positive routine TCR sample. The system must provide Tier 3 public notification within 1 year
of learning of the violation. Notification must be provided by mail or other direct delivery method (such
as hand delivery), and any other reasonable method to reach affected individuals that would not have
received the information by mail or the direct delivery method used. Notice must be provided to each
customer receiving a bill and other service connections to which water is delivered.
Special Notice
No special notice is required for this scenario.
CCR
Since System E is a CWS, it could use the CCR to inform the public of the Tier 3 violations if the CCR is
released within 1 year of the system's learning of the violations. For this particular example, the system
became aware of the monitoring violation on January 2, 2012. The public could therefore be informed of
the violation in the CCR produced for calendar year 2011.
An example of a public notice that fulfills the public notification requirements for this violation is shown
in Example 6-9. An example of a report of this violation in the CCR is shown in Example 6-10.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 122 November 2007
-------
Example 6-9. Example Tier 3 Public Notification for Failure to Collect Source Water
Sample(s) Following a Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DRINKING WATER
Monitoring Requirements not Met for System E
Our water system recently failed to collect source water samples for fecal indicators following a total coliform-
positive routine distribution system sample. Although this incident was not an emergency, as our customers, you
have a right to know what happened and what we did to correct the situation.
What should I do?
There is nothing you need to do. You do not need to boil your water or take other corrective actions. You may
continue to drink the water. If a situation arises where the water is no longer safe to drink, you will be notified
within 24 hours. We will announce any emergencies on Channel 22 or Radio Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What was done?
We collected samples from all four wells and had them tested for fecal indicators on January 4, 2012. None of the
samples was positive for fecal indicators.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System E, at 555-1234 or write to 2600 Winding
Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice is being sent to you by System E.
State Water System ID# TM 1234585. Sent: 2/5/2012
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 123 November 2007
-------
Example 6-10. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Source Water
Sample(s) Following a Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result
Violation
On December 15, 2011, we were informed by our laboratory that one of our routine bacteriological samples for
December tested positive for total coliform.
We were required to collect follow-up samples within 24 hours of learning of the total coliform-positive sample.
Follow-up samples needed to be tested for fecal indicators from all sources that were active at the time the total
coliform-positive sample was collected. Source water samples were collected on January 4, 2012, and all of the
samples were negative for fecal indicators.
Failure to conduct source water monitoring within the required 24 hour period is a monitoring and reporting
violation.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 124 November 2007
-------
Scenario 6: A System Fails to Conduct Compliance Monitoring
System Description - System F
System F is a noncommunity GWS serving 3,900 people. The system has two wells in use year-round and
notifies the state in January 2009 that it provides 4-log treatment of viruses before the first customer.
Situation
The system is conducting continuous residual disinfectant monitoring in accordance with the GWR and
recording the lowest residual disinfectant concentration every day it serves water to the public. For 1
week that the system is in operation in April 2010, the system fails to conduct residual disinfectant
monitoring. The state notifies the system that it is in violation of the GWR monitoring requirements on
May 25, 2010.
Public Notification. Special Notice and CCR Requirements
Public Notification
System F has committed a monitoring violation. Because it serves more than 3,300 people and provides
4-log treatment of viruses, the system must continuously monitor the residual disinfectant level at a state-
approved location. The system must provide Tier 3 public notification within 1 year of learning of the
violation. Notification must be provided by mail or other direct delivery method (such as hand delivery),
and any other reasonable method to reach affected individuals that would not have received the
information by mail or the direct delivery method used. Notice must be provided to each customer
receiving a bill and other service connections to which water is delivered.
An example of a public notice that fulfills the public notification requirements for this violation is shown
in Example 6-11.
Special Notice
No special notice is required for this scenario.
CCR
Because System F is a NCWS, it is not required to prepare and distribute a CCR.
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 125 November 2007
-------
Example 6-11. Example Tier 3 Public Notification for Failure to Conduct Compliance
Monitoring
DRINKING WATER NOTICE
Monitoring and Reporting Requirements not Met for System F
Our water system recently failed to collect routine samples for residual disinfectants in the water that we deliver to
you. Although this incident was not an emergency, as our customers, you have a right to know what happened and
what we did to correct the situation.
What should I do?
There is nothing you need to do. You do not need to boil your water or take other corrective actions. You may
continue to drink the water. If a situation arises where the water is no longer safe to drink, you will be notified
within 24 hours. We will announce any emergencies on Channel 22 or Radio Station KMMM (97.3 FM).
What was done?
Our continuous disinfection residual monitoring equipment has been repaired and all monitoring requirements are
being satisfied.
For more information, please contact John Johnson, manager of System F, at 555-1234 or write to 2600 Winding
Rd., Townsville, TM 12345.
Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have
received this notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You can
do this by posting this notice in a public place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
This notice has been posted by System F.
State Water System ID# TM 1234586. Sent: 6/1/2010
Draft GWR Implementation Guidance 126 November 2007
------- |