J. J. Keller® Compliance Network Logo
Start Experiencing Compliance Network for Free!
Update to Professional Trial!

Be Part of the Ultimate Safety & Compliance Community

Trending news, knowledge-building content, and more – all personalized to you!

Already have an account?
FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman Resources related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmat related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.
You'll also get exclusive access to:
TRY IT FREE TODAY
Already have an account? .

Recent data shows that the annual number of confined space fatalities is growing. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were an average of 96 confined space fatalities per year between 2005-2009. But between 2011-2018, that number grew to an average of 129 fatalities per year.

What does confined space safety look like at your facility? Are your workers prepared? Or will they become another statistic?

Here are some of the key challenges of confined space entry, and how to overcome them.

1. Lack of training and awareness: Inadequate training and awareness among workers about the confined space hazards can lead to accidents and injuries. Confined space incidents have also been linked to insufficient training on proper entry procedures, monitoring, and emergency response.

  • Develop and implement comprehensive training programs that have been tailored to the specific hazards and spaces within your workplace.
  • Conduct regular refresher training sessions to help reinforce initial training and maintain hazard awareness, knowledge, and skills associated with confined spaces.

2. Complacency and risk-taking behavior: Workers may become complacent or engage in risky behavior when entering confined spaces, especially if they have performed similar tasks without incident in the past. This can lead to increased chances of incidents.

  • Remind workers regularly of the importance of following safety procedures when entering confined spaces with safety meetings, toolbox talks, and signage in the workplace.
  • Encourage open communication and provide a feedback loop to help identify and address complacency or risk-taking behavior before it leads to accidents or injuries.

3. Insufficient risk assessment: Not addressing all risks before entering a confined space can result in overlooked hazards. Without a thorough evaluation of the work environment and potential hazards, workers may be ill-prepared to address unforeseen dangers during entry. This increases the likelihood of incidents or injuries.

  • Establish a systematic risk assessment process, including ways of identifying potential hazards, evaluating their likelihood and severity, and determining appropriate control measures.
  • Ensure that the risk assessment process is documented, regularly reviewed, and communicated to all workers involved in confined space entry.

4. Ineffective hazard communication: Poor communication of hazards and safety procedures among workers, supervisors, and contractors can lead to misunderstandings and mistakes. Clear and effective communication is essential for ensuring that all personnel involved are aware of the hazards present and the necessary safety measures.

  • Provide thorough training to all authorized and affected personnel, including workers, supervisors, and contractors, on hazards and safety procedures.
  • Foster a culture of open communication where workers (and contractors) feel comfortable reporting hazards and discussing safety concerns.

5. Inadequate supervision and oversight: Lack of supervision during confined space entry can result in workers taking unnecessary risks or overlooking critical safety measures. Remember, OSHA requires active participation from the entrant, attendant, and supervisor.

  • Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the confined space entrant, attendant, and supervisor and ensure that each person understands their specific duties.
  • Supervisors should be knowledgeable about confined space regulations and actively monitor the entry process to ensure compliance and address any issues that arise.

6. Not following the established permit process: Permit procedures establish specific precautions and control measures such as atmospheric monitoring, ventilation, lockout/tagout procedures, and personal protective equipment requirements. Failure to follow these procedures can leave workers vulnerable to harm.

  • Ensure that all confined space entry personnel receive thorough training on the importance of the permit process.
  • Conduct regular audits and inspections of your permits to verify that the required precautions and control measures are being followed and to identify areas for improvement.

7. Failure to establish and implement a comprehensive rescue plan: A comprehensive rescue plan should outline the equipment, tools, and training necessary for confined space rescue operations. Without an adequate rescue plan in place, your rescue efforts can quickly turn into a recovery process.

  • Select an appropriate rescue team and develop an adequate rescue plan – relying on 911 is not an option.
  • Ensure that all personnel involved in confined space entry receive proper training on the rescue plan and the use of rescue equipment.

Key to remember: It is essential for employers to enforce strict adherence to confined space permit and entry procedures. You must also provide comprehensive training, establish clear accountability for compliance, and foster a culture of safety where employees choose to prioritize the safety of themselves and those around them.

Specialized Industries

Go beyond the regulations! Visit the Institute for in-depth guidance on a wide range of compliance subjects in safety and health, transportation, environment, and human resources.

J. J. Keller® COMPLIANCE NETWORK is a premier online safety and compliance community, offering members exclusive access to timely regulatory content in workplace safety (OSHA), transportation (DOT), environment (EPA), and human resources (DOL).

Interact With Our Compliance Experts

Puzzled by a regulatory question or issue? Let our renowned experts provide the answers and get your business on track to full compliance!

Upcoming Events

Reference the Compliance Network Safety Calendar to keep track of upcoming safety and compliance events. Browse by industry or search by keyword to see relevant dates and observances, including national safety months, compliance deadlines, and more.

SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS

Keep up to date on the latest developments affecting OSHA, DOT, EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.

RegSense®Regulatory Reference

Explore a comprehensive database of word-for-word regulations and best practices on a wide range of topics.

THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE

The J. J. Keller INSTITUTE is your destination for in-depth content on hundreds of topics. Browse by subject to gain foundational knowledge and confirm best practices on the topics that matter to you. You'll find articles, videos, and interactive exercises that help you become an expert and apply key concepts in practical scenarios. There are almost 130 subjects covering 100s of topics.

Add Premium Hazmat & Environmental Resources

Unlock premium content offering expert insight into hazmat and environmental regulations with a COMPLIANCE NETWORK EDGE membership.

INTERACT WITH A COMPLIANCE EXPERT

In search of an answer? Try our FAQ Library or engage with an Expert for help!

Upcoming Events

Reference the Compliance Network Safety Calendar to keep track of upcoming safety and compliance events. Browse by industry or search by keyword to see relevant dates and observances, including national safety months, compliance deadlines, and more.

Most Recent Highlights In Environmental

Protecting yourself all season — All masks are not created equal!
2024-05-16T05:00:00Z

Protecting yourself all season — All masks are not created equal!

As the common cold, flu, and even lingering cases of COVID rear their heads throughout the year, many may reach for a mask as a precaution. But are your masks going to offer the protection you need? Employers must understand the differences between the various masks workers depend on for their safety.

Although most mask mandates have been lifted, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) still recommends wearing quality masks over the nose and mouth in high traffic or congested areas, such as airplanes, at concerts, or in large groups. With many mask options floating around, it’s important to understand the differences between N95, KN95, cloth, and surgical masks.

Which mask is best?

According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), masks are intended to block respiratory droplets and aerosols that may contain viral particles. Overall, masks can be effective and are recommended during flu and cold season, but which mask is best is going to depend upon the circumstances.

Masks differ in the maximum internal leak proportion limit (the highest level of leak protection offered), so here’s the low-down:

  • N95— deemed more effective than surgical masks, N95 masks are the most common type of particulate filtering facepiece respirator. The “95” represents the 95% of airborne particles that are filtered out, which means that don’t entirely block the transmission of some viruses. These masks require fit testing to ensure proper protection.
  • KN95 — “KN” is a designation given by China as an indicator of effectiveness; though the designation is not as stringent as with N95 masks and therefore don’t qualify as N95s. These can be quickly identified by the ear loops versus the dual straps required on N95s.
  • Surgical — meant to protect from droplets and sprays, surgical masks filter large particles from the air when the wearer inhales. However, these disposable masks tend to be loose-fitting which could reduce their efficiency to lower than that of N95 masks.
  • Cloth— usually homemade, these masks offer limited protection from infection, especially persistent ones like COVID-19. Cloth masks are machine-washable and reusable, but they do fit more loosely especially near the nose, cheeks, and jawline, which reduces their effectiveness. Homemade masks create inconsistent and unknown protection levels, so are not recommended for sufficient defense against viruses or other infectious particles.
  • Other protections — scarfs, gators, and other protections have been used as an attempt to protect from contagious infections. Intended to trap respiratory droplets, these “masks” must be used in layers to have the same effectiveness as a mask, so are not the best option.

Overcoming the negatives of wearing a mask

The theory is that wearing some mask is better than wearing no mask at all. However, the use of some masks, such as N-95s can result in some not-so-pleasant physical responses such as anxiety, headaches, nausea, and vomiting. Additionally, wearing the wrong mask or incorrectly wearing a mask can create a false sense of security, placing the wearer at even greater risk. So, how can workers overcome the negatives of wearing a mask?

When wearing masks, workers can ease the “burden” by:

  • Selecting the most protective, yet comfortable mask for the expected exposure type.
  • Ensuring the mask is fit properly (around the face with no gaps around the edges) to help with air flow.
  • Using masks with bendable nose strips for efficacy and comfort.
  • Securing both straps around the ears to ensure optimal protection and prevent constant slippage.
  • Acclimating to mask use by wearing one for short periods initially and building up to longer durations.
  • Remaining aware of temperature extremes and humidity when required to wear masks.
  • Keeping your respiratory system fit and healthy so masks don’t seem like a barrier to normal breathing.

Keys to Remember: While surgical and cloth masks offer some protection from viruses, N95s and KN95s masks offer better protection in most cases. Employers must ensure workers are choosing masks that fit and filter properly to ensure safe use and appropriate level of protection.

2021-12-27T06:00:00Z

86 FR 73131 Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) for Public Water Systems and Announcement of Public Meetings

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 141

[EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530; FRL-6791-03-OW]

RIN 2040-AF89

Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) for Public Water Systems and Announcement of Public Meetings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule and notice of public meetings.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) rule that requires certain public water systems (PWSs) to collect national occurrence data for 29 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and lithium. Subject to the availability of appropriations, EPA will include all systems serving 3,300 or more people and a representative sample of 800 systems serving 25 to 3,299 people. If EPA does not receive the appropriations needed for monitoring all of these systems in a given year, EPA will reduce the number of systems serving 25 to 10,000 people that will be asked to perform monitoring. This final rule is a key action to ensure science-based decision-making and prioritize protection of disadvantaged communities in accordance with EPA's PFAS Strategic Roadmap. EPA is also announcing plans for public webinars to discuss implementation of the fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5).

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 26, 2022. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this final rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 26, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda D. Bowden, Standards and Risk Management Division (SRMD), Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) (MS 140), Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; telephone number: (513) 569-7961; email address: bowden.brenda@epa.gov; or Melissa Simic, SRMD, OGWDW (MS 140), Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; telephone number: (513) 569-7864; email address: simic.melissa@epa.gov. For general information, visit the Ground Water and Drinking Water web page at: https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Summary Information

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

1. What action is EPA taking?

2. Does this action apply to me?

3. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

4. What is the applicability date?

B. Summary of the Regulatory Action

C. Economic Analysis

1. What is the estimated cost of this action?

2. What are the benefits of this action?

II. Public Participation

A. What meetings have been held in preparation for UCMR 5?

B. How do I participate in the upcoming meetings?

1. Meeting Participation

2. Meeting Materials

III. General Information

A. How are CCL, UCMR, Regulatory Determination process, and NCOD interrelated?

B. What are the Consumer Confidence Reporting and Public Notice Reporting requirements for public water systems that are subject to UCMR?

C. What is the UCMR 5 timeline?

D. What is the role of “States” in UCMR?

E. How did EPA consider Children's Environmental Health?

F. How did EPA address Environmental Justice?

G. How did EPA coordinate with Indian Tribal Governments?

H. How are laboratories approved for UCMR 5 analyses?

1. Request To Participate

2. Registration

3. Application Package

4. EPA's Review of Application Package

5. Proficiency Testing

6. Written EPA Approval

I. What documents are being incorporated by reference?

1. Methods From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

2. Alternative Methods From American Public Health Association—Standard Methods (SM)

3. Methods From ASTM International

IV. Description of Final Rule and Summary of Responses to Public Comments

A. What contaminants must be monitored under UCMR 5?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

a. Aggregate PFAS Measure

b. Legionella Pneumophila

c. Haloacetonitriles

d. 1,2,3-Trichloropropane

B. What is the UCMR 5 sampling design?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

C. What is the sampling frequency and timing?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

D. Where are the sampling locations and what is representative monitoring?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

E. How long do laboratories and PWSs have to report data?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

F. What are the reporting requirements for UCMR 5?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

a. Data Elements

b. Reporting State Data

G. What are the UCMR 5 Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) and how were they determined?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

H. What are the requirements for laboratory analysis of field reagent blank samples?

1. This Final Rule

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

I. How will EPA support risk communication for UCMR 5 results?

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

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

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

VI. References

Abbreviations and Acronyms

μg/L Microgram per Liter

11Cl-PF3OUdS 11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfonic Acid

4:2 FTS 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorohexane Sulfonic Acid

6:2 FTS 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid

8:2 FTS 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecane Sulfonic Acid

9Cl-PF3ONS 9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanone-1-sulfonic Acid

ADONA 4,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic Acid

AES Atomic Emission Spectrometry

ASDWA Association of State Drinking Water Administrators

ASTM ASTM International

AWIA America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018

CASRN Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number

CBI Confidential Business Information

CCL Contaminant Candidate List

CCR Consumer Confidence Report

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CRA Congressional Review Act

CWS Community Water System

DBP Disinfection Byproduct

DWSRF Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

EPTDS Entry Point to the Distribution System

FR Federal Register

FRB Field Reagent Blank

GW Ground Water

GWRMP Ground Water Representative Monitoring Plan

HFPO-DA Hexafluoropropylene Oxide Dimer Acid (GenX)

HRL Health Reference Level

ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma

ICR Information Collection Request

IDC Initial Demonstration of Capability

LCMRL Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level

LC/MS/MS Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry

MDBP Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct

MRL Minimum Reporting Level

NAICS North American Industry Classification System

NCOD National Contaminant Occurrence Database

NDAA National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020

NEtFOSAA N-ethyl Perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic Acid

NFDHA Nonafluoro‐3,6‐dioxaheptanoic Acid

ng/L Nanogram per Liter

NMeFOSAA N-methyl Perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic Acid

NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulation

NTNCWS Non-transient Non-community Water System

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

NTWC National Tribal Water Council

OGWDW Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water

OMB Office of Management and Budget

PFAS Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances

PFBA Perfluorobutanoic Acid

PFBS Perfluorobutanesulfonic Acid

PFDA Perfluorodecanoic Acid

PFDoA Perfluorododecanoic Acid

PFEESA Perfluoro (2‐ethoxyethane) Sulfonic Acid

PFHpA Perfluoroheptanoic Acid

PFHpS Perfluoroheptanesulfonic Acid

PFHxA Perfluorohexanoic Acid

PFHxS Perfluorohexanesulfonic Acid

PFMBA Perfluoro‐4‐methoxybutanoic Acid

PFMPA Perfluoro‐3‐methoxypropanoic Acid

PFNA Perfluorononanoic Acid

PFOA Perfluorooctanoic Acid

PFOS Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid

PFPeA Perfluoropentanoic Acid

PFPeS Perfluoropentanesulfonic Acid

PFTA Perfluorotetradecanoic Acid

PFTrDA Perfluorotridecanoic Acid

PFUnA Perfluoroundecanoic Acid

PN Public Notice

PRA Paperwork Reduction Act

PT Proficiency Testing

PWS Public Water System

QC Quality Control

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act

SBA Small Business Administration

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SDWARS Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System

SDWIS/Fed Safe Drinking Water Information System Federal Reporting Services

SM Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SPE Solid Phase Extraction

SRMD Standards and Risk Management Division

SW Surface Water

SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule

TNCWS Transient Non-community Water System

TOF Total Organic Fluorine

TOP Total Oxidizable Precursors

UCMR Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

U.S. United States

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

I. Summary Information

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

1. What action is EPA taking?

This final rule requires certain public water systems (PWSs), described in section I.A.2 of this preamble, to collect national occurrence data for 29 PFAS and lithium. PFAS and lithium are not currently subject to national primary drinking water regulations, and EPA is requiring collection of data under UCMR 5 to inform EPA regulatory determinations and risk-management decisions. Consistent with EPA's PFAS Strategic Roadmap, UCMR 5 will provide new data critically needed to improve EPA's understanding of the frequency that 29 PFAS (and lithium) are found in the nation's drinking water systems and at what levels. This data will ensure science-based decision-making and help prioritize protection of disadvantaged communities.

2. Does this action apply to me?

This final rule applies to PWSs described in this section. PWSs are systems that provide water for human consumption through pipes, or constructed conveyances, to at least 15 service connections or that regularly serve an average of at least 25 individuals daily at least 60 days out of the year. A community water system (CWS) is a PWS that has at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents. A non-transient non-community water system (NTNCWS) is a PWS that is not a CWS and that regularly serves at least 25 of the same people over 6 months per year. Under this final rule, all large CWSs and NTNCWSs serving more than 10,000 people are required to monitor. In addition, small CWSs and NTNCWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people are required to monitor (subject to available EPA appropriations and EPA notification of such requirement) as are the PWSs included in a nationally representative sample of CWSs and NTNCWSs serving between 25 and 3,299 people (see “Selection of Nationally Representative Public Water Systems for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule: 2021 Update” for a description of the statistical approach for EPA's selection of the nationally representative sample (USEPA, 2021a), available in the UCMR 5 public docket). EPA expects to clarify the monitoring responsibilities for affected small systems by approximately July 1 of each year preceding sample collection, based on the availability of appropriations each year.

As in previous UCMRs, transient non-community water systems (TNCWSs) ( i.e., non-community water systems that do not regularly serve at least 25 of the same people over 6 months per year) are not required to monitor under UCMR 5. EPA leads UCMR 5 monitoring as a direct-implementation program. States, Territories, and Tribes with primary enforcement responsibility (primacy) to administer the regulatory program for PWSs under SDWA (hereinafter collectively referred to in this document as “states”), can participate in the implementation of UCMR 5 through voluntary Partnership Agreements (see discussion of Partnership Agreements in Section III.D of this preamble). Under Partnership Agreements, states can choose to be involved in various aspects of UCMR 5 monitoring for PWSs they oversee; however, the PWS remains responsible for compliance with the final rule. Potentially regulated categories and entities are identified in the following table.

CategoryExamples of potentially regulated entitiesNAICS *
* NAICS = North American Industry Classification System.
State, local, & Tribal governmentsState, local, and Tribal governments that analyze water samples on behalf of PWSs required to conduct such analysis; State, local, and Tribal governments that directly operate CWSs and NTNCWSs required to monitor924110
IndustryPrivate operators of CWSs and NTNCWSs required to monitor221310
MunicipalitiesMunicipal operators of CWSs and NTNCWSs required to monitor924110

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your entity is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the definition of PWS found in Title 40 in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 141.2 and 141.3, and the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(1) and (2). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, please consult the contacts listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

3. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

As part of EPA's responsibilities under SDWA, the agency implements section 1445(a)(2), Monitoring Program for Unregulated Contaminants. This section, as amended in 1996, requires that once every five years, beginning in August 1999, EPA issue a list of not more than 30 unregulated contaminants to be monitored by PWSs. SDWA requires that EPA enter the monitoring data into the agency's publicly available National Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD) at https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/national-contaminant-occurrence-database-ncod.

EPA must vary the frequency and schedule for monitoring based on the number of people served, the source of supply, and the contaminants likely to be found. EPA is using SDWA Section 1445(a)(2) authority as the basis for monitoring the unregulated contaminants under this final rule.

Section 2021 of America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 (AWIA) (Pub. L. 115-270) amended SDWA and specifies that, subject to the availability of EPA appropriations for such purpose and sufficient laboratory capacity, EPA's UCMR program must require all PWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people to monitor for the contaminants in a particular UCMR cycle, and ensure that only a nationally representative sample of systems serving between 25 and 3,299 people are required to monitor for those contaminants. EPA has developed this final rule anticipating that necessary appropriations will become available; however, to date, Congress has not appropriated additional funding ( i.e., funding in addition to the $2.0 million that EPA has historically set aside each year from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, using SDWA authority, to support UCMR monitoring at small systems) to cover monitoring expenses for all PWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people. Provisions in the final rule enable the agency to adjust the number of these systems that must monitor based upon available appropriations.

AWIA did not amend the original SDWA requirements for large PWSs. Therefore, PWSs serving a population larger than 10,000 people continue to be responsible for participating in UCMR.

Section 7311 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 116-92) amended SDWA and specifies that EPA shall include all PFAS in UCMR 5 for which a drinking water method has been validated by the Administrator and that are not subject to a national primary drinking water regulation.

4. What is the applicability date?

The applicability date represents an internal milestone used by EPA to determine if a PWS is included in the UCMR program and whether it will be treated as small ( i.e., serving 25 to 10,000 people) or large ( i.e., serving more than 10,000 people). It does not represent a date by which respondents need to take any action. The determination of whether a PWS is required to monitor under UCMR 5 is based on the type of system ( e.g., CWS, NTNCWS, etc.) and its retail population served, as indicated by the Safe Drinking Water Information System Federal Reporting Services (SDWIS/Fed) inventory on February 1, 2021. SDWIS/Fed can be accessed at https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/safe-drinking-water-information-system-sdwis-federal-reporting. Examining water system type and population served as of February 1, 2021 allowed EPA to develop a draft list of PWSs tentatively subject to UCMR 5 and share that list with the states during 2021 for their review. This advance planning and review then allowed EPA to load state-reviewed PWS information into EPA's reporting system so that those PWSs can be promptly notified upon publication of this final rule. If a PWS receives such notification and believes it has been erroneously included in UCMR 5 based on an incorrect retail population, the system should contact their state authority to verify its population served as of the applicability date. If an error impacting rule applicability is identified, the state or the PWS may contact EPA to address the error. The 5-year UCMR 5 cycle spans January 2022 through December 2026, with preparations in 2022, sample collection between January 1, 2023, and December 31, 2025, and completion of data reporting in 2026. By approximately July 1 of the year prior to each year's sample collection ( i.e., by July 1, 2022 for 2023 sampling; by July 1, 2023 for 2024 sampling; and by July 1, 2024 for 2025 sampling) EPA expects to determine whether it has received necessary appropriations to support its plan to monitor at all systems serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people and at a representative group of 800 smaller systems. As EPA finalizes its small-system plan for each sample collection year, the agency will notify the small PWSs accordingly.

B. Summary of the Regulatory Action

EPA is requiring certain PWSs to collect occurrence data for 29 PFAS and lithium. This document addresses key aspects of UCMR 5, including the following: Analytical methods to measure the contaminants; laboratory approval; monitoring timeframe; sampling locations; data elements ( i.e., information required to be collected along with the occurrence data); data reporting timeframes; monitoring cost; public participation; conforming and editorial changes, such as those necessary to remove requirements solely related to UCMR 4; and EPA responses to public comments on the proposed rule. This document also discusses the implication for UCMR 5 of the AWIA Section 2021(a) requirement that EPA collect monitoring data from all systems serving more than 3,300 people “subject to the availability of appropriations.”

Regardless of whether EPA is able to carry out the small-system monitoring as planned, or instead reduces the scope of that monitoring, the small-system data collection, coupled with data collection from all systems serving more than 10,000 people under this action, will provide scientifically valid data on the national occurrence of 29 PFAS and lithium in drinking water. The UCMR data are the primary source of national occurrence data that EPA uses to inform regulatory and other risk management decisions for drinking water contaminant candidates.

EPA is required under SDWA Section 1445(a)(2)(C)(ii) to pay the “reasonable cost of such testing and laboratory analysis” for all applicable PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people. Consistent with AWIA, EPA will require monitoring at as many systems serving 3,300 to 10,000 people as appropriations support (see Section IV.B of this preamble for more information on the agency's sampling design).

The agency received several public comments expressing concern that significant laboratory capacity will be needed to support the full scope envisioned for UCMR 5 PFAS monitoring. EPA anticipates that sufficient laboratory capacity will exist to support the expanded UCMR 5 scope. EPA's experience over the first four cycles of UCMR implementation has been that laboratory capacity quickly grows to meet UCMR demand. EPA also notes that the number of laboratories successfully participating in the early stages of the UCMR 5 laboratory approval program is a good indicator that there will be a robust national network of laboratories experienced in PFAS drinking water analysis.

By early 2022, EPA will notify all small CWSs and NTNCWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people of their anticipated requirement to monitor, which EPA expects to confirm and schedule by July 1 preceding each collection year based on the availability of appropriations. The nationally representative sample of smaller PWSs described in Section I.A of this preamble will be similarly notified and advised of their schedules.

This final rule addresses the requirements of the NDAA by including all 29 PFAS that are within the scope of EPA Methods 533 and 537.1. Both of these methods have been validated by EPA for drinking water analysis.

C. Economic Analysis

1. What is the estimated cost of this action?

EPA estimates the total average national cost of this action would be $21 million per year over the 5-year effective period of the final rule (2022-2026) assuming EPA collects information from all systems serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people. All of these costs are associated with paperwork burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). EPA discusses the expected costs as well as documents the assumptions and data sources used in the preparation of this estimate in the “Information Collection Request for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5)” (USEPA, 2021b). Costs are incurred by large PWSs (for sampling and analysis); small PWSs (for sampling); state regulatory agencies ( i.e., those who volunteer to assist EPA with oversight and implementation support); and EPA (for regulatory support and oversight activities, and analytical and shipping costs for samples from small PWSs). These costs are also summarized in Exhibit 1 of this preamble. EPA's estimates are based on executing the full monitoring plan for small systems ( i.e., including all systems serving 3,300 to 10,000 people and a representative group of 800 smaller systems). As such, those estimates represent an upper bound. If EPA does not receive the necessary appropriations in one or more of the collections years—and thus collects data from fewer small systems—the actual costs would be lower than those estimated here.

EPA received several comments on the cost of monitoring. EPA has accounted for the cost/burden associated with all of the PWS activities as part of the comprehensive cost/burden estimates. In order to provide the most accurate and updated cost estimate, EPA re-examined labor burden estimates for states, EPA, and PWS activities and updated costs of laboratory services for sample analysis, based on consultations with national drinking water laboratories, when developing this final rule.

The costs for a particular UCMR cycle are heavily influenced by the selection of contaminants and associated analytical methods. EPA identified three EPA-developed analytical methods (and, in the case of lithium, multiple optional alternative methods) to analyze samples for UCMR 5 contaminants. EPA's estimate of the UCMR 5 analytical cost is $740 per sample set ( i.e., $740 to analyze a set of samples from one sample point and one sample event for the 30 UCMR 5 contaminants).

Exhibit 1 of this preamble details the EPA-estimated annual average national costs (accounting for labor and non-labor expenses). Laboratory analysis and sample shipping account for approximately 65 percent of the estimated total national cost for the implementation of UCMR 5. EPA estimated laboratory costs based on consultations with multiple commercial drinking water testing laboratories. EPA's cost estimates for the laboratory methods include shipping and analysis.

EPA expects that states will incur modest labor costs associated with voluntary assistance with the implementation of UCMR 5. EPA estimated state costs using the relevant assumptions from the State Resource Model developed by the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) (ASDWA, 2013) to help states forecast resource needs. Model estimates were adjusted to account for actual levels of state participation under UCMR 4. State assistance with EPA's implementation of UCMR 5 is voluntary; thus, the level of effort is expected to vary among states and will depend on their individual agreements with EPA.

EPA assumes that one-third of the systems will collect samples during each of the three sample-collection years from January 2023 through December 2025.

Exhibit 1—Estimated Average Annual Costs of UCMR 5 1
EntityAverage annual cost (million) (2022-2026) 2
1 Based on the scope of small-system monitoring described in AWIA.
2 Totals may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
3 Labor costs pertain to PWSs, states, and EPA. Costs include activities such as reading the final rule, notifying systems selected to participate, sample collection, data review, reporting, and record keeping.
4 Non-labor costs will be incurred primarily by EPA and by large and very large PWSs. They include the cost of shipping samples to laboratories for testing and the cost of the laboratory analyses.
5 For a typical UCMR program that involves the expanded scope prescribed by AWIA, EPA estimates an average annual cost to the agency of $17M/year (over a 5-year cycle) ($2M/year for the representative sample of 800 PWSs serving between 25 and 3,299 people and $15M/year for all PWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people). The projected cost to EPA for UCMR 5 implementation is lower than for a typical UCMR program because of lower sample analysis expenses. Those lower expenses are a result of analytical method efficiencies ( i.e., being able to monitor for 30 chemicals with only three analytical methods).
Small PWSs (25-10,000), including labor 3 only (non-labor costs 4 paid for by EPA)$0.3
Large PWSs (10,001-100,000), including labor and non-labor costs7.0
Very Large PWSs (100,001 and greater), including labor and non-labor costs2.2
States, including labor costs related to implementation coordination0.8
EPA, including labor for implementation and non-labor for small system testing5 10.5
Average Annual National Total20.8

Additional details regarding EPA's cost assumptions and estimates can be found in the Information Collection Request (ICR) (USEPA, 2021b), ICR Number 2040-0304, which presents estimated cost and labor hours for the 5-year UCMR 5 period of 2022-2026. Copies of the ICR may be obtained from the EPA public docket for this final rule under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530.

2. What are the benefits of this action?

The public benefits from the information about whether or not unregulated contaminants are present in their drinking water. If contaminants are not found, consumer confidence in their drinking water should improve. If contaminants are found, related health effects may be avoided when subsequent actions, such as regulations, are implemented, reducing or eliminating those contaminants.

II. Public Participation

A. What meetings have been held in preparation for UCMR 5?

EPA held three public meetings on UCMR 5 over the period of 2018 through 2021. EPA held a meeting focused on drinking water methods for unregulated contaminants on June 6, 2018, in Cincinnati, Ohio. Representatives from state agencies, laboratories, PWSs, environmental organizations, and drinking water associations joined the meeting via webinar and in person. Meeting topics included an overview of regulatory process elements (including the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), UCMR, and Regulatory Determination), and drinking water methods under development (see USEPA, 2018 for presentation materials). EPA held a second meeting on July 16, 2019, in Cincinnati, Ohio. Representatives from State agencies, Tribes, laboratories, PWSs, environmental organizations, and drinking water associations participated in the meeting via webinar and in person. Meeting topics included the impacts of AWIA, analytical methods and contaminants being considered by EPA, potential sampling design, and other possible aspects of the UCMR 5 approach (see USEPA, 2019a for meeting materials). EPA held two identical virtual meetings on April 6 and 7, 2021, during the public comment period for the proposed rule (see USEPA, 2021c for presentation materials). Topics included the proposed UCMR 5 monitoring requirements, analyte selection and rationale, analytical methods, the laboratory approval process, and ground water representative monitoring plans (GWRMPs). Representatives of state agencies, laboratories, PWSs, environmental organizations, and drinking water associations participated in the meeting via webinar. In Section II.B of this preamble, the agency is announcing additional meetings to be held in 2022, which will assist with implementation.

B. How do I participate in the upcoming meetings?

EPA will hold multiple virtual meetings during 2022 to discuss UCMR 5 implementation planning, data reporting using Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System (SDWARS), and best practices for sample collection. Dates and times of the upcoming meetings will be posted on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials. EPA anticipates hosting the meetings focused on implementation planning in spring 2022, and the SDWARS and sample-collection meetings in fall 2022. Stakeholders who have participated in past UCMR meetings and/or those who register to use SDWARS will receive notification of these events. Other interested stakeholders are also welcome to participate.

1. Meeting Participation

Those who wish to participate in the public meetings, via webinar, can find information on how to register at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials. The number of webinar connections available for the meetings are limited and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. If stakeholder interest results in exceeding the maximum number of available connections for participants in upcoming webinar offerings, EPA may schedule additional webinars, with dates and times posted on EPA's Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Program Meetings and Materials web page at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials.

2. Meeting Materials

EPA expects to send meeting materials by email to all registered participants prior to the meeting. The materials will be posted on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant- monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials for people who do not participate in the webinar.

III. General Information

A. How are CCL, UCMR, Regulatory Determination process, and NCOD interrelated?

Under the 1996 amendments to SDWA, Congress established a multi-step, risk-based approach for determining which contaminants would become subject to drinking water standards. Under the first step, EPA is required to publish a CCL every five years that identifies contaminants that are not subject to any proposed or promulgated drinking water regulations, are known or anticipated to occur in PWSs, and may require future regulation under SDWA. EPA published the draft CCL 5 in the Federal Register on July 19, 2021 (86 FR 37948, July 19, 2021 (USEPA, 2021d)). Under the second step, EPA must require, every five years, monitoring of unregulated contaminants as described in this action. The third step requires EPA to determine, every five years, whether or not to regulate at least five contaminants from the CCL. Under Section 1412(b)(1)(A) of SDWA, EPA regulates a contaminant in drinking water if the Administrator determines that:

(1) The contaminant may have an adverse effect on the health of persons;

(2) The contaminant is known to occur or there is substantial likelihood that the contaminant will occur in PWSs with a frequency and at levels of public health concern; and

(3) In the sole judgment of the Administrator, regulation of such contaminant presents a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by PWSs.

For the contaminants that meet all three criteria, SDWA requires EPA to publish national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs). Information on the CCL and the regulatory determination process can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/ccl.

The data collected through the UCMR program are made available to the public through the National Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD) for drinking water. EPA developed the NCOD to satisfy requirements in SDWA Section 1445(g), to assemble and maintain a drinking water contaminant occurrence database for both regulated and unregulated contaminants in drinking water systems. NCOD houses data on unregulated contaminant occurrence; data from EPA's “Six-Year Review” of national drinking water regulations; and ambient and/or source water data. Section 1445(g)(3) of SDWA requires that EPA maintain UCMR data in the NCOD and use the data when evaluating the frequency and level of occurrence of contaminants in drinking water at a level of public health concern. UCMR results can be viewed by the public via NCOD ( https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/national-contaminant-occurrence-database-ncod ) or via the UCMR web page at: https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr.

B. What are the Consumer Confidence Reporting and Public Notice Reporting requirements for public water systems that are subject to UCMR?

In addition to reporting UCMR monitoring data to EPA, PWSs are responsible for presenting and addressing UCMR results in their annual Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) (40 CFR 141.153) and must address Public Notice (PN) requirements associated with UCMR (40 CFR 141.207). More details about the CCR and PN requirements can be viewed by the public at: https://www.epa.gov/ccr and https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/public-notification-rule, respectively.

C. What is the UCMR 5 timeline?

This final rule identifies a UCMR 5 sampling period of 2023 to 2025. Prior to 2023 EPA will coordinate laboratory approval, tentatively select representative small systems (USEPA, 2021a), organize Partnership Agreements, develop State Monitoring Plans (see Section III.D of this preamble), establish monitoring schedules and inventory, and conduct outreach and training. Exhibit 2 of this preamble illustrates the major activities that EPA expects will take place in preparation for and during the implementation of UCMR 5.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P



BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

D. What is the role of “States” in UCMR?

UCMR is a direct implementation rule ( i.e., EPA has primary responsibility for its implementation) and state participation is voluntary. Under the previous UCMR cycles, specific activities that individual states agreed to carry out or assist with were identified and established exclusively through Partnership Agreements. Through Partnership Agreements, states can help EPA implement UCMR and help ensure that the UCMR data are of the highest quality possible to best support the agency decision making. Under UCMR 5, EPA will continue to use the Partnership Agreement process to determine and document the following: The process for review and revision of the State Monitoring Plans; replacing and updating PWS information, including inventory ( i.e., PWS identification codes (PWSID), facility identification code along with associated facility types and water source type, etc.); review of proposed GWRMPs; notification and instructions for systems; and compliance assistance. EPA recognizes that states often have the best information about their PWSs and encourages them to partner in the UCMR 5 program.

E. How did EPA consider Children's Environmental Health?

By monitoring for unregulated contaminants that may pose health risks via drinking water, UCMR furthers the protection of public health for all citizens, including children. Children consume more water per unit of body weight compared to adults. Moreover, formula-fed infants drink a large amount of water compared to their body weight; thus, children's exposure to contaminants in drinking water may present a disproportionate health risk (USEPA, 2011). The objective of UCMR 5 is to collect nationally representative drinking water occurrence data on unregulated contaminants for future regulatory consideration. Information on the prioritization process, as well as contaminant-specific information ( e.g., source, use, production, release, persistence, mobility, health effects, and occurrence), that EPA used to select the analyte list, is contained in “Information Compendium for Contaminants for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5)” (USEPA, 2021e), available in the UCMR 5 public docket.

Since this is a final rule to monitor for contaminants and not to reduce their presence in drinking water to an acceptable level, the rule does not concern environmental health or safety risks presenting a disproportionate risk to children that would be addressed by this action (See Section V.G Executive Order 13045 of this preamble). Therefore, Executive Order 13045 does not apply to UCMR. However, EPA's Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children, which ensures that the health of infants and children is explicitly considered in the agency's decision making, is applicable, see: https://www.epa.gov/children/epas-policy-evaluating-risk-children.

EPA considered children's health risks during the development of UCMR 5. This included considering public comments about candidate contaminant priorities. Many commenters supported the agency's inclusion of PFAS and lithium in UCMR 5. Some commenters requested that EPA consider children and infant health risks in its risk communication for UCMR 5.

Using quantitation data from multiple laboratories, EPA establishes statistically-based UCMR reporting levels the agency considers feasible for the national network of approved drinking water laboratories. EPA generally sets the reporting levels as low as is technologically practical for measurement by that national network of laboratories, even if that level is well below concentrations that are currently associated with known or suspected health effects. In doing so, EPA positions itself to better address contaminant risk information in the future, including that associated with unique risks to children.

F. How did EPA address Environmental Justice (EJ)?

EPA has concluded that this action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 because it does not establish an environmental health or safety standard (see Section V.J Executive Order 12898 of this preamble). EPA Administrator Regan issued a directive to all EPA staff to incorporate environmental justice (EJ) into the agency's work, including regulatory activities, such as integrating EJ considerations into the regulatory development processes and considering regulatory options to maximize benefits to communities that “continue to suffer from disproportionately high pollution levels and the resulting adverse health and environmental impacts.” In keeping with this directive, and consistent with AWIA, EPA will, subject to the availability of sufficient appropriations, expand UCMR 5 to include all PWSs serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people as described in Sections I.A.4 and IV.B of this preamble. If there are sufficient appropriations, the expansion in the number of participating PWSs will provide a more comprehensive assessment of contaminant occurrence data from small and rural communities, including disadvantaged communities.

By developing a national characterization of unregulated contaminants that may pose health risks via drinking water from PWSs, UCMR furthers the protection of public health for all citizens. If EPA receives the needed appropriations, the expansion in monitoring scope reflected in UCMR 5 ( i.e., including all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people) will better support state and regional analyses and determination of potential EJ-related issues that need to be addressed. EPA structured the UCMR 5 rulemaking process to allow for meaningful involvement and transparency. EPA organized public meetings and webinars to share information regarding the development and implementation of UCMR 5; consulted with Tribal governments; and convened a workgroup that included representatives from several states. EPA will support stakeholder interest in UCMR 5 results by making them publicly available, as described in Section III.A of this preamble, and by developing additional risk-communication materials to help individuals and communities understand the significance of contaminant occurrence.

EPA received multiple comments on environmental justice considerations. Commenters expressed support for the continued collection of U.S. Postal Service Zip Codes for each PWS's service area and requested that EPA provide multilingual UCMR materials. EPA will continue to collect Zip Codes for UCMR 5, as collected under UCMR 3 and UCMR 4, to support potential assessments of whether or not certain communities are disproportionately impacted by particular drinking water contaminants. EPA also intends to develop the sampling instructions, fact sheets, and data summaries in both English and Spanish.

G. How did EPA coordinate with Indian Tribal Governments?

EPA has concluded that this action has Tribal implications. However, it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized Tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. (See section V.F Executive Order 13175 of this preamble).

EPA consulted with Tribal officials under the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes early in the process of developing this action to ensure meaningful and timely input into its development. EPA initiated the Tribal consultation and coordination process before proposing the rule by mailing a “Notification of Consultation and Coordination” letter on June 26, 2019, to the Tribal leadership of the then 573 federally recognized Tribes. The letter invited Tribal leaders and representatives of Tribal governments to participate in an August 6, 2019, UCMR 5 Tribal consultation and coordination informational meeting. Presentation topics included an overview of the UCMR program, potential approaches to monitoring and implementation for UCMR 5, and the UCMR 5 contaminants and analytical methods under consideration. After the presentation, EPA provided an opportunity for input and questions on the action. Eight representatives from five Tribes attended the August meeting. Tribal representatives asked clarifying questions regarding program costs to PWSs and changes in PWS participation per AWIA. EPA addressed the questions during the meeting. Following the meeting, EPA received and addressed one additional clarifying question from a Tribal representative during the Tribal consultation process. No other Tribal representatives submitted written comments during the UCMR 5 consultation comment period that ended September 1, 2019.

Prior to the August 2019 meeting, EPA provided additional opportunities for Tribal officials to provide meaningful and timely input into the development of the proposed rule. On July 10, 2019, EPA participated in a monthly conference call with the National Tribal Water Council (NTWC). EPA shared a brief summary of UCMR statutory requirements with the Council and highlighted the upcoming official Tribal meeting. EPA also invited Tribal leaders and representatives to participate in a public meeting, held on July 16, 2019, to discuss the development of the proposed rule. Representatives from six Tribes participated in the public meeting. Following the publication of the proposal, EPA advised the Indian Health Services of the 60-day public comment period to assist with facilitating additional Tribal comments on the proposed rule. EPA received no public comments from Tribal officials.

A complete summary of the consultation, titled, “Summary of the Tribal Coordination and Consultation Process for the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” is provided in the UCMR 5 public docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

H. How are laboratories approved for UCMR 5 analyses?

Consistent with prior UCMRs, this action maintains the requirement that PWSs use laboratories approved by EPA to analyze UCMR 5 samples. Interested laboratories are encouraged to apply for EPA approval as early as possible. The UCMR 5 laboratory approval process, which began with the publication of the UCMR 5 proposal, is designed to assess whether laboratories possess the required equipment and can meet laboratory-performance and data-reporting criteria described in this action.

EPA expects demand for laboratory support to increase significantly based on the greater number of PWSs expected to participate in UCMR 5. EPA anticipates that the number of participating small water systems will increase from the typical 800 to approximately 6,000 (see Exhibit 5 in Section IV.B of this preamble). In preparation for this increase, EPA will solicit proposals and award contracts to laboratories to support small system monitoring prior to the end of the proficiency testing (PT) program. As in previous UCMR programs, EPA expects that laboratories awarded contracts by EPA will be required to first be approved to perform all methods. The requirements for the laboratory approval process are described in steps 1 through 6 of the following paragraphs.

EPA will require laboratories seeking approval to: (1) Provide EPA with data documenting an initial demonstration of capability (IDC) as outlined in each method; (2) verify successful performance at or below the minimum reporting levels (MRLs) as specified in this action; (3) provide information about laboratory standard operating procedures (SOPs); and (4) participate in two EPA PT studies for the analytes of interest. Audits of laboratories may be conducted by EPA prior to and/or following approval, and maintaining approval is contingent on timely and accurate reporting. The “UCMR 5 Laboratory Approval Manual” (USEPA, 2021f), available in the UCMR 5 public docket, provides more specific guidance on EPA laboratory approval program and the specific method acceptance criteria. EPA has included sample-collection procedures that are specific to the methods in the “UCMR 5 Laboratory Manual,” and will address these procedures in our outreach to the PWSs that will be collecting samples.

The UCMR 5 laboratory approval program will provide an assessment of the ability of laboratories to perform analyses using the methods listed in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(3), Table 1 of this preamble. Laboratory participation in the program is voluntary. However, as in the previous UCMRs, EPA will require PWSs to exclusively use laboratories that have been approved under the program. EPA will post a list of approved UCMR 5 laboratories to https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr and will bring this to the attention of the PWSs in our outreach.

1. Request To Participate

Laboratories interested in the UCMR 5 laboratory approval program first email EPA at: UCMR_Lab_Approval@epa.gov to request registration materials. EPA began accepting requests beginning with the publication of the proposal in the Federal Register .

2. Registration

Laboratory applicants provide registration information that includes laboratory name, mailing address, shipping address, contact name, phone number, email address, and a list of the UCMR 5 methods for which the laboratory is seeking approval. This registration step provides EPA with the necessary contact information and ensures that each laboratory receives a customized application package.

3. Application Package

Laboratory applicants will complete and return a customized application package that includes the following: IDC data, including precision, accuracy, and results of MRL studies; information regarding analytical equipment and other materials; proof of current drinking water laboratory certification (for select compliance monitoring methods); method-specific SOPs; and example chromatograms for each method under review.

As a condition of receiving and maintaining approval, the laboratory must promptly post UCMR 5 monitoring results and quality control data that meet method criteria (on behalf of its PWS clients) to EPA's UCMR electronic data reporting system, SDWARS.

Based on the January 1, 2023 start for UCMR 5 sample collection, the deadline for a laboratory to submit the necessary registration and application information is August 1, 2022.

4. EPA's Review of Application Package

EPA will review the application packages and, if necessary, request follow-up information. Laboratories that successfully complete the application process become eligible to participate in the UCMR 5 PT program.

5. Proficiency Testing

A PT sample is a synthetic sample containing a concentration of an analyte or mixture of analytes that is known to EPA, but unknown to the laboratory. To be approved, a laboratory must meet specific acceptance criteria for the analysis of a UCMR 5 PT sample(s) for each analyte in each method, for which the laboratory is seeking approval. EPA offered three PT studies between publication of the proposed rule and final rule, and anticipates offering at least two additional studies. Interested laboratories must participate in and report data for at least two PT studies. This allows EPA to collect a robust dataset for PT results, and provides laboratories with extra analytical experience using UCMR 5 methods. Laboratories must pass a PT for every analyte in the method to be approved for that method and may participate in multiple PT studies in order to produce passing results for each analyte. EPA has taken this approach in UCMR 5, recognizing that EPA Method 533 contains 25 analytes. EPA does not expect to conduct additional PT studies after the start of PWS monitoring; however, EPA expects to conduct laboratory audits (remote and/or on-site) throughout the implementation of UCMR 5 on an as needed and/or random basis. Initial laboratory approval is contingent on successful completion of PT studies, which includes properly uploading the PT results to SDWARS. Continued laboratory approval is contingent on successful completion of the audit process and satisfactorily meeting all the other stated conditions.

6. Written EPA Approval

For laboratories that have already successfully completed steps 1 through 5, EPA sent the laboratory a notification letter listing the methods for which approval was “pending” ( i.e., pending promulgation of this final rule). Because no changes have been made to the final rule that impact the laboratory approval program, laboratories that received pending-approval letters will be notified of full approval without further action on their part. Approval actions for additional laboratories that successfully complete steps 1 through 5 will also be documented by EPA in writing.

I. What documents are being incorporated by reference?

The following methods are being incorporated by reference into this section for UCMR 5 monitoring. All method material is available for inspection electronically at https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530), or from the sources listed for each method. The methods that may be used to support monitoring under this final rule are as follows:

1. Methods From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

The following methods are available at EPA's Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530.

(i) EPA Method 200.7 “Determination of Metals and Trace Elements in Water and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry,” Revision 4.4, 1994. Available at https://www.epa.gov/esam/method-2007-determination-metals-and-trace-elements-water-and-wastes-inductively-coupled-plasma. This is an EPA method for the analysis of metals and trace elements in water by ICP-AES and may be used to measure lithium during UCMR 5. See also the discussion of non-EPA alternative methods for lithium in this section.

(ii) EPA Method 533 “Determination of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Isotope Dilution Anion Exchange Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” November 2019, EPA 815-B-19-020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/analytical-methods-developed-epa-analysis-unregulated-contaminants. This is an EPA method for the analysis PFAS in drinking water using SPE and LC/MS/MS and is to be used to measure 25 PFAS during UCMR 5 (11Cl-PF3OUdS, 8:2 FTS, 4:2 FTS, 6:2 FTS, ADONA, 9Cl-PF3ONS, HFPO-DA (GenX), NFDHA, PFEESA, PFMPA, PFMBA, PFBS, PFBA, PFDA, PFDoA, PFHpS, PFHpA, PFHxS, PFHxA, PFNA, PFOS, PFOA, PFPeS, PFPeA, and PFUnA).

(iii) EPA Method 537.1 “Determination of Selected Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS),” Version 2.0, March 2020, EPA/600/R-20/006. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/analytical-methods-developed-epa-analysis-unregulated-contaminants. This is an EPA method for the analysis of PFAS in drinking water using SPE and LC/MS/MS and is to be used to measure four PFAS during UCMR 5 (NEtFOSAA, NMeFOSAA, PFTA, and PFTrDA).

2. Alternative Methods From American Public Health Association—Standard Methods (SM)

The following methods are from American Public Health—Standard Methods (SM), 800 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20001-3710.

(i) “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater,” 23rd edition (2017).

(a) SM 3120 B, “Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy (2017): Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method.” This is a Standard Method for the analysis of metals in water and wastewater by emission spectroscopy using ICP and may be used for the analysis of lithium.

(ii) “Standard Methods Online,” approved 1999. Available for purchase at https://www.standardmethods.org.

(a) SM 3120 B, “Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy: Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method, Standard Methods Online,” revised December 14, 2020. This is a Standard Method for the analysis of metals in water and wastewater by emission spectroscopy using ICP and may be used for the analysis of lithium.

3. Methods From ASTM International

The following methods are from ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

(i) ASTM D1976-20, “Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy,” approved May 1, 2020. Available for purchase at https://www.astm.org/Standards/D1976.htm. This is an ASTM method for the analysis of elements in water by ICP-AES and may be used to measure lithium.

IV. Description of Final Rule and Summary of Responses to Public Comments

EPA published “Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) for Public Water Systems and Announcement of Public Meeting;” Proposed Rule, on March 11, 2021 (86 FR 13846, (USEPA, 2021g)). The UCMR 5 proposal identified three EPA analytical methods, and multiple alternative methods, to support water system monitoring for 30 UCMR 5 contaminants (29 PFAS and lithium) and detailed other potential changes relative to UCMR 4. Among the other changes reflected in the UCMR 5 proposal were the following: Requirement for water systems serving 3,300 to 10,000 people to monitor per AWIA requirements “subject to the availability of appropriations”; provisions for sampling frequency, timing, and locations; submission timeframe for GWRMPs; data reporting timeframes; and reporting requirements.

EPA received 75 sets of comments from 72 public commenters, including other federal agencies, state and local governments, utilities and utility stakeholder organizations, laboratories, academia, non-governmental organizations, and other interested stakeholders. After considering the comments, EPA developed the final UCMR 5 as described in Exhibit 3 of this preamble. Except as noted, the UCMR 5 final rule approach is consistent with the proposed rule. A track-changes version of the rule language, comparing UCMR 4 to UCMR 5, (“Revisions to 40 CFR 141.35 and 141.40” (USEPA, 2021h)), is included in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

This section summarizes key aspects of this final rule and the associated comments received in response to the proposed rule. EPA has compiled all public comments and EPA's responses in the “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

Exhibit 3—Key Elements of Final UCMR 5
NumberTitle
CFR rule sectionDescription of sectionCorresponding preamble section
NumberTitle
40 CFR 141.40(a)(3)Contaminants in UCMR 5Maintains proposed list of 29 PFAS and lithium for monitoringIV.A
40 CFR 141.35(d), 40 CFR 141.40(a)(2)(ii), and 40 CFR 141.40(a)(4)(ii)Scope of UCMR 5 applicabilityRevises the scope of UCMR 5 to reflect that small CWSs and NTNCWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people will monitor (consistent with AWIA), if they are notified by the agencyIV.B
40 CFR 141.40(a)(i)(B)Sampling frequency and timingMaintains proposed sample frequency (four sample events for SW, two sample events for GW)IV.C
40 CFR 141.35(c)(3)Sampling locations and Ground Water Representative Monitoring Plans (GWRMPs)Maintains proposed flexibility for PWSs to submit a GWRMP proposal to EPAIV.D
40 CFR 141.35(c)(6)(ii) and 40 CFR 141.40(a)(5)(vi)Reporting timeframeMaintains proposed timeframe (“within 90 days from the sample collection date”) for laboratories to post and approve analytical results in EPA's electronic data reporting system (for review by the PWS). Maintains proposed timeframe (“30 days from when the laboratory posts the data to EPA's electronic data reporting system”) for PWSs to review, approve, and submit data to the state and EPAIV.E
40 CFR 141.35(e)Reporting requirementsRemoves one proposed data element, maintains 27 proposed data elements, and clarifies the use of state dataIV.F
40 CFR 141.40(a)(3)Minimum reporting levels (MRL)Maintains proposed MRLs for contaminantsIV.G

A. What contaminants must be monitored under UCMR 5?

1. This Final Rule

EPA is maintaining the proposed list of UCMR 5 contaminants and the methods associated with analyzing those contaminants (see Exhibit 4 of this preamble). Further information on the prioritization process, as well as contaminant-specific information ( e.g., source, use, production, release, persistence, mobility, health effects, and occurrence), that EPA used to select the analyte list, is contained in “Information Compendium for Contaminants for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5)” (USEPA, 2021e). This Information Compendium can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

Exhibit 4—UCMR 5 Analytes
1 EPA Method 533 (Solid phase extraction (SPE) liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)) (USEPA, 2019b).
2 EPA Method 537.1 Version 2.0 (Solid phase extraction (SPE) liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)) (USEPA, 2020).
3 EPA Method 200.7 (Inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES)) (USEPA, 1994).
4 Standard Methods (SM) 3120 B (SM, 2017) or SM 3120 B-99 (SM Online, 1999).
5 ASTM International (ASTM) D1976-20 (ASTM, 2020).
Twenty-five Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) using EPA Method 533 (SPE LC/MS/MS):
11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfonic acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS)perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA).
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecane sulfonic acid (8:2 FTS)perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA).
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (4:2 FTS)perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid (PFHpS).
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (6:2 FTS)perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA).
4,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA)perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS).
9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanone-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS)perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA).
hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA) (GenX)perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA).
nonafluoro‐3,6‐dioxaheptanoic acid (NFDHA)perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS).
perfluoro (2‐ethoxyethane) sulfonic acid (PFEESA)perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA).
perfluoro‐3‐methoxypropanoic acid (PFMPA)perfluoropentanesulfonic acid (PFPeS).
perfluoro‐4‐methoxybutanoic acid (PFMBA)perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA).
perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS)perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA).
perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA)
Four Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) using EPA Method 537.1 (SPE LC/MS/MS):
n-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA)perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA).
n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA)perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA).
One Metal/Pharmaceutical using EPA Method 200.7 (ICP-AES)or alternate SMor ASTM:
lithium

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

Those who expressed an opinion about the proposed UCMR 5 analytes were supportive of EPA's inclusion of the 29 PFAS and lithium. Commenters expressed mixed opinions on the consideration of additional contaminants, particularly “aggregate PFAS,” Legionella pneumophilia, haloacetonitriles, and 1,2,3-trichloropropane. The major comments and EPA responses regarding these contaminants are summarized in the discussion that follows.

a. Aggregate PFAS Measure

EPA received multiple comments encouraging the agency to validate and include a total organic fluorine (TOF) and/or total oxidizable precursors (TOP) technique in UCMR 5 as a screening tool to determine “total PFAS.” EPA also received comments expressing concern for the limitations of the analytical methodologies, including a lack of sensitivity and specificity for PFAS using TOF.

EPA has not identified a complete, validated, peer-reviewed aggregate PFAS method with the appropriate specificity and sensitivity to support UCMR 5 monitoring. EPA's Office of Water and Office of Research and Development are currently developing and evaluating methodologies for broader PFAS analysis in drinking water, however, the measurement approaches are subject to significant technical challenges. The sensitivity of TOF is currently in the low μg/L range, as opposed to the low ng/L range of interest required for PFAS analysis in drinking water. TOF is also not specific to PFAS. TOP, while focusing on PFAS, is limited to measuring compounds that can be detected by LC/MS/MS and the technique requires two LC/MS/MS analyses; one before oxidation and one after oxidation. EPA is evaluating the TOP approach to understand the degree to which certain precursors are oxidized, and subsequently measurable by LC/MS/MS, as well as the degree to which PFAS that were measured in the pre-oxidation sample are still measured post-oxidation.

EPA is also monitoring progress by commercial laboratories and academia. In 2020 and 2021, EPA contacted commercial laboratories that advertised TOF capability, and these laboratories indicated that they had not yet commercialized the TOF method (see Appendix 4 in “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble). TOP has been more widely commercialized but is often used as an exploratory tool to estimate precursors.

In summary, there are still analytical challenges leading to uncertainties in the results using the TOF and TOP techniques. More research and method refinement are needed before a peer-reviewed validated method that meets UCMR quality control needs is available to address PFAS more broadly.

b. Legionella Pneumophila

Some comments supported EPA's proposal to not include Legionella pneumophila in UCMR 5, while others encouraged EPA to add it. EPA has decided not to include Legionella pneumophila in the final UCMR 5.

Under EPA's Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), EPA established NPDWRs for Giardia, viruses, Legionella, turbidity and heterotrophic bacteria and set maximum contaminant level goals of zero for Giardia lamblia, viruses and Legionella pneumophila (54 FR 27486, June 29, 1989 (USEPA, 1989)). EPA is currently examining opportunities to enhance protection against Legionella pneumophila through revisions to the suite of Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct (MDBP) rules. In addition to the SWTR, the MDBP suite includes the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproduct Rules; the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule; and the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

As stated in the conclusions from EPA's third “Six-Year Review of Drinking Water Standards” (82 FR 3518, January 11, 2017 (USEPA, 2017)), “EPA identified the following NPDWRs under the SWTR as candidates for revision, because of the opportunity to further reduce residual risk from pathogens (including opportunistic pathogens such as Legionella ) beyond the risk addressed by the current SWTR.” In accordance with the dates in the Settlement Agreement between EPA and Waterkeeper Alliance ( Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. 1:19-cv-00899-LJL (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 1, 2020)), the agency anticipates signing a proposal for revisions to the MDBP rules and a final action on the proposal by July 31, 2024 and September 30, 2027, respectively. EPA has concluded that UCMR 5 data collection for Legionella pneumophila would not be completed in time to meaningfully inform MDBP revision and that UCMR 5 data for Legionella pneumophila would soon lack significance because it would not reflect conditions in water systems after any regulatory revisions become effective (because water quality would be expected to change as a result of PWSs complying with such regulatory revisions).

EPA estimates that Legionella pneumophila monitoring under UCMR 5 would have added $10.5 million in new expenses for large PWSs, $20 million in new expenses for the agency for small system monitoring, and $0.5 million in new expenses for small PWSs and states over the 5-year UCMR period. Because the data would not be available in time to inform MDBP regulatory revisions and because MDBP revisions could change the presence of Legionella pneumophila in drinking water distribution systems ( Legionella occurrence may change, for example, if the required minimum disinfectant residual concentration is higher following MDBP revisions), EPA concluded that the expense of this monitoring is not warranted given the limited utility of the data.

c. Haloacetonitriles

Some commenters agreed with EPA's rationale for not including the four unregulated haloacetonitrile disinfection byproducts (DBPs) in UCMR 5, while others encouraged EPA to include them. EPA has decided not to include haloacetonitrile DBPs in the final UCMR 5.

As was the case with Legionella pneumophila, EPA has concluded that UCMR 5 data collection for haloacetonitriles would not be completed in time to meaningfully inform MDBP revision and that UCMR 5 data would not reflect conditions in water systems after any regulatory revisions become effective (haloacetonitrile occurrence may change, for example, if the required minimum disinfectant residual concentration is higher following MDBP revisions).

As with Legionella pneumophila, inclusion of haloacetonitriles in UCMR 5 would introduce significant monitoring and reporting complexity and cost compared to the sampling design for PFAS and lithium. If haloacetonitriles were to be added to UCMR 5, most of the additional expenses would be borne by large PWSs (for analysis of their samples) and EPA (for analysis of samples from small PWSs). EPA estimates this would result in $13 million in new expenses for large PWSs, $19 million in new expenses for the agency, and $0.5 million in new expenses for small PWSs and states over the 5-year UCMR period.

Because the data would not be available in time to inform MDBP regulatory revisions and because MDBP revisions could change the presence of haloacetonitriles in drinking water distribution systems, EPA concluded that the expense of this monitoring is not warranted given the limited utility of the data.

d. 1,2,3-Trichloropropane

EPA received some comments that support the agency's proposed decision to not include 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) monitoring in UCMR 5, and others recommending that 1,2,3-TCP be included. EPA concluded that appropriate analytical methods are not currently available to support additional UCMR data collection ( i.e., above and beyond the data collection under UCMR 3 (USEPA, 2019c)).

Several commenters suggested that EPA consider analytical methods to monitor for 1,2,3-trichloropropane at lower levels. They suggested, for example, that the agency use California method SRL-524M (California DHS, 2002), which is prescribed by the state for compliance monitoring at 0.005 μg/L (5 ng/L). EPA has reviewed SRL 524M and determined that the associated quality control (QC) and IDC criteria do not meet the EPA's needs for drinking water analysis. See also EPA's “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

Occurrence data collected during UCMR 3 (77 FR 26072, May 2, 2012 (USEPA, 2012)) for 1,2,3-trichloropropane may be found at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/occurrence-data-unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule#3.

B. What is the UCMR 5 sampling design?

1. This Final Rule

EPA has utilized up to three different tiers of contaminant monitoring, associated with three different “lists” of contaminants, in past UCMRs. EPA designed the monitoring tiers to reflect the availability and complexity of analytical methods, laboratory capacity, sampling frequency, and cost. The Assessment Monitoring tier is the largest in scope and is used to collect data to determine the national occurrence of “List 1” contaminants for the purpose of estimating national population exposure. Assessment Monitoring has been used in the four previous UCMRs to collect occurrence data from all systems serving more than 10,000 people and a representative sample of 800 smaller systems. Consistent with AWIA, the Assessment Monitoring approach was redesigned for UCMR 5 and reflects the plan, subject to additional appropriations being made available for this purpose, that would require all systems serving 3,300 or more people and a representative sample of systems serving 25 to 3,299 people to perform monitoring (USEPA, 2021a). The population-weighted sampling design for the nationally representative sample of small systems (used in previous UCMR cycles to select 800 systems serving 25 to 10,000 people and used in UCMR 5 to select 800 systems serving 25 to 3,299 people) calls for the sample to be stratified by water source type (ground water or surface water), service size category, and state (where each state is allocated a minimum of two systems in its State Monitoring Plan). The allowable margin of error at the 99 percent confidence level is ±1 percent for an expected contaminant occurrence of 1 percent at the national level. Assessment Monitoring is the primary tier used for contaminants and generally relies on analytical methods that use more common techniques that are expected to be widely available. EPA has used an Assessment Monitoring tier for 72 contaminants and contaminant groups over the course of UCMR 1 through UCMR 4. The agency is exclusively requiring Assessment Monitoring in UCMR 5. This monitoring approach yields the most complete set of occurrence data to support EPA's decision making.

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

Many commenters expressed support for the increase in small system Assessment Monitoring, with no opposition to the inclusion of all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people in UCMR 5. The U.S. Small Business Administration asked that EPA clarify small-system responsibilities in the event of inadequate EPA funding to fully support the envisioned monitoring.

Recognizing the uncertainty in funding from year-to-year, the agency will implement a “monitor if notified” approach for PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people. In 2022, EPA will notify the approximately 6,000 small PWSs tentatively selected for the expanded UCMR 5 (all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people and a statistically-based, nationally representative set of 800 PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people) of their anticipated UCMR 5 monitoring requirements; that initial notification will specify that monitoring is conditioned on EPA having sufficient funds and will be confirmed in a second notification. Upon receiving appropriations for a particular year, EPA will determine the number of small PWSs whose monitoring is covered by the appropriations, and notify the included small PWSs of their upcoming requirements at least six months prior to their scheduled monitoring. EPA has made minor edits to 40 CFR 141.35 and 40 CFR 141.40 for consistency with this approach.

Additionally, to ensure that EPA has access to a nationally representative set of small-system data, even in the absence of sufficient appropriations to support the planned monitoring by small systems, a statistically-based nationally representative set of 800 PWSs will also be selected from among the PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people. An updated description of the statistical approach for the nationally representative samples for UCMR 5 is available in the docket as “Selection of Nationally Representative Public Water Systems for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule: 2021 Update” (USEPA 2021a).

To minimize the impact of the final rule on small systems (those serving 25 to 10,000 people), EPA pays for their sample kit preparation, sample shipping fees, and sample analysis. Large systems (those serving more than 10,000 people) pay for all costs associated with their monitoring. Exhibit 5 of this preamble shows a summary of the estimated number of PWSs subject to monitoring.

Exhibit 5—Systems Expected To Participate in UCMR 5 Monitoring
List 1 chemicals
1 EPA pays for all analytical costs associated with monitoring at small systems.
2 Counts for small PWSs serving 3,300-10,000 people are approximate.
3 Large system counts are approximate.
4 In the absence of appropriations to support monitoring at all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people, EPA could instead include as few as 400 PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people and 400 PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people (for a representative sample of 800 PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people).
System size (number of people served)National sample: Assessment monitoring designTotal number of systems per size category
List 1 chemicals
Small Systems1 (25-3,299)800 randomly selected systems (CWSs and NTNCWSs)4 800
Small Systems12 (3,300-10,000)All systems (CWSs and NTNCWSs) subject to the availability of appropriations4 5,147
Large Systems3 (10,001 and over)All systems (CWSs and NTNCWSs)4,364
Total10,311

C. What is the sampling frequency and timing?

1. This Final Rule

This final rule maintains the proposed sampling frequency and timeframe for Assessment Monitoring. On a per-system basis, the anticipated number of samples collected by each system is consistent with sample collection during prior UCMR cycles (although, as described elsewhere in this document, the number of water systems expected to participate in UCMR 5 is significantly greater under this final rule per AWIA). Water systems will be required to collect samples based on the typical UCMR sampling frequency and timeframe as follows: For surface water, ground water under the direct influence of surface water, and mixed locations, sampling will take place for four consecutive quarters over the course of 12 months (total of 4 sampling events). Sampling events will occur three months apart. For example, if the first sample is taken in January, the second will then occur anytime in April, the third will occur anytime in July, and the fourth will occur anytime in October. For ground water locations, sampling will take place twice over the course of 12 months (total of 2 sampling events). Sampling events will occur five to seven months apart. For example, if the first sample is taken in April, the second sample will then occur anytime in September, October, or November.

EPA, in conjunction with the states, will initially determine schedules (year and months of monitoring) for large water systems. Thereafter, large PWSs will have an opportunity to modify this initial schedule for planning purposes or other reasons ( e.g., to spread costs over multiple years, if a sampling location will be closed during the scheduled month of monitoring, etc.). EPA will schedule and coordinate small system monitoring (for PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people and for the nationally representative sample of smaller PWSs) by working closely with partnering states. State Monitoring Plans provide an opportunity for states to review and revise the initial sampling schedules developed by EPA (see discussion of State Monitoring Plans in Section III.D of this preamble).

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

EPA received two comments recommending that the agency reduce the sampling frequency for both ground water (GW) and surface water (SW) systems, including a suggestion that UCMR 5 require only one sample per system. EPA concluded that less frequent data collection would affect the integrity of the data and result in insufficient data to fulfill the needs envisioned by the 1996 SDWA Amendments, particularly with regard to supporting the Administrator's regulatory determinations and drinking water regulation development. Maintaining the proposed sampling frequency allows the resulting contaminant data to be analyzed for temporal variability, in addition to between-system variability. These analyses are not possible with a single-sample structure. When making regulatory determinations, EPA evaluates the number of systems (and populations) with means or single measured values above health levels of concern, as both values provide important information.

EPA acknowledges that based on UCMR 3 (77 FR 26072, May 2, 2012 (USEPA, 2012)) data, the correlation between results from multiple sample events can be high; however, the approach suggested by commenters would yield less accurate data for several reasons. EPA's assessment of sampling frequency using UCMR 3 and UCMR 4 data (see Appendix 2 in “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble) shows that for both SW and GW systems, there are numerous cases where occurrence is notably different between sample events. Focusing first on UCMR 3 results for PWS with SW sources, the number of sample points at which PFOS was measured at or above the MRL was 108 percent greater when considering multiple sample events, versus only considering the first sample event. There were multiple occasions where the results from the first sample event were below the health-based reference concentration while subsequent results were above it. Looking at UCMR 3 results for PWSs with GW sources, PFOS was measured at or above the MRL at 26 percent more sample points in the second sample event relative to the first. Similar to the UCMR 3 results for SW systems, there were multiple occasions where the second result from a GW system exceeded the reference concentration while the first result did not.

Some commenters suggested that between-system variability is much greater for PFAS than within-system variability. While it may be less than between-system variability, within-system variability can still be important. Shifting to a single sample prevents reasonable assessments of within-system variability and limits the ability to observe between-system variability estimates. This would then drastically reduce the ability to characterize uncertainty.

Additionally, although the provisions of AWIA could include the addition of approximately 5,200 more PWSs to UCMR 5 relative to earlier cycles and thus capture more spatial variation in the resulting dataset, it is important to note that spatial variation is different than temporal or seasonal variation. Capturing more of one does not diminish the influence of the others on national occurrence data and reducing the frequency of sampling eliminates the possibility of analyzing the resulting data for temporal variation. In addition, statistical means based on two measurements have considerably less error than a single measurement per system, and provide a more robust dataset for future regulatory decisions. Having more than one sample event also greatly reduces the chance of underestimating the true proportion of occurrence of the contaminant in drinking water ( i.e., exposure).

Regarding monitoring frequency and burden, EPA notes that the agency allows large GW systems the opportunity to reduce monitoring burden by using approved representative entry points (40 CFR 141.35(c)(3)) as described in Section IV.D of this preamble. Representative monitoring plans will result in fewer samples and thus time and cost savings to the PWS. Consecutive systems with multiple connections from a particular wholesaler are also permitted to choose one entry point as representative, thus reducing burden.

D. Where are the sampling locations and what is representative monitoring?

1. This Final Rule

Consistent with past UCMR cycles, sample collection for UCMR 5 contaminants will take place at the entry point to the distribution system (EPTDS). As during past UCMRs and as described in 40 CFR 141.35(c)(3) of this preamble, this final rule will allow large ground water systems (or large surface water systems with ground water sources) that have multiple ground water EPTDSs to request approval to sample at representative monitoring locations rather than at each ground water EPTDS. GWRMPs approved under prior UCMRs may be used for UCMR 5, presuming no significant changes in the configuration of the ground water EPTDSs since the prior approval. Water systems that intend to use a previously approved plan must send EPA a copy of the approval documents received under prior UCMRs from their state (if reviewed by the state) or EPA.

Relative to the rules for prior UCMR cycles, this final rule provides greater flexibility to PWSs in submitting GWRMPs to EPA. Plans must be submitted to EPA six months prior to the PWS's scheduled sample collection, instead of by a specified date; those PWSs scheduled to collect samples in 2024 or 2025 will have significant additional time to develop and propose representative plans. PWSs, particularly those scheduled for sample collection in 2023, are encouraged to submit proposals for a new GWRMP by December 31, 2022, to allow time for review by EPA and, as appropriate, the state. EPA will work closely with the states to coordinate the review of GWRMPs in those cases where such review is part of the state's Partnership Agreement. Changes to inventory data in SDWARS that impact a PWS's representative plan before or during the UCMR sampling period must be reported within 30 days of the change. EPA will collaborate with small systems (particularly those with many ground water locations) to develop a GWRMP when warranted, recognizing that EPA pays for the analysis of samples from small systems.

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

EPA received multiple comments regarding GWRMPs and representative sampling for wholesale systems and consecutive connections. Generally, commenters supported the continued use of GWRMPS and the use of previously approved monitoring plans. An additional supporting document, titled, “Instructions for Preparing a Ground Water Representative Monitoring Plan for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule,” (USEPA, 2021j) has been placed in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

Several commenters recommended that EPA not require monitoring by consecutive systems that purchase 100 percent of their water from wholesale systems that are already subject to UCMR 5 monitoring. They requested that EPA instead require wholesalers to identify the PWSIDs of consecutive systems receiving water from the wholesaler, and that EPA rely on wholesaler monitoring in lieu of monitoring by the consecutive systems. EPA has decided to require monitoring by consecutive systems to conduct monitoring in accordance with UCMR 5. Previous UCMR data demonstrate that wholesalers and purchasers can have different analytical results (see Appendix 3 in “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble). For example, pairing the results from wholesaler to consecutive connections for 190 manganese results from UCMR 4 (81 FR 92666, December 20, 2016 (USEPA, 2016)), one-third of the results are higher at the wholesaler and one-third of the results are higher at the consecutive connection, with one-third of all results being comparable [±0.4 μg/L]. The agency therefore elected to maintain the proposed approach in which all eligible consecutive systems must monitor, irrespective of monitoring being conducted by the wholesale system from which they purchase drinking water.

E. How long do laboratories and PWSs have to report data?

1. This Final Rule

EPA is maintaining the revised reporting timeframes for laboratories and PWSs as proposed. For UCMR 5, laboratories have 90 days (versus 120 days in prior UCMR cycles) from the sample collection date to post and approve analytical results in SDWARS for PWS review. Large PWSs have 30 days (versus 60 days in prior UCMR cycles) to review and approve the analytical results posted to SDWARS. As with the UCMR 4 requirements, data will be considered approved and available for state and EPA review if the PWS takes no action within their allotted review period.

In the proposed rule for UCMR 5, EPA noted that multiple states have expressed an interest in earlier access to UCMR data (see Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530). EPA believes that the shorter timeframes for posting and approving data are feasible and reasonable based on our experience with UCMR reporting to date.

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

Commenters generally agreed with the revised timeframes for laboratories to post and approve analytical results in SDWARS. The 90-day laboratory timeframe makes UCMR results more readily available to interested stakeholders and states. Some commenters supported the timely reporting of data by laboratories to ensure that PWSs have adequate time to reconcile QC issues, especially those that may require a PWS to resample. Some expressed concerns that the revised timeframe could be challenging for laboratories. Some suggested that the shorter timeframe be conditioned on consistent functionality and availability of SDWARS.

Commenters generally agreed with the changes in the timeframes for large PWSs to review and approve analytical results posted to SDWARS, though several requested that EPA maintain the 60-day review period.

EPA has observed that many laboratories are routinely posting data to SDWARS within 90 days of sample collection and that many large PWSs are approving and submitting data within 30 days of their laboratory posting the data. Judging by reporting for 2020 monitoring under UCMR 4 (81 FR 92666, December 20, 2016 (USEPA, 2016)), more than 75 percent of laboratories posted and approved data within 90 days, and more than 85 percent of large PWSs who chose to act on their data, did so within 30 days of the laboratory posting it. During UCMR 3 and UCMR 4, less than half of large PWSs chose to actively review and approve their data, as opposed to letting the results default to “approved” status after the review period. The many large PWSs that have routinely chosen to not review and approve their data will not be impacted by the revised timeframe for PWS data review for UCMR 5. See also Appendix 5 in “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

EPA does not anticipate functionality or availability issues with SDWARS during UCMR 5 but is prepared to make case-by-case exceptions for reporting timeframes should significant issues occur with the reporting system.

F. What are the reporting requirements for UCMR 5?

1. This Final Rule

Today's final rule removes 1 of the proposed data elements (“Direct Potable Reuse Water Information”) and maintains the 27 others described in the proposed rule. EPA has updated some of the data-element definitions for clarity and consistency in the reporting requirements. Please see Table 1 of 40 CFR 141.35(e) of this preamble for the complete list of data elements, definitions and drop-down options that will be provided in the data reporting system.

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

a. Data Elements

EPA received multiple comments on the proposed contaminant-specific data elements, with some commenters questioning the quality, reliability, and utility of some of the data that would be provided to the agency per the proposed data element requirements. Several commenters requested that EPA include rationale explaining the intended use of such data. EPA has updated the data elements for clarity ( e.g., clarifying treatment types, and abbreviations for them; adding the treatment option “NMT = not modified after testing”) and has provided additional rationale (including describing how the information could impact regulatory decision making and risk-management strategies) in the “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), available in the UCMR 5 public docket (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble). EPA acknowledges the data collected will have some limitations but believes that the collection of the information is still valuable. In addition, EPA notes the modest burden associated with the collection.

b. Reporting State Data

EPA received several comments suggesting that PWSs be permitted to submit occurrence data collected under state-based monitoring, in lieu of conducting UCMR 5 monitoring, to reduce the monitoring burden. In those cases where the monitoring required by a state is aligned with the requirements of UCMR 5, PWSs may be able to conduct PFAS monitoring that meets the needs of their state and UCMR 5, with the understanding that UCMR 5 requirements must be met. This includes the requirement that PFAS samples be analyzed by a UCMR 5-approved laboratory using EPA Method 533 and Method 537.1. EPA offers flexibility for PWSs to reschedule their UCMR 5 monitoring, and PWSs may do so to coordinate it with their state-required monitoring. PWSs wishing to conduct “dual purpose” monitoring ( i.e., concurrently meeting the state and UCMR 5 needs) may contact their state or EPA, as appropriate, if there are questions about whether the state and UCMR 5 requirements are being met.

G. What are the UCMR 5 Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) and how were they determined?

1. This Final Rule

EPA is maintaining the proposed minimum reporting levels for the UCMR 5 contaminants. EPA establishes MRLs to ensure consistency in the quality of the information reported to the agency. As defined in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(5)(iii) of this preamble, the MRL is the minimum quantitation level that, with 95 percent confidence, can be achieved by capable analysts at 75 percent or more of the laboratories using a specified analytical method. More detailed explanation of the MRL calculation is in the “Technical Basis for the Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level (LCMRL) Calculator” (USEPA, 2010), available at ( https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/lowest-concentration-minimum-reporting-level-lcmrl-calculator ).

EPA requires each laboratory interested in supporting UCMR analyses to demonstrate that they can reliably make quality measurements at or below the established MRL to ensure that high quality results are being reported by participating laboratories. EPA established the proposed MRLs in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(3), Table 1 of this preamble, for each analyte/method by obtaining data from at least three laboratories that performed “lowest concentration minimum reporting level” (LCMRL) studies. The results from these laboratory LCMRL studies can be found in the “UCMR 5 Laboratory Approval Manual” (USEPA, 2021f), available in the electronic docket (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble).

The multiple laboratory LCMRLs were then processed through a statistical routine to derive an MRL that, with 95 percent confidence, is predicted to be attainable by 75 percent of laboratories using the prescribed method. EPA considers these to be the lowest reporting levels that can practically and consistently be achieved on a national basis (recognizing that individual laboratories may be able to measure at lower levels).

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

Some commenters recommended that EPA establish lower MRLs for the 29 PFAS in UCMR 5. MRLs used for the UCMR program are based on calculations that account for the ability of laboratories to report accurate and precise measurements with a specific statistical confidence. Based on the results from multiple laboratories that participated in MRL-setting studies, EPA concluded that the proposed MRLs represent the lowest feasible levels for a national MRL measure. Sensitivity ( i.e., quantitation limit) may improve with time, experience, and instrumentation advances.

H. What are the requirements for laboratory analysis of field reagent blank samples?

1. This Final Rule

EPA initially proposed that laboratories analyze all field reagent blank (FRB) samples, along with the corresponding field samples, to reduce the possibility of invalidating a positive field sample result ( i.e., a field sample result at or above the MRL) because of FRB hold times being exceeded.

2. Summary of Major Comments and EPA Responses

EPA did not receive any comments expressing concerns with the laboratory approval process; however, the agency did receive a comment on the FRB sample analysis criteria, suggesting that the agency not require analysis of every FRB sample. EPA Method 537.1 and Method 533, used for PFAS analysis, require collection of a corresponding FRB sample from each unique sampling location for each sampling event. The methods require that the FRB be analyzed if there is a positive result for a PFAS analyte in a corresponding field sample. Based on further consideration, EPA is now providing laboratories with discretion as to whether they analyze every FRB sample proactively or only those associated with positive field sample results. This is with the understanding that laboratories must analyze field samples promptly enough such that the corresponding FRB analyses, if needed, may be completed within the prescribed hold time. Compliance with the method hold-time requirements, and other provisions of the methods, is a condition of maintaining laboratory approval. EPA is studying the possibility of extending the FRB hold times for EPA Method 537.1 and Method 533, and will communicate the results of the studies with the approved laboratories.

I. How will EPA support risk communication for UCMR 5 results?

EPA received comments requesting that the agency develop and provide risk communication materials to support interpretation and characterization of UCMR 5 results. EPA intends to publish a “reference concentration” summary document with available EPA health values; provide a template for PWSs to consider using in communicating with their customers about the detection of PFAS in drinking water; and provide other supporting material as risk-related information becomes available.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket. A full analysis of potential costs associated with this action, the “Information Collection Request for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5),” (USEPA, 2021b) ICR Number 2040-0304, is also available in the docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530). A summary of the ICR can be found in Section I.C of this preamble.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

The information collection activities in this final rule have been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document (USEPA, 2021b) that EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number ICR 2683.02. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this final rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.

The information that EPA will collect under this final rule fulfills the statutory requirements of Section1445(a)(2) of SDWA, as amended in 1996, 2018, and 2019. The data will describe the source of the water, location, and test results for samples taken from public water systems (PWSs) as described in 40 CFR 141.35(e). The information collected will support EPA's decisions as to whether or not to regulate particular contaminants under SDWA. Reporting is mandatory. The data are not subject to confidentiality protection.

The 5-year UCMR 5 period spans 2022-2026. UCMR 5 sample collection begins in 2023 and continues through 2025. Since ICRs cannot be approved by OMB for a period longer than three years pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.10, the primary analysis in the ICR only covers the first three years of the UCMR 5 period ( i.e., 2022-2024). Prior to expiration of the initial UCMR 5 ICR, EPA will seek to extend the ICR and thus receive approval to collect information under the PRA in the remaining two years of the UCMR 5 period (2025-2026).

EPA received several comments regarding cost and burden of the proposed rule. Those comments recommended that EPA provide more accurate cost estimates. EPA's response is detailed more fully in the “Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” (USEPA, 2021i), which can be found in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

EPA has reviewed and, as appropriate, revised the cost and burden figures for UCMR 5; this includes using updated unit cost estimates for sample analysis. The annual burden and cost estimates described in this section are based on the implementation assumptions described in Section III of this preamble, among them the inclusion of all systems serving 3,300 to 10,000 people and a representative sample of smaller systems. As such, those estimates represent an upper bound. If EPA does not receive the necessary appropriations in one or more of the collections years—and thus collects data from fewer small systems—the actual costs would be lower than those estimated here. In general, burden hours were calculated by:

1. Determining the activities that PWSs and states would complete to comply with UCMR activity;

2. Estimating the number of hours per activity;

3. Estimating the number of respondents per activity; and

4. Multiplying the hours per activity by the number of respondents for that activity.

Respondents/affected entities: The respondents/affected entities are small PWSs (those serving 25 to 10,000 people); large PWSs (those serving 10,001 to 100,000 people); very large PWSs (those serving more than 100,000 people); and states.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR 141.35).

Estimated number of respondents: Respondents to UCMR 5 include 5,947 small PWSs, 4,364 large PWSs, and the 56 primacy agencies (50 States, one Tribal nation, and five Territories) for a total of 10,367 respondents.

Frequency of response: The frequency of response varies across respondents and years. Across the initial 3-year ICR period for UCMR 5, small PWSs will sample an average of 2.8 times per PWS ( i.e., number of responses per PWS); large PWSs will sample and report an average of 3.2 times per PWS; and very large PWSs will sample and report an average of 3.7 times per PWS.

Total estimated burden: 48,469 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $9,404,007 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the agency will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number for the approved information collection activities contained in this final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

For purposes of assessing the impacts of this final rule on small entities, EPA considered small entities to be PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people. As required by the RFA, EPA proposed using this alternative definition in the Federal Register (63 FR 7606, February 13, 1998 (USEPA, 1998a)), sought public comment, consulted with the Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Advocacy, and finalized the alternative definition in the Consumer Confidence Reports rulemaking (63 FR 44512, August 19, 1998 (USEPA, 1998b)). As stated in that document, the alternative definition applies to this regulation.

Exhibit 6—Number of Publicly- and Privately-Owned Small Systems Subject to UCMR 5 1
1 In the absence of appropriations to support monitoring at all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people, EPA could instead include as few as 400 PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people and 400 PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people (for a representative sample of 800 PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people).
2 PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category.
System size (number of people served)Publicly-ownedPrivately-ownedTotal 2
Ground Water
500 and under42126168
501 to 3,300320121441
3,301 to 10,0002,3345412,875
Subtotal Ground Water2,6967883,484
Surface Water (and Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water)
500 and under91120
501 to 3,30012645171
3,301 to 10,0001,7625102,272
Subtotal Surface Water1,8975662,463
Total of Small Water Systems4,5931,3545,947

The basis for the UCMR 5 RFA certification is as follows: For the 5,947 small water systems that EPA anticipates will be affected, per the planned monitoring, the average annual cost for complying with this final rule represents an average of 0.02 percent of system revenues. The average yearly cost to small systems to comply with UCMR 5 over the 5-year period of 2022-2026, is approximately $0.3 million. EPA anticipates that approximately one third of the 5,947 small PWSs will collect samples in each of three years (2023, 2024, and 2025).

PWS costs are attributed to the labor required for reading about UCMR 5 requirements, monitoring, reporting, and record keeping. The estimated average annual burden across the 5-year UCMR 5 implementation period of 2022-2026 is 1.3 hours at $52 per small system. By assuming all costs for laboratory analyses, shipping and quality control for small entities, EPA incurs the entirety of the non-labor costs associated with UCMR 5 small system monitoring, or 96 percent of total small system testing costs. Exhibit 7 and Exhibit 8 of this preamble present the estimated economic impacts in the form of a revenue test for publicly- and privately-owned systems.

Exhibit 7—UCMR 5 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Publicly-Owned Systems [2022-2026] 1
System size (number of people served)Annual number of systems impacted 2Average annual hours per systemAverage annual cost per systemSBREFA criteria- revenue test 3 (%)
1 In the absence of appropriations to support monitoring at all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people, EPA could instead include as few as 400 PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people and 400 PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people (for a representative sample of 800 PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people).
2 PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category. Includes the publicly-owned portion of small systems subject to UCMR 5.
3 Costs are presented as a percentage of median annual revenue for each size category.
Ground Water Systems
500 and under81.0$40.650.09
501 to 3,300641.143.370.02
3,301 to 10,0004671.349.920.01
Surface Water (and Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water) Systems
500 and under21.454.390.07
501 to 3,300251.456.190.02
3,301 to 10,0003531.557.390.004
Exhibit 8—UCMR 5 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Privately-Owned Systems [2022-2026] 1
System size (number of people served)Annual number of systems impacted 2Average annual hours per systemAverage annual cost per systemSBREFA criteria- revenue test 3 (%)
1 In the absence of appropriations to support monitoring at all PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people, EPA could instead include as few as 400 PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people and 400 PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people (for a representative sample of 800 PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people).
2 PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category. Includes the privately-owned portion of small systems subject to UCMR 5.
3 Costs are presented as a percentage of median annual revenue for each size category.
Ground Water Systems
500 and under251.0$40.650.48
501 to 3,300241.1$43.370.03
3,301 to 10,0001081.3$49.920.004
Surface Water (and Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water) Systems
500 and under21.4$54.390.11
501 to 3,30091.4$56.190.02
3,301 to 10,0001021.5$57.390.004

Up to 9.4 percent of all small systems ( i.e., up to 5,947 small PWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people) will participate in UCMR 5 if EPA receives the necessary appropriations to support its plan. EPA has determined that participating small systems will experience an average impact of 0.02 percent of revenues. This accounts for small PWSs familiarizing themselves with the regulatory requirements; reading sampling instructions; traveling to the sampling location; collecting and shipping the samples; and maintaining their records. The 5,947 small PWSs are comprised of all 5,147 systems serving between 3,300 and 10,000 people, and the representative group of 800 systems serving between 25 and 3,299 people; the remainder of small systems will not participate in UCMR 5 monitoring and will not be impacted.

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The small entities subject to the requirements of this action along with a description of the very minor impacts are previously addressed in this section. Although this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA has attempted to reduce impacts by assuming all costs for analyses of the samples, and for shipping the samples from small systems to laboratories contracted by EPA to analyze the UCMR 5 samples (the cost of shipping is included in the cost of each analytical method). EPA has historically set aside $2.0 million each year from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) with its authority to use DWSRF monies for the purposes of implementing this provision of SDWA. EPA anticipates drawing on these and additional funds, if available, to implement the plan and carry out the expanded UCMR monitoring approach outlined in AWIA. We have therefore concluded that this action will have no significant impact on any directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action implements mandate(s) specifically and explicitly set forth in SDWA Section 1445(a)(2), Monitoring Program for Unregulated Contaminants.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This action has Tribal implications. However, it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized Tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. As described previously in this document, this final rule requires monitoring by all large PWSs. Information in the SDWIS/Fed water system inventory indicates there are approximately 27 large Tribal PWSs (serving 10,001 to 40,000 people). EPA estimates the average annual cost to each of these large PWSs, over the 5-year rule period, to be $1,783. This cost is based on a labor component (associated with the collection of samples), and a non-labor component (associated with shipping and laboratory fees). As planned, UCMR 5 is expected to also require monitoring by all small PWSs serving 3,300 to 10,000 people and a nationally representative sample of small PWSs serving 25 to 3,299 people. Information in the SDWIS/Fed water system inventory indicates there are approximately 75 small Tribal PWSs (serving 3,300 to 10,000 people). EPA estimates that less than 2 percent of small Tribal systems serving 25 to 3,299 people will be selected as part of the nationally representative sample. EPA estimates the average annual cost to small Tribal systems over the 5-year rule period to be $52. Such cost is based on the labor associated with collecting a sample and preparing it for shipping. All other small-PWS expenses (associated with shipping and laboratory fees) are paid by EPA.

EPA consulted with Tribal officials under the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes early in the process of developing this regulation to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. A summary of that consultation, titled, “Summary of the Tribal Coordination and Consultation Process for the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” is provided in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

As required by section 7(a), the EPA's Tribal Consultation Official has certified that the requirements of the executive order have been met in a meaningful and timely manner. A copy of the certification is included in the docket for this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern such an environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

This action is not a “significant energy action” because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of energy and has not otherwise been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. This is a national drinking water occurrence study that was submitted to OMB for review.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This action involves technical standards. EPA has identified options that involve using analytical methods developed by the agency and three major voluntary consensus method organizations to support UCMR 5 monitoring. The voluntary consensus method organizations are Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, and ASTM International. EPA identified acceptable consensus method organization standards for the analysis of lithium. A summary of each method along with how the method specifically applies to UCMR 5 can be found in Section III.I of this preamble.

All of these standards are reasonably available for public use. EPA methods are free for download on the agency's website. The methods in the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 23rd edition are consensus standards, available for purchase from the publisher, and are commonly used by the drinking water laboratory community. The methods in the Standard Methods Online are consensus standards, available for purchase from the publisher's website, and are commonly used by the drinking water laboratory community. The methods from ASTM International are consensus standards, are available for purchase from the publisher's website, and are commonly used by the drinking water laboratory community.

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

EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an environmental health or safety standard. Background information regarding EPA's consideration of Executive Order 12898 in the development of this final rule is provided in Section III.F of this preamble, and an additional supporting document, titled, “Summary of Environmental Justice Considerations for the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal,” has been placed in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

VI. References

(i) ASDWA. 2013. Insufficient Resources for State Drinking Water Programs Threaten Public Health: An Analysis of State Drinking Water Programs' Resources and Needs. December 2013. Available at https://www.asdwa.org/asdwa-reports/.

(ii) ASTM. 2020. ASTM D1976-20— Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy. ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA, 19428. Approved May 1, 2020. Available for purchase at https://www.astm.org/Standards/D1976.htm.

(iii) California DHS. 2002. California Department of Health Services. Determination of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane in Drinking Water by Purge and Trap Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management, Sanitation and Radiation Laboratories Branch, Berkeley, CA. Available at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/documents/123-tcp/tcp_by_pt_gcms.pdf.

(iv) Settlement Agreement, Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. 1:19-cv-00899-LJL (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 1, 2020).

(v) SM. 2017. 3120B—Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy (2017): Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 23rd edition. American Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20001-3710.

(vi) SM Online. 1999. 3120B-99—Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy: Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method (Editorial Revisions, 2020). Standard Methods Online. Available for purchase at http://www.standardmethods.org.

(vii) USEPA. 1989. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Filtration, Disinfection; Turbidity, Giardia lamblia, Viruses, Legionella, and Heterotrophic Bacteria; Final Rule.Federal Register . Vol. 54, No. 124, p. 27486, June 29, 1989.

(viii) USEPA. 1994. EPA Method 200.7—Determination of Metals and Trace Elements in Water and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, Revision 4.4. Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. Available at https://www.epa.gov/esam/method-2007-determination-metals-and-trace-elements-water-and-wastes-inductively-coupled-plasma.

(ix) USEPA. 1998a. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Consumer Confidence Reports; Proposed Rule. Federal Register . Vol. 63, No. 30, p. 7606, February 13, 1998.

(x) USEPA. 1998b. National Primary Drinking Water Regulation: Consumer Confidence Reports; Final Rule. Federal Register . Vol. 63, No. 160, p. 44512, August 19, 1998.

(xi) USEPA. 2010. Technical Basis for the Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level (LCMRL) Calculator. EPA 815-R-11-001. Office of Water. December 2010. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods.

(xii) USEPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook 2011 Edition (Final Report). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-09/052F. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. September 2011. Available at https://www.epa.gov/expobox/about-exposure-factors-handbook.

(xiii) USEPA. 2012. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR 3) for Public Water Systems; Final Rule. Federal Register . Vol. 77, No. 85, p. 26072, May 2, 2012.

(xiv) USEPA. 2016. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) for Public Water Systems and Announcement of Public Meeting. Federal Register . Vol. 81, No. 244, p. 92666, December 20, 2016.

(xv) USEPA. 2017. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Announcement of the Results of EPA's Review of Existing Drinking Water Standards and Request for Public Comment and/or Information on Related Issues. Federal Register . Vol. 82, No. 7, p. 3518, January 11, 2017.

(xvi) USEPA. 2018. Method Development for Unregulated Contaminants in Drinking Water: Public Meeting and Webinar. EPA 815-A-18-001. Office of Water. June 2018. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods.

(xvii) USEPA. 2019a. Development of the Proposed Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule for the Fifth Monitoring Cycle (UCMR 5). Presentation Slides. EPA 815-A-19-001. Office of Water. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials.

(xviii) USEPA. 2019b. EPA Method 533—Determination of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Isotope Dilution Anion Exchange Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry. EPA 815-B-19-020. Office of Water, Cincinnati, OH. November 2019. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods.

(xix) USEPA. 2019c. Appendix C: 1,2,3-Trichloropropane in Regulatory Determination 4 Support Document for Selected Contaminants from the Fourth Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 4). EPA 815-R-19-006. Docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0583. Available at https://www.regulations.gov.

(xx) USEPA. 2020. EPA Method 537.1—Determination of Selected Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Version 2.0. EPA/600/R-20/006. Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. March 2020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods.

(xxii) USEPA. 2021a. Selection of Nationally Representative Public Water Systems for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule: 2021 Update. EPA 815-B-21-012. Office of Water. December 2021.

(xxiii) USEPA. 2021b. Information Collection Request for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5). EPA 815-B-21-008. Office of Water. December 2021.

(xxiv) USEPA. 2021c. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule for the Fifth Monitoring Cycle (UCMR 5): Public Meeting and Webinar. Presentation Slides. EPA 815-A-21-001. Office of Water. April 2021. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials.

(xxv) USEPA. 2021d. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 5—Draft. Federal Register . Vol. 86, No. 135 p. 37948, July 19, 2021.

(xxvi) USEPA. 2021e. Information Compendium for Contaminants for the Final Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5). EPA 815-B-21-009. Office of Water. December 2021.

(xxvii) USEPA. 2021f. UCMR 5 Laboratory Approval Manual. EPA 815-B-21-010. Office of Water. December 2021.

(xxviii) USEPA. 2021g. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule for Public Water Systems and Announcement of Public Meeting; Proposed Rule and Notice of Public Meeting. Federal Register . Vol. 86, No. 46, p. 13846, March 11, 2021.

(xxix) USEPA. 2021h. Revisions to 40 CFR 141.35 and 141.40. EPA 815-B-21-011. Office of Water. December 2021. Available in EPA's public docket (under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0530) at https://www.regulations.gov.

(xxx) USEPA. 2021i. Response to Comments on the Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) Proposal. EPA 815-R-21-008. Office of Water. December 2021.

(xxi) USEPA. 2021j. Instructions for Preparing a Ground Water Representative Monitoring Plan for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule. EPA 815-B-21-013. Office of Water. December 2021.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141

Environmental protection, Chemicals, Incorporation by reference, Indian—lands, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water supply.

Michael S. Regan,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 141 as follows:

PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

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

Authority:

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

Subpart D—Reporting and Recordkeeping

2. Amend §141.35 as follows:

a. In paragraph (a), revise the fourth sentence;

b. In paragraph (c)(1), remove the text “December 31, 2017” and add, in its place the text “December 31, 2022”;

c. Revise paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3)(i) through (iii), (c)(4), (c)(5)(i), and (c)(6)(ii);

d. In paragraph (d)(2), revise the first, second, and third sentences; and

f. Revise paragraph (e).

The revisions read as follows:

§141.35 Reporting for unregulated contaminant monitoring results.

(a) * * * For the purposes of this section, PWS “population served” is the retail population served directly by the PWS as reported to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/Fed). * * *

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) Sampling location inventory information. You must provide your inventory information by December 31, 2022, using EPA's electronic data reporting system, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. You must submit, verify, or update data elements 1-9 (as defined in Table 1 of paragraph (e) of this section) for each sampling location, or for each approved representative sampling location (as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section) regarding representative sampling locations. If this information changes, you must report updates, including new sources, and sampling locations that are put in use before or during the UCMR sampling period, to EPA's electronic data reporting system within 30 days of the change.

(3) * * *

(i) Qualifications. Large PWSs that have EPA- or State-approved representative EPTDS sampling locations from a previous UCMR cycle, or as provided for under 40 CFR 141.23(a)(1), 40 CFR 141.24(f)(1), or 40 CFR 141.24(h)(1), may submit a copy of documentation from your State or EPA that approves your representative sampling plan. PWSs that do not have an approved representative EPTDS sampling plan may submit a proposal to sample at representative EPTDS(s) rather than at each individual EPTDS if: You use ground water as a source; all of your well sources have either the same treatment or no treatment; and you have multiple EPTDSs from the same source ( i.e., same aquifer). You must submit a copy of the existing or proposed representative EPTDS sampling plan, as appropriate, at least six months prior to your scheduled sample collection, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If changes to your inventory that impact your representative plan occur before or during the UCMR sampling period, you must report updates within 30 days of the change.

(ii) Demonstration. If you are submitting a proposal to sample at representative EPTDS(s) rather than at each individual EPTDS, you must demonstrate that any EPTDS that you propose as representative of multiple wells is associated with a well that draws from the same aquifer as the wells it will represent. The proposed well must be representative of the highest annual volume and most consistently active wells in the representative array. If that representative well is not in use at the scheduled sampling time, you must select and sample an alternative representative well. You must submit the information defined in Table 1, paragraph (e) of this section for each proposed representative sampling location. You must also include documentation to support your proposal that the specified wells are representative of other wells. This documentation can include system-maintained well logs or construction drawings indicating that the representative well(s) is/are at a representative depth, and details of well casings and grouting; data demonstrating relative homogeneity of water quality constituents ( e.g., pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, iron, manganese) in samples drawn from each well; and data showing that your wells are located in a limited geographic area ( e.g., all wells within a 0.5 mile radius) and/or, if available, the hydrogeologic data indicating the ground water travel time between the representative well and each of the individual wells it represents ( e.g., all wells within a five-year time of travel delineation). Your proposal must be sent in writing to EPA, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(iii) Approval. EPA or the State (as specified in the Partnership Agreement reached between the State and EPA) will review your proposal and coordinate any necessary changes with you. Your plan will not be final until you receive written approval from EPA, identifying the final list of EPTDSs where you will be required to monitor.

(4) Contacting EPA if your PWS has not been notified of requirements. If you believe you are subject to UCMR requirements, as defined in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(1) and (a)(2)(i), and you have not been contacted by either EPA or your State by April 26, 2022, you must send a letter to EPA, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The letter must be from your PWS Official and must include an explanation as to why the UCMR requirements are applicable to your system along with the appropriate contact information. A copy of the letter must also be submitted to the State as directed by the State. EPA will make an applicability determination based on your letter, and in consultation with the State when necessary and will notify you regarding your applicability status and required sampling schedule. However, if your PWS meets the applicability criteria specified in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(2)(i), you are subject to the UCMR monitoring and reporting requirements, regardless of whether you have been contacted by the State or EPA.

(5) * * *

(i) General rescheduling notification requirements. Large systems may independently change their monitoring schedules up to December 31, 2022, using EPA's electronic data reporting system, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. After this date has passed, if your PWS cannot sample according to your assigned sampling schedule ( e.g., because of budget constraints, or if a sampling location will be closed during the scheduled month of monitoring), you must mail or email a letter to EPA, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, prior to the scheduled sampling date. You must include an explanation of why the samples cannot be taken according to the assigned schedule, and you must provide the alternative schedule you are requesting. You must not reschedule monitoring specifically to avoid sample collection during a suspected vulnerable period. You are subject to your assigned UCMR sampling schedule or the schedule that you revised on or before December 31, 2022, unless and until you receive a letter from EPA specifying a new schedule.

* * * * *

(6) * * *

(ii) Reporting schedule. You must require your laboratory, on your behalf, to post and approve the data in EPA's electronic data reporting system, accessible at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr, for your review within 90 days from the sample collection date (sample collection must occur as specified in 40 CFR 141.40(a)(4)). You then have 30 days from when the laboratory posts and approves your data to review, approve, and submit the data to the State and EPA via the agency's electronic data reporting system. If you do not electronically approve and submit the laboratory data to EPA within 30 days of the laboratory posting approved data, the data will be considered approved by you and available for State and EPA review.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(2) Sampling location inventory information. You must provide your inventory information by December 31, 2022, using EPA's electronic data reporting system, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If this information changes, you must report updates, including new sources, and sampling locations that are put in use before or during the UCMR sampling period, to EPA's electronic data reporting system within 30 days of the change, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * *

(e) Data elements. Table 1 defines the data elements that must be provided for UCMR monitoring.

Table 1 to Paragraph (e)—Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Reporting Requirements
Data elementDefinition
1. Public Water System Identification (PWSID) CodeThe code used to identify each PWS. The code begins with the standard 2-character postal State abbreviation or Region code; the remaining 7 numbers are unique to each PWS in the State. The same identification code must be used to represent the PWS identification for all current and future UCMR monitoring.
2. Public Water System NameUnique name, assigned once by the PWS.
3. Public Water System Facility Identification CodeAn identification code established by the State or, at the State's discretion, by the PWS, following the format of a 5-digit number unique within each PWS for each applicable facility (i.e., for each source of water, treatment plant, distribution system, or any other facility associated with water treatment or delivery). The same identification code must be used to represent the facility for all current and future UCMR monitoring.
4. Public Water System Facility NameUnique name, assigned once by the PWS, for every facility ID ( e.g., Treatment Plant).
5. Public Water System Facility TypeThat code that identifies that type of facility as either: CC = Consecutive connection. SS = Sampling station. TP = Treatment plant. OT = Other.
6. Water Source TypeThe type of source water that supplies a water system facility. Systems must report one of the following codes for each sampling location:
SW = Surface water (to be reported for water facilities that are served entirely by a surface water source during the 12-month period).
GU = Ground water under the direct influence of surface water (to be reported for water facilities that are served all or in part by ground water under the direct influence of surface water at any time during the 12-month sampling period), and are not served at all by surface water during this period.
MX = Mixed water (to be reported for water facilities that are served by a mix of surface water, ground water, and/or ground water under the direct influence of surface water during the 12-month period).
GW = Ground water (to be reported for water facilities that are served entirely by a ground water source during the 12-month period).
7. Sampling Point Identification CodeAn identification code established by the State, or at the State's discretion, by the PWS, that uniquely identifies each sampling point. Each sampling code must be unique within each applicable facility, for each applicable sampling location (i.e ., entry point to the distribution system). The same identification code must be used to represent the sampling location for all current and future UCMR monitoring.
8. Sampling Point NameUnique sample point name, assigned once by the PWS, for every sample point ID ( e.g., Entry Point).
9. Sampling Point Type CodeA code that identifies the location of the sampling point as: EP = Entry point to the distribution system.
10. Disinfectant TypeAll of the disinfectants/oxidants that have been added prior to and at the entry point to the distribution system. Please select all that apply:
PEMB = Permanganate.
HPXB = Hydrogen peroxide.
CLGA = Gaseous chlorine.
CLOF = Offsite generated hypochlorite (stored as a liquid form).
CLON = Onsite generated hypochlorite.
CAGC = Chloramine (formed with gaseous chlorine).
CAOF = Chloramine (formed with offsite hypochlorite).
CAON = Chloramine (formed with onsite hypochlorite).
CLDB = Chlorine dioxide.
OZON = Ozone.
ULVL = Ultraviolet light.
OTHD = All other types of disinfectant/oxidant.
NODU = No disinfectant/oxidant used.
11. Treatment InformationTreatment information associated with the sample point. Please select all that apply.
CON = Conventional (non-softening, consisting of at least coagulation/sedimentation basins and filtration).
SFN = Softening.
RBF = River bank filtration.
PSD = Pre-sedimentation.
INF = In-line filtration.
DFL = Direct filtration.
SSF = Slow sand filtration.
BIO = Biological filtration (operated with an intention of maintaining biological activity within filter).
UTR = Unfiltered treatment for surface water source.
GWD = Groundwater system with disinfection only.
PAC = Application of powder activated carbon.
GAC = Granular activated carbon adsorption (not part of filters in CON, SFN, INF, DFL, or SSF).
AIR = Air stripping (packed towers, diffused gas contactors).
POB = Pre-oxidation with chlorine (applied before coagulation for CON or SFN plants or before filtration for other filtration plants).
MFL = Membrane filtration.
IEX = Ionic exchange.
DAF = Dissolved air floatation.
CWL = Clear well/finished water storage without aeration.
CWA = Clear well/finished water storage with aeration.
ADS = Aeration in distribution system (localized treatment).
OTH = All other types of treatment.
NTU = No treatment used.
DKN = Do not know.
12. Sample Collection DateThe date the sample is collected, reported as 4-digit year, 2-digit month, and 2-digit day (YYYYMMDD).
13. Sample Identification CodeAn alphanumeric value up to 30 characters assigned by the laboratory to uniquely identify containers, or groups of containers, containing water samples collected at the same sampling location for the same sampling date.
14. ContaminantThe unregulated contaminant for which the sample is being analyzed.
15. Analytical Method CodeThe identification code of the analytical method used.
16. Extraction Batch Identification CodeLaboratory assigned extraction batch ID. Must be unique for each extraction batch within the laboratory for each method. For CCC samples report the Analysis Batch Identification Code as the value for this field. For methods without an extraction batch, leave this field null.
17. Extraction DateDate for the start of the extraction batch (YYYYMMDD). For methods without an extraction batch, leave this field null.
18. Analysis Batch Identification CodeLaboratory assigned analysis batch ID. Must be unique for each analysis batch within the laboratory for each method.
19. Analysis DateDate for the start of the analysis batch (YYYYMMDD).
20. Sample Analysis TypeThe type of sample collected and/or prepared, as well as the fortification level. Permitted values include: CCCL = MRL level continuing calibration check; a calibration standard containing the contaminant, the internal standard, and surrogate analyzed to verify the existing calibration for those contaminants.
CCCM = Medium level continuing calibration check; a calibration standard containing the contaminant, the internal standard, and surrogate analyzed to verify the existing calibration for those contaminants.
CCCH = High level continuing calibration check; a calibration standard containing the contaminant, the internal standard, and surrogate analyzed to verify the existing calibration for those contaminants.
FS = Field sample; sample collected and submitted for analysis under this final rule.
LFB = Laboratory fortified blank; an aliquot of reagent water fortified with known quantities of the contaminants and all preservation compounds.
LRB = Laboratory reagent blank; an aliquot of reagent water treated exactly as a field sample, including the addition of preservatives, internal standards, and surrogates to determine if interferences are present in the laboratory, reagents, or other equipment.
LFSM = Laboratory fortified sample matrix; a UCMR field sample with a known amount of the contaminant of interest and all preservation compounds added.
LFSMD = Laboratory fortified sample matrix duplicate; duplicate of the laboratory fortified sample matrix.
QCS = Quality control sample; a sample prepared with a source external to the one used for initial calibration and CCC. The QCS is used to check calibration standard integrity.
FRB = Field reagent blank; an aliquot of reagent water treated as a sample including exposure to sampling conditions to determine if interferences or contamination are present from sample collection through analysis.
21. Analytical Result—SignA value indicating whether the sample analysis result was: (<) “less than” means the contaminant was not detected, or was detected at a level below the Minimum Reporting Level. (=) “equal to” means the contaminant was detected at the level reported in “Analytical Result— Measured Value.”
22. Analytical Result—Measured ValueThe actual numeric value of the analytical results for: Field samples; laboratory fortified matrix samples; laboratory fortified sample matrix duplicates; and concentration fortified.
23. Additional ValueRepresents the true value or the fortified concentration for spiked samples for QC Sample Analysis Types (CCCL, CCCM, CCCH, QCS, LFB, LFSM, and LFSMD).
24. Laboratory Identification CodeThe code, assigned by EPA, used to identify each laboratory. The code begins with the standard two-character State postal abbreviation; the remaining five numbers are unique to each laboratory in the State.
25. Sample Event CodeA code assigned by the PWS for each sample event. This will associate samples with the PWS monitoring plan to allow EPA to track compliance and completeness. Systems must assign the following codes:
SE1, SE2, SE3, and SE4—Represent samples collected to meet UCMR Assessment Monitoring requirements; where “SE1” and “SE2” represent the first and second sampling period for all water types; and “SE3” and “SE4” represent the third and fourth sampling period for SW, GU, and MX sources only.
26. Historical Information for Contaminant Detections and TreatmentA yes or no answer provided by the PWS for each entry point to the distribution system. Question: Have you tested for the contaminant in your drinking water in the past? YES = If yes, did you modify your treatment and if so, what types of treatment did you implement? Select all that apply.
PAC = Application of powder activated carbon.
GAC = Granular activated carbon adsorption (not part of filters in CON, SFN, INF, DFL, or SSF).
IEX = Ionic exchange.
NRO = Nanofiltration and reverse osmosis.
OZN = Ozone.
BAC = Biologically active carbon.
MFL = Membrane filtration.
UVL = Ultraviolet light.
OTH = Other.
NMT = Not modified after testing.
NO = Have never tested for the contaminant.
DK = Do not know.
27. Potential PFAS SourcesA yes or no answer provided by the PWS for each entry point to the distribution system. Question: Are you aware of any potential current and/or historical sources of PFAS that may have impacted the drinking water sources at your water system?
YES = If yes, select all that apply:
MB = Military base.
FT = Firefighting training school.
AO = Airport operations.
CW = Car wash or industrial launderers.
PS = Public safety activities ( e.g., fire and rescue services).
WM = Waste management.
HW = Hazardous waste collection, treatment, and disposal.
UW = Underground injection well.
SC = Solid waste collection, combustors, incinerators.
MF = Manufacturing.
FP = Food packaging.
TA = Textile and apparel ( e.g., stain- and water-resistant, fiber/thread, carpet, house furnishings, leather).
PP = Paper.
CC = Chemical.
PR = Plastics and rubber products.
MM = Machinery.
CE = Computer and electronic products.
FM = Fabricated metal products (e.g., nonstick cookware).
PC = Petroleum and coal products.
FF = Furniture.
OG = Oil and gas production.
UT = Utilities (e.g ., sewage treatment facilities).
CT = Construction (e.g ., wood floor finishing, electrostatic painting).
OT = Other.
NO = Not aware of any potential current and/or historical sources.
DK = Do not know.

Subpart E—Special Regulations, Including Monitoring Regulations and Prohibition on Lead Use

3. Amend §141.40 as follows:

a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, remove the text “December 31, 2015” and add in its place the text “February 1, 2021 or subsequent corrections from the State”;

b. Revise paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) introductory text, (a)(2)(ii)(A), and (a)(3);

c. In paragraph (a)(4)(i) introductory text, remove the text “December 31, 2017” and add in its place the text “December 31, 2022”;

d. Revise paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(A) through (C), (a)(4)(ii) introductory text, and the first sentence in paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(A);

e. Remove paragraph (a)(4)(iii);

f. In paragraph (a)(5)(ii), revise the fifth and sixth sentences;

g. Revise paragraph (a)(5)(iii) introductory text;

h. Remove and reserve paragraph (a)(5)(iv); and

i. Revise paragraphs (a)(5)(v) and (vi) and paragraph (c).

The revisions read as follows:

§141.40 Monitoring requirements for unregulated contaminants.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) Small systems. EPA will provide sample containers, provide pre-paid air bills for shipping the sampling materials, conduct the laboratory analysis, and report and review monitoring results for all small systems selected to conduct monitoring under paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section. If you own or operate a PWS (other than a transient non-community water system) that serves a retail population of 10,000 or fewer people and you are notified of monitoring requirements by the State or EPA, you must monitor as follows:

(A) Assessment Monitoring. You must monitor for the contaminants on List 1 per table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) if you are notified by your State or EPA that you are part of the State Monitoring Plan for Assessment Monitoring.

* * * * *

(3) Analytes to be monitored. Lists 1, 2, and 3 contaminants are provided in table 1 to paragraph (a)(3):

Table 1 to Paragraph(a)(3)—UCMR Contaminant List
1—Contaminant2—CASRN3—Analytical methods a4—Minimum reporting level b5—Sampling location c6—Period during which sample collection to be completed
Column headings are:
1—Contaminant: The name of the contaminant to be analyzed.
2—CASRN (Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number) or Identification Number: A unique number identifying the chemical contaminants.
3—Analytical Methods: Method numbers identifying the methods that must be used to test the contaminants.
4—Minimum Reporting Level (MRL): The value and unit of measure at or above which the concentration of the contaminant must be measured using the approved analytical methods. If EPA determines, after the first six months of monitoring that the specified MRLs result in excessive resampling, EPA will establish alternate MRLs and will notify affected PWSs and laboratories of the new MRLs. N/A is defined as non-applicable.
5—Sampling Location: The locations within a PWS at which samples must be collected.
6—Period During Which Sample Collection to be Completed: The time period during which the sampling and testing will occur for the indicated contaminant.
a The analytical procedures shall be performed in accordance with the documents associated with each method, see paragraph (c) of this section.
b The MRL is the minimum concentration of each analyte that must be reported to EPA.
c Sampling must occur at your PWS's entry points to the distribution system (EPTDSs), after treatment is applied, that represent each non-emergency water source in routine use over the 12-month period of monitoring. Systems that purchase water with multiple connections from the same wholesaler may select one representative connection from that wholesaler. The representative EPTDS must be a location within the purchaser's water system. This EPTDS sampling location must be representative of the highest annual volume connections. If the connection selected as the representative EPTDS is not available for sampling, an alternate highest volume representative connection must be sampled. See 40 CFR 141.35(c)(3) for an explanation of the requirements related to the use of representative GW EPTDSs.
List 1: Assessment Monitoring
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)
11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfonic acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS)763051-92-9EPA 5330.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecane sulfonic acid (8:2 FTS)39108-34-4EPA 5330.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (4:2 FTS)757124-72-4EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (6:2 FTS)27619-97-2EPA 5330.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
4,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA)919005-14-4EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanone-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS)756426-58-1EPA 5330.002 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA) (GenX)13252-13-6EPA 5330.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
nonafluoro‐3,6‐dioxaheptanoic acid (NFDHA)151772-58-6EPA 5330.02 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoro (2‐ethoxyethane) sulfonic acid (PFEESA)113507-82-7EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoro‐3‐methoxypropanoic acid (PFMPA)377-73-1EPA 5330.004 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoro‐4‐methoxybutanoic acid (PFMBA)863090-89-5EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS)375-73-5EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA)375-22-4EPA 5330.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA)335-76-2EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA)307-55-1EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid (PFHpS)375-92-8EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA)375-85-9EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS)355-46-4EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA)307-24-4EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)375-95-1EPA 5330.004 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)1763-23-1EPA 5330.004 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)335-67-1EPA 5330.004 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoropentanesulfonic acid (PFPeS)2706-91-4EPA 5330.004 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA)2706-90-3EPA 5330.003 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA)2058-94-8EPA 5330.002 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
n-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA)2991-50-6EPA 537.10.005 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA)2355-31-9EPA 537.10.006 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA)376-06-7EPA 537.10.008 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA)72629-94-8EPA 537.10.007 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
Metal/Pharmaceutical
Lithium7439-93-2EPA 200.7, SM 3120 B, ASTM D1976-209 µg/LEPTDS1/1/2023-12/31/2025
List 2: Screening Survey
ReservedReservedReservedReservedReservedReserved
List 3: Pre-Screen Testing
ReservedReservedReservedReservedReservedReserved

(4) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) Sample collection period. You must collect the samples in one continuous 12-month period for List 1 Assessment Monitoring, and, if applicable, for List 2 Screening Survey, or List 3 Pre-Screen Testing, during the timeframe indicated in column 6 of table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) of this section. EPA or your State will specify the month(s) and year(s) in which your monitoring must occur. As specified in 40 CFR 141.35(c)(5), you must contact EPA if you believe you cannot collect samples according to your schedule.

(B) Frequency. You must collect the samples within the timeframe and according to the frequency specified by contaminant type and water source type for each sampling location, as specified in table 2 to this paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B). For the second or subsequent round of sampling, if a sample location is non-operational for more than one month before and one month after the scheduled sampling month ( i.e., it is not possible for you to sample within the window specified in table 2), you must notify EPA as specified in 40 CFR 141.35(c)(5) to reschedule your sampling.

Table 2 to Paragraph ( )(4)( )(B)—Monitoring Frequency by Contaminant and Water Source Types
Contaminant typeWater source typeTimeframeFrequency 1
1 Systems must assign a sample event code for each contaminant listed in Table 1. Sample event codes must be assigned by the PWS for each sample event. For more information on sample event codes see 40 CFR 141.35(e) Table 1.
List 1 ContaminantsSurface water, Mixed, or GWUDI12 monthsYou must monitor for four consecutive quarters. Sample events must occur three months apart. (Example: If first monitoring is in January, the second monitoring must occur any time in April, the third any time in July, and the fourth any time in October).
Ground water12 monthsYou must monitor twice in a consecutive 12-month period. Sample events must occur 5-7 months apart. (Example: If the first monitoring event is in April, the second monitoring event must occur any time in September, October, or November.)

(C) Location. You must collect samples for each List 1 Assessment Monitoring contaminant, and, if applicable, for each List 2 Screening Survey, or List 3 Pre-Screen Testing contaminant, as specified in table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) of this section. Samples must be collected at each sample point that is specified in column 5 and footnote c of table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) of this section. If you are a GW system with multiple EPTDSs, and you request and receive approval from EPA or the State for sampling at representative EPTDS(s), as specified in 40 CFR 141.35(c)(3), you must collect your samples from the approved representative sampling location(s).

* * * * *

(ii) Small systems. If you serve a population of 10,000 or fewer people and are notified that you are part of the State Monitoring Plan, you must comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)(A) through (H) of this section. If EPA or the State informs you that they will be collecting your UCMR samples, you must assist them in identifying the appropriate sampling locations and in collecting the samples.

(A) Sample collection and frequency. You must collect samples at the times specified for you by the State or EPA. Your schedule must follow both the timing of monitoring specified in table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) of this section, List 1, and, if applicable, List 2, or List 3, and the frequency of monitoring in table 2 to paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) of this section.

* * * * *

(5) * * *

(ii) * * * To participate in the UCMR Laboratory Approval Program, the laboratory must register and complete the necessary application materials by August 1, 2022. Correspondence must be addressed to: UCMR Laboratory Approval Coordinator, USEPA, Technical Support Center, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, (MS 140), Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; or emailed to EPA at: UCMR_Lab_Approval@epa.gov.

(iii) Minimum Reporting Level. The MRL is defined by EPA as the quantitation limit achievable, with 95 percent confidence, by 75 percent of laboratories nationwide, assuming the use of good instrumentation and experienced analysts.

* * * * *

(v) Method defined quality control. You must ensure that your laboratory analyzes Laboratory Fortified Blanks and conducts Laboratory Performance Checks, as appropriate to the method's requirements, for those methods listed in column 3 in table 1 to paragraph (a)(3) of this section. Each method specifies acceptance criteria for these QC checks.

(vi) Reporting. You must require your laboratory, on your behalf, to post and approve these data in EPA's electronic data reporting system, accessible at https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr, for your review within 90 days from the sample collection date. You then have 30 days from when the laboratory posts and approves your data to review, approve, and submit the data to the State and EPA, via the agency's electronic data reporting system. If you do not electronically approve and submit the laboratory data to EPA within 30 days of the laboratory posting approved data, the data will be considered approved by you and available for State and EPA review.

* * * * *

(c) Incorporation by reference. The standards required in this section are incorporated by reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved material is available for inspection at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20004, (202) 566-1744, email Docket-customerservice@epa.gov, or go to https://www.epa.gov/dockets/epa-docket-center-reading-room, and is available from the sources indicated elsewhere in this paragraph. The material is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

(1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20004; telephone: (202) 566-1744.

(i) Method 200.7, “Determination of Metals and Trace Elements in Water and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry,” Revision 4.4, EMMC Version, 1994. Available at https://www.epa.gov/esam/method-2007-determination-metals-and-trace-elements-water-and-wastes-inductively-coupled-plasma.

(ii) Method 537.1, “Determination of Selected Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” Version 2.0, 2020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.

(iii) Method 533, “Determination of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Drinking Water by Isotope Dilution Anion Exchange Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” November 2019, EPA 815-B-19-020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods.

(2) American Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20001-3710; telephone: (202) 777-2742; email: comments@apha.org; www.apha.org.

(i) “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater,” 23rd edition (2017).

(A) SM 3120 B, “Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy (2017): Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method.”

(B) [Reserved]

(ii) “Standard Methods Online,” approved 1999; https://www.standardmethods.org.

(A) SM 3120 B, “Metals by Plasma Emission Spectroscopy: Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Method,” revised December 14, 2020.

(B) [Reserved]

(3) ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959; telephone: (610) 832-9500; email: service@astm.org; www.astm.org.

(i) ASTM D1976-20, “Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy,” approved May 1, 2020.

(ii) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2021-27858 Filed 12-23-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

2024-05-13T05:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: NESHAP for Primary Copper Smelting

This action finalizes the residual risk and technology review (RTR) conducted for the Primary Copper Smelting major source category regulated under national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP). This action also finalizes the technology review for the Primary Copper Smelting area source NESHAP. The final amendments for the major source NESHAP include particulate matter (PM) emission standards as a surrogate for metal hazardous air pollutants (HAP) other than mercury (primarily lead and arsenic) for anode refining point sources, process fugitive emissions from roofline vents, Hoboken converter process fugitive capture systems where they combine with anode refining point sources, and new converters. We are also finalizing emission standards for previously unregulated HAP including mercury, benzene, toluene, hydrogen chloride (HCl), chlorine, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and dioxins and furans (D/F). In addition, we are taking final action in the major source NESHAP to establish work practice standards for bypass stacks, and add a new emissions limit for lead and emissions control design standards to minimize process fugitive emissions at facilities with flash furnaces and Peirce-Smith converters. Final amendments for both the major source NESHAP and the area source NESHAP include removing exemptions and associated provisions for periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM), specifying that the emission standards apply at all times, and requiring electronic reporting of performance test results and notification of compliance reports.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 13, 2024, except for changes to §63.14, which are effective July 15, 2024. This final rule is published in the Federal Register May 13, 2024, page 41648.

View final rule.

§63.14 Incorporations by reference.
(f)(1) and (i)(95), (105), and (110)RevisedView text
(o)AddedView text
§63.14 Incorporations by reference. (Effective July 15, 20240
(f)(1) and (i)(110)RevisedView text
(o) RevisedView text
Subpart QQQ - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Copper Smelting
Entire subpartRevisedView text
§63.11147 What are the standards and compliance requirements for existing sources not using batch copper converters?
(b)(6), (c)(1) and (5), (d), and (e)RevisedView text
§63.11148 What are the standards and compliance requirements for existing sources using batch copper converters?
(a)(1), (a)(3)(ii), (a)(4)(iv), (b)(1), (b)(2)(i), (b)(4), (c)(2) and (4), (e)(3), (f)(1), (f)(4)(ii) and (iii), (f)(5), (g), and (h)RevisedView text
§63.11149 What are the standards and compliance requirements for new sources?
Entire sectionRevisedView text
§63.11151 What definitions apply to this subpart?
definition “Blowing”AddedView text
definition “Capture system”RevisedView text
§63.11152 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(c) introductory textRevisedView text
undesignated paragraph after paragraph (c)(5)RemovedView text
(c)(6)AddedView text
Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63 - Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart EEEEEE
Entire tableRevisedView text

New Text

§63.14 Incorporations by reference. (Effective July 15, 20240

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus], issued August 31, 1981, IBR approved for §§63.116(c); 63.116 and (h); 63.128(a); 63.145(i); 63.309(k); 63.365(b); 63.457(k); 63.490(g); 63.772(e) and (h); 63.865(b); 63.997(e); 63.1282(d) and (g); 63.1450(a), (b), and (e) through (g); 63.1625(b); table 5 to subpart EEEE; §§63.3166(a); 63.3360(e); 63.3545(a); 63.3555(a); 63.4166(a); 63.4362(a); 63.4766(a); 63.4965(a); 63.5160(d); table 4 to subpart UUUU; table 3 to subpart YYYY; §§63.7822(b); 63.7824(e); 63.7825(b); 63.8000(d); 63.9307(c); 63.9323(a); 63.9621(b) and (c); 63.11148(e); 63.11155(e); 63.11162(f); 63.11163(g); 63.11410(j); 63.11551(a); 63.11646(a); 63.11945; table 4 to subpart AAAAA; table 5 to subpart DDDDD; table 4 to subpart JJJJJ; table 4 to subpart KKKKK; table 4 to subpart SSSSS; tables 4 and 5 to subpart UUUUU; table 1 to subpart ZZZZZ; table 4 to subpart JJJJJJ.

* * * * *

(i) * * *

(110) ASTM D7520-16, Standard Test Method for Determining the Opacity of a Plume in the Outdoor Ambient Atmosphere, approved April 1, 2016; IBR approved for §§63.1450(c), (e), and (g); 63.1453(h); 63.1625(b); table 3 to subpart LLLLL; §§63.7823(c) through (f), 63.7833(g); 63.11423(c).

* * * * *

(o) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 272-0167, http://www.epa.gov.

(1) EPA/100/R-10/005, Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of 2, 3, 7, 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds, December 2010; IBR approved for §63.1459 and table 2 to subpart QQQ. (Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2013-09/documents/tefs-for-dioxin-epa-00-r-10-005-final.pdf).

(2) EPA-453/R-08-002, Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Primer-Surfacer and Topcoat, published September 2008, IBR approved for §§63.3130(c), 63.3161(d) and (g), 63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart IIII.

(3) EPA-453/R-01-005, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Integrated Iron and Steel Plants - Background Information for Proposed Standards, Final Report, January 2001, IBR approved for §63.7491(g).

(4) EPA-454/B-08-002, Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems; Volume IV: Meteorological Measurements, Version 2.0 (Final), Issued March 2008, IBR approved for §63.7792(b).

(5) EPA-454/R-98-015, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance, September 1997, https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=2000D5T6.PDF, IBR approved for §§63.548(e), 63.864(e), 63.7525(j), 63.8450(e), 63.8600(e), 63.9632(a), 63.9804(f), and 63.11224(f).

(6) EPA-454/R-99-005, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Meteorological Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications, February 2000, IBR approved for appendix A to this part: Method 325A.

(7) EPA/600/R-12/531, EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards, May 2012, IBR approved for §63.2163(b).

(8) EPA-625/3-89-016, Interim Procedures for Estimating Risks Associated with Exposures to Mixtures of Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and -Dibenzofurans (CDDs and CDFs) and 1989 Update, March 1989. IBR approved for §63.1513(d).

(9) SW-846-0011, Sampling for Selected Aldehyde and Ketone Emissions from Stationary Sources, Revision 0, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 4 to subpart DDDD.

(10) SW-846-3020A, Acid Digestion of Aqueous Samples And Extracts For Total Metals For Analysis By GFAA Spectroscopy, Revision 1, July 1992, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD and table 5 to subpart JJJJJJ.

(11) SW-846-3050B, Acid Digestion of Sediments, Sludges, and Soils, Revision 2, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD and table 5 to subpart JJJJJJ.

(12) SW-846-5030B, Purge-And-Trap For Aqueous Samples, Revision 2, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §63.2492(b) and (c).

(13) SW-846-5031, Volatile, Nonpurgeable, Water-Soluble Compounds by Azeotropic Distillation, Revision 0, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §63.2492(b) and (c).

(14) SW-846-8015C, Nonhalogenated Organics by Gas Chromatography, Revision 3, February 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §§63.11960, 63.11980, and table 10 to subpart HHHHHHH.

(15) SW-846-8260B, Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), Revision 2, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §§63.1107(a), 63.11960, 63.11980, and table 10 to subpart HHHHHHH.

(16) SW-846-8270D, Semivolatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), Revision 4, February 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §§63.1107(a), 63.11960, 63.11980, and table 10 to subpart HHHHHHH.

(17) SW-846-8315A, Determination of Carbonyl Compounds by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), Revision 1, December 1996, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §§63.11960 and 63.11980, and table 10 to subpart HHHHHHH.

(18) SW-846-8260D, Volatile Organic Compounds By Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, Revision 4, June 2018, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for §63.2492(b) and (c).

(19) SW-846-6010C, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry, Revision 3, February 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(20) SW-846-6020A, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry, Revision 1, February 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(21) SW-846-7060A, Arsenic (Atomic Absorption, Furnace Technique), Revision 1, September 1994, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(22) SW-846-7740, Selenium (Atomic Absorption, Furnace Technique), Revision 0, September 1986, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(23) SW-846-9056, Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion Chromatography, Revision 1, February 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(24) SW-846-9076, Test Method for Total Chlorine in New and Used Petroleum Products by Oxidative Combustion and Microcoulometry, Revision 0, September 1994, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(25) SW-846-9250, Chloride (Colorimetric, Automated Ferricyanide AAI), Revision 0, September 1986, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(26) Method 200.8, Determination of Trace Elements in Waters and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry, Revision 5.4, 1994, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(27) Method 1631 Revision E, Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Fluorescence Spectrometry, Revision E, EPA-821-R-02-019, August 2002, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(28) SW-846-9250, Chloride (Colorimetric, Automated Ferricyanide AAI), Revision 0, September 1986, in EPA Publication No. SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Third Edition, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(29) Method 200.8, Determination of Trace Elements in Waters and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma—Mass Spectrometry, Revision 5.4, 1994, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(30) Method 1631 Revision E, Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Fluorescence Spectrometry, Revision E, EPA-821-R-02-019, August 2002, IBR approved for table 6 to subpart DDDDD.

(31) EPA/100/R-10/005, Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of 2, 3, 7, 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds, December 2010; IBR approved for §63.1459 and table 2 to subpart QQQ. (Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2013-09/documents/tefs-for-dioxin-epa-00-r-10-005-final.pdf.)

* * * * *

Previous Text

§63.14 Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus], issued August 31, 1981; IBR approved for §§63.309(k); 63.365(b); 63.457(k); 63.772(e) and (h); 63.865(b); 63.997(e); 63.1282(d) and (g); 63.1625(b); table 5 to subpart EEEE; §§63.3166(a); 63.3360(e); 63.3545(a); 63.3555(a); 63.4166(a); 63.4362(a); 63.4766(a); 63.4965(a); 63.5160(d); table 4 to subpart UUUU; table 3 to subpart YYYY; §§63.7822(b); 63.7824(e); 63.7825(b); 63.8000(d); 63.9307(c); 63.9323(a); 63.9621(b) and (c); 63.11148(e); 63.11155(e); 63.11162(f); 63.11163(g); 63.11410(j); 63.11551(a); 63.11646(a); 63.11945; table 4 to subpart AAAAA; table 5 to subpart DDDDD; table 4 to subpart JJJJJ; table 4 to subpart KKKKK; table 4 to subpart SSSSS; tables 4 and 5 of subpart UUUUU; table 1 to subpart ZZZZZ; and table 4 to subpart JJJJJJ.

* * * * *

(i) * * *

(95) ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2010), Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, Approved October 1, 2010, IBR approved for §§63.670(j), Table 4 to subpart UUUU, 63.7142(b), and appendix A to this part: Method 325B.

* * * * *

(105) ASTM D6784–16, Standard Test Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), Approved March 1, 2016; IBR approved for §§63.9621(d); table 5 to subpart UUUUU; appendix A to subpart UUUUU.

* * * * *

(110) ASTM D7520-16, Standard Test Method for Determining the Opacity of a Plume in the Outdoor Ambient Atmosphere, approved April 1, 2016; IBR approved for §§63.1625(b); table 3 to subpart LLLLL; 63.7823(c) through (e), 63.7833(g); 63.11423(c).

* * * * *

Subpart QQQ - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Copper Smelting

§63.1440 What is the purpose of this subpart?

This subpart establishes national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for primary copper smelters. This subpart also establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with all applicable emission limitations, work practice standards, and operation and maintenance requirements in this subpart.

§63.1441 Am I subject to this subpart?

You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a primary copper smelter that is (or is part of) a major source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions and your primary copper smelter uses batch copper converters as defined in §63.1459. Your primary copper smelter is a major source of HAP if it emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at the rate of 10 tons or more per year or any combination of HAP at a rate of 25 tons or more per year.

§63.1442 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

(a) This subpart applies to each new and existing affected source at your primary copper smelter. The affected sources are each copper concentrate dryer, each smelting furnace, each slag cleaning vessel, each copper converter department, and the entire group of fugitive emission sources, as defined in §63.1459.

(b) An affected source at your primary copper smelter is existing if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source before April 20, 1998.

(c) An affected source at your primary copper smelter is new if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source on or after April 20, 1998. An affected source is reconstructed if it meets the definition of “reconstruction” in §63.2.

§63.1443 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

(a) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you no later than June 13, 2005.

(b) If you have a new affected source and its initial startup date is on or before June 12, 2002, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you by June 12, 2002.

(c) If you have a new affected source and its initial startup date is after June 12, 2002, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you upon initial startup.

(d) If your primary copper smelter is an area source that becomes a major source of HAP, the compliance dates listed in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section apply to you.

(1) Any portion of the existing primary copper smelter that is a new affected source or a new reconstructed source must be in compliance with this subpart upon startup.

(2) All other parts of the primary copper smelter must be in compliance with this subpart no later than 3 years after it becomes a major source.

(e) You must meet the notification and schedule requirements in §63.1454. Several of these notifications must be submitted before the compliance date for your affected source.

§63.1444 What emissions limitations and work practice standards must I meet for my copper concentrate dryers, smelting furnaces, slag cleaning vessels, and copper converter departments?

(a) Copper concentrate dryers. For each copper concentrate dryer, you must comply with the emission limitation in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that applies to you.

(1) For each existing copper concentrate dryer, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from the dryer vent any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 50 milligrams per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(2) For each new copper concentrate dryer, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from the dryer vent any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 23 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(b) Smelting furnaces. For each smelting furnace, you must comply with the emission limitations and work practice standards in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) For each smelting furnace, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere any process off-gas that contains nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in excess of 6.2 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(b). Process off-gas from a smelting furnace is generated when copper ore concentrates and fluxes are being smelted to form molten copper matte and slag layers.

(2) For each smelting furnace, you must control the process fugitive emissions released when tapping copper matte or slag from the smelting furnace according to paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) At all times when copper matte or slag is tapped from the smelting furnace, you must operate a capture system that collects the gases and fumes released from the tapping port in use. The design and placement of this capture system must be such that the tapping port opening, launder, and receiving vessel (e.g., ladle, slag pot) are positioned within the confines or influence of the capture system's ventilation draft during those times when the copper matte or slag is flowing from the tapping port opening.

(ii) You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from the capture system used to comply with paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 23 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(c) Slag cleaning vessels. For each slag cleaning vessel, you must comply with the emission limitations and work practice standards in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section that apply to you.

(1) For each slag cleaning vessel, except as provided for in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere any process off-gas that contains nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in excess of 6.2 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(b).

(2) As an alternative to complying with the emission limit for nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, for each existing slag cleaning vessel you may choose to comply with the emission limit for total particulate matter specified in this paragraph (c)(2). You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere any process off-gas that contains total particulate matter in excess of 46 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(3) For each slag cleaning vessel, you must control process fugitive emissions released when tapping copper matte or slag from the slag cleaning vessel according to paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) At all times when copper matte or slag is tapped from the slag cleaning vessel, you must operate a capture system that collects the gases and fumes released from the tapping port in use. The design and placement of this capture system must be such that the tapping port opening, launder, and receiving vessel (e.g., ladle, slag pot) are positioned within the confines or influence of the capture system's ventilation draft during those times when the copper matte or slag is flowing from the tapping port opening.

(ii) You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from the capture system used to comply with paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 23 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(d) Existing copper converter departments. For each existing copper converter department, you must comply with the emission limitations and work practice standards in paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this section that apply to you.

(1) You must operate a capture system that collects the process off gas vented from each batch copper converter. At all times when one or more batch copper converters are blowing, you must operate the capture system according to the written operation and maintenance plan that has been prepared according to the requirements in §63.1447(b).

(2) If your copper converter department uses Pierce-Smith converters, the capture system design must include use of a primary hood that covers the entire mouth of the converter vessel when the copper converter is positioned for blowing. Additional hoods (e.g., secondary hoods) or other capture devices must be included in the capture system design as needed to achieve the opacity limit in paragraph (d)(4) of this section. The capture system design may use multiple intake and duct segments through which the ventilation rates are controlled independently of each other, and individual duct segments may be connected to separate control devices.

(3) If your copper converter department uses Hoboken converters, the capture system must collect all process off-gas vented during blowing through the side-flue intake on each converter vessel.

(4) You must operate the capture system such that any visible emissions exiting the roof monitors or roof exhaust fans on the building housing the copper converter department meet the opacity limit as specified in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) The opacity of any visible emissions exiting the roof monitors or roof exhaust fans on the building housing the copper converter department must not exceed 4 percent as determined by a performance test conducted according to §63.1450(c).

(ii) The opacity limit in paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section applies only at those times when a performance test is conducted according to §63.1450(c). The requirements for compliance with opacity and visible emission standards specified in §63.6(h) do not apply to this opacity limit.

(5) You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from any Pierce-Smith converter primary hood capture system or Hoboken converter side-flue intake capture system any process off-gas that contains nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in excess of 6.2 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(b).

(6) You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from any secondary capture system any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 23 mg/dscm as measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(e) New copper converter departments. For each new copper converter department for which construction commenced on or after April 20, 1998, the use of batch copper converters is prohibited.

(f) Baghouses. For each baghouse applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, you must operate the baghouse such that the bag leak detection system does not alarm for more than 5 percent of the total operating time in any semiannual reporting period.

(g) Venturi wet scrubbers. For each venturi wet scrubber applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, you must maintain the hourly average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate at or above the minimum levels established during the initial or subsequent performance test.

(h) Other control devices. For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, you must operate the control device as specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) You must select one or more operating parameters, as appropriate for the control device design, that can be used as representative and reliable indicators of the control device operation.

(2) You must maintain the hourly average value for each of the selected parameters at or above the minimum level or at or below the maximum level, as appropriate for the selected parameter, established during the initial or subsequent performance test.

§63.1445 What work practice standards must I meet for my fugitive dust sources?

(a) You must control particulate matter emissions from fugitive dust sources at your primary copper smelter by operating according to a written fugitive dust control plan that has been approved by the designated authority. For the purpose of complying with this paragraph (a) you may use an existing fugitive dust control plan provided that the plan complies with the requirements of this section. A fugitive dust control plan is considered to be approved if the plan has been incorporated in your applicable State implementation plan, and the document addresses the fugitive dust sources specified in paragraph (b) of this section and includes the information specified in paragraph (c) of this section.

(b) Your fugitive dust control plan must address each of the fugitive dust emission sources listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this section that are located at your primary copper smelter.

(1) On-site roadways used by trucks or other motor vehicles (e.g., front-end loaders) when transporting bulk quantities of fugitive dust materials. Paved roads and parking areas that are not used by these vehicles do not need to be included in the plan (e.g., employee and visitor parking lots).

(2) Unloading of fugitive dust materials from trucks or railcars.

(3) Outdoor piles used for storage of fugitive dust materials.

(4) Bedding areas used for blending copper concentrate and other feed constituents.

(5) Each transfer point in conveying systems used to transport fugitive dust materials. These points include, but are not limited to, transfer of material from one conveyor belt to another and transfer of material to a hopper or bin.

(6) Other site-specific sources of fugitive dust emissions that the Administrator or delegated permitting authority designate to be included in your fugitive dust control plan.

(c) Your fugitive dust control plan must describe the control measures you use to control fugitive dust emissions from each source addressed in the plan, as applicable and appropriate for your site conditions. Examples of control measures include, but are not limited to, locating the source inside a building or other enclosure, installing and operating a local hood capture system over the source and venting the captured gas stream to a control device, placing material stockpiles below grade, installing wind screens or wind fences around the source, spraying water on the source as weather conditions require, applying appropriate dust suppression agents on the source, or combinations of these control measures.

(d) The requirement for you to operate according to a written fugitive dust control plan must be incorporated in your operating permit that is issued by the designated permitting authority under part 70 of this chapter. A copy of your fugitive dust control plan must be sent to the designated permitting authority on or before the compliance date for your primary copper smelter, as specified in §63.1443.

§63.1446 What alternative emission limitation may I meet for my combined gas streams?

(a) For situations where you combine gas streams from two or more affected sources for discharge to the atmosphere through a single vent, you may choose to meet the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section as an alternative to complying with the individual total particulate matter emission limits specified in §63.1444 that apply to you. This alternative emission limit for a combined gas stream may be used for any combination of the affected source gas steams specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section.

(1) Gas stream discharged from a copper concentrate dryer vent that would otherwise be subject to §63.1444(a)(1) or (2);

(2) Gas stream discharged from a smelting furnace capture system that would otherwise be subject to §63.1444(b)(2)(ii);

(3) Process off-gas stream discharged from a slag cleaning vessel that would otherwise be subject to §63.1444(c)(2);

(4) Gas stream discharged from a slag cleaning vessel capture system that would otherwise be subject to §63.1444(c)(3)(ii); and

(5) Gas stream discharged from a batch copper converter secondary capture system that would otherwise be subject to §63.1444(d)(5).

(b) You must meet the requirements specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section for the combined gas stream discharged through a single vent.

(1) For each combined gas stream discharged through a single vent, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of the emission limit calculated using the procedure in paragraph (b)(2) of this section and measured using the test methods specified in §63.1450(a).

(2) You must calculate the alternative total particulate matter emission limit for your combined gas stream using Equation 1 of this section. The volumetric flow rate value for each of the individual affected source gas streams that you use for Equation 1 (i.e., the flow rate of the gas stream discharged from the affected source but before this gas stream is combined with the other gas streams) is to be the average of the volumetric flow rates measured using the test method specified in §63.1450(a)(1)(ii):



Where

EAlt = Alternative total particulate matter emission limit for the combined gas stream discharged to atmosphere through a single vent (mg/dscm);

Ed = Total particulate matter emission limit applicable to copper concentrate dryer as specified in §63.1444(a)(1) or (2) (mg/dscm);

Qd = Copper concentrate dryer exhaust gas stream volumetric flow rate before being combined with other gas streams (dscm);

Esv = Total particulate matter emission limit for smelting furnace capture system as specified in §63.1444(b)(2)(ii) (mg/dscm);

Qsv = Smelting furnace capture system exhaust gas stream volumetric flow rate before being combined with other gas streams (dscm);

Escvp = Total particulate matter emission limit for slag cleaning vessel process off-gas as specified in §63.1444(c)(2) (mg/dscm);

Qscvp = Slag cleaning vessel process off-gas volumetric flow rate before being combined with other gas streams (dscm);

Escvf = Total particulate matter emission limit for slag cleaning vessel capture system as specified in §63.1444(c)(3)(ii) (mg/dscm);

Qscvf = Slag cleaning vessel capture system exhaust gas stream volumetric flow rate before being combined with other gas streams (dscm);

Ecc = Total particulate emission limit for the batch copper converter secondary capture system as specified in §63.1544(d)(5) (mg/dscm); and

Qcc = Batch copper converter capture system exhaust gas stream volumetric flow rate before being combined with other gas streams (dscm).

(c) For each baghouse applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraph (b) of this section, you must operate the baghouse such that the bag leak detection system does not alarm for more than 5 percent of the total operating time in any semiannual reporting period.

(d) For each venturi wet scrubber applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraph (b) of this section, you must maintain the hourly average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate at or above the minimum levels established during the initial or subsequent performance test.

(e) For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber applied to meet any total particulate matter emission limit in paragraph (b) of this section, you must operate the control device as specified in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) You must select one or more operating parameters, as appropriate for the control device design, that can be used as representative and reliable indicators of the control device operation.

(2) You must maintain the hourly average value for each of the selected parameters at or above the minimum level or at or below the maximum level, as appropriate for the selected parameter, established during the initial or subsequent performance test.

§63.1447 What are my operation and maintenance requirements?

(a) As required by §63.6(e)(1)(i), you must always operate and maintain your affected source, including air pollution control and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions at least to the levels required by this subpart.

(b) You must prepare and operate at all times according to a written operation and maintenance plan for each capture system and control device subject to standards in §63.1444 or §63.1446. The plan must address the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section as applicable to the capture system or control device.

(1) Preventative maintenance. You must perform preventative maintenance for each capture system and control device according to written procedures specified in your operation and maintenance plan. The procedures must include a preventative maintenance schedule that is consistent with the manufacturer's instructions for routine and long-term maintenance.

(2) Capture system inspections. You must conduct monthly inspections of the equipment components of the capture system that can affect the performance of the system to collect the gases and fumes emitted from the affected source (e.g., hoods, exposed ductwork, dampers, fans) according to written procedures specified in your operation and maintenance plan. The inspection procedure must include the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section as applicable to the capture system or control device.

(i) Observations of the physical appearance of the equipment to confirm the physical integrity of the equipment (e.g., verify by visual inspection no holes in ductwork or hoods, no flow constrictions caused by dents, or accumulated dust in ductwork).

(ii) Inspection, and if necessary testing, of equipment components to confirm that the component is operating as intended (e.g., verify by appropriate measures that flow or pressure sensors, damper plates, automated damper switches and motors are operating according to manufacture or engineering design specifications).

(iii) In the event that a defective or damaged component is detected during an inspection, you must initiate corrective action according to written procedures specified in your operation and maintenance plan to correct the defect or deficiency as soon as practicable.

(3) Copper converter department capture system operating limits. You must establish, according to the requirements in paragraph (b)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section, operating limits for the capture system that are representative and reliable indicators of the performance of capture system when it is used to collect the process off-gas vented from batch copper converters during blowing.

(i) Select operating limit parameters appropriate for the capture system design that are representative and reliable indicators of the performance of the capture system when it is used to collect the process off-gas vented from batch copper converters during blowing. At a minimum, you must use appropriate operating limit parameters that indicate the level of the ventilation draft and the damper position settings for the capture system when operating to collect the process off-gas from the batch copper converters during blowing. Appropriate operating limit parameters for ventilation draft include, but are not limited to, volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood, total volumetric flow rate at the inlet to control device to which the capture system is vented, fan motor amperage, or static pressure. Any parameter for damper position setting may be used that indicates the duct damper position relative to the fully open setting.

(ii) For each operating limit parameter selected in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, designate the value or setting for the parameter at which the capture system operates during batch copper converter blowing. If your blister copper production operations allow for more than one batch copper converter to be operating simultaneously in the blowing mode, designate the value or setting for the parameter at which the capture system operates during each possible batch copper converter blowing configuration that you may operate at your smelter (i.e., the operating limits with one converter blowing, with two converters blowing, with three converters blowing, as applicable to your smelter).

(iii) Include documentation in the plan to support your selection of the operating limits established for the capture system. This documentation must include a description of the capture system design, a description of the capture system operation during blister copper production, a description of each selected operating limit parameter, a rationale for why you chose the parameter, a description of the method used to monitor the parameter according to the requirements in §63.1452(a), and the data used to set the value or setting for the parameter for each of your batch copper converter configurations.

(4) Baghouse leak detection corrective actions. In the event a bag leak detection system alarm is triggered, you must initiate corrective action according to written procedures specified in your operation and maintenance plan to determine the cause of the alarm within 1 hour of the alarm, initiate corrective action to correct the cause of the problem within 24 hours of the alarm, and complete the corrective action as soon as practicable. Corrective actions may include, but are not limited to, the activities listed in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section.

(i) Inspecting the baghouse for air leaks, torn or broken bags or filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in emissions.

(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media.

(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or otherwise repairing the control device.

(iv) Sealing off a defective baghouse compartment.

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe, or otherwise repair the bag leak detection system.

(vi) Shutting down the process producing the particulate emissions.

§63.1448 What are my general requirements for complying with this subpart?

(a) You must be in compliance with the emission limitations, work practice standards, and operation and maintenance requirements in this subpart at all times, except during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction as defined in §63.2.

(b) During the period between the compliance date specified for your affected source in §63.1443, and the date upon which continuous monitoring systems have been installed and certified and any applicable operating limits have been set, you must maintain a log detailing the operation and maintenance of the process and emissions control equipment.

(c) You must develop a written startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan according to the provisions in §63.6(e)(3).

§63.1449 By what dates must I conduct performance tests or other initial compliance demonstrations?

(a) As required in §63.7(a)(2), you must conduct a performance test within 180 calendar days of the compliance date that is specified in §63.1443 for your affected source to demonstrate initial compliance with each emission and opacity limit in §§63.1443 and 63.1446 that applies to you.

(b) For each work practice standard and operation and maintenance requirement that applies to you where initial compliance is not demonstrated using a performance test or opacity observation, you must demonstrate initial compliance within 30 calendar days after the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in §63.1443.

§63.1450 What test methods and other procedures must I use to demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limitations?

(a) Total particulate matter emission limits. You must conduct each performance test to determine compliance with the total particulate matter emission limits in §63.1444 or §63.1446 that apply to you according to the requirements for representative test conditions specified in §63.7(e)(1) and using the test methods and procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section.

(1) Determine the concentration of total particulate matter according to the test methods in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter as specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.

(i) Method 1 to select sampling port locations and the number of traverse points. Sampling ports must be located at the outlet of the control device and prior to any releases to the atmosphere.

(ii) Method 2, 2F, or 2G to determine the volumetric flow rate of the stack gas.

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B to determine the dry molecular weight of the stack gas.

(iv) Method 4 to determine the moisture content of the stack gas.

(v) Method 5, 5D, or 17, as applicable, to determine the concentration of total particulate matter. You can also use ASTM D4536-96 incorporated by reference in §63.14 as an alternative to the sampling equipment and operating procedures in Method 5 or 17 when testing a positive pressure baghouse, but you must use the sample traverse location and number of sampling points described in Method 5D.

(2) As an alternative to using the applicable method specified in paragraph (a)(1)(v) of this section, you may determine total particulate matter emissions from the control device using Method 29 in appendix A of part 60 of this chapter provided that you follow the procedures and precautions prescribed in Method 29. If the control device is a positive pressure baghouse, you must also follow the measurement procedure specified in sections 4.1 through 4.3 of Method 5D.

(3) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance test. Each test run must have a minimum sampling time of 60 minutes and a minimum sampling volume of 0.85 dscm. For the purpose of determining compliance with the applicable total particulate matter emission limit, the arithmetic mean of the results for the three separate test runs is used.

(4) For a venturi wet scrubber applied to emissions from an affected source and subject to operating limits in §63.1444(g) or §63.1446(d) for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate, you must establish site-specific operating limits according to the procedures in paragraph (a)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Using the continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) required in §63.1452, measure and record the pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate during each run of the particulate matter performance test.

(ii) Compute and record the hourly average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate for each individual test run. Your operating limits are the lowest average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate value in any of the three runs that meet the applicable emission limit.

(5) For a control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber applied to emissions from an affected source and subject to site-specific operating limit(s) in §63.1444(h) or §63.1446(e) for appropriate, site-specific operating parameters that are representative and reliable indicators of the control device performance, you must establish a site-specific operating limit(s) according to the procedures in paragraph (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Select one or more operating parameters, as appropriate for the control device design, that can be used as representative and reliable indicators of the control device operation.

(ii) Using the CPMS required in §63.1452, measure and record the selected operating parameters for the control device during each run of the total particulate matter performance test.

(iii) Compute and record the hourly average value for each of the selected operating parameters for each individual test run. Your operating limits are the lowest value or the highest value, as appropriate for the selected operating parameter, measured in any of the three runs that meet the applicable emission limit.

(iv) You must prepare written documentation to support your selection of the operating parameters used for the control device. This documentation must include a description of each selected parameter, a rationale for why you chose the parameter, a description of the method used to monitor the parameter, and the data recorded during the performance test and used to set the operating limit(s).

(b) Nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emission limits. You must conduct each performance test to determine compliance with the nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emission limits in §63.1444 that apply to you according to the requirements for representative test conditions specified in §63.7(e)(1) and using the test methods and procedures in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) Determine the concentration of nonsulfuric acid particulate matter according to the test methods in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter as specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.

(i) Method 1 to select sampling port locations and the number of traverse points. Sampling ports must be located at the outlet of the control device and prior to any releases to the atmosphere.

(ii) Method 2, 2F, or 2G to determine the volumetric flow rate of the stack gas.

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B to determine the dry molecular weight of the stack gas.

(iv) Method 4 to determine the moisture content of the stack gas.

(v) Method 5B to determine the nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emissions.

(2) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance test. Each test run must have a minimum sampling time of 240 minutes and a minimum sampling volume of 3.4 dscm. For the purpose of determining compliance with the nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emission limit, the arithmetic mean of the results for the three separate test runs is used.

(c) Copper converter department capture system opacity limit. You must conduct each performance test to determine compliance with the opacity limit in §63.1444 using the test methods and procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) through (9) of this section.

(1) You must conduct the performance test during the period when the primary copper smelter is operating under conditions representative of the smelter's normal blister copper production rate. You may not conduct a performance test during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction. Before conducting the performance test, you must prepare a written test plan specifying the copper production conditions to be maintained throughout the opacity observation period and including a copy of the written documentation you have prepared according to paragraph (a)(3) of this section to support the established operating limits for the copper converter department capture system. You must submit a copy of the test plan for review and approval by the Administrator or delegated authority. During the observation period, you must collect appropriate process information and copper converter department capture system operating information to prepare documentation sufficient to verify that all opacity observations were made during the copper production and capture system operating conditions specified in the approved test plan.

(2) You must notify the Administrator or delegated authority before conducting the opacity observations to allow the Administrator or delegated authority the opportunity to have authorized representatives attend the test. Written notification of the location and scheduled date for conducting the opacity observations must be received by the Administrator on or before 30 calendar days before this scheduled date.

(3) You must gather the data needed for determining compliance with the opacity limit using qualified visible emission observers and process monitors as described in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Opacity observations must be performed by a sufficient number of qualified visible emission observers to obtain two complete concurrent sets of opacity readings for the required observation period. Each visible emission observer must be certified as a qualified observer by the procedure specified in section 3 of Method 9 in appendix A of part 60 of this chapter. The entire set of readings during the required observation period does not need to be made by the same two observers. More than two observers may be used to allow for substitutions and provide for observer rest breaks. The owner or operator must obtain proof of current visible emission reading certification for each observer.

(ii) A person (or persons) familiar with the copper production operations conducted at the smelter must serve as the indoor process monitor. The indoor process monitor is stationed at a location inside the building housing the batch copper converters such that he or she can visually observe and record operations that occur in the batch copper converter aisle during the times that the visible emission observers are making opacity readings. More than one indoor process monitor may be used to allow for substitutions and provide for rest breaks.

(4) You must make all opacity observations using Method 9 in appendix A to part 60 of this chapter and following the procedures described in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Each visible emission observer must make his or her readings at a position from the outside of the building that houses the copper converter department such that the observer's line-of-sight is approximately perpendicular to the longer axis of the converter building, and the observer has an unobstructed view of the building roof monitor sections or roof exhaust fan outlets that are positioned over each of the batch copper converters inside the building. Opacity readings can only be made during those times when the observer's position meets the sun orientation and other conditions specified in section 2.1 of Method 9.

(ii) At 15-second intervals, each visible emission observer views the building roof monitor sections or roof exhaust fan outlets that are positioned over each of the batch copper converters inside the building and reads the opacity of the visible plumes. If no plume is visible, the observer records zero as the opacity value for the 15-second interval. In situations when it is possible for an observer to distinguish two or more visible emission plumes from the building roof monitor sections or roof exhaust fan outlets, the observer must identify, to the extent feasible, the plume having the highest opacity and record his or her opacity reading for that plume as the opacity value for the 15-second interval.

(5) You must make opacity observations for a period of sufficient duration to obtain a minimum of 120 1-minute intervals during which at least one copper converter is blowing and no interferences have occurred from other copper production events, as specified in paragraph (c)(7) of this section, which generate visible emissions inside the building that potentially can interfere with the visible emissions from the converter capture systems as seen by the outside observers. To obtain the required number of 1-minute intervals, the observation period may be divided into two or more segments performed on the same day or on different days if conditions prevent the required number of opacity readings from being obtained during one continuous time period. Examples of these conditions include, but are not limited to, changes in the sun's orientation relative to visible emission observers' positions such that the Method 9 conditions are no longer met or an unexpected thunder storm. If the total observation period is divided into two or more segments, all opacity observations must be made during the same set of copper production conditions described in your approved test plan as required by paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

(6) You must gather indoor process information during all times that the visible emission observers are making opacity readings outside the building housing the copper converter department. The indoor process monitor must continually observe the operations occurring in the copper converter department and prepare a written record of his or her observations using the procedure specified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) At the beginning of each observation period or segment, the clock time setting on the watch or clock to be used by the indoor process monitor must be synchronized with the clock time settings for the timepieces to be used by the outdoor opacity observers.

(ii) During each period or segment when opacity readings are being made by the visible emission observers, the indoor process monitor must continuously observe the operations occurring in the copper converter department and record his or her observations in a log book, on data sheets, or other type of permanent written format.

(iii) When a batch copper converter is blowing, a record must be prepared for the converter that includes, but is not limited to, the clock times for when blowing begins and when blowing ends and the converter blowing rate. This information may be recorded by the indoor process monitor or by a separate, automated computer data system.

(iv) The process monitor must record each event other than converter blowing that occurs in or nearby the converter aisle that he or she observes to generate visible emissions inside the building. The recorded entry for each event must include, but is not limited to, a description of the event and the clock times when the event begins and when the event ends.

(7) You must prepare a summary of the data for the entire observation period using the information recorded during the observation period by the outdoor visible emission observers and the indoor process monitor and the procedure specified in paragraphs (c)(7)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Using the field data sheets, identify the 1-minute clock times for which a total of eight opacity readings were made and recorded by both observers at 15-second intervals according to the test procedures (i.e., a total of four opacity values have been recorded for the 1-minute interval by each of the two observers). Calculate the average of the eight 15-second interval readings recorded on the field data sheets by the two observers during the clock time minute interval (add the four consecutive 15-second interval opacity readings made by Observer A during the specified clock time minute, plus the four consecutive 15-second interval opacity readings made by Observer B during the same clock time minute, and divide the resulting total by eight). Record the clock time and the opacity average for the 1-minute interval on a data summary sheet. Figure 1 of this subpart shows an example of the format for the data summary sheet you may use, but are not required to use.

(ii) Using the data summary sheets prepared according to paragraph (c)(7)(i) of this section and the process information recorded according to paragraph (c)(6)(iii) of this section, identify those 1-minute intervals for which at least one of the batch copper converters was blowing.

(iii) Using the data summary sheets prepared according to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of this section and the process information recorded according to paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of this section, identify the 1-minute intervals during which at least one copper converter was blowing but none of the interference events listed in paragraphs (c)(7)(iii)(A) through (F) of this section occurred. Other ancillary activities not listed but conducted in or adjacent to the converter aisle during the opacity observations are not considered to be interference events (e.g., converter aisle cleaning, placement of smoking ladles or skulls on the converter aisle floor).

(A) Charging of copper matte, reverts, or other materials to a batch copper converter;

(B) Skimming slag or other molten materials from a batch copper converter;

(C) Pouring of blister copper or other molten materials from a batch copper converter;

(D) Return of slag or other molten materials to the flash smelting furnace or slag cleaning vessel;

(E) Roll-out or roll-in of the batch copper converter; or

(F) Smoke and fumes generated inside the converter building by operation of the smelting furnace, the slag cleaning vessel (if used), anode refining and casting processes that drift into the copper converter department.

(iv) Using the data summary sheets prepared according to paragraph (c)(7)(iii) of this section, up to five 1-minute intervals following an interference event may be eliminated from data used for the compliance determination calculation specified in paragraph (c)(8) of this section by applying a time delay factor. The time delay factor must be a constant number of minutes not to exceed 5 minutes that is added to the clock time recorded when cessation of the interference event occurs. The same time delay factor must be used for all interference events (i.e., a constant time delay factor for the smelter of 1 minute, 2 minutes, 3 minutes, 4 minutes, or 5 minutes). The number of minutes to be used for the time delay factor is determined based on the site-specific equipment and converter building configuration. An explanation of the rationale for selecting the value used for the time delay factor must be prepared and included in the test report.

(8) You must use the data summary prepared in paragraph (c)(7) of this section to calculate the average opacity value for a minimum of 120 1-minute intervals during which at least one copper converter was blowing with no interference events as determined according to paragraphs (c)(7)(iii) and (iv) of this section. Average opacity is calculated using Equation 1 of this section:



Where

VEave = Average opacity to be used for compliance determination (percent);

n = Total number of 1-minute intervals during which at least one copper converter was blowing with no interference events as determined according to paragraphs (c)(7)(iii) and (iv) of this section (at least 120 1-minute intervals);

i = 1-minute interval “i” during which at least one copper converter was blowing with no interference events as determined according to paragraphs (c)(7)(iii) and (iv) of this section; and

VEi = Average opacity value calculated for the eight opacity readings recorded during 1-minute interval “i” (percent).

(9) You must certify that the copper converter department capture system operated during the performance test at the operating limits established in your capture system operation and maintenance plan using the procedure specified in paragraphs (c)(9)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Concurrent with all opacity observations, measure and record values for each of the operating limit parameters in your capture system operation and maintenance plan according to the monitoring requirements specified in §63.1452(a).

(ii) For any dampers that are manually set and remain in the same position at all times the capture system is operating, the damper position must be visually checked and recorded at the beginning and end of each opacity observation period segment.

(iii) Review the recorded monitoring data. Identify and explain any times during batch copper converter blowing when the capture system operated outside the applicable operating limits.

(iv) Certify in your performance test report that during all observation period segments, the copper converter department capture system was operating at the values or settings established in your capture system operation and maintenance plan.

§63.1451 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limitations, work practice standards, and operation and maintenance requirements that apply to me?

(a) Total particulate matter emission limits. For each copper concentrate dryer, smelting furnace, slag cleaning vessel, and copper converter department subject to a total particulate matter emission limits in §63.1444 or §63.1446 that applies to you, you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) The average concentration of total particulate matter from a control device applied to emissions from the affected source, measured according to the performance test procedures in §63.1450(a), did not exceed the applicable emission limit.

(2) You have submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(b) Nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emissions limits. For each smelting furnace, slag cleaning vessel, and copper converter departments subject to the nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emissions limit in §63.1444 as applies to you, you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) The average concentration of nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in the process off-gas discharged from the affected source, measured according to the performance test procedures in §63.1450(b), did not exceed 6.2 mg/dscm.

(2) You have submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(c) For each existing copper converter department subject to the opacity limit in §63.1444, you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) The opacity of visible emissions exiting the roof monitors or roof exhaust fans on the building housing the copper converter department measured according to the performance test procedures in §63.1450(c), did not exceed 4 percent opacity.

(2) You have submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(d) Copper converter department capture systems. You have demonstrated initial compliance of the copper converter department capture system if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this section.

(1) Prepared the capture system operation and maintenance plan according to the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section;

(2) Conducted an initial performance test according to the procedures of §63.1450(c) demonstrating the opacity of any visible emissions exiting the roof monitors or roof exhaust fans on the building housing the copper converter department does not exceed 4 percent opacity;

(3) Included in your notification of compliance status a copy of your written capture system operation and maintenance plan and have certified in your notification of compliance status that you will operate the copper converter department capture system at all times during blowing at the values or settings established for the operating limits in that plan; and

(4) Submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(e) Baghouses. For each baghouse subject to operating limits in §63.1444(f) or §63.1446(c), you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) You have included in your written operation and maintenance plan required under §63.1447(b) detailed descriptions of the procedures you use for inspection, maintenance, bag leak detection, and corrective action for the baghouse.

(2) You have certified in your notification of compliance status that you will operate the baghouse according to your written operation and maintenance plan.

(3) You have submitted the notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(f) Venturi wet scrubbers. For each venturi wet scrubber subject to operating limits in §63.1444(g) or §63.1446(d), you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Established site-specific operating limits for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate and have a record of the pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate measured during the performance test you conduct to demonstrate initial compliance with paragraph (a) of this section.

(2) Certified in your notification of compliance status that you will operate the venturi wet scrubber within the established operating limits for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate.

(3) Submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(g) Other control devices. For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber subject to operating limits in §63.1444(h) or §63.1446(e), you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this section.

(1) Selected one or more operating parameters, as appropriate for the control device design, that can be used as representative and reliable indicators of the control device operation.

(2) Established site-specific operating limits for each of the selected operating parameters based on values measured during the performance test you conduct to demonstrate initial compliance with paragraph (a) of this section and have prepared written documentation according to the requirements in §63.1450(a)(5)(iv).

(3) Included in your notification of compliance status a copy of the written documentation you have prepared to demonstrate compliance with paragraph (g)(2) of this section and have certified in your notification of compliance status that you will operate the control device within the established operating limits.

(4) Submitted a notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(h) Fugitive dust sources. For all fugitive dust sources subject to work practice standards in §63.1445, you have demonstrated initial compliance if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Prepared a written fugitive dust control plan according to the requirements in §63.1454 and it has been approved by the designated authority.

(2) Certified in your notification of compliance status that you will control emissions from the fugitive dust sources according to the procedures in the approved plan.

(3) Submitted the notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

(i) Operation and maintenance requirements. You have demonstrated initial compliance with the operation and maintenance requirements that apply to you if you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Prepared an operation and maintenance plan according to the requirements in §63.1454(b).

(2) Certified in your notification of compliance status that you will operate each capture system and control device according to the procedures in the plan.

(3) Submitted the notification of compliance status according to the requirements in §63.1454(e).

§63.1452 What are my monitoring requirements?

(a) Copper converter department capture systems. For each operating limit established under your capture system operation and maintenance plan, you must install, operate, and maintain an appropriate monitoring device according the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) though (6) of this section to measure and record the operating limit value or setting at all times the copper converter department capture system is operating during batch copper converter blowing. Dampers that are manually set and remain in the same position at all times the capture system is operating are exempted from the requirements of this paragraph (a).

(1) Install the monitoring device, associated sensor(s), and recording equipment according to the manufacturers' specifications. Locate the sensor(s) used for monitoring in or as close to a position that provides a representative measurement of the parameter being monitored.

(2) If a flow measurement device is used to monitor the operating limit parameter, you must meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Locate the flow sensor and other necessary equipment such as straightening vanes in a position that provides a representative flow.

(ii) Use a flow sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2 percent of the flow rate.

(iii) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal velocity distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances.

(iv) Conduct a flow sensor calibration check at least semiannually.

(3) If a pressure measurement device is used to monitor the operating limit parameter, you must meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(3)(i) through (v) of this section.

(i) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in or as close to a position that provides a representative measurement of the pressure.

(ii) Minimize or eliminate pulsating pressure, vibration, and internal and external corrosion.

(iii) Use a gauge with a minimum tolerance of 0.5 inch of water or a transducer with a minimum tolerance of 1 percent of the pressure range.

(iv) Check pressure tap pluggage daily.

(v) Using a manometer, check gauge calibration quarterly and transducer calibration monthly.

(4) Conduct calibration and validation checks any time the sensor exceeds the manufacturer's specifications or you install a new sensor.

(5) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections for leakage.

(6) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and validation check.

(b) Baghouses. For each baghouse subject to the operating limit in §63.1444(f) or §63.1446(c) for the bag leak detection system alarm, you must at all times monitor the relative change in particulate matter loadings using a bag leak detection system according to the requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and conduct regular inspections according to the requirements in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

(1) You must install, operate, and maintain each bag leak detection system according to the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section.

(i) The system must be certified by the manufacturer to be capable of detecting emissions of particulate matter at concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual cubic meter (0.0044 grains per actual cubic foot) or less.

(ii) The system must provide output of relative changes in particulate matter loadings.

(iii) The system must be equipped with an alarm that will sound when an increase in relative particulate loadings is detected over a preset level. The alarm must be located such that it can be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.

(iv) Each system that works based on the triboelectric effect must be installed, operated, and maintained in a manner consistent with the guidance document, “Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance,” EPA-454/R-98-015, September 1997. You may obtain a copy of this guidance document by contacting the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) at 800-553-6847. You may install, operate, and maintain other types of bag leak detection systems in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's written specifications and recommendations.

(v) To make the initial adjustment of the system, establish the baseline output by adjusting the sensitivity (range) and the averaging period of the device. Then, establish the alarm set points and the alarm delay time.

(vi) Following the initial adjustment, do not adjust the sensitivity or range, averaging period, alarm set points, or alarm delay time, except as detailed in your operation and maintenance plan. Do not increase the sensitivity by more than 100 percent or decrease the sensitivity by more than 50 percent over a 365-day period unless a responsible official certifies, in writing, that the baghouse has been inspected and found to be in good operating condition.

(vii) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.

(2) You must conduct baghouse inspections at their specified frequencies according to the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (viii) of this section.

(i) Monitor the pressure drop across each baghouse cell each day to ensure pressure drop is within the normal operating range identified in the manual.

(ii) Confirm that dust is being removed from hoppers through weekly visual inspections or other means of ensuring the proper functioning of removal mechanisms.

(iii) Check the compressed air supply for pulse-jet baghouses each day.

(iv) Monitor cleaning cycles to ensure proper operation using an appropriate methodology.

(v) Check bag cleaning mechanisms for proper functioning through monthly visual inspection or equivalent means.

(vi) Make monthly visual checks of bag tension on reverse air and shaker-type baghouses to ensure that bags are not kinked (kneed or bent) or laying on their sides. You do not have to make this check for shaker-type baghouses using self-tensioning (spring-loaded) devices.

(vii) Confirm the physical integrity of the baghouse through quarterly visual inspections of the baghouse interior for air leaks.

(viii) Inspect fans for wear, material buildup, and corrosion through quarterly visual inspections, vibration detectors, or equivalent means.

(c) Venturi wet scrubbers. For each venturi wet scrubber subject to the operating limits for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate in §63.1444(g) or §63.1446(d), you must at all times monitor the hourly average pressure drop and water flow rate using a CPMS. You must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS according to the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) For the pressure drop CPMS, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section.

(i) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in or as close to a position that provides a representative measurement of the pressure and that minimizes or eliminates pulsating pressure, vibration, and internal and external corrosion.

(ii) Use a gauge with a minimum measurement sensitivity of 0.5 inch of water or a transducer with a minimum measurement sensitivity of 1 percent of the pressure range.

(iii) Check the pressure tap for pluggage daily.

(iv) Using a manometer, check gauge calibration quarterly and transducer calibration monthly.

(v) Conduct calibration checks any time the sensor exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating pressure range, or install a new pressure sensor.

(vi) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections for leakage.

(2) For the scrubber water flow rate CPMS, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Locate the flow sensor and other necessary equipment in a position that provides a representative flow and that reduces swirling flow or abnormal velocity distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances.

(ii) Use a flow sensor with a minimum measurement sensitivity of 2 percent of the flow rate.

(iii) Conduct a flow sensor calibration check at least semiannually according to the manufacturer's instructions.

(iv) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections for leakage.

(d) Other control devices. For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber subject to the operating limits for appropriate parameters in §63.1444(h) or §63.1446(e), you must at all times monitor each of your selected parameters using an appropriate CPMS. You must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS according to the equipment manufacturer's specifications and the requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) though (5) of this section.

(1) Locate the sensor(s) used for monitoring in or as close to a position that provides a representative measurement of the parameter being monitored.

(2) Determine the hourly average of all recorded readings.

(3) Conduct calibration and validation checks any time the sensor exceeds the manufacturer's specifications or you install a new sensor.

(4) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections for leakage.

(5) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and validation check.

(e) Except for monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality assurance or control activities (including as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments), you must monitor continuously (or collect data at all required intervals) at all times an affected source is operating.

(f) You may not use data recorded during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality assurance or control activities in data averages and calculations used to report emission or operating levels or to fulfill a minimum data availability requirement, if applicable. You must use all the data collected during all other periods in assessing compliance.

(g) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable failure of the monitor to provide valid data. Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions.

§63.1453 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations, work practice standards, and operation and maintenance requirements that apply to me?

(a) Particulate matter emission limits. For each affected source subject to a particulate matter emission limit §63.1444 or §63.1446 as applies to you, you must demonstrate continuous compliance according to the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1) For each copper concentrate dryer, smelting furnace, slag cleaning vessel, and copper converter department subject to a total particulate matter emission limit in §63.1444 or §63.1446 as applies to you, you must demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Maintain the average concentration of total particulate matter in the gases discharged from the affected source at or below the applicable emission limit.

(ii) Conduct subsequent performance tests following your initial performance test no less frequently than once per year according to the performance test procedures in §63.1450(a).

(2) For each smelting furnace, slag cleaning vessel, and copper converter department subject to the nonsulfuric acid particulate matter emission limit in §63.1444 as applies to you, you must demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the conditions in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Maintain the average concentration of nonsulfuric acid particulate matter in the process off-gas discharged from the affected source at or below 6.2 mg/dscm.

(ii) Conduct subsequent performance tests following your initial performance test no less frequently than once per year according to the performance test procedures in §63.1450(b).

(b) Copper converter department capture systems. You must demonstrate continuous compliance of the copper converter department capture system by meeting the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.

(1) Operate the copper converter department capture system at all times during blowing at or above the lowest values or settings established for the operating limits and demonstrated to achieve the opacity limit according to the applicable requirements of this subpart;

(2) Inspect and maintain the copper converter department capture system according to the applicable requirements in §63.1447 and recording all information needed to document conformance with these requirements;

(3) Monitor the copper converter department capture system according to the requirements in §63.1452(a) and collecting, reducing, and recording the monitoring data for each of the operating limit parameters according to the applicable requirements of this subpart; and

(4) Conduct subsequent performance tests according to the requirements of §63.1450(c) following your initial performance test no less frequently than once per year to demonstrate that the opacity of any visible emissions exiting the roof monitors or roof exhaust fans on the building housing the copper converter department does not exceed 4 percent opacity.

(c) Baghouses. For each baghouse subject to the operating limit for the bag leak detection system alarm in §63.1444(f) or §63.1446(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Maintain the baghouse such that the bag leak detection system alarm does not sound for more than 5 percent of the operating time during any semiannual reporting period. To determine the percent of time the alarm sounded use the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.

(i) Alarms that occur due solely to a malfunction of the bag leak detection system are not included in the calculation.

(ii) Alarms that occur during startup, shutdown, or malfunction are not included in the calculation if the condition is described in the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan, and you operated the source during such periods in accordance with §63.6(e)(1).

(iii) Count 1 hour of alarm time for each alarm when you initiated procedures to determine the cause of the alarm within 1 hour.

(iv) Count the actual amount of time you took to initiate procedures to determine the cause of the alarm if you did not initiate procedures to determine the cause of the alarm within 1 hour of the alarm.

(v) Calculate the percentage of time the alarm on the bag leak detection system sounds as the ratio of the sum of alarm times to the total operating time multiplied by 100.

(2) Maintain records of the times the bag leak detection system alarm sounded, and for each valid alarm, the time you initiated corrective action, the corrective action(s) taken, and the date on which corrective action was completed.

(3) Inspect and maintain each baghouse according to the requirements in §63.1451(b)(2) and recording all information needed to document conformance with these requirements. If you increase or decrease the sensitivity of the bag leak detection system beyond the limits specified in §63.1451(b)(1)(vi), you must include a copy of the required written certification by a responsible official in the next semiannual compliance report.

(d) Venturi wet scrubbers. For each venturi wet scrubber subject to the operating limits for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate in §63.1444(g) or §63.1446(d), you must demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the requirements of paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section.

(1) Maintain the hourly average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate at levels no lower than those established during the initial or subsequent performance test;

(2) Inspect and maintain each venturi wet scrubber CPMS according to §63.1452(c) and recording all information needed to document conformance with these requirements; and

(3) Collect and reduce monitoring data for pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate according to §63.1452(e) and recording all information needed to document conformance with these requirements.

(e) Other control devices. For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber subject to the operating limits for site-specific operating parameters in §63.1444(h) or §63.1446(e), you must demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the requirements of paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section:

(1) Maintain the hourly average rate at levels no lower than those established during the initial or subsequent performance test;

(2) Inspect and maintain each CPMS operated according to §63.1452(d) and record all information needed to document conformance with these requirements; and

(3) Collect and reduce monitoring data for selected parameters according to §63.1452(e) and recording all information needed to document conformance with these requirements.

(f) Fugitive dust sources. For each fugitive dust source subject to work practice standards in §63.1445, you must demonstrate continuous compliance by implementing all of fugitive control measures specified for the source in your written fugitive dust control plan.

§63.1454 What notifications must I submit and when?

(a) You must submit all of the notifications in §§63.6(h)(4) and (h)(5), 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(f)(4), and 63.9(b) through (h) that apply to you by the specified dates.

(b) As specified in §63.9(b)(2), if you start your affected source before June 12, 2002, you must submit your initial notification not later than October 10, 2002, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.

(c) As specified in §63.9(b)(3), if you start your new affected source on or after June 12, 2002, you must submit your initial notification not later than 120 calendar days after you become subject to this subpart.

(d) If you are required to conduct a performance test, you must submit a notification of intent to conduct a performance test at least 60 calendar days before the performance test is scheduled to begin as required in §63.7(b)(1).

(e) If you are required to conduct a performance test, opacity observation, or other initial compliance demonstration, you must submit a notification of compliance status according to §63.9(h)(2)(ii) by the date specified in paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section as applies to you.

(1) For each initial compliance demonstration that does not include a performance test, you must submit the notification of compliance status before the close of business on the 30th calendar day following the completion of the initial compliance demonstration.

(2) For each initial compliance demonstration that includes a performance test, you must submit the notification of compliance status, including the performance test results, before the close of business on the 60th calendar day following the completion of the performance test according to §63.10(d)(2).

§63.1455 What reports must I submit and when?

(a) You must submit each report in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section that applies to you.

(1) You must submit a compliance report semiannually according to the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section and containing the information in paragraph (c) of this section.

(2) You must submit an immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction report if you had a startup, shutdown, or malfunction during the reporting period that is not consistent with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan. You must report the actions taken for the event by fax or telephone within 2 working days after starting actions inconsistent with the plan. You must submit the information in §63.10(d)(5)(ii) of this part by letter within 7 working days after the end of the event unless you have made alternative arrangements with the permitting authority.

(b) Unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule under §63.10(a), you must submit each compliance report required in paragraph (a) of this section according to the applicable requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.

(1) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in §63.1443 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date comes first after the compliance date that is specified for your source in §63.1443.

(2) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date comes first after your first compliance report is due.

(3) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual reporting period from July 1 through December 31.

(4) Each subsequent compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date comes first after the end of the semiannual reporting period.

(5) For each affected source that is subject to permitting regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and if the permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) of this chapter, you may submit the first and subsequent compliance reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established instead of according to the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.

(c) Each compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section and, as applicable, paragraphs (c)(4) through (8) of this section.

(1) Company name and address.

(2) Statement by a responsible official, as defined in 40 CFR 63.2, with that official's name, title, and signature, certifying the accuracy and completeness of the content of the report.

(3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting period.

(4) If you had a startup, shutdown or malfunction during the reporting period and you took actions consistent with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan, the compliance report must include the information in §63.10(d)(5)(i).

(5) If there are no deviations from any emission limitations (emission limit, operating limit, opacity limit) that applies to you and there are no deviations from the requirements for work practice standards in this subpart, a statement that there were no deviations from the emission limitations, work practice standards, or operation and maintenance requirements during the reporting period.

(6) If there were no periods during which an operating parameter monitoring system was out-of-control as specified in §63.8(c)(7), a statement that there were no periods during which the monitoring system was out-of-control during the reporting period.

(7) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit, operating limit, opacity limit) and for each deviation from the requirements for work practice standards that occurs at an affected source where you are not using a continuous monitoring system to comply with the emission limitations or work practice standards in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section and the information in paragraphs (b)(7)(i) and (ii) of this section. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.

(i) The total operating time of each affected source during the reporting period.

(ii) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations (including unknown cause, if applicable), as applicable, and the corrective action taken.

(8) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit, operating limit, opacity limit, and visible emission limit) occurring at an affected source where you are using an operating parameter monitoring system to comply with the emission limitation in this subpart, you must include the information in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section and the information in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) through (xi) of this section. This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.

(i) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.

(ii) The date and time that each monitoring system was inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks.

(iii) The date, time and duration that each monitoring system was out-of-control, including the information in §63.8(c)(8).

(iv) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and whether each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period.

(v) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the reporting period and the total duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that reporting period.

(vi) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.

(vii) A summary of the total duration of monitoring system downtime during the reporting period and the total duration of monitoring system downtime as a percent of the total source operating time during that reporting period.

(viii) A brief description of the process units.

(ix) A brief description of the monitoring system.

(x) The date of the latest monitoring system certification or audit.

(xi) A description of any changes in continuous monitoring systems, processes, or controls since the last reporting period.

(d) If you have obtained a Title V operating permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 must report all deviations as defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If you submit a compliance report pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section along with, or as part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the compliance report includes all required information concerning deviations from any emission limitation(including any operating limit), or work practice requirement in this subpart, submission of the compliance report is deemed to satisfy any obligation to report the same deviations in the semiannual monitoring report. However, submission of a compliance report does not otherwise affect any obligation you may have to report deviations from permit requirements to the permit authority.

§63.1456 What records must I keep and how long must I keep my records?

(a) You must keep the records listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of this section.

(1) A copy of each notification and report that you submitted to comply with this subpart, including all documentation supporting any initial notification or notification of compliance status that you submitted, according to the requirements in §63.10(b)(2)(xiv).

(2) The records in §63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction.

(3) Records of performance tests and performance evaluations as required in §63.10(b)(2)(viii).

(4) For each monitoring system, you must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) Records described in §63.10(b)(2)(vi) through (xi).

(ii) Monitoring data recorded by the monitoring system during a performance evaluation as required in §63.6(h)(7)(i) and (ii).

(iii) Previous (i.e., superseded) versions of the performance evaluation plan as required in §63.8(d)(3).

(iv) Records of the date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and whether the deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period.

(5) For each performance test you conduct to demonstrate compliance with an opacity limit according to §63.1450(c), you must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (ix) of this section.

(i) Dates and time intervals of all opacity observation period segments;

(ii) Description of overall smelter operating conditions during each observation period. Identify, if any, the smelter copper production process equipment that was out-of-service during the performance test and explain why this equipment was not in operation;

(iii) Name, affiliation, and copy of current visible emission reading certification for each visible emission observer participating in the performance test;

(iv) Name, title, and affiliation for each indoor process monitor participating in the performance test;

(v) Copies of all visible emission observer opacity field data sheets;

(vi) Copies of all indoor process monitor operating log sheets;

(vii) Copies of all data summary sheets used for data reduction;

(viii) Copy of calculation sheets of the average opacity value used to demonstrate compliance with the opacity limit; and

(ix) Documentation according to the requirements in §63.1450(c)(9)(iv) to support your selection of the site-specific capture system operating limits used for each batch copper converter capture system when blowing.

(6) For each baghouse subject to the operating limit in §63.1444(f) or §63.1446(c), you must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) Records of alarms for each bag leak detection system.

(ii) Description of the corrective actions taken following each bag leak detection alarm.

(7) For each control device other than a baghouse or venturi wet scrubber subject to site-specific operating limits in §63.1444(g) or §63.1446(f), you must keep documentation according to the requirements in §63.1450(a)(5)(iv) to support your selection of the site-specific operating limits for the control device.

(b) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available for expeditious review, according to §63.10(b)(1).

(c) As specified in §63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record for 5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.

(d) You must keep each record on site for at least 2 years after the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record, according to §63.10(b)(1). You can keep the records off site for the remaining 3 years.

§63.1457 What part of the general provisions apply to me?

Table 2 to this subpart shows which parts of the general provisions in §§63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.

§63.1458 Who implements and enforces this subpart?

(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), or a delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to your State, local, or tribal agency.

(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities listed in paragraph (c) of this section are retained by the U.S. EPA Administrator and are not transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.

(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or tribal agencies are as listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.

(1) Approval of alternatives to the emission limitations and work practice standards in §§63.1444 through 63.1446 under §63.6(g).

(2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under §63.7(f) and as defined in §63.90.

(3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under §63.8(f) and as defined in §63.90.

(4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting under §63.10(f) and as defined in §63.90.

§63.1459 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in §63.2, and in this section as follows:

Bag leak detection system means a system that is capable of continuously monitoring relative particulate matter (dust) loadings in the exhaust of a baghouse in order to detect bag leaks and other upset conditions. A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that operates on triboelectric, light scattering, transmittance or other effect to continuously monitor relative particulate matter loadings.

Baghouse means a control device that collects particulate matter by filtering the gas stream through bags. A baghouse is also referred to as a “fabric filter.”

Batch copper converter means a Pierce-Smith converter or Hoboken converter in which copper matte is oxidized to form blister copper by a process that is performed in discrete batches using a sequence of charging, blowing, skimming, and pouring.

Blowing means the operating mode for a batch copper converter during which air or oxygen-enriched air is injected into the molten converter bath.

Capture system means the collection of components used to capture gases and fumes released from one or more emission points, and to convey the captured gases and fumes to a control device. A capture system may include, but is not limited to, the following components as applicable to a given capture system design: duct intake devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, dampers, manifolds, plenums, and fans.

Charging means the operating mode for a batch copper converter during which molten or solid material is added into the vessel.

Control device means the air pollution control equipment used to collect particulate matter emissions. Examples of such equipment include, but are not limited to, a baghouse, an electrostatic precipitator, and a wet scrubber.

Copper concentrate dryer means a vessel in which copper concentrates are heated in the presence of air to reduce the moisture content of the material. Supplemental copper-bearing feed materials and fluxes may be added or mixed with the copper concentrates fed to a copper concentrate dryer.

Copper converter department means the area at a primary copper smelter in which the copper converters are located.

Copper matte means a material predominately composed of copper and iron sulfides produced by smelting copper ore concentrates.

Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a source fails to meet any of the following:

(1) Any requirement or obligation established by this subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation (including any operating limit) or work practice standard;

(2) Any term or condition that is adopted to implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is included in the operating permit for any affected source required to obtain such a permit; or

(3) Any emission limitation (including any operating limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or malfunction, regardless whether or not such failure is permitted by this subpart.

Emission limitation means any emission limit, opacity limit, operating limit, or visible emission limit.

Fugitive dust material means copper concentrate, dross, reverts, slag, speiss, or other solid copper-bearing materials.

Fugitive dust source means a stationary source of particulate matter emissions resulting from the handling, storage, transfer, or other management of fugitive dust materials where the source is not associated with a specific process, process vent, or stack. Examples of a fugitive dust source include, but are not limited to, on-site roadways used by trucks transporting copper concentrate, unloading of materials from trucks or railcars, outdoor material storage piles, and transfer of material to hoppers and bins.

Holding means the operating mode for a batch copper converter during which the molten bath is maintained in the vessel but no blowing is performed nor is material added into or removed from the vessel.

Opacity means the degree to which emissions reduce the transmission of light.

Particulate matter means any finely divided solid or liquid material, other than uncombined water, as measured by the specific reference method.

Pouring means the operating mode for a batch copper converter during which molten copper is removed from the vessel.

Primary copper smelter means any installation or any intermediate process engaged in the production of copper from copper sulfide ore concentrates through the use of pyrometallurgical techniques.

Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40 CFR 70.2.

Skimming means the batch copper converter operating mode during which molten slag is removed from the vessel.

Slag cleaning vessel means a vessel that receives molten copper-bearing material and the predominant use of the vessel is to separate this material into molten copper matte and slag layers.

Smelting furnace means a furnace, reactor, or other type of vessel in which copper ore concentrate and fluxes are melted to form a molten mass of material containing copper matte and slag. Other copper-bearing materials may also be charged to the smelting furnace.

Work practice standard means any design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard, or combination thereof, that is promulgated pursuant to section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.

Table 1 to Subpart QQQ of Part 63 - Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart QQQ

As required in §63.1457, you must comply with the requirements of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) shown in the following table:

CitationSubjectApplies to subpart QQQExplanation
§63.1 ApplicabilityYes
§63.2 DefinitionsYes
§63.3 Units and AbbreviationsYes
§63.4 Prohibited ActivitiesYes
§63.5 Construction and ReconstructionYes
§63.6(a)-(g)Compliance with Standards and Maintenance requirementsYes
§63.6(h)Determining compliance with Opacity and VE standardsNoSubpart QQQ specifies the requirements and test protocol used to determine compliance with the opacity limits.
§63.6(i)-(j)Extension of Compliance and Presidential Compliance ExemptionYes
§63.7(a)(1)-(2)Applicability and Performance Test DatesNoSubpart QQQ specifies performance test applicability and dates.
§63.7(a)(3), (b)-(h)Performance Testing RequirementsYes
§63.8 except for (a)(4),(c)(4), and (f)(6)Monitoring RequirementsYes
§63.8(a)(4)Additional Monitoring Requirements for Control devices in §63.11 NoSubpart QQ does not require flares.
§63.8(c)(4)Continuous Monitoring System RequirementsNoSubpart QQQ specifies requirements for operation of CMS.
§63.8(f)(6)RATA AlternativeNoSubpart QQQ does not require continuous emission monitoring systems.
§63.9 Notification RequirementsYes
§63.9(g)(5)DATA reductionNoSubpart QQQ specifies data reduction requirements
§63.10 except for (b)(2)(xiii) and (c)(7)-(8)Recordkeeping and reporting RequirementsYes
§63.10(b)(2)(xiii)CMS Records for RATA AlternativeNoSubpart QQQ does not require continuous emission monitoring systems.
§63.10(c)(7)-(8)Records of Excess Emissions and Parameter Monitoring Accedences for CMSNoSubpart QQQ specifies record keeping requirements
§63.11 Control Device RequirementsNoSubpart QQQ does not require flares
§63.12 State Authority and DelegationsYes
§§63.13-63.15Addresses, Incorporation by Reference, Availability of InformationYes

§63.11147 What are the standards and compliance requirements for existing sources not using batch copper converters?

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(6) You must submit to the permitting authority by the 20th day of each month a report summarizing the 24-hour average mass PM10 emissions rates for the previous month.

* * * * *

* * * * *

(c) * * * (1) At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the permitting authority which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source.

* * * * *

(5) As an alternative to the requirements in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, you must comply with the startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).

(d) Deviations. You must submit written notification to the permitting authority of any deviation from the requirements of this subpart, including the probable cause of such deviations and any corrective actions or preventative measures taken. You must submit this notification within 14 days of the date the deviation occurred.

(e) Reports. You must submit semiannual monitoring reports to your permitting authority. All instances of deviations from the requirements of this subpart must be clearly identified in the reports.

* * * * *

§63.11148 What are the standards and compliance requirements for existing sources using batch copper converters?

(a) * * * (1) For each copper concentrate dryer, you must not discharge to the atmosphere from the dryer vent any gases that contain total particulate matter (PM) in excess of 0.022 grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf).

* * * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) During periods when no copper ore concentrate feed is charged to the smelting vessel but the smelting vessel remains in operation to temporarily hold molten material in the vessel before resuming copper production, you must exhaust the process off gas from the smelting vessel to an electrostatic precipitator, wet scrubber, or baghouse prior to discharge to the atmosphere.

(4) * * *

(iv) For each secondary capture system that is used to comply with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section and is not vented to a gas cleaning system controlling PM and a sulfuric acid plant, you must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere any gases that contain total particulate matter in excess of 0.02 grains/dscf.

(b) * * *

(1) Each COMS must meet Performance Specification 1 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.

(2) * * *

(i) You must automatically (intrinsic to the opacity monitor) check the zero and upscale (span) calibration drifts at least once daily. For a particular COMS, the acceptable range of zero and upscale calibration materials is as defined in the applicable version of Performance Specification 1 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.

* * * * *

(4) You must log in ink or electronic format and maintain a record of 24-hour opacity measurements performed in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section and any corrective actions taken, if any. A record of corrective actions taken must include the date and time during which the 24-hour rolling average opacity exceeded 15 percent and the date, time and type of the corrective action.

(c) * * *

(2) The baghouse leak detection system must meet the specifications and requirements in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (v) of this section.

(i) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the manufacturer to be capable of detecting particulate matter emissions at concentrations that can effectively discern any dysfunctional leaks of the baghouse.

(ii) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of relative or absolute particulate matter loadings.

(iii) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm system that will sound automatically when an increase in relative particulate emissions over a preset level is detected. The alarm must be located where it is easily heard by plant operating personnel.

(iv) The bag leak detection system must be installed downstream of the baghouse.

(v) The bag leak detection system must be installed, operated, calibrated, and maintained in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's written specifications and recommendations. The calibration of the system must, at a minimum, consist of establishing the relative baseline output level by adjusting the sensitivity and the averaging period of the device and establishing the alarm set points and the alarm delay time.

* * * * *

(4) You must log in ink or electronic format and maintain a record of installation, calibration, maintenance, and operation of the bag leak detection system. If the bag leak detection system alarm sounds, the records must include an identification of the date and time of all bag leak detection alarms, their cause, and an explanation of the corrective actions taken, if any.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(3) You must conduct each performance test according to §63.7(e)(1) using the test methods and procedures in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (v) of this section.

(i) Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to select sampling port locations and the number of traverse points in each stack or duct. Sampling sites must be located at the outlet of the control device (or at the outlet of the emissions source if no control device is present) prior to any releases to the atmosphere.

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the volumetric flow rate of the stack gas.

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the dry molecular weight of the stack gas. You may use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, “Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses” (incorporated by reference - see §63.14) as an alternative to EPA Method 3B.

(iv) Method 4 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the moisture content of the stack gas.

(v) Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the PM concentration for negative pressure baghouses or Method 5D (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) for positive pressure baghouses. A minimum of three valid test runs are needed to comprise a PM performance test.

(f) * * * (1) At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the permitting authority which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source.

* * * * *

(4) * * *

(ii) You must document through signed contemporaneous logs or other relevant evidence that an emergency occurred and you can identify the probable cause, your facility was being operated properly at the time the emergency occurred, and the corrective actions taken to minimize emissions as required by paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section.

(iii) You must submit a notice of the emergency to the permitting authority within two working days of the time when emission limitations were exceeded due to the emergency (or an alternate timeframe acceptable to the permitting authority). This notice must contain a description of the emergency, any steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions taken.

(5) As an alternative to the requirements in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, you must comply with the startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).

(g) Recordkeeping requirements. (1) You must maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected source subject to this subpart; any malfunction of the air pollution control equipment; or any periods during which a continuous monitoring system or monitoring device is inoperative.

(2) You must maintain a file of all measurements, including continuous monitoring system, monitoring device, and performance testing measurements; all continuous monitoring system performance evaluations; all continuous monitoring system or monitoring device calibration checks; adjustments and maintenance performed on these systems or devices; and all other information required by this section recorded in a permanent form suitable for inspection. The file must be retained for at least 5 years following the date of such measurements, maintenance, reports.

(h) Reporting requirements. (1) You must prepare and submit to the permitting authority an excess emissions and monitoring systems performance report and summary report every calendar quarter. A less frequent reporting interval may used for either report as approved by the permitting authority.

(2) The summary report must include the information in paragraphs (h)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i) The magnitude of excess emissions computed, any conversion factor(s) used, and the date and time of commencement and completion of each time period of excess emissions. The process operating time during the reporting period.

(ii) Specific identification of each period of excess emissions that occurs during startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions of the affected facility. The nature and cause of any malfunction (if known), the corrective action taken or preventative measures adopted.

(iii) The date and time identifying each period during which the continuous monitoring system was inoperative except for zero and span checks and the nature of the system repairs or adjustments.

(iv) When no excess emissions have occurred or the continuous monitoring system(s) have not been inoperative, repaired, or adjusted, such information must be stated in the report.

§63.11149 What are the standards and compliance requirements for new sources?

(a) Emissions limits and work practice standards. (1) You must not discharge to the atmosphere exhaust gases that contain total PM in excess of 0.6 pound per ton of copper concentrate feed charged on a 24-hour average basis from any combination of stacks, vents, or other openings on furnaces, reactors, or other types of process vessels used for the production of anode copper from copper sulfide ore concentrates by pyrometallurgical techniques. Examples of such process equipment include, but are not limited to, copper concentrate dryers, smelting flash furnaces, smelting bath furnaces, converting vessels, combined smelting and converting reactors, anode refining furnaces, and anode shaft furnaces.

(2) You must operate a capture system that collects the gases and fumes released during the transfer of molten materials from smelting vessels and converting vessels and conveys the collected gas stream to a baghouse or other PM control device.

(3) You must operate one or more capture systems that collect the gases and fumes released from each vessel used to refine blister copper, remelt anode copper, or remelt anode scrap and convey each collected gas stream to a baghouse or other PM control device. One control device may be used for multiple collected gas streams.

(b) Monitoring requirements. (1) You must install, operate, and maintain a PM continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to measure and record PM concentrations and gas stream flow rates for the exhaust gases discharged to the atmosphere from each affected source subject to the emissions limit in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. A single PM CEMS may be used for the combined exhaust gas streams from multiple affected sources at a point before the gases are discharged to the atmosphere. For each PM CEMS used to comply with this paragraph, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.

(i) You must install, certify, operate, and maintain the PM CEMS according to EPA Performance Specification 11 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, and the quality assurance requirements of Procedure 2 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F.

(ii) You must conduct an initial performance evaluation of the PM CEMS according to the requirements of Performance Specification 11 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B. Thereafter, you must perform the performance evaluations as required by Procedure 2 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F.

(iii) You must perform quarterly accuracy determinations and daily calibration drift tests for the PM CEMS according to Procedure 2 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F.

(2) You must install, operate, and maintain a weight measurement system to measure and record the weight of the copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting vessel on a daily basis.

(c) Compliance requirements. (1) You must demonstrate initial compliance with the emissions limit in paragraph (a)(1) of this section using the procedures in paragraph (c)(2) this section within 180 days after startup and report the results in your notification of compliance status no later than 30 days after the end of the compliance demonstration.

(2) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the emissions limit in paragraph (a)(1) of this section using the procedures in paragraph (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section whenever your facility is producing copper from copper concentrate.

(i) You must continuously monitor and record PM emissions, determine and record the daily (24-hour) value for each day, and calculate and record the daily average pounds of total PM per ton of copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting vessel according to the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section.

(ii) You must calculate the daily average at the end of each calendar day for the preceding 24-hour period.

(iii) You must maintain records of the calculations of daily averages with supporting information and data, including measurements of the weight of copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting vessel. Collected PM CEMS data must be made available for inspection.

(d) Alternative startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements. You must comply with the requirements specified in this paragraph as an alternative to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). In the event of an emergency situation, you must comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this section. For the purpose of complying with this paragraph, an emergency situation is any situation arising from sudden and reasonably unforeseeable events beyond the control of the facility owner or operator that requires immediate corrective action to restore normal operation, and that causes the affected source to exceed an applicable emissions limitation under this subpart, due to unavoidable increases in emissions attributable to the emergency. An emergency must not include noncompliance to the extent it is caused by improperly designed equipment, lack of preventive maintenance, careless or improper operation, or operator error.

(1) During the period of the emergency, you must implement all reasonable steps to minimize levels of emissions that exceeded the emission standards or other applicable requirements in this subpart.

(2) You must document through signed contemporaneous logs or other relevant evidence that an emergency occurred and you can identify the probable cause, your facility was being operated properly at the time the emergency occurred, and the corrective actions taken to minimize emissions as required by paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(3) You must submit a notice of the emergency to the permitting authority within two working days of the time when emissions limitations were exceeded due to the emergency (or an alternate timeframe acceptable to the permitting authority). This notice must contain a description of the emergency, any steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions taken.

(e) Reports. You must submit to the permitting authority by the 20th day of each month a summary of the daily average PM per ton of copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting vessel for the previous month.

§63.11151 What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *

Capture system means the collection of components used to capture gases and fumes released from one or more emissions points and then convey the captured gas stream to a control device. A capture system may include, but is not limited to, the following components as applicable to a given capture system design: Duct intake devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, dampers, manifolds, plenums, and fans.

* * * * *

§63.11152 Who implements and enforces this subpart?

* * * * *

(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section.

* * * * *

Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63 - Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart EEEEEE

CitationSubjectApplies to subpart EEEEEE?Explanation
63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)-(a)(12) (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), (e)ApplicabilityYes.
63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)-(a)(9), (b)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d)ReservedNo.
63.2DefinitionsYes.
63.3Units and AbbreviationsYes.
63.4Prohibited Activities and CircumventionYes.
63.5Preconstruction Review and Notification RequirementsNo.
63.6(a), (b)(1)-(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5)Compliance with Standards and Maintenance Requirements - Applicability and Compliance DatesYes.
63.6(e)Operation and Maintenance RequirementsYes/NoOperation and maintenance requirements do not apply to existing sources except that the startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements in §63.6(e)(3) are allowed as an alternative to the rule requirements for emergency situations. Operation and maintenance requirements apply to new sources except that the rule requirements for emergency situations are allowed as an alternative to the startup, shutdown, and malfunction requirements in §63.6(e)(3).
63.6(f), (g), (i), (j)Compliance with Nonopacity Emission StandardsYes.
63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(2), (e)(3)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5)(iv)ReservedNo.
63.6(h)(1)-(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)-(h)(5)(iii), (h)(6)-(h)(9)Yes/NoRequirements apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.7(a), (e), (f), (g), (h)Performance Testing RequirementsYes.
63.7(b), (c)Yes/NoNotification of performance tests and quality assurance program apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c), (f), (g)Monitoring RequirementsYes.
63.8(a)(3)ReservedNo.
63.8(a)(4)NoSubpart EEEEEE does not require flares.
63.8(d), (e)Yes/NoRequirements for quality control program and performance evaluations apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), (d), (h)(1)-(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6), (i), (j)Notification RequirementsYes.
63.9(b)(3), (h)(4)ReservedNo.
63.9(b)(4), (f)No.
63.9(e), (g)Yes/NoNotification requirements for performance test and use of continuous monitoring systems apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.10(a), (b)(1), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(4), (d)(5), (f)Recordkeeping and Reporting RequirementsYes/NoRecordkeeping requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.10(b)(2), (b)(3), (c)(1) (c)(5)-(c)(8), (c)(10)-(c)(15), (e)(1), (e)(2)Yes/NoRecordkeeping requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.10(c)(2)-(c)(4), (c)(9)ReservedNo.
63.10(d)(3), (e)(4)NoReporting requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.10(e)(3)Yes/NoReporting requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources.
63.11Control Device RequirementsNoSubpart EEEEEE does not require flares.
63.12State Authorities and DelegationsYes.
63.13AddressesYes.
63.14Incorporations by ReferenceYes.
63.15Availability of Information and ConfidentialityYes.
63.16Performance Track ProvisionsYes.
2024-05-09T05:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is finalizing a Clean Water Act regulation to revise the technology-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the steam electric power generating point source category applicable to flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, bottom ash (BA) transport water and legacy wastewater at existing sources, and combustion residual leachate (CRL) at new and existing sources. Last updated in 2015 and 2020, this regulation is estimated to cost an additional $536 million to $1.1 billion dollars annually in social costs and reduce pollutant discharges by an additional approximately 660 to 672 million pounds per year.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2024 published in the Federal Register May 9, 2024, page 40198.

View final rule.

Part 423 - Steam electric power generating point source category
Authority Revised View text
§423.10 Applicability.
Entire sectionRevised View text
§423.11 Specialized definitions.
(n), (p), (r), (w), (z), and (bb)Revised View text
(ee) and (ff)AddedView text
§423.13 Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best available technology economically achievable (BAT).
(g), (h)(1), (i)(1), (k), (l), and (o) Revised View text
§423.15 New source performance standards (NSPS).
(c)AddedView text
§423.16 Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
(e) and (g)Revised View text
§423.17 Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
(c)AddedView text
§423.18 Permit conditions.
Entire sectionRevised View text
§423.19 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Entire sectionRevised View text

New Text

Part 423 - Steam electric power generating point source category

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 1311; 1314(b), (c), (e), (g), and (i)(A) and (B); 1316; 1317; 1318 and 1361.

§423.10 Applicability and severability.

(a) Applicability. The provisions of this part apply to discharges resulting from the operation of a generating unit by an establishment whose generation of electricity is the predominant source of revenue or principal reason for operation, and whose generation of electricity results primarily from a process utilizing fossil-type fuel (coal, oil, or gas), fuel derived from fossil fuel (e.g., petroleum coke, synthesis gas), or nuclear fuel in conjunction with a thermal cycle employing the steam water system as the thermodynamic medium. This part applies to discharges associated with both the combustion turbine and steam turbine portions of a combined cycle generating unit.

(b) Severability. The provisions of this part are separate and severable from one another. If any provision is stayed or determined to be invalid, the remaining provisions shall continue in effect.

§423.11 Specialized definitions.

* * * * *

(n) The term flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater means any wastewater generated specifically from the wet flue gas desulfurization scrubber system that comes into contact with the flue gas or the FGD solids, including but not limited to, the blowdown from the FGD scrubber system, overflow or underflow from the solids separation process, FGD solids wash water, and the filtrate from the solids dewatering process. Wastewater generated from cleaning the FGD scrubber, cleaning FGD solids separation equipment, cleaning FGD solids dewatering equipment; FGD paste equipment cleaning water; treated FGD wastewater permeate or distillate used as boiler makeup water; water that is collected in floor drains in the FGD process area; wastewater removed from FGD wastewater treatment equipment within the first 120 days of decommissioning the equipment, or wastewater generated by a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration storm event when meeting the certification requirements in §423.19(o) is not considered FGD wastewater.

* * * * *

(p) The term transport water means any wastewater that is used to convey fly ash, bottom ash, or economizer ash from the ash collection or storage equipment, or boiler, and has direct contact with the ash. Transport water does not include low volume, short duration discharges of wastewater from minor leaks (e.g., leaks from valve packing, pipe flanges, or piping), minor maintenance events (e.g., replacement of valves or pipe sections), FGD paste equipment cleaning water, bottom ash purge water, wastewater removed from ash handling equipment within the first 120 days of decommissioning the equipment, or wastewater generated by a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration storm event when meeting the certification requirements in §423.19(o).

* * * * *

(r) The term combustion residual leachate means leachate from landfills or surface impoundments containing combustion residuals. Leachate is composed of liquid, including any suspended or dissolved constituents in the liquid, that has percolated through waste or other materials emplaced in a landfill, or that passes through the surface impoundment's containment structure (e.g., bottom, dikes, berms). Combustion residual leachate includes seepage and/or leakage from a combustion residual landfill or impoundment unit. Combustion residual leachate includes wastewater from landfills and surface impoundments located on non-adjoining property when under the operational control of the permitted facility. Combustion residual leachate does not include wastewater generated by a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration storm event when meeting the certification requirements in §423.19(o).

* * * * *

(w) The term permanent cessation of coal combustion means the owner or operator certifies under §423.19(g) or (h) that an electric generating unit will cease combustion of coal no later than December 31, 2028, or December 31, 2034.

* * * * *

(z) The term low utilization electric generating unit means any electric generating unit for which the facility owner certifies, and annually recertifies, under §423.19(f) that the two-year average annual capacity utilization rating is less than 10 percent.

* * * * *

(bb) The term tank means a stationary device, designed to contain an accumulation of wastewater which is constructed primarily of non-earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic) which provide structural support and which is not a coal combustion residual surface impoundment.

* * * * *

§423.13 Effluent limitations guidelines representing the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the application of the best available technology economically achievable (BAT).

* * * * *

(g) FGD wastewater(1) 2020 BAT.(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(2) or (3) of this section applies, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 5 to this paragraph (g)(1)(i). Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(1)(i) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning October 13, 2021, but no later than December 31, 2025. The effluent limitations in this paragraph (g)(1)(i) apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (g)(1)(i), until the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations in paragraph (g)(4) of this section.

Table 5 to Paragraph (g)(1)(i)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)188
Mercury, total (ng/L)10334
Selenium, total (µg/L)7029
Nitrate/nitrite as N (mg/L)43

(ii) For FGD wastewater generated before the date determined by the permitting authority, as specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section, the EPA is declining to establish BAT limitations and is reserving such limitations to be established by the permitting authority on a case-by-case basis using the permitting authority's best professional judgment.

(2) 2020 BAT subcategories.(i) For any electric generating unit with a total nameplate capacity of less than or equal to 50 megawatts, that is an oil-fired unit, or for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(g), the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed for total suspended solids (TSS) in §423.12(b)(11).

(A) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(g), where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2028, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after April 30, 2029.

(B) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(g), where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2028, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after December 31, 2028.

(ii) For FGD wastewater discharges from a high FGD flow facility, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 6 to this paragraph (g)(2)(ii). Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(2)(ii) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning October 13, 2021, but no later than December 31, 2023. The effluent limitations in this paragraph (g)(2)(ii) apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (g)(2)(ii), until the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations in paragraph (g)(4) of this section.

Table 6 to Paragraph (g)(2)(ii)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

(iii) For FGD wastewater discharges from a low utilization electric generating unit, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 6 to paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section. Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(2)(iii) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning October 13, 2021, but no later than December 31, 2023. These effluent limitations apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (g)(2)(iii), until the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations in paragraph (g)(4) of this section.

(3) Voluntary incentives plan.(i) For dischargers who voluntarily choose to meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(3)(i), the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 7 to this paragraph (g)(3)(i). Dischargers who choose to meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(3)(i) must meet such limitations by December 31, 2028. The effluent limitations in this paragraph (g)(3)(i) apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after December 31, 2028.

Table 7 to Paragraph (g)(3)(i)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (ug/L)5NA
Mercury, total (ng/L)2310
Selenium, total (ug/L)10NA
Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L)2.01.2
Bromide (mg/L)0.2NA
TDS (mg/L)306149

(ii) For discharges of FGD wastewater generated before December 31, 2023, the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed for TSS in §423.12(b)(11).

(4) 2024 BAT.(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraphs (g)(3) and (g)(4)(ii) through (iv) of this section applies, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater.

(A) Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for FGD wastewater in this paragraph (g)(4)(i) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning July 8, 2024, but no later than December 31, 2029. These effluent limitations apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (g)(4)(i).

(B) A facility which submits a request under §423.19(n) may discharge permeate or distillate from an FGD wastewater treatment system designed to achieve the limitations in this paragraph (g)(4)(i) for an additional period of up to one year from the date determined in paragraph (g)(4)(i)(A) of this section.

(ii) For any electric generating unit with a total nameplate capacity of less than or equal to 50 megawatts or that is an oil-fired unit, the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed for TSS in §423.12(b)(11).

(iii) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(h), the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall continue to be subject to limitations specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section as incorporated into the existing permit.

(A) Where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after April 30, 2035.

(B) Where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after December 31, 2034.

(iv) For FGD wastewater discharged from any coal combustion residual surface impoundment which commences closure pursuant to 40 CFR 257.102(e) after July 8, 2024, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 8 to this paragraph (g)(4)(iv).

Table 8 to Paragraph (g)(4)(iv)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

(h) Fly ash transport water.(1)(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraph (h)(2) of this section applies, or when the fly ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in fly ash transport water. Dischargers must meet the discharge limitation in this paragraph by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2018, but no later than December 31, 2023. This limitation applies to the discharge of fly ash transport water generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the discharge limitation, as specified in this paragraph. Whenever fly ash transport water is used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant (except when it is used in the FGD scrubber), the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge limitation in this paragraph. When the fly ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, the quantity of pollutants in fly ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of fly ash transport water times the concentration listed in the table in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section.

(ii) Legacy fly ash transport water. For fly ash transport water generated before the date determined by the permitting authority, as specified in paragraph (h)(1)(i) of this section, the EPA is declining to establish BAT limitations and is reserving such limitations to be established by the permitting authority on a case-by-case basis using the permitting authority's best professional judgment.

* * * * *

(i) Flue gas mercury control wastewater.(1)(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraph (i)(2) of this section applies, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in flue gas mercury control wastewater. Dischargers must meet the discharge limitation in this paragraph by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2018, but no later than December 31, 2023. This limitation applies to the discharge of flue gas mercury control wastewater generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the discharge limitation, as specified in this paragraph. Whenever flue gas mercury control wastewater is used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant, the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge limitation in this paragraph.

(ii) Legacy flue gas mercury control wastewater. For flue gas mercury control wastewater generated before the date determined by the permitting authority, as specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this section, the EPA is declining to establish BAT limitations and is reserving such limitations to be established by the permitting authority on a case-by-case basis using the permitting authority's best professional judgment.

* * * * *

(k) Bottom ash transport water(1) 2020 BAT.(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraph (k)(2) of this section applies, or when the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. Dischargers must meet the discharge limitation in this paragraph (k)(1)(i) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning October 13, 2021, but no later than December 31, 2025. The limitation in this paragraph (k)(1)(i) applies to the discharge of bottom ash transport water generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the discharge limitation, as specified in this paragraph (k)(1)(i), until the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations in paragraph (k)(4) of this section. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (k)(2) of this section applies, whenever bottom ash transport water is used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant (except when it is used in the FGD scrubber), the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge limitation in this paragraph (k)(1)(i). When the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, it ceases to be bottom ash transport water, and instead is FGD wastewater, which must meet the requirements in paragraph (g) of this section.

(ii) For bottom ash transport water generated before the date determined by the permitting authority, as specified in paragraph (k)(1)(i) of this section, the EPA is declining to establish BAT limitations and is reserving such limitations to be established by the permitting authority on a case-by-case basis using the permitting authority's best professional judgment.

(2) 2020 BAT subcategories.(i)(A) The discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from a properly installed, operated, and maintained bottom ash system is authorized under the following conditions:

(1) To maintain system water balance when precipitation-related inflows are generated from storm events exceeding a 10-year storm event of 24-hour or longer duration (e.g., 30-day storm event) and cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies, maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment; or

(2) To maintain system water balance when regular inflows from wastestreams other than bottom ash transport water exceed the ability of the bottom ash system to accept recycled water and segregating these other wastestreams is not feasible; or

(3) To maintain system water chemistry where installed equipment at the facility is unable to manage pH, corrosive substances, substances or conditions causing scaling, or fine particulates to below levels which impact system operation or maintenance; or

(4) To conduct maintenance not otherwise included in paragraph (k)(2)(i)(A)(1), (2), or (3) of this section and not exempted from the definition of transport water in §423.11(p), and when water volumes cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies, maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment.

(B) The total volume that may be discharged for the activities in paragraph (k)(2)(i)(A) of this section shall be reduced or eliminated to the extent achievable using control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically achievable in light of best industry practice. The total volume of the discharge authorized in this paragraph (k)(2)(i)(B) shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the permitting authority and in no event shall such discharge exceed a 30-day rolling average of ten percent of the primary active wetted bottom ash system volume. The volume of daily discharges used to calculate the 30-day rolling average shall be calculated using measurements from flow monitors.

(ii) For any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of less than or equal to 50 megawatts, that is an oil-fired unit, or for which the owner has certified to the permitting authority that it will cease combustion of coal pursuant to §423.19(g), the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of the applicable wastewater times the concentration for TSS listed in §423.12(b)(4).

(A) Where a unit has certified that it will cease combustion of coal pursuant to §423.19(g) and such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2028, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after April 30, 2029.

(B) Where a unit has certified that it will cease combustion of coal pursuant to §423.19(g) and such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2028, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after December 31, 2028.

(iii) For bottom ash transport water generated by a low utilization electric generating unit, the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of the applicable wastewater times the concentration for TSS listed in §423.12(b)(4), until the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations in paragraph (k)(4) of this section, and shall incorporate the elements of a best management practices plan as described in paragraph (k)(3) of this section.

(3) Best management practices plan. Where required in paragraph (k)(2)(iii) of this section, the discharger shall prepare, implement, review, and update a best management practices plan for the recycle of bottom ash transport water, and must include:

(i) Identification of the low utilization coal-fired generating units that contribute bottom ash to the bottom ash transport system.

(ii) A description of the existing bottom ash handling system and a list of system components (e.g., remote mechanical drag system, tanks, impoundments, chemical addition). Where multiple generating units share a bottom ash transport system, the plan shall specify which components are associated with low utilization generating units.

(iii) A detailed water balance, based on measurements, or estimates where measurements are not feasible, specifying the volume and frequency of water additions and removals from the bottom ash transport system, including:

(A) Water removed from the BA transport system:

(1) To the discharge outfall;

(2) To the FGD scrubber system;

(3) Through evaporation;

(4) Entrained with any removed ash; and

(5) To any other mechanisms not specified paragraphs (k)(3)(iii)(A)(1) through (4) of this section.

(B) Water entering or recycled to the BA transport system:

(1) Makeup water added to the BA transport water system.

(2) Bottom ash transport water recycled back to the system in lieu of makeup water.

(3) Any other mechanisms not specified in paragraphs (k)(3)(iii)(B)(1) and (2) of this section.

(iv) Measures to be employed by all facilities:

(A) Implementation of a comprehensive preventive maintenance program to identify, repair and replace equipment prior to failures that result in the release of bottom ash transport water.

(B) Daily or more frequent inspections of the entire bottom ash transport water system, including valves, pipe flanges and piping, to identify leaks, spills and other unintended bottom ash transport water escaping from the system, and timely repair of such conditions.

(C) Documentation of preventive and corrective maintenance performed.

(v) Evaluation of options and feasibility, accounting for the associated costs, for eliminating or minimizing discharges of bottom ash transport water, including:

(A) Segregation of bottom ash transport water from other process water.

(B) Minimization of the introduction of stormwater by diverting (e.g., curbing, using covers) storm water to a segregated collection system.

(C) Recycling bottom ash transport water back to the bottom ash transport water system.

(D) Recycling bottom ash transport water for use in the FGD scrubber.

(E) Optimization of existing equipment (e.g., pumps, pipes, tanks) and installing new equipment where practicable to achieve the maximum amount of recycle.

(F) Utilization of “in-line” treatment of transport water (e.g., pH control, fines removal) where needed to facilitate recycle.

(vi) Description of the bottom ash recycle system, including all technologies, measures, and practices that will be used to minimize discharge.

(vii) A schedule showing the sequence of implementing any changes necessary to achieve the minimized discharge of bottom ash transport water, including the following:

(A) The anticipated initiation and completion dates of construction and installation associated with the technology components or process modifications specified in the plan.

(B) The anticipated dates that the discharger expects the technologies and process modifications to be fully implemented on a full-scale basis, which in no case shall be later than December 31, 2023.

(C) The anticipated change in discharge volume and effluent quality associated with implementation of the plan.

(viii) Description establishing a method for documenting and demonstrating to the permitting/control authority that the recycle system is well operated and maintained.

(ix) Performance of weekly flow monitoring for the following:

(A) Make up water to the bottom ash transport water system.

(B) Bottom ash transport water sluice flow rate (e.g., to the surface impoundment(s), dewatering bins(s), tank(s), remote mechanical drag system).

(C) Bottom ash transport water discharge to surface water or publicly owned treatment works (POTW).

(D) Bottom ash transport water recycle back to the bottom ash system or FGD scrubber.

(4) 2024 BAT.(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraphs (k)(4)(ii) through (iv) of this section applies, or when the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. Dischargers must meet the discharge limitation in this paragraph (k)(4)(i) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning July 8, 2024, but no later than December 31, 2029. The limitation in this paragraph (k)(4)(i) applies to the discharge of bottom ash transport water generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the discharge limitation, as specified in this paragraph (k)(4)(i).

(ii) For any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of less than or equal to 50 megawatts or that is an oil-fired unit, the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of the applicable wastewater times the concentration for TSS listed in §423.12(b)(4).

(iii) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(h), the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall continue to be subject to limitations specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2)(i) or (iii) of this section as incorporated into the existing permit.

(A) Where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after April 30, 2035.

(B) Where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after December 31, 2034.

(iv) For bottom ash transport water discharged from any coal combustion residual surface impoundment which commences closure pursuant to 40 CFR 257.102(e) after July 8, 2024, the quantity of pollutants in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of bottom ash transport water times the concentration listed in table 10 to this paragraph (k)(4)(iv).

Table 10 to Paragraph (k)(4)(iv)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

(l) Combustion residual leachate(1) 2024 BAT.(i) Except for those discharges to which paragraph (l)(1)(i)(B) or (C) or (1)(2) of this section applies, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in combustion residual leachate.

(A) Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for combustion residual leachate in this paragraph (l)(1)(i) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning July 8, 2024, but no later than December 31, 2029. The effluent limitations in this paragraph (l)(1)(i) apply to the discharge of combustion residual leachate generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (l)(1)(i).

(B) A facility which submits a request under §423.19(n) may discharge permeate or distillate from a combustion residual leachate treatment system designed to achieve the limitations in this paragraph (l)(1)(i) for an additional period of up to one year from the date determined in paragraph (l)(1)(i)(A) of this section.

(C) After the retirement of all units at a facility, the quantity of pollutants in combustion residual leachate (CRL) shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of CRL permeate times the concentrations listed in the table 7 to paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section or the flow of CRL distillate times the concentrations listed in the table following §423.15(b)(13).

(ii) For combustion residual leachate generated before the date determined by the permitting authority, as specified in paragraph (l)(1)(i) of this section, the EPA is declining to establish BAT limitations and is reserving such limitations to be established by the permitting authority on a case-by-case basis using the permitting authority's best professional judgment.

(2) 2024 BAT subcategories.(i) Discharges of combustion residual leachate for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(h).

(A) Where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2034, the quantity of pollutants in combustion residual leachate shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of combustion residual leachate times the concentration listed in table 11 to this paragraph (l)(2)(i)(A) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning 120 days after the facility permanently ceases coal combustion, but no later than April 30, 2035.

Table 11 to paragraph (l)(2)(i)(A)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

(B) Where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in combustion residual leachate after December 31, 2034.

(ii) For discharges of unmanaged combustion residual leachate, the quantity of pollutants in unmanaged combustion residual leachate shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of unmanaged combustion residual leachate times the concentration listed in the table 11 to paragraph (l)(2)(i)(A) of this section.

(A) Dischargers must meet the effluent limitations for unmanaged combustion residual leachate in this paragraph (l)(2)(ii) by a date determined by the permitting authority that is as soon as possible beginning July 8, 2024, but no later than December 31, 2029. The effluent limitations in this paragraph (l)(2)(ii) apply to the discharge of unmanaged combustion residual leachate generated on and after the date determined by the permitting authority for meeting the effluent limitations, as specified in this paragraph (l)(2)(ii).

(B) Discharges of unmanaged combustion residual leachate before the date determined in paragraph (l)(2)(ii)(A) of this section.

(iii) For combustion residual leachate discharged from any coal combustion residual surface impoundment which commences closure pursuant to 40 CFR 257.102(e) after July 8, 2024, the quantity of pollutants in combustion residual leachate shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of combustion residual leachate times the concentration listed in table 12 to this paragraph (l)(2)(iii).

Table 12 to Paragraph (l)(2)(iii)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyBAT effluent limitations
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

* * * * *

(o) Transfers.(1) Transfer between applicable limitations in a permit. Where, in the permit, the permitting authority has included alternative limits subject to eligibility requirements, upon timely notification to the permitting authority under §423.19(l), a facility can become subject to the alternative limits under the following circumstances:

(i) On or before December 31, 2023, a facility may convert:

(A) From limitations for electric generating units permanently ceasing coal combustion under paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (k)(2)(ii) of this section to limitations for low utilization electric generating units under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) or (k)(2)(iii) of this section; or

(B) From voluntary incentives program limitations under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section or generally applicable limitations under paragraph (k)(1)(i) of this section to limitations for low utilization electric generating units under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) or (k)(2)(iii) of this section.

(ii) On or before December 31, 2025, a facility may convert:

(A) From voluntary incentives program limitations under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section to limitations for electric generating units permanently ceasing coal combustion under paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this section; or

(B) From limitations for electric generating units permanently ceasing coal combustion under paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (k)(2)(ii) of this section to voluntary incentives program limitations under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section or generally applicable limitations under (k)(1)(i) of this section; or

(C) From limitations for low utilization electric generating units under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) or (k)(2)(iii) of this section to generally applicable limitations under paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (k)(1)(i) of this section; or

(D) From limitations for low utilization electric generating units under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) or (k)(2)(iii) of this section to voluntary incentives program limitations under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section or generally applicable limitations under paragraph (k)(1)(i) of this section; or

(E) From limitations for low utilization electric generating units under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) or (k)(2)(iii) of this section to limitations for electric generating units permanently ceasing coal combustion under paragraph (g)(2)(i) and (k)(2)(ii) of this section.

(2) A facility must be in compliance with all of its currently applicable requirements to be eligible to file a notice under §423.19(l) and to become subject to a different set of applicable requirements under paragraph (o)(1) of this section.

(3) Where a facility seeking a transfer under paragraph (o)(1)(ii) of this section is currently subject to more stringent limitations than the limitations being sought, the facility must continue to meet those more stringent limitations.

* * * * *

§423.16 Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).

* * * * *

(e) FGD wastewater(1) 2020 PSES. Except as provided for in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, for any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts, that is not an oil-fired unit, and that the owner has not certified that it will cease coal combustion pursuant to §423.19(g), the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in table 3 to this paragraph (e)(1). Dischargers must meet the standards in this paragraph (e)(1) by October 13, 2023, except as provided for in paragraph (e)(2) of this section. The standards in this paragraph (e)(1) apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after October 13, 2023.

Table 3 to Paragraph (e)(1)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyPSES
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)188
Mercury, total (ng/L)10334
Selenium, total (µg/L)7029
Nitrate/nitrite as N (mg/L)43

(2) 2020 PSES subcategories.(i) For FGD wastewater discharges from a low utilization electric generating unit, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in the table 4 to paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section. Dischargers must meet the standards in this paragraph (e)(2)(i) by October 13, 2023.

(ii) If any low utilization electric generating unit fails to timely recertify that the two year average capacity utilization rating of such an electric generating unit is below 10 percent per year as specified in §423.19(f), regardless of the reason, within two years from the date such a recertification was required, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in the table 3 to paragraph (e)(1) of this section.

Table 4 to Paragraph (e)(2)(ii)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyPSES
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

(3) 2024 PSES. Except as provided for in paragraph (e)(4) of this section, for any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts and that is not an oil-fired unit, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater. Dischargers must meet the standards in this paragraph (e)(3) by May 9, 2027, except as provided for in paragraph (e)(4) of this section. The standards in this paragraph (e)(3) apply to the discharge of FGD wastewater generated on and after May 9, 2027.

(4) 2024 PSES subcategories.(i) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(h), the quantity of pollutants discharged in FGD wastewater shall continue to be subject to standards specified in paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section as incorporated into the existing control mechanism.

(A) Where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after April 30, 2035.

(B) Where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in FGD wastewater after December 31, 2034.

(ii) For FGD wastewater discharged from any coal combustion residual surface impoundment which commences closure pursuant to 40 CFR 257.102(e) after July 8, 2024, the quantity of pollutants in FGD wastewater shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of FGD wastewater times the concentration listed in the table 5 to this paragraph (e)(4)(ii).

Table 5 to Paragraph (e)(4)(ii)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyPSES
Maximum for any 1 dayAverage of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

* * * * *

(g) Bottom ash transport water(1) 2020 PSES. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(2) of this section applies, or when the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, for any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts, that is not an oil-fired unit, that is not a low utilization electric generating unit, and that the owner has not certified that the electric generating unit will cease coal combustion pursuant to §423.19(g), there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. The standard in this paragraph (g)(1) applies to the discharge of bottom ash transport water generated on and after October 13, 2023. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(2) of this section applies, whenever bottom ash transport water is used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant (except when it is used in the FGD scrubber), the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge standard in this paragraph (g)(1). When the bottom ash transport water is used in the FGD scrubber, the quantity of pollutants in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of bottom ash transport water times the concentration listed in table 3 to paragraph (e)(1) of this section.

(2) 2020 PSES subcategories.(i) The discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water from a properly installed, operated, and maintained bottom ash system is authorized under the following conditions:

(A) To maintain system water balance when precipitation-related inflows are generated from a 10-year storm event of 24-hour or longer duration (e.g., 30-day storm event) and cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies, maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment; or

(B) To maintain system water balance when regular inflows from wastestreams other than bottom ash transport water exceed the ability of the bottom ash system to accept recycled water and segregating these other wastestreams is feasible; or

(C) To maintain system water chemistry where current operations at the facility are unable to currently manage pH, corrosive substances, substances or conditions causing scaling, or fine particulates to below levels which impact system operation or maintenance; or

(D) To conduct maintenance not otherwise included in paragraphs (g)(2)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section and not exempted from the definition of transport water in §423.11(p), and when water volumes cannot be managed by installed spares, redundancies, maintenance tanks, and other secondary bottom ash system equipment.

(ii) The total volume that may be discharged to a POTW for the activities in paragraphs (g)(2)(i)(A) through (D) of this section shall be reduced or eliminated to the extent achievable as determined by the control authority. The control authority may also include control measures (including best management practices) that are technologically available and economically achievable in light of best industry practice. In no event shall the total volume of the discharge exceed a 30-day rolling average of ten percent of the primary active wetted bottom ash system volume. The volume of daily discharges used to calculate the 30-day rolling average shall be calculated using measurements from flow monitors.

(iii) For bottom ash transport water generated by a low utilization electric generating unit, the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall incorporate the elements of a best management practices plan as described in §423.13(k)(3).

(3) 2024 PSES. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(4) of this section applies, for any electric generating unit with a total nameplate generating capacity of more than 50 megawatts, that is not an oil-fired unit, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water. The standard in this paragraph (g)(3) applies to the discharge of bottom ash transport water generated on and after May 9, 2027. Except for those discharges to which paragraph (g)(4) of this section applies, whenever bottom ash transport water is used in any other plant process or is sent to a treatment system at the plant, the resulting effluent must comply with the discharge standard in this paragraph (g)(3).

(4) 2024 PSES subcategories.(i) For any electric generating unit for which the owner has submitted a certification pursuant to §423.19(h), the quantity of pollutants discharged in bottom ash transport water shall continue to be subject to standards specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) as incorporated into the existing control mechanism.

(A) Where such unit has permanently ceased coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after April 30, 2035.

(B) Where such unit has failed to permanently cease coal combustion by December 31, 2034, there shall be no discharge of pollutants in bottom ash transport water after December 31, 2034.

(ii) For bottom ash transport water discharged from any coal combustion residual surface impoundment which commences closure pursuant to 40 CFR 257.102(e) after July 8, 2024, the quantity of pollutants in bottom ash transport water shall not exceed the quantity determined by multiplying the flow of bottom ash transport water times the concentration listed in table 6 to this paragraph (g)(4)(ii).

Table 6 to Paragraph (g)(4)(ii)
Pollutant or pollutant propertyPSES
Maximum for any 1 day Average of daily values for 30 consecutive days shall not exceed
Arsenic, total (µg/L)118
Mercury, total (ng/L)788356

* * * * *

§423.18 Permit conditions.

All permits subject to this part shall include the following permit conditions:

(a) An electric generating unit shall qualify as a low utilization electric generating unit, permanently ceasing the combustion of coal by December 31, 2028, or permanently ceasing the combustion of coal by December 31, 2034, if such qualification would have been demonstrated absent the following qualifying event:

(1) An emergency order issued by the Department of Energy under section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act;

(2) A reliability must run agreement issued by a Public Utility Commission; or

(3) Any other reliability-related order, energy emergency alert, or agreement issued by a competent electricity regulator (e.g., an independent system operator) which results in that electric generating unit operating in a way not contemplated when the certification was made; or

(4) The operation of the electric generating unit was necessary for load balancing in an area subject to a declaration under 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq., that there exists:

(i) An “Emergency”; or

(ii) A “Major Disaster”; and

(iii) That load balancing was due to the event that caused the “Emergency” or “Major Disaster” in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section to be declared.

(b) Any facility providing the required documentation pursuant to §423.19(i) may avail itself of the protections of the permit condition in paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) A facility discharging permeate or distillate from an FGD wastewater or combustion residual leachate treatment system and satisfying §423.19(n) shall be deemed to meet the following requirements:

(1) The FGD wastewater requirements of §423.13(g)(4) for up to one year after the date determined pursuant to §423.11(t); and

(2) The combustion residual leachate requirements of §423.13(l)(1) for up to one year after the date determined pursuant to §423.11(t).

§423.19 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

(a) In general. Discharges subject to this part must comply with the reporting requirements in this section.

(b) Signature and certification. Unless otherwise provided in this section, all certifications and recertifications required in this part must be signed and certified pursuant to 40 CFR 122.22 for direct dischargers or 40 CFR 403.12(l) for indirect dischargers.

(c) Publicly accessible internet site requirements.(1) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, each facility subject to one or more of the reporting requirements in paragraphs (d) through (o) of this section must maintain a publicly accessible internet site (ELG website) containing the information specified in paragraphs (d) through (o), if applicable. This website shall be titled “ELG Rule Compliance Data and Information.” The facility must ensure that all information required to be posted is immediately available to anyone visiting the site, without requiring any prerequisite, such as registration or a requirement to submit a document request. All required information must be clearly identifiable and must be able to be immediately downloaded by anyone accessing the site in a format that enables additional analysis (e.g., comma-separated values text file format). When the facility initially creates, or later changes, the web address (i.e., Uniform Resource Locator (URL)) at any point, they must notify EPA via the “contact us” form on EPA's Effluent Guidelines website and the permitting authority or control authority within 14 days of creating the website or making the change. The facility's ELG website must also have a “contact us” form or a specific email address posted on the website for the public to use to submit questions and issues relating to the availability of information on the website.

(2)(i) When an owner or operator subject to this section already maintains a “CCR Rule Compliance Data and Information” website pursuant to 40 CFR 257.107, the postings required under this section may be made to the existing “CCR Rule Compliance Data and Information” website and shall be delineated under a separate heading that shall state “ELG Rule Compliance Data and Information.” When electing to use an existing website pursuant to this paragraph (c)(2), the facility shall notify EPA via the “contact us” form on EPA's Effluent Guidelines website and the permitting authority or control authority no later than July 8, 2024, or upon first becoming subject to paragraphs (d) through (o) of this section, whichever is later.

(ii) When the same owner or operator is subject to the provisions of this part for multiple facilities, the owner or operator may comply with the requirements of this section by using the same internet site for multiple facilities provided the ELG website clearly delineates information by the name of each facility.

(3) Unless otherwise required in this section, the information required to be posted to the ELG website must be made available to the public for at least 10 years following the date on which the information was first posted to the ELG website, or the length of the permit plus five years, whichever is longer. All required information must be clearly identifiable and must be able to be immediately downloaded by anyone accessing the site in a format that enables additional analysis (e.g., comma-separated values text file format).

(4) Unless otherwise required in this section, the information must be posted to the ELG website:

(i) Within 30 days of submitting the information to the permitting authority or control authority; or

(ii) Where information was submitted to the permitting authority or control authority prior to July 8, 2024, by July 8, 2024.

(d) Requirements for facilities discharging bottom ash transport water under this part(1) Certification statement. For sources seeking to discharge bottom ash transport water pursuant to §423.13(k)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(i), an initial certification shall be submitted to the permitting authority by the as soon as possible date determined under §423.11(t), or the control authority by October 13, 2023, in the case of an indirect discharger.

(2) Signature and certification. The certification statement must be signed and certified by a professional engineer.

(3) Contents. An initial certification shall include the following:

(i) A statement that the professional engineer is a licensed professional engineer.

(ii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the requirements in this part.

(iii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the facility.

(iv) The primary active wetted bottom ash system volume in §423.11(aa).

(v) Material assumptions, information, and calculations used by the certifying professional engineer to determine the primary active wetted bottom ash system volume.

(vi) A list of all potential discharges under §423.13(k)(2)(i)(A)(1) through (4) or §423.16(g)(2)(i)(A) through (D), the expected volume of each discharge, and the expected frequency of each discharge.

(vii) Material assumptions, information, and calculations used by the certifying professional engineer to determine the expected volume and frequency of each discharge including a narrative discussion of why such water cannot be managed within the system and must be discharged.

(viii) A list of all wastewater treatment systems at the facility currently, or otherwise required by a date certain under this section.

(ix) A narrative discussion of each treatment system including the system type, design capacity, and current or expected operation.

(e) Requirements for a bottom ash best management practices plan(1) Initial and annual certification statement. For sources required to develop and implement a best management practices plan pursuant to §423.13(k)(3), an initial certification shall be made to the permitting authority with a permit application or within two years of October 13, 2021, whichever is later, or to the control authority no later than October 13, 2023, in the case of an indirect discharger, and an annual recertification shall be made to the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, within 60 days of the anniversary of the original plan.

(2) Signature and certification. The certification statement must be signed and certified by a professional engineer.

(3) Contents for initial certification. An initial certification shall include the following:

(i) A statement that the professional engineer is a licensed professional engineer.

(ii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the requirements in this part.

(iii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the facility.

(iv) The best management practices plan.

(v) A statement that the best management practices plan is being implemented.

(4) Additional contents for annual certification. In addition to the required contents of the initial certification in paragraph (e)(3) of this section an annual certification shall include the following:

(i) Any updates to the best management practices plan.

(ii) An attachment of weekly flow measurements from the previous year.

(iii) The average amount of recycled bottom ash transport water in gallons per day.

(iv) Copies of inspection reports and a summary of preventative maintenance performed on the system.

(v) A statement that the plan and corresponding flow records are being maintained at the office of the plant.

(f) Requirements for low utilization electric generating units(1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources seeking to qualify as a low utilization electric generating units, a Notice of Planned Participation shall be submitted to the permitting authority or control authority no later than October 13, 2021.

(2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall identify the potential low utilization electric generating unit. The notice shall also include a statement of at least two years' capacity utilization rating data for the most recent two years of operation of each low utilization electric generating unit and a statement that the facility has a good faith belief that each low utilization electric generating unit will continue to operate at the required capacity utilization rating. Where the most recent capacity utilization rating does not meet the low utilization electric generating unit requirement, a discussion of the projected future utilization shall be provided, including material data and assumptions used to make that projection.

(3) Initial and annual certification statement. For sources seeking to qualify as a low utilization electric generating unit under this part, an initial certification shall be made to the permitting authority, or to the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than December 31, 2023, and an annual recertification shall be made to the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, within 60 days of submitting annual electricity production data to the Energy Information Administration.

(4) Contents. A certification or annual recertification shall be based on the information submitted to the Energy Information Administration and shall include copies of the underlying forms submitted to the Energy Information Administration, as well as any supplemental information and calculations used to determine the two year average annual capacity utilization rating.

(g) Requirements for units that will achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion by December 31, 2028(1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources seeking to qualify as an electric generating unit that will achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion by December 31, 2028, under this part, a Notice of Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority, or to the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than June 27, 2023.

(2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall identify the electric generating units intended to achieve the permanent cessation of coal combustion. A Notice of Planned Participation shall include the expected date that each electric generating unit is projected to achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion, whether each date represents a retirement or a fuel conversion, whether each retirement or fuel conversion has been approved by a regulatory body, and what the relevant regulatory body is. The Notice of Planned Participation shall also include a copy of the most recent integrated resource plan for which the applicable state agency approved the retirement or repowering of the unit subject to the ELGs, certification of electric generating unit cessation under 40 CFR 257.103(b), or other documentation supporting that the electric generating unit will permanently cease the combustion of coal by December 31, 2028. The Notice of Planned Participation shall also include, for each such electric generating unit, a timeline to achieve the permanent cessation of coal combustion. Each timeline shall include interim milestones and the projected dates of completion.

(3) Annual progress report. Annually after submission of the Notice of Planned Participation in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, a progress report shall be filed with the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger.

(4) Contents. An annual progress report shall detail the completion of any interim milestones listed in the Notice of Planned Participation since the previous progress report, provide a narrative discussion of any completed, missed, or delayed milestones, and provide updated milestones. An annual progress report shall also include one of the following:

(i) A copy of the official suspension filing (or equivalent filing) made to the facility's reliability authority detailing the conversion to a fuel source other than coal;

(ii) A copy of the official retirement filing (or equivalent filing) made to the facility's reliability authority which must include a waiver of recission rights; or

(iii) An initial certification, or recertification for subsequent annual progress reports, containing either a statement that the facility will make the filing required in paragraph (g)(4)(i) of this section or a statement that the facility will make the filing required in paragraph (g)(4)(ii) of this section. The certification or recertification must include the estimated date that such a filing will be made.

(iv) A facility shall not include a certification or recertification under paragraph (g)(4)(iii) of this section in the final annual progress report submitted prior to permanent cessation of coal combustion. Rather, this final annual progress report must include the filing under paragraph (g)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.

(h) Requirements for units that will achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion by December 31, 2034(1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources seeking to qualify as an electric generating unit that will achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion by December 31, 2034, under this part, a Notice of Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority, or to the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than December 31, 2025.

(2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall identify the electric generating units intended to achieve the permanent cessation of coal combustion. A Notice of Planned Participation shall include the expected date that each electric generating unit is projected to achieve permanent cessation of coal combustion, whether each date represents a retirement or a fuel conversion, whether each retirement or fuel conversion has been approved by a regulatory body, and what the relevant regulatory body is. The Notice of Planned Participation shall also include a copy of the most recent integrated resource plan for which the applicable state agency approved the retirement or repowering of the unit subject to the ELGs, or other documentation supporting that the electric generating unit will permanently cease the combustion of coal by December 31, 2034. The Notice of Planned Participation shall also include, for each such electric generating unit, a timeline to achieve the permanent cessation of coal combustion. Each timeline shall include interim milestones and the projected dates of completion. Finally, the Notice of Planned Participation shall also include, for each such electric generating unit, a certification statement that the facility is in compliance with the following limitations or standards:

(i) The applicable limitations or standards for FGD wastewater in §423.13(g)(1) or (g)(2)(ii) or (iii) or §423.16(e)(1) or (2); and

(ii) The applicable limitations or standards for bottom ash transport water in §423.13(k)(1) or (k)(2)(i) or (iii) or §423.16(g)(1) or (2).

(3) Annual progress report. Annually after submission of the Notice of Planned Participation in paragraph (h)(1) of this section, a progress report shall be filed with the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger.

(4) Contents. An annual progress report shall detail the completion of any interim milestones listed in the Notice of Planned Participation since the previous progress report, provide a narrative discussion of any completed, missed, or delayed milestones, and provide updated milestones. An annual progress report shall also include one of the following:

(i) A copy of the official suspension filing (or equivalent filing) made to the facility's reliability authority detailing the conversion to a fuel source other than coal;

(ii) A copy of the official retirement filing (or equivalent filing) made to the facility's reliability authority which must include a waiver of recission rights; or

(iii) An initial certification, or recertification for subsequent annual progress reports, containing either a statement that the facility will make the filing required in paragraph (h)(4)(i) of this section or a statement that the facility will make the filing required in paragraph (h)(4)(ii) of this section. The certification or recertification must include the estimated date that such a filing will be made.

(iv) A facility shall not include a certification or recertification under paragraph (h)(4)(iii) of this section in the final annual progress report submitted prior to permanent cessation of coal combustion. Rather, this final annual progress report must include the filing under paragraph (h)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section.

(i) Requirements for facilities seeking protections under this part(1) Certification statement. For sources seeking to apply the protections of the permit conditions in §423.18(a), and for each instance that §423.18(a) is applied, a one-time certification shall be submitted to the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than:

(i) In the case of an order or agreement under §423.18(a)(1), 30 days from receipt of the order or agreement attached pursuant to paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section; or

(ii) In the case of an “Emergency” or “Major Disaster” under §423.18(a)(2), 30 days from the date that a load balancing need arose.

(2) Contents. A certification statement must include the following:

(i) The qualifying event from the list in §423.18(a), the individual or entity that issued or triggered the event, and the date that such an event was issued or triggered.

(ii) A copy of any documentation of the qualifying event from the individual or entity listed under paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section, or, where such documentation does not exist, other documentation with indicia of reliability for the permitting authority to confirm the qualifying event.

(iii) An analysis and accompanying narrative discussion which demonstrates that an electric generating unit would have qualified for the subcategory at issue absent the event detailed in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section, including the material data, assumptions, and methods used.

(3) Termination of need statement. For sources filing a certification statement under paragraph (i)(1) of this section, and for each such certification statement, a one-time termination of need statement shall be submitted to the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than 30 days from when the source is no longer subject to increased production from the qualifying event.

(4) Contents. A termination of need statement must include a narrative discussion including the date the qualifying event terminated, or if it has not terminated, why the source believes the capacity utilization will no longer be elevated to a level requiring the protection of §423.18.

(j) Requirements for facilities voluntarily meeting limits in this part(1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources opting to comply with the Voluntary Incentives Program requirements of §423.13(g)(3)(i) by December 31, 2028, a Notice of Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority no later than October 13, 2021.

(2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall identify the facility opting to comply with the Voluntary Incentives Program requirements of §423.13(g)(3)(i), specify what technology or technologies are projected to be used to comply with those requirements, and provide a detailed engineering dependency chart and accompanying narrative demonstrating when and how the system(s) and any accompanying disposal requirements will be achieved by December 31, 2028.

(3) Annual progress report. After submission of the Notice of Planned Participation in paragraph (j)(1) of this section, a progress report shall be filed with the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger.

(4) Contents. An annual progress report shall detail the completion of interim milestones presented in the engineering dependency chart from the Notice of Planned Participation since the previous progress report, provide a narrative discussion of completed, missed, or delayed milestones, and provide updated milestones.

(5) Rollover certification. Where, prior to October 13, 2020, a discharger has already provided a notice to the permitting authority of opting to comply with the Voluntary Incentives Program requirements of §423.13(g)(3)(i), such notice will satisfy paragraph (j)(1) of this section. However, where details required by paragraph (j)(2) of this section were missing from the previously provided notice, those details must be provided in the first annual progress report, no later than October 13, 2021.

(k) Requirements for facilities with discharges of unmanaged combustion residual leachate(1) Annual combustion residual leachate monitoring report. In addition to reporting pursuant to 40 CFR part 127, each facility with discharges of unmanaged combustion residual leachate meeting the definition in §423.11(ff)(1) shall file an annual combustion residual leachate monitoring report each calendar year to the permitting authority.

(2) Contents. The annual combustion residual leachate monitoring report shall provide the following monitoring data for each pollutant listed in table 1 to paragraph (k)(2)(v) of this section. For paragraphs (k)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section the report shall also describe the location of monitoring wells, screening depth, and frequency of sampling. The report shall include summary statistics including monthly minimum, maximum, and average concentrations for each pollutant. The report shall be supported by an appendix of all samples.

(i) A list of coal combustion residual landfills and surface impoundments which the permitting authority has determined are point sources with functional equivalent direct discharges.

(ii) Groundwater monitoring data as the combustion residual leachate leaves each of the landfills or surface impoundment listed in paragraph (k)(2)(i) of this section.

(iii) Groundwater monitoring at the point the combustion residual leachate enters a surface waterbody.

(iv) Effluent monitoring data reported pursuant to 40 CFR part 127.

(v) Summary statistics for the data described in paragraphs (k)(2)(ii) through (iv) of this section including the monthly average and daily maximum of each pollutant in the table 1 to this paragraph (k)(2)(v) and a comparison to any limitation in §423.13(l)(2)(ii).

Table 1 to Paragraph
BAT Treated Pollutants in Combustion Residual Leachate
AntimonyMagnesium
ArsenicManganese
BariumMercury
BerylliumMolybdenum
CadmiumNickel
ChromiumThallium
CobaltTitanium
CopperVanadium
LeadZinc

(l) Requirements for facilities seeking to transfer between applicable limitations in a permit under this part(1) Notice of Planned Participation. For sources which have filed a Notice of Planned Participation under paragraph (f)(1), (g)(1), or (j)(1) of this section and intend to make changes that would qualify them for a different set of requirements under §423.13(o), a Notice of Planned Participation shall be made to the permitting authority, or to the control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than the dates stated in §423.13(o)(1).

(2) Contents. A Notice of Planned Participation shall include a list of the electric generating units for which the source intends to change compliance alternatives. For each such electric generating unit, the notice shall list the specific provision under which this transfer will occur, the reason such a transfer is warranted, and a narrative discussion demonstrating that each electric generating unit will be able to maintain compliance with the relevant provisions.

(m) Notice of material delay(1) Notice. Within 30 days of experiencing a material delay in the milestones set forth in paragraph (g)(2), (h)(2), or (j)(2) of this section and where such a delay may preclude permanent cessation of coal combustion or compliance with the voluntary incentives program limitations by December 31, 2028, a facility shall file a notice of material delay with the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger.

(2) Contents. The contents of such a notice shall include the reason for the delay, the projected length of the delay, and a proposed resolution to maintain compliance.

(n) Requirements for facilities seeking a one-year flexibility to discharge permeate or distillate from an FGD wastewater or combustion residual leachate treatment system designed to achieve limitations in this part(1) Initial request letter. When filing a permit application or permit modification request, a facility seeking to discharge permeate or distillate during the first year of operations after the date determined in §423.13(g)(4)(i)(A) or (l)(1)(i)(A) shall include a letter requesting this flexibility from the permitting authority. The initial request letter shall detail the expected type, frequency, duration, and necessity of discharge. The initial request letter shall also state that this period of discharge was not included for consideration in establishing the applicability timing under §423.11(t)(3).

(2) Discharge monitoring and reporting. Upon inclusion in the permit of the flexibility to discharge the permeate or distillate as requested in paragraph (n)(1) of this section, the permitting authority shall also extend any existing monitoring and reporting requirements (e.g., arsenic monitoring).

(o) Certification for wastewater generated by a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration storm event(1) Storm Event Discharge Certification Statement. For sources seeking to discharge low volume wastewater which would otherwise be considered FGD wastewater, bottom ash transport water, or combustion residual leachate but for a storm event exceeding a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration storm event, a Storm Event Discharge Certification Statement shall be submitted to the permitting authority, or control authority in the case of an indirect discharger, no later than five business days from the last discharge.

(2) Signature and certification. The certification statement must be signed and certified by a professional engineer.

(3) Contents. A Storm Event Discharge Certification shall include the following:

(i) A statement that the professional engineer is a licensed professional engineer.

(ii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the requirements in this part.

(iii) A statement that the professional engineer is familiar with the facility.

(iv) A statement that the facility experienced a storm event exceeding a 10-year, 24-hour or longer duration, including specifics of the actual storm event that are sufficient for a third party to verify the accuracy of the statement.

(v) A statement that a discharge of low volume wastewater that would otherwise meet the definition of FGD wastewater, bottom ash transport water, or combustion residual leachate was necessary, including a list of the best management practices at the site and a narrative discussion of the ability of on-site equipment and practices to manage the wastewater.

(vi) The duration and volume of any such discharge.

(vii) A statement that the discharge does not otherwise violate any other limitation or permit condition.

2024-05-09T05:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: New Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing multiple actions under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs). First, the EPA is finalizing the repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule. Second, the EPA is finalizing emission guidelines for GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired steam generating EGUs, which include both coal-fired and oil/gas-fired steam generating EGUs. Third, the EPA is finalizing revisions to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for GHG emissions from new and reconstructed fossil fuel-fired stationary combustion turbine EGUs. Fourth, the EPA is finalizing revisions to the NSPS for GHG emissions from fossil fuel-fired steam generating units that undertake a large modification, based upon the 8-year review required by the CAA. The EPA is not finalizing emission guidelines for GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired stationary combustion turbines at this time; instead, the EPA intends to take further action on the proposed emission guidelines at a later date.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2024, published in the Federal Register May 9, 2024, page 39798.

View final rule.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

EHS Monthly Round Up - April 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - April 2024

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll go over the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. Let’s get started!

OSHA’s worker walkaround rule takes effect May 31st. It expands the criteria for who employees can authorize to act as their representative during an inspection.

Between 2015 and 2022, there were about 1,500 worker injuries involving food processing machinery. A new OSHA alert raises awareness of these hazards. It addresses hazard recognition, corrective measures, and workers’ rights.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) seeks stakeholder input on protecting outdoor workers from wildfire smoke. The agency intends to develop a hazard review document that provides recommendations to protect workers.

The Mine Safety and Health Administration published a final rule that lowers miners’ exposure to silica dust. It also revises the standard to reflect the latest advances in respiratory protection and practices.

OSHA released 2023 injury and illness data. The agency provides public access to this information in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to injuries and illnesses.

And turning to environmental news, EPA finalized a rule to designate two widely used PFAS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA. The rule requires immediate release notifications for the two PFAS. It also gives EPA the authority to hold polluters responsible for contamination.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - March 2024

EHS Monthly Round Up - March 2024

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll go over the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. Let’s get started! The Office of Management and Budget completed its review of OSHA’s worker walkaround final rule on March 20. The next step is publication in the Federal Register. The rule expands the criteria for who employees can authorize to act as their representative during an OSHA inspection.

Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week was held the week of March 25. This annual event brings attention to hazards in the grain handling and storage industry and encourages employers to focus on safe work practices.

Over 100 people die in ladder-related deaths each year, and thousands more suffer disabling injuries. During Ladder Safety Month, which is held each March, the American Ladder Institute promotes ladder safety to decrease the number of injuries and fatalities.

Between 2010 and 2023, 11 miners drowned in incidents involving submerged mobile equipment. In response, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert. It recommends measures miners should take when operating equipment near water.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA finalized amendments to its Risk Management Program in an effort to improve safety at facilities that use and distribute hazardous chemicals. The rule seeks to improve chemical process safety; assist in planning for, preparing for, and responding to accidents; and increase public awareness of chemical hazards at regulated sites.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

2024-05-08T05:00:00Z

EPA Final Rule: Methylene Chloride regulation under TSCA

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is finalizing a rule to address the unreasonable risk of injury to health presented by methylene chloride under its conditions of use. TSCA requires that EPA address by rule any unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment identified in a TSCA risk evaluation and apply requirements to the extent necessary so that the chemical no longer presents unreasonable risk. EPA's final rule will, among other things, prevent serious illness and death associated with uncontrolled exposures to the chemical by preventing consumer access to the chemical, restricting the industrial and commercial use of the chemical while also allowing for a reasonable transition period where an industrial and commercial use of the chemical is being prohibited, provide a time-limited exemption for a critical or essential use of methylene chloride for which no technically and economically feasible safer alternative is available, and protect workers from the unreasonable risk of methylene chloride while on the job.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2024, published in the Federal Register, May 8, 2024.

View final rule.

§751.5 Definitions.
definitions for “Article”, “Authorized person”, “Owner or operator”, “Potentially exposed person”, “Product”, “Regulated area”, and “Retailer” AddedView text
§751.101 General.
Entire sectionRevisedView text
§751.103 Definitions.
definition of “Distribution in commerce”RevisedView text
definitions for “ECEL”, “ECEL action level”, and “EPA STEL”RevisedView text
§751.105 Consumer paint and coating removal.
Section headingRevisedView text
§751.107 Downstream notification.
Entire section as 751.111RedesignatedView text
New 751.107AddedView text
§751.109 Recordkeeping.
Entire section as 751.113RedesignatedView text
New 751.109AddedView text
§751.115 Exemptions.
Entire sectionAddedView text
§751.117 Interim requirements for paint and coating removal for the refinishing of wooden furniture, decorative pieces, and architectural fixtures of artistic, cultural, or historic value.
Entire sectionAddedView text

New Text

§751.101 General.

(a) Applicability. This subpart sets certain restrictions on the manufacture (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of methylene chloride (CASRN 75-09-2) to prevent unreasonable risks of injury to health.

(b) De minimis threshold. Unless otherwise specified in this subpart, the prohibitions and restrictions of this subpart do not apply to products containing methylene chloride at thresholds less than 0.1 percent by weight. This provision does not apply to 751.105.

§751.103 Definitions.

* * * * *

Distribution in commerce has the same meaning as in section 3 of the Act, except that the term does not include retailers for purposes of §§751.111 and 751.113.

* * * * *

§751.105 Prohibition of manufacturing (including import), processing, and distribution in commerce related to consumer paint and coating removal.

§751.107 Other prohibitions of manufacturing (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, and use.

(a) Applicability.(1) This section applies to all manufacturing (including import), processing, and distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for consumer use other than for the paint and coating removal use addressed under 751.105.

(2) This section applies to:

(i) All manufacturing (including import), processing, and distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for industrial or commercial use, other than for the conditions of use addressed under 751.109(a); and

(ii) All commercial or industrial use of methylene chloride, other than the conditions of use addressed under 751.109(a).

(3) This section does not apply to manufacturing, processing, or distribution in commerce of methylene chloride solely for export that meets the conditions described in TSCA section 12(a)(1)(A) and (B).

(b) Prohibitions.(1) After February 3, 2025, all persons are prohibited from distributing in commerce (including making available) methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride-containing products, to retailers for any use.

(2) After May 5, 2025, all retailers are prohibited from distributing in commerce (including making available) methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride-containing products, for any use.

(3) After May 5, 2025, all persons are prohibited from manufacturing (including import) methylene chloride, for the uses listed in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section except for those uses specified in paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) of this section.

(4) After August 1, 2025, all persons are prohibited from processing methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride-containing products, for the uses listed in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section except for those uses specified in paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) of this section.

(5) After January 28, 2026, all persons are prohibited from distributing in commerce (including making available) methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride-containing products, for any use described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section except for those uses specified in paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) of this section.

(6) After April 28, 2026, all persons are prohibited from industrial or commercial use of methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride containing products, for the uses listed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section except for those uses specified in paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) of this section.

(7) After May 8, 2034, all persons are prohibited from manufacturing (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, or use of methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride containing products, for industrial or commercial use in an emergency by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or its contractors as described in 751.115(b).

(8) After May 8, 2029, all persons are prohibited from manufacturing (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, or use of methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride containing products, for industrial or commercial use for paint and coating removal for refinishing of wooden furniture, decorative pieces and architectural fixtures of artistic, cultural, or historic significance, with interim requirements as described in 751.117.

(9) After May 8, 2029, all persons are prohibited from manufacturing (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, or use of methylene chloride, including any methylene chloride-containing products, for industrial or commercial use for adhesives and sealants in aircraft, space vehicle, and turbine applications for structural and safety critical non-structural applications.

§751.109 Workplace Chemical Protection Program.

(a) Applicability. The provisions of this section apply to the following conditions of use of methylene chloride, including manufacturing and processing for export, except to the extent the conditions of use are prohibited by §§751.105 and 751.107:

(1) Manufacturing (domestic manufacture);

(2) Manufacturing (import);

(3) Processing: as a reactant;

(4) Processing: incorporation into a formulation, mixture, or reaction product;

(5) Processing: repackaging;

(6) Processing: recycling;

(7) Industrial and commercial use as a laboratory chemical;

(8) Industrial or commercial use for paint and coating removal from safety-critical, corrosion-sensitive components of aircraft and spacecraft;

(9) Industrial or commercial use as a bonding agent for solvent welding;

(10) Industrial and commercial use as a processing aid;

(11) Industrial and commercial use for plastic and rubber products manufacturing;

(12) Industrial and commercial use as a solvent that becomes part of a formulation or mixture, where that formulation or mixture will be used inside a manufacturing process, and the solvent (methylene chloride) will be reclaimed; and

(13) Disposal.

(b) Relationship to other regulations. For purposes of this section:

(1) Any provisions applying to “employee” in 29 CFR 1910.132, 1910.134, and 1910.1052 also apply equally to potentially exposed persons; and

(2) Any provisions applying to “employer” in 29 CFR 1910.132, 1910.134, and 1910.1052 also apply equally to any owner or operator for the regulated area.

(c) Exposure limits(1) ECEL. The owner or operator must ensure that no person is exposed to an airborne concentration of methylene chloride in excess of 2 parts of methylene chloride per million parts of air (2 ppm) as an 8-hour TWA after February 8, 2027 for Federal agencies and Federal contractors acting for or on behalf of the Federal Government, August 1, 2025 for other owners and operators, or beginning 4 months after introduction of methylene chloride into the workplace if methylene chloride use commences after May 5, 2025, consistent with paragraphs (d) through (f) of this section.

(2) EPA STEL. The owner or operator must ensure that no person is exposed to an airborne concentration of methylene chloride in excess of 16 parts of methylene chloride per million parts of air (16 ppm) as determined over a sampling period of 15 minutes after February 8, 2027 for Federal agencies and Federal contractors acting for or on behalf of the Federal Government, August 1, 2025 for other owners and operators, or beginning 4 months after introduction of methylene chloride into the workplace if methylene chloride use commences after May 5, 2025, consistent with paragraphs (d) through (f) of this section.

(3) Regulated areas. The owner or operator must:

(i) Establish and maintain regulated areas in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1052(e)(2) and (4) through (7) by February 8, 2027 for Federal agencies and Federal contractors acting for or on behalf of the Federal Government, August 1, 2025 for other owners and operators, or within 3 months after receipt of the results of any monitoring data consistent with paragraph (d) of this section.

(ii) Establish a regulated area wherever a potentially exposed person's exposure to airborne concentrations of methylene chloride exceeds or can reasonably be expected to exceed either the ECEL or EPA STEL.

(iii) Demarcate regulated areas from the rest of the workplace in any manner that adequately establishes and alerts potentially exposed persons to the boundaries of the area and minimizes the number of authorized persons exposed to methylene chloride within the regulated area.

(iv) Restrict access to the regulated area by any potentially exposed person who lacks proper training, personal protective equipment, or is otherwise unauthorized to enter.

(d) Exposure monitoring(1) In general(i) Characterization of exposures. Owners or operators must determine each potentially exposed person's exposure, without regard to respiratory protection, by either:

(A) Taking a personal breathing zone air sample of each potentially exposed person's exposure; or

(B) Taking personal breathing zone air samples that are representative of each potentially exposed person's exposure.

(ii) Representative samples. Owners or operators are permitted to consider personal breathing zone air samples to be representative of each potentially exposed person's exposure, without regard to respiratory protection, when they are taken as follows:

(A) ECEL. The owner or operator has taken one or more personal breathing zone air samples for at least one potentially exposed person in each job classification in a work area during every work shift, and the person sampled is expected to have the highest methylene chloride exposure.

(B) EPA STEL. The owner or operator has taken one or more personal breathing zone air samples which indicate the highest likely 15-minute exposures during such operations for at least one potentially exposed person in each job classification in the work area during every work shift, and the person sampled is expected to have the highest methylene chloride exposure.

(C) Exception. Personal breathing zone air samples taken during one work shift may be used to represent potentially exposed person exposures on other work shifts where the owner or operator can document that the tasks performed and conditions in the workplace are similar across shifts.

(iii) Accuracy of monitoring. Owners or operators must ensure that the methods used to perform exposure monitoring produce results that are accurate to a confidence level of 95%, and are:

(A) Within plus or minus 25% for airborne concentrations of methylene chloride above the ECEL or the EPA STEL; or

(B) Within plus or minus 35% for airborne concentrations of methylene chloride at or above the ECEL action level but at or below the ECEL.

(iv) Currency of monitoring data. Owners or operators are not permitted to rely on monitoring data that is more than 5 years old to demonstrate compliance with initial or periodic monitoring requirements for either the ECEL or the EPA STEL.

(2) Initial monitoring.