RULES AND REGULATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD
[25 PA. CODE CH. 109]
Safe Drinking Water; Radionuclides Rule
[34 Pa.B. 1762]
The Environmental Quality Board (Board) amends Chapter 109 (relating to safe drinking water). The final-form rulemaking includes requirements for uranium, which is not currently regulated, and amendments to the monitoring requirements for combined radium-226 and radium-228, gross alpha particle radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity. The final-form rulemaking also makes the radionuclides regulations more consistent with other regulations, such as amendments to monitoring frequencies and the point of compliance.
This order was adopted by the Board at its meeting of December 16, 2003.
A. Effective Date
The final-form rulemaking will go into effect upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
B. Contact Persons
For further information, contact Jeffrey A. Gordon, Chief, Division of Drinking Water Management, P. O. Box 8467, Rachel Carson State Office Building, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8467, (717) 772-4018; or Marylou Barton, Assistant Counsel, Bureau of Regulatory Counsel, P. O. Box 8464, Rachel Carson State Office Building, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8464, (717) 787-7060. Persons with a disability may use the AT&T Relay Service, (800) 654-5984 (TDD users) or (800) 654-5988 (voice users). This final-form rulemaking is available on the Department of Environmental Protection's (Department) website: www.dep. state.pa.us.
C. Statutory Authority
The final-form rulemaking is made under the authority of section 4 of the Pennsylvania Safe Drinking Water Act (35 P. S. § 721.4), which grants the Board the authority to adopt rules and regulations governing the provision of drinking water to the public, and sections 1917-A and 1920-A of The Administrative Code of 1929 (71 P. S. §§ 510-7 and 510-20).
D. Background of the Final-Form Rulemaking
In 1976, National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations were promulgated for combined radium-226 and radium-228, gross alpha particle radioactivity and beta particle and photon radioactivity. The 1986 reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) required the United State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) and National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for the previous radionuclides, radon and uranium.
In 1991, the EPA proposed new radionuclide regulations. These proposed regulations established MCLGs for all of the radionuclides, established maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for uranium (20 pCi/L or 30 µg/l) and radon (300 pCi/L) and revised the MCLs for radium-226 (20 pCi/L), radium-228 (20 pCi/L) and beta and photon radioactivity (4 mrem-effective dose equivalent). The proposal also established a standard monitoring framework, and changed the monitoring requirements for beta and photon radioactivity from large systems using surface water and serving over 100,000 people to only those systems that are vulnerable to contamination by radionuclides. The proposed regulation proved controversial, especially the radon component, and the regulation was not finalized at the time.
On April 21, 2000, the EPA published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) on radionuclides. The NODA included updated information on the health effects of the radionuclides. Based on the updated information, the EPA reestablished the combined radium MCL at 5 pCi/L, the beta and photon radioactivity at 4 mrem and requested comments on establishing a uranium MCL of 20, 40 or 80 µg/l or pCi/L. The EPA excluded radon from the proposed radionuclides rule as required by the 1996 SDWA amendments.
The EPA finalized the radionuclides rule on December 7, 2000. The final Federal regulation applies to all community water systems, retains the MCLs for combined radium-226 and radium-228, gross alpha particle activity and beta and photon radioactivity and establishes the uranium MCL at 30 µg/l, based on kidney toxicity. The final regulation also retains the standard monitoring framework proposed in 1991, as well as beta and photon radioactivity monitoring only for systems that are designated as vulnerable to radionuclide contamination or which utilize waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities. The deadline for adoption of this regulation was 2 years after Federal promulgation, or December 7, 2002. The Department has requested an extension from the EPA to allow the Commonwealth to maintain primacy for the Safe Drinking Water Program. The EPA has granted an extension until December 8, 2004.
To ensure that every customer's water in this Commonwealth meets the MCLs for radionuclides, the Department's Radionuclides Rule requires monitoring at each entry point to a community water system's distribution system. This requirement is consistent with the monitoring requirements for other, comparable drinking water contaminants. By contrast, the 1976 Rule protected only ''the average customer'' by requiring the collection of monitoring samples from a ''free flowing tap.''
The Technical Assistance Center for Small Water Systems Advisory Board (Board) reviewed the draft final-form rulemaking at their meeting on August 14, 2003. The Board endorsed the amendments to Chapter 109.
The Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) reviewed the draft final-form rulemaking at their meeting on September 10, 2003. The WRAC recommended that that the terms ''contaminated,'' ''nuclear facility,'' ''vicinity'' and ''vulnerable'' be defined in the preamble, since they are not defined in the text of the regulation.
''Contaminated systems'' will be identified by the prior analytical results for gross beta particle and photon radioactivity. Systems with wide variations in the analytical results or analytical results close to the MCL will be considered a system contaminated by a radioactive source.
''Nuclear facilities'' are nuclear power and nonpower plants, Department of Energy facilities, military bases utilizing nuclear materials and radiation-contaminated sites listed on the EPA's National Priority List or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Site Decommissioning Management Plan.
''Vulnerable systems'' are water systems that are located in the same watershed as a nuclear facility, or located within 15 miles downstream of a nuclear facility. Additional systems may be designated as vulnerable if the watershed contains hazardous geologic conditions, such as carbonate geology, highly fractured bedrock or gravel deposits.
A system will be defined as being ''in the vicinity of a nuclear facility'' if there is any environmental surveillance data taken by a nuclear facility that is applicable to the system, and which may be used instead of monitoring.
In addition, these terms will be further defined in Departmental guidance.
E. Summary of Changes to the Proposed Rulemaking
§ 109.301(8)(iii) (relating to general monitoring requirements)
This subparagraph applies to consecutive water systems and clarifies that the monitoring requirements for radionuclides do not apply to consecutive systems, provided that the public water system from which the finished water is obtained monitors for compliance with the MCLs for radionuclides established by the EPA.
This subclause was clarified to indicate the initial monitoring starting date for systems serving 3,301 or more persons.
§ 109.301(14)(i)(A)(VI)--(VII) and (B)(I)--(IV)
These subclauses were clarified to indicate that radionuclides are to be monitored individually, not lumped together as a group. Clause (A)(VI) and (VII) was renumbered as (V) and (VI), respectively, at final-form rulemaking due to the deletion of subclause (I).
This clause was clarified to indicate that January 1, 2008, is the beginning date of a compliance monitoring period.
This clause was amended to reflect consistent terminology throughout the paragraph. Several terms that all have the same meaning have been replaced by the term ''appropriate historical data.''
This subclause was clarified to indicate that the Department may require more frequent sampling, rather than more frequent monitoring, than specified in subparagraphs (i) and (ii).
§ 109.303(j) (relating to sampling requirements)
This subsection was deleted. It was determined that the location of performance samples is better handled through the permitting process than through the regulation.
§ 109.503(a)(1)(iii)(B)(VII) (relating to public water system construction permits)
This subclause was clarified to indicate that the new source sampling requirements also include radium-226, radium-228 and uranium.
F. Summary of Comments and Responses on the Proposed Rulemaking
The only comments submitted on the proposed rulemaking came from the EPA and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC). The following is a summary of the comments and the Board's responses.
The EPA noted that the Department left out the sentence stating that when a community water supply (CWS) substitutes gross alpha for radium-226 or uranium, the gross alpha result will be used to determine the future monitoring frequency for radium-226 or uranium, and that this omission could leave a reader unclear about how to determine when next to sample for radium-226 or uranium. The Board disagrees that this omission could result in confusion. When the gross alpha value is substituted for the radium-226 or uranium, or both, the result becomes the result for radium-226 or uranium, or both. The future monitoring is based on the values for radium-226 and uranium, not the gross alpha value.
IRRC commented that the phrases ''historical monitoring data,'' ''monitoring data,'' ''appropriate historical monitoring data'' and ''appropriate historical data'' have the same meaning, and that one term should be used consistently. The Board has changed the final-form rulemaking to reflect the use of one consistent term, ''appropriate historical data.''
IRRC commented that the term ''environmental surveillance data'' needs to be clarified. The Board notes that this term is not defined in the Federal regulation, but will include samples collected by either the nuclear facility or the Department. Environmental surveillance data typically include surface water samples downstream of the facility, air samples, milk samples and sediment samples. Several of the nuclear facilities (Susquehanna, Three Mile Island and Limerick) also collect samples at nearby water treatment plants.
IRRC questioned what criteria the Department will use to determine if a community water system is in the vicinity of a nuclear facility. The Board notes that the only place in the final-form rulemaking where the term ''vicinity of a nuclear facility'' is used is in the utilization of environmental surveillance data. Therefore, if the environmental surveillance data is applicable to the system, it will be considered to be in the ''vicinity of a nuclear facility.'' If the environmental surveillance data are not applicable to the system, it is not considered to be in the ''vicinity.''
IRRC commented that the proposed rulemaking did not contain a definition of a ''nuclear facility'' and questioned the rationale for defining the term in the preamble, rather than in the rulemaking. The Board notes that EPA does not include a definition of ''nuclear facility'' in its regulation. The definition is included in the guidance documents. The Board believes that it is in the best interest of the Commonwealth to define a term in the same manner that the EPA does. ''Nuclear facilities'' are defined as nuclear power and nonpower plants, Department of Energy facilities, military bases utilizing nuclear materials and radiation-contaminated sites listed on the EPA's National Priority List or the NRC's Site Decommissioning Management Plan.
The EPA commented that the proposed rulemaking did not contain provisions consistent with 40 CFR 141.66(f) (relating to maximum contaminant levels for radionuclides), which lists compliance dates. The Board notes that the compliance dates for the MCL and public notification requirements are incorporated by reference. The monitoring requirement will become effective immediately upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
The EPA commented that the proposed rulemaking did not contain provisions in the new regulations consistent with 40 CFR 141.66(g), which lists best available technologies (BAT). The Board has never listed BAT in its regulations. BAT is used for obtaining variances and exemptions. The Board requires the use of ''the best treatment technology that the Department, in concurrence with the Administrator, finds are generally available to reduce the level of the contaminant.'' BAT is also considered in the Department's permitting program, which the EPA does not have.
IRRC requested clarification on § 109.301(14)(iii)(A) concerning the requirement of more frequent monitoring. The Board has identified conditions where more frequent monitoring may be required. These conditions are listed in § 109.302 (relating to special monitoring requirements).
IRRC requested clarification on § 109.303(j) concerning performance monitoring. The Board has deleted this section, since it was determined that it would be best to address this issue on a case-by-case basis in the permitting process, rather than in regulation.
G. Benefits, Costs and Compliance
The purpose of the radionuclide regulation is to minimize the public risk of consuming drinking water containing unsafe levels of naturally occurring and manmade radionuclides.
The current regulations do not provide protection from kidney damage due to the presence of high levels of uranium in drinking water. The new uranium MCL will reduce the exposure of 620,000 persons in the United States to this contaminant, will protect CWS customers from exposure to uranium at levels that may cause kidney damage and will reduce the risk of cancer caused by exposure to uranium. An estimated 0.8 cancer case are expected to be avoided annually in the United States due to the MCL, resulting in estimated benefits of $3 million per year. (The monetary benefits from reduced kidney damage cannot be quantified because of limitation in existing health effects models at levels near the MCL.) Reducing the presence of uranium in drinking water will also remove other contaminants, providing additional benefits to CWS customers.
The current regulations do not require the analysis of radium-228 unless the gross alpha particle activity is greater than 5 pCi/L. However, since radium-228 is a beta emitter, linking the sampling to results of alpha particle activity is not protective of health. The new rule sets separate monitoring requirements for radium-228, which are expected to reduce the exposure of 420,000 persons in the United States and result in the avoidance of 0.4 cancer case per year, with estimated monetized health effects benefits of $2 million annually. Water mitigation for radium also tends to reduce iron and manganese levels and hardness, which also has significant associated benefits.
In addition to providing increased public protection, the final-form rulemaking allows for reduced monitoring frequencies in systems where the concentration of radionuclides is low. The reduced monitoring will result in lower costs for compliance with the final-form rulemaking.
The compliance cost depends on the number of entry points to the distribution system for a CWS and whether the MCL is exceeded. CWSs have been monitoring for gross alpha and radium since the late 1970s. Since 1986, CWSs in this Commonwealth have also been monitoring for radium-226 and radium-228 when the gross alpha exceeds 5 pCi/L. CWSs in this Commonwealth that have exceeded the combined radium MCL have either provided treatment or abandoned the source. The Department will also use the option that allows the grandfathering of previous compliance monitoring results to reduce the initial compliance monitoring for gross alpha and combined radium, as well as uranium, if applicable. There should be minimal additional monitoring costs associated with the combined radium MCL, except possibly for CWSs that have more than a single entry point to the distribution system.
The only new MCL is for uranium, which the Department has incorporated by reference in § 109.202(a)(2) (relating to State MCLs, MRDLs and treatment technique requirements). The EPA has estimated that the cost for the analysis of total uranium is approximately $48 per sample (by laser phosphorimetry, 1999 dollars). The cost to individual CWSs will depend on the number of entry points. The larger systems will have more entry points than a smaller system. The cost estimate for uranium testing has been estimated to be $37--$512 per year per system.
The EPA has not done a cost analysis for the uranium MCL of 30 µg/l. It has, however, done cost analyses for MCLs of 20 µg/l and 40 µg/l. Based on these analyses, it is estimated that Nationwide between 430 and 970 CWSs will require treatment to meet the uranium MCL with a total estimated annual cost of $68 million to $157 million.
Compliance Assistance Plan
The Safe Drinking Water Program utilizes the Commonwealth's Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority Program to offer financial assistance to eligible public water systems. This assistance is in the form of a low-interest loan, with some augmenting grant funds for hardship cases. Eligibility is based upon factors such as public health impact, compliance necessity and project/operational affordability.
The Safe Drinking Water Program has established a network of regional and central office training staff that is responsive to identifiable training needs. The target audience in need of training may be either the program staff or the regulated community. Training is anticipated for water systems in Fall 2004.
In addition to this network of training staff, the Bureau of Water Supply and Wastewater Management has a division dedicated to providing both training and outreach support services to public water system operators. The Department's website also contains the Drinking Water and Wastewater Operator Information Center website, which provides a bulletin board of timely, useful information for treatment plant operators.
Community water systems are already required to monitor for radionuclides. Systems may use existing forms for compliance with this final-form rulemaking. It is anticipated that the majority of systems will be able to monitor on 6-year and 9-year frequencies, rather than the 4-year frequency that is required under the existing regulations. This reduced monitoring frequency will reduce the paperwork and recordkeeping requirements.
H. Sunset Review
This final-form rulemaking will be reviewed in accordance with the sunset review schedule published by the Department to determine whether the final-form rulemaking effectively fulfills the goals for which it was intended.
I. Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), on February 21, 2003, the Department submitted a copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking, published at 33 Pa.B. 1239 (March 8, 2003), to IRRC and the Chairpersons of the Senate and House Environmental Resources and Energy Committees for review and comment.
Under section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC and the Committees were provided with copies of the comments received during the public comment period, as well as other documents when requested. In preparing the final-form rulemaking, the Department has considered all comments from IRRC, the House and Senate Committees and the public.
Under section 5.1(j.2) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(j.2)), on February 25, 2004, the final-form rulemaking was deemed approved by the House and Senate Committees. Under section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC met on February 26, 2004, and approved the final-form rulemaking.
The Board finds that:
(1) Public notice of proposed rulemaking was given under sections 201 and 202 of the act of July 31, 1968 (P. L. 769, No. 240) (45 P. S. §§ 1201 and 1202) and regulations promulgated thereunder, 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1 and 7.2.
(2) A public commend period was provided as required by law, and all comments were considered.
(3) The final-form rulemaking does not enlarge the purpose of the proposed rulemaking published at 33 Pa.B. 1239.
(4) The final-form rulemaking is necessary and appropriate for administration and enforcement of the authorizing acts identified in Section C.
The Board, acting under the authorizing statutes, orders that:
(a) The regulations of the Department, 25 Pa. Code Chapter 109, are amended by amending §§ 109.301, 109.303 and 109.503 to read as set forth in Annex A, with ellipses referring to the existing text of the regulations.
(b) The Chairperson of the Board shall submit this order and Annex A to the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Attorney General for review and approval as to legality and form, as required by law.
(c) The Chairperson shall submit this order and Annex A to IRRC and the Senate and House Environmental Resources and Energy Committees as required by the Regulatory Review Act.
(d) The Chairperson of the Board shall certify this order and Annex A and deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau, as required by law.
(e) This order shall take effect immediately upon publication.
KATHLEEN A. MCGINTY,
(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, relating to this document, see 34 Pa.B. 1525 (March 13, 2004).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 7-381 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulations.
TITLE 25. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
PART I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Subpart C. PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
ARTICLE II. WATER RESOURCES
CHAPTER 109. SAFE DRINKING WATER
Subchapter C. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
§ 109.301. General monitoring requirements.
The monitoring requirements established by the EPA under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR Part 141 (relating to national primary drinking water regulations), as of December 8, 1984, are incorporated by reference. Public water suppliers shall monitor for compliance with MCLs and MRDLs in accordance with the requirements established in the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, except as otherwise established by this chapter unless increased monitoring is required by the Department under § 109.302 (relating to special monitoring requirements). Alternative monitoring requirements may be established by the Department and may be implemented in lieu of monitoring requirements for a particular National Primary Drinking Water Regulation if the alternative monitoring requirements are in conformance with the Federal act and regulations. The monitoring requirements shall be applied as follows:
* * * * *
(8) Monitoring requirements for public water systems that obtain finished water from another public water system.
* * * * *
(iii) Consecutive water suppliers are exempt from conducting monitoring for the MCLs for VOCs, SOCs, IOCs and radionuclides if the public water system from which the finished water is obtained complies with paragraphs (5)--(7) and (14), except that asbestos monitoring is required in accordance with subparagraph (ii)(B).
* * * * *
(14) Monitoring requirements for radionuclides. Community water systems shall monitor for compliance with the MCLs for radionuclides established by the EPA under 40 CFR 141.66(b), (c), (d) and (e) (relating to maximum contaminant levels for radionuclides). The monitoring shall be conducted according to the requirements established by EPA under 40 CFR 141.25 and 141.26 (relating to analytical methods for radioactivity; and compliance requirements for radionuclides in community water systems) which are incorporated by reference, except as modified by this chapter. Initial or first-year monitoring mentioned in this paragraph refers to monitoring conducted on or after January 1, 2005.
(i) Monitoring requirements for gross alpha particle activity, radium-226, radium-228 and uranium.
(A) Initial monitoring schedule. The initial monitoring shall consist of four consecutive quarterly samples for each radionuclide at each entry point in accordance with the following monitoring schedule except for systems that are granted reduced initial monitoring in accordance with subclause (V).
(I) Systems serving more than 3,301 persons shall begin monitoring during the quarter beginning January 1, 2005.
(II) Systems serving 500 to 3,300 persons shall begin monitoring during the quarter beginning January 1, 2006.
(III) Systems serving fewer than 500 persons shall begin monitoring during the quarter beginning January 1, 2007.
(IV) Systems that add new entry points associated with new sources shall begin initial quarterly monitoring during the first quarter the entry point begins serving the public. Quarterly monitoring shall continue until reduced monitoring is granted in accordance with clause (B) or subclause (V).
(V) If the first 2 quarterly samples for a radionuclide at an entry point have results below the detection limit, as defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c)(1), the final two quarterly samples for that radionuclide at that entry point are waived.
(VI) For entry points at which the monitoring result for a radionuclide at an entry point is above the MCL, the system shall collect and analyze quarterly samples for that radionuclide at that entry point until the system has results from 4 consecutive quarters for that radionuclide at that entry point that are at or below the MCL.
(B) Repeat monitoring. Beginning with the January 1, 2008, compliance period, systems shall take one sample for each radionuclide at each entry point in each 3-year compliance period, unless the system qualifies for reduced monitoring as follows:
(I) For entry points where the average of the initial monitoring results for a radionuclide is at or above the detection limit as defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c)(1), but at or below one-half of the MCL for that radionuclide, the repeat monitoring is reduced to one sample for that radionuclide at that entry point every 6 years.
(II) For entry points where the average of the initial monitoring results for a radionuclide is below the detection limit as defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c)(1), the repeat monitoring is reduced to one sample for that radionuclide at that entry point every 9 years.
(III) If a system has a monitoring result that exceeds the MCL for a radionuclide, the system shall collect and analyze quarterly samples for that radionuclide at that entry point beginning the next calendar quarter following the exceedance until the system has results from 4 consecutive quarters for that radionuclide at that entry point that are below the MCL.
(IV) Systems shall use the results of the samples collected during the repeat monitoring period to determine the monitoring frequency for subsequent monitoring periods.
(V) Reduced monitoring does not apply to those systems where treatment has been installed for radionuclide removal to comply with an MCL listed under 40 CFR 141.66. Compliance monitoring for radionuclides where treatment has been installed to comply with an MCL shall be conducted at least annually, and performance monitoring for the specific radionuclides for which treatment is provided shall be conducted quarterly.
(C) Gross alpha substitution. A gross alpha particle activity measurement may be substituted for the required radium-226 measurement provided that the measured gross alpha particle activity does not exceed 5 pCi/L. A gross alpha particle activity measurement may be substituted for the required uranium measurement provided that the measured gross alpha particle activity does not exceed 15 pCi/L. The gross alpha measurement shall have a confidence interval of 95% (1.65phi, where phi is the standard deviation of the net counting rate of the sample) for radium-226 and uranium. If the gross alpha particle activity result is less than the detection limit as defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c)(1), one-half of the detection limit will be used to determine compliance and the future monitoring frequency.
(D) Grandfathering. The Department will allow appropriate historical data collected at an entry point to satisfy the initial monitoring requirements required under clause (A) for that entry point in the following situations:
(I) A system having only one entry point may use the monitoring data from the compliance monitoring period between June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
(II) A system with multiple entry points and having appropriate historical data for each entry point may use the monitoring data from the compliance monitoring period between June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
(III) A system with multiple entry points and having appropriate historical data for a representative point in the distribution system may use the monitoring data from the compliance monitoring period between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, provided that the Department finds that the appropriate historical data satisfactorily demonstrate that each entry point is expected to be in compliance based upon the appropriate historical data and reasonable assumptions about the variability of radionuclide levels between entry points. The system shall supply sufficient information to allow the Department to make a written finding indicating how the data conform to these requirements.
(ii) Monitoring requirements for beta-particle and photon radioactivity.
(A) Systems designated by the Department as vulnerable to beta-particle or photon radioactivity, or both, shall sample for beta particle and photon radioactivity. Systems shall collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point, beginning within 1 quarter after being notified by the Department.
(I) If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity at an entry point has a running annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 50 pCi/L (screening level), the frequency of monitoring at that entry point shall be repeated every 3 years. Systems shall collect all samples required in clause (A) during the reduced monitoring period.
(II) For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the system may utilize environmental surveillance data collected by the nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry points, when the Department determines that the data is applicable to the system. If there is a release from a nuclear facility, systems that are using surveillance data shall begin monitoring at the community water system's entry points in accordance with clause (A).
(B) Systems designated by the Department as utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities shall sample for beta particle and photon radioactivity. Systems shall monitor quarterly for beta emitters and iodine-131, and annually for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point, beginning within 1 quarter after being notified by the Department. Monitoring shall be conducted as follows:
(I) Monitoring for gross beta particle activity shall be based on the average of an analysis of 3 monthly samples.
(II) For iodine-131, a composite of five consecutive daily samples shall be analyzed once each quarter. More frequent monitoring, as determined by the Department, shall be conducted when iodine-131 is identified in the finished water.
(III) Monitoring for strontium-90 and tritium shall be conducted by means of the analysis of 4 quarterly samples.
(IV) If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity at an entry point has a running annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 15 pCi/L (screening level), the frequency of monitoring at that entry point shall be reduced to four consecutive quarterly samples taken once every 3 years. Systems shall collect all samples required in clause (B) during the reduced monitoring period.
(V) For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the system may utilize environmental surveillance data collected by the nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry points, when the Department determines that the data is applicable to the system. If there is a release from a nuclear facility, systems that are using surveillance data shall begin monitoring at the system's entry points in accordance with clause (B).
(C) Systems designated by the Department to monitor for beta particle and photon radioactivity may not apply to the State for a waiver from the monitoring frequencies specified in clause (A) or (B).
(D) Systems may analyze for naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity from the same or equivalent sample used for the gross beta particle activity analysis. The potassium-40 beta particle activity shall be calculated by multiplying elemental potassium concentrations (in mg/L) by a factor of 0.82.
(E) If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity exceeds the screening level, an analysis of the sample shall be performed to identify the major radioactive constituents present in the sample. The results of the individual constituent analysis shall be reported in pCi/L, and the appropriate doses must be calculated and summed to determine compliance with the MCL, using the formula in 40 CFR 141.66(d)(2). Doses shall also be calculated and combined for measured levels of tritium and strontium to determine compliance.
(F) Systems shall monitor monthly at the entry points that exceed the MCL beginning the month after the exceedance occurs. Systems shall continue monthly monitoring until the system has established, by a rolling average of three monthly samples, that the MCL is being met. Systems that establish that the MCL is being met shall return to quarterly monitoring until they meet the requirements set forth in subclause (A)(I) or (B)(IV).
(iii) General monitoring and compliance requirements.
(A) The Department may require more frequent sampling than specified in subparagraphs (i) and (ii), or may require confirmation samples. The results of the initial and confirmation samples will be averaged for use in compliance determinations.
(B) Each system shall monitor at the time designated by the Department during each compliance period.
(C) Compliance with the MCLs will be determined based on the analytical results obtained at each entry point. If one entry point is in violation of an MCL, the system is in violation of the MCL.
(I) For systems monitoring more than once per year, compliance with the MCL is determined by a running annual average at each entry point. If the running annual average at an entry point is greater than the MCL, the system is in violation of the MCL. If a sample result will cause the running annual average to exceed the MCL at an entry point, the system is in violation of the MCL immediately.
(II) Systems shall include all samples taken and analyzed under this section in determining compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.
(III) If a system does not collect all required samples when compliance is based on a running annual average of quarterly samples, compliance will be based on the running average of the samples collected.
(IV) If a sample result is less than the detection limit, zero will be used to calculate the annual average, unless a gross alpha particle activity is being used in lieu of radium-226 or uranium, or both. If the gross alpha particle activity result is less than detection, one-half of the detection limit will be used to calculate the annual average.
(D) The Department may delete results of obvious sampling or analytic errors.
§ 109.303. Sampling requirements.
* * * * *
(h) Samples taken to determine compliance with combined radium-226 and radium-228, gross alpha particle activity, or uranium under 40 CFR 141.66 (b), (c) and (e) (relating to maximum containment levels for radionuclides) may be composited from a single entry point if the analysis is done within a year of the date of the collection of the first sample. The Department will treat analytical results from the composited sample as the average analytical result to determine compliance with the MCLs and the future monitoring frequency.
(1) If the analytical result from the composited sample is greater than one-half the MCL, the Department may direct the system to take additional quarterly samples before allowing the system to sample under a reduced monitoring schedule.
(2) Samples obtained from an entry point that contains water treated to specifically meet an MCL for a radionuclide contaminant listed under 40 CFR 141.66 (b), (c) or (e) may not be composited.
(i) Samples taken to determine compliance with beta particle and photon radioactivity under 40 CFR 141.66(d) may be composited as follows:
(1) Monitoring for gross beta-particle activity may be based on the analysis of a composite of 3 monthly samples.
(2) Monitoring for strontium-90 and tritium may be based on the analysis of a composite of 4 consecutive quarterly samples.
Subchapter E. PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
§ 109.503. Public water system construction permits.
(a) Permit application requirements. An application for a public water system construction permit shall be submitted in writing on forms provided by the Department and shall be accompanied by plans, specifications, engineer's report, water quality analyses and other data, information or documentation reasonably necessary to enable the Department to determine compliance with the act and this chapter. The Department will make available to the applicant the Public Water Supply Manual, available from the Bureau of Water Supply and Community Health, Post Office Box 8467, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 which contains acceptable design standards and technical guidance. Water quality analyses shall be conducted by a laboratory certified under this chapter.
(1) General requirements. An application shall include:
* * * * *
(ii) Information describing new sources. The Department may accept approval of an out-of-State source by the agency having jurisdiction over drinking water in that state if the supplier submits adequate proof of the approval and the agency's standards are at least as stringent as this chapter. Information describing sources shall include:
* * * * *
(B) An evaluation of the quality of the raw water from each new source. This subparagraph does not apply when the new source is finished water obtained from an existing permitted community water system unless the Department provides written notice that an evaluation is required. The evaluation shall include analysis of the following:
* * * * *
(VII) Gross Alpha (alpha), radium-226, radium-228, uranium and Gross Beta (beta).
* * * * *
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 04-552. Filed for public inspection April 2, 2004, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.