Each system shall complete the corrosion control treatment requirements described below which are applicable to such system under § 141.81.
(a) System recommendation regarding corrosion control treatment. Based upon the results of lead and copper tap monitoring and water quality parameter monitoring, small and medium-size water systems exceeding the lead or copper action level shall recommend installation of one or more of the corrosion control treatments listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this section which the system believes constitutes optimal corrosion control for that system. The State may require the system to conduct additional water quality parameter monitoring in accordance with § 141.87(b) to assist the State in reviewing the system's recommendation.
(b) State decision to require studies of corrosion control treatment (applicable to small and medium-size systems). The State may require any small or medium-size system that exceeds the lead or copper action level to perform corrosion control studies under paragraph (c) of this section to identify optimal corrosion control treatment for the system.
(c) Performance of corrosion control studies.
(1) Any public water system performing corrosion control studies shall evaluate the effectiveness of each of the following treatments, and, if appropriate, combinations of the following treatments to identify the optimal corrosion control treatment for that system:
(i) Alkalinity and pH adjustment;
(ii) Calcium hardness adjustment; and
(iii) The addition of a phosphate or silicate based corrosion inhibitor at a concentration sufficient to maintain an effective residual concentration in all test tap samples.
(2) The water system shall evaluate each of the corrosion control treatments using either pipe rig/loop tests, metal coupon tests, partial-system tests, or analyses based on documented analogous treatments with other systems of similar size, water chemistry and distribution system configuration.
(3) The water system shall measure the following water quality parameters in any tests conducted under this paragraph before and after evaluating the corrosion control treatments listed above:
(vii) Orthophosphate (when an inhibitor containing a phosphate compound is used);
(viii) Silicate (when an inhibitor containing a silicate compound is used);
(ix) Water temperature.
(4) The water system shall identify all chemical or physical constraints that limit or prohibit the use of a particular corrosion control treatment and document such constraints with at least one of the following:
(i) Data and documentation showing that a particular corrosion control treatment has adversely affected other water treatment processes when used by another water system with comparable water quality characteristics; and/or
(ii) Data and documentation demonstrating that the water system has previously attempted to evaluate a particular corrosion control treatment and has found that the treatment is ineffective or adversely affects other water quality treatment processes.
(5) The water system shall evaluate the effect of the chemicals used for corrosion control treatment on other water quality treatment processes.
(6) On the basis of an analysis of the data generated during each evaluation, the water system shall recommend to the State in writing the treatment option that the corrosion control studies indicate constitutes optimal corrosion control treatment for that system. The water system shall provide a rationale for its recommendation along with all supporting documentation specified in paragraphs (c) (1) through (5) of this section.
(d) State designation of optimal corrosion control treatment.
(1) Based upon consideration of available information including, where applicable, studies performed under paragraph (c) of this section and a system's recommended treatment alternative, the State shall either approve the corrosion control treatment option recommended by the system, or designate alternative corrosion control treatment(s) from among those listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. When designating optimal treatment the State shall consider the effects that additional corrosion control treatment will have on water quality parameters and on other water quality treatment processes.
(2) The State shall notify the system of its decision on optimal corrosion control treatment in writing and explain the basis for this determination. If the State requests additional information to aid its review, the water system shall provide the information.
(e) Installation of optimal corrosion control. Each system shall properly install and operate throughout its distribution system the optimal corrosion control treatment designated by the State under paragraph (d) of this section.
(f) State review of treatment and specification of optimal water quality control parameters. The State shall evaluate the results of all lead and copper tap samples and water quality parameter samples submitted by the water system and determine whether the system has properly installed and operated the optimal corrosion control treatment designated by the State in paragraph (d) of this section. Upon reviewing the results of tap water and water quality parameter monitoring by the system, both before and after the system installs optimal corrosion control treatment, the State shall designate:
(1) A minimum value or a range of values for pH measured at each entry point to the distribution system;
(2) A minimum pH value, measured in all tap samples. Such value shall be equal to or greater than 7.0, unless the State determines that meeting a pH level of 7.0 is not technologically feasible or is not necessary for the system to optimize corrosion control;
(3) If a corrosion inhibitor is used, a minimum concentration or a range of concentrations for the inhibitor, measured at each entry point to the distribution system and in all tap samples, that the State determines is necessary to form a passivating film on the interior walls of the pipes of the distribution system;
(4) If alkalinity is adjusted as part of optimal corrosion control treatment, a minimum concentration or a range of concentrations for alkalinity, measured at each entry point to the distribution system and in all tap samples;
(5) If calcium carbonate stabilization is used as part of corrosion control, a minimum concentration or a range of concentrations for calcium, measured in all tap samples.
The values for the applicable water quality control parameters listed above shall be those that the State determines to reflect optimal corrosion control treatment for the system. The State may designate values for additional water quality control parameters determined by the State to reflect optimal corrosion control for the system. The State shall notify the system in writing of these determinations and explain the basis for its decisions.
(g) Continued operation and monitoring. All systems optimizing corrosion control shall continue to operate and maintain optimal corrosion control treatment, including maintaining water quality parameters at or above minimum values or within ranges designated by the State under paragraph (f) of this section, in accordance with this paragraph for all samples collected under § 141.87(d) through (f). Compliance with the requirements of this paragraph shall be determined every six months, as specified under § 141.87(d). A water system is out of compliance with the requirements of this paragraph for a six-month period if it has excursions for any State-specified parameter on more than nine days during the period. An excursion occurs whenever the daily value for one or more of the water quality parameters measured at a sampling location is below the minimum value or outside the range designated by the State. Daily values are calculated as follows. States have discretion to delete results of obvious sampling errors from this calculation.
(1) On days when more than one measurement for the water quality parameter is collected at the sampling location, the daily value shall be the average of all results collected during the day regardless of whether they are collected through continuous monitoring, grab sampling, or a combination of both. If EPA has approved an alternative formula under § 142.16 of this chapter in the State's application for a program revision submitted pursuant to § 142.12 of this chapter, the State's formula shall be used to aggregate multiple measurements taken at a sampling point for the water quality parameter in lieu of the formula in this paragraph.
(2) On days when only one measurement for the water quality parameter is collected at the sampling location, the daily value shall be the result of that measurement.
(3) On days when no measurement is collected for the water quality parameter at the sampling location, the daily value shall be the daily value calculated on the most recent day on which the water quality parameter was measured at the sample site.
(h) Modification of State treatment decisions. Upon its own initiative or in response to a request by a water system or other interested party, a State may modify its determination of the optimal corrosion control treatment under paragraph (d) of this section or optimal water quality control parameters under paragraph (f) of this section. A request for modification by a system or other interested party shall be in writing, explain why the modification is appropriate, and provide supporting documentation. The State may modify its determination where it concludes that such change is necessary to ensure that the system continues to optimize corrosion control treatment. A revised determination shall be made in writing, set forth the new treatment requirements, explain the basis for the State's decision, and provide an implementation schedule for completing the treatment modifications.
(i) Treatment decisions by EPA in lieu of the State. Pursuant to the procedures in § 142.19, the EPA Regional Administrator may review treatment determinations made by a State under paragraphs (d), (f), or (h) of this section and issue federal treatment determinations consistent with the requirements of those paragraphs where the Regional Administrator finds that:
(1) A State has failed to issue a treatment determination by the applicable deadlines contained in § 141.81,
(2) A State has abused its discretion in a substantial number of cases or in cases affecting a substantial population, or
(3) The technical aspects of a State's determination would be indefensible in an expected Federal enforcement action taken against a system.