Rule2024-23549
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper: Improvements (LCRI)
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 30, 2024
Effective
December 30, 2024
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
In December 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requested comment on the proposed the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI), which informed the revisions to the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for lead and copper. After consideration of public comment on the LCRI, and consistent with the provisions set forth under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the EPA is finalizing revisions to the NPDWR for lead and copper. In this rule, the agency is finalizing requirements for drinking water systems to replace lead and certain galvanized service lines. The final rule also removes the lead trigger level, reduces the lead action level to 0.010 mg/L, and strengthens tap sampling procedures to improve public health protection and simplify implementation relative to the 2021 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR). Further, this final rule strengthens corrosion control treatment, public education and consumer awareness, requirements for small systems, and sampling in schools and child care facilities. The final rule will significantly reduce the adverse human health impacts of exposure to toxic lead in drinking water.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86418-86667]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23549]
[[Page 86417]]
Vol. 89
Wednesday,
No. 210
October 30, 2024
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Parts 141 and 142
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper:
Improvements (LCRI); Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 210 / Wednesday, October 30, 2024 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 86418]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 141 and 142
[EPA-HQ-OW-2022-0801; FRL-5423.2-02-OW]
RIN 2040-AG16
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper:
Improvements (LCRI)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In December 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) requested comment on the proposed the Lead and Copper Rule
Improvements (LCRI), which informed the revisions to the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for lead and copper. After
consideration of public comment on the LCRI, and consistent with the
provisions set forth under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the EPA
is finalizing revisions to the NPDWR for lead and copper. In this rule,
the agency is finalizing requirements for drinking water systems to
replace lead and certain galvanized service lines. The final rule also
removes the lead trigger level, reduces the lead action level to 0.010
mg/L, and strengthens tap sampling procedures to improve public health
protection and simplify implementation relative to the 2021 Lead and
Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR). Further, this final rule strengthens
corrosion control treatment, public education and consumer awareness,
requirements for small systems, and sampling in schools and child care
facilities. The final rule will significantly reduce the adverse human
health impacts of exposure to toxic lead in drinking water.
DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective on December 30,
2024.
Judicial review: For judicial review purposes, this final rule is
promulgated as of October 30, 2024.
Compliance dates: The compliance date for the revisions to 40 CFR
part 141, subpart I, is set forth in Sec. 141.80(a). The compliance
date for the revisions to 40 CFR 141.2 and 141.31 is November 1, 2027.
The compliance date for the changes made to 40 CFR part 141, subpart O,
is set forth in Sec. 141.152(a). The compliance date for the changes
to 40 CFR part 141, subpart Q (Sec. 141.202 and appendices A and B) is
November 1, 2027.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2022-0801. All documents in the docket are
listed on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information 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 <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goldberg, Office of Ground
Water and Drinking Water, Standards and Risk Management Division (Mail
Code 4607M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-1379; email
address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0e424d5c474e6b7e6f20696178"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="83cfc0d1cac3e6f3e2ade4ecf5">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. General Information
A. What does the final LCRI require?
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Dates for Compliance
III. Background
A. Overview of Lead and Lead Exposures Through Drinking Water
B. Human Health Effects of Lead and Copper
C. Regulatory History
D. Statutory Authority
E. Anti-backsliding Analysis of LCRI Relative to LCR and LCRR
F. White House Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan and EPA's
Strategy To Reduce Lead Exposures and Disparities in U.S.
Communities
G. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Other Financial Resources
H. Lead Exposure and Environmental Justice, Equity, and Federal
Civil Rights
IV. Final Revisions to 40 CFR Part 141, Subpart I, Control of Lead
and Copper
A. Regulatory Approach
B. Service Line Replacement
C. Service Line Replacement Plan
D. Service Line Inventory
E. Tap Sampling for Lead and Copper
F. Corrosion Control Treatment
G. Water Quality Parameter Monitoring
H. Distribution System and Site Assessment
I. Compliance Alternatives for a Lead Action Level Exceedance
for Small Community Water Systems and Non-Transient Non-Community
Water Systems
J. Public Education
K. Additional Requirements for Systems With Multiple Lead Action
Level Exceedances
L. Lead Sampling at Schools and Child Care Facilities
M. Copper
N. System Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
O. Other Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 141
V. Rule Implementation and Enforcement
A. General
B. What are the rule compliance dates?
C. State Primacy and Special Primacy Requirements
D. State Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
VI. Economic Analysis
A. Summary of Public Comments and the EPA's Response
B. Affected Entities and Major Data Sources Used To Develop the
Baseline
C. Overview of the Cost-Benefit Model
D. Cost Analysis
E. Benefits Analysis
F. Cost-Benefit Comparison
G. Alternative Regulatory Options Considered
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and
Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review)
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. The 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 and Safety Risks)
H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations) and Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's
Commitment to Environmental Justice for All)
K. Consultations With the Science Advisory Board (SAB) and the
National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC)
L. Consultation With the Department of Health and Human Services
Under SDWA Section 1412(d)
M. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
VIII. Severability
IX. References
I. Executive Summary
The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) mission
is to protect human health and the environment. The EPA is finalizing
the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) to significantly reduce
the risk of exposure to lead through drinking water. There is no known
safe level of lead in drinking water. Exposure to drinking water
contaminated with lead can cause serious human health impacts including
neurodevelopmental problems in children and heart disease in adults.
Young children and pregnant people are especially susceptible to the
[[Page 86419]]
impacts of lead exposure. Reducing lead in drinking water will reduce
the risk of negative neurodevelopmental outcomes for children as well
as reduce a range of health risks to adults. This final rule builds on
the 2021 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR) and the pre-2021 Lead
and Copper Rule (LCR), originally promulgated in 1991.
The EPA conducted a review of the 2021 LCRR in accordance with
Executive Order 13990 \1\ and announced its intention to strengthen the
2021 LCRR with this new rulemaking, the LCRI, to address key issues and
opportunities identified in the review. This final LCRI addresses the
priorities the EPA identified in the 2021 LCRR review, including the
equitable replacement of lead service lines (LSLs) in the nation,
improving identification of where LSLs are located, and triggering
action in communities most at risk of lead exposure, and streamlined
and improved implementation of the rule relative to the 2021 LCRR. This
final LCRI is the culmination of numerous meaningful consultations with
stakeholders and the public during the 2021 LCRR review, engagements
and consultations held to support the development of the LCRI, and
public comments received on the proposed LCRI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring
Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis (86 FR 7037, January 20, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The LCRI makes important advancements in protecting children and
adults from the significant and irreversible health effects of exposure
to lead in drinking water. These advancements are scientifically based
and incorporate drinking water system best practices. The final rule
strengthens the lead and copper rule in five focus areas: (1) achieving
lead pipe replacement within 10 years, (2) locating legacy lead pipes,
(3) improving tap sampling, (4) lowering the lead action level, and (5)
strengthening protections to reduce exposure. The final rule also
includes compliance dates and an updated benefits and costs analysis.
Each of these topics is summarized below, in sequential order.
Achieving Lead Pipe Replacement Within 10 Years
This final rule provides a fundamental shift to a more preventive
approach to lead in drinking water. This is based on the EPA's
experience in implementing the lead rule for many years. Specifically,
based on over 30 years of implementing the 1991 LCR, the EPA has
determined that requiring lead service line replacement (LSLR) based on
tap sampling and 90th percentile lead levels alone is insufficient to
protect public health. LSLs are a source of lead exposure in drinking
water, even when systems are optimized at or below the lead action
level.
The science is clear that there is no known safe level of lead in
drinking water, especially for children. Among other effects, lead
exposure can cause damage to the brain and kidneys and can interfere
with the production of red blood cells that carry oxygen to all parts
of the body. In children, even low levels of lead exposure can cause
cognitive health effects like lower intelligence quotient (IQ) as well
as learning and behavioral problems. In adults, health effects include
elevated risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, kidney or nervous
system problems, and cancer.
In the LCRI, the EPA is requiring water systems to replace all lead
and certain galvanized service lines (specifically, galvanized
requiring replacement (GRR) service lines) under their control no later
than 10 years after the compliance date. The LCRI provides, in limited
circumstances, additional time for some systems to complete systemwide
full service line replacement. Water systems must replace lead and GRR
service lines under their control regardless of the lead levels
occurring in tap or other drinking water samples. Replacing lead and
GRR service lines will significantly reduce lead releases into drinking
water. In addition, while consistently well-operated and optimized
corrosion control treatment (CCT) is generally effective at reducing
lead to low levels, elimination of lead and GRR service lines will
result in even greater public health protection by eliminating a
significant lead exposure source and will minimize the impacts of CCT
implementation errors that have been documented over the years.
Historically, lead service lines,\2\ as well as lead-bearing
fixtures and solder, were commonly used in water distribution systems
as well as in home plumbing. While replacing LSLs does not eliminate
all lead exposures from tap water because plumbing systems inside homes
and buildings (i.e., premise plumbing) can also contain lead
components, replacing LSLs removes a key source of lead in drinking
water. Where present, LSLs represent the greatest lead exposure source
through drinking water (Sandvig et al., 2008).\3\ Buildings and homes
built before 1986 often have LSLs connecting their plumbing system to
the main water supply line under the street. These LSLs can deteriorate
or corrode, releasing lead particles into the drinking water (Sandvig
et al., 2008). Modeling done as part of the LCRI economic analysis
confirms that LSL presence significantly contributes to drinking water
lead levels (USEPA, 2024a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The EPA does not believe that there are lead water mains in
the United States and, if they do occur, it is extremely rare. The
poor structural integrity of lead pipes that are more than two
inches in diameter means that lead was primarily used in pipes of
smaller diameter such as service lines. Conversely, the water mains
that distribute water throughout a city or town tend to be six
inches or larger in diameter. The common water main materials
include ductile iron, PVC, asbestos cement, high-density
polyethylene (HDPE), and concrete steel. The oldest water mains are
cast iron and asbestos cement (Folkman, 2018).
\3\ Sandvig et al. (2008) found that LSLs contributed an average
of approximately 50 to 75 percent of the total lead mass measured at
the tap, while premise piping and the faucet contributed
approximately 20 to 35 percent and 1 to 3 percent, respectively. At
sites with no LSL, premise piping and the faucet contributed a
greater percentage of lead mass to the total lead mass measured at
the tap (approximately 55 percent and 12 percent, respectively),
while main samples ranged from approximately 3 to 15 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Locating Legacy Lead Pipes
Knowing where lead pipes are located is critical to replacing them
efficiently and equitably, as well as for informing consumers (i.e.,
persons served) so they can take actions to reduce their exposure to
lead. The LCRI builds upon the 2021 LCRR's requirement for water
systems to create an initial inventory, to regularly update their
inventory, and to identify the material of all service lines by the
mandatory service line replacement deadline. Under the final LCRI, all
water systems are required to make their service line inventories
publicly available. Water systems must use a validation process to
ensure the service line inventory is accurate. Water systems are also
required to track lead connectors in their inventories and replace them
as they are encountered.
Improving Tap Sampling
The final LCRI makes key changes to the required protocol for tap
sampling informed by best practices already being deployed at the local
and State level. Under the LCRI, water systems are required to collect
first- and fifth-liter tap samples at sites with LSLs and use the
higher of the two values when determining compliance. This method will
better represent water that has been stagnant both within the LSL and
the premise plumbing. This will help water systems better understand
the effectiveness of their CCT.
[[Page 86420]]
Lowering the Lead Action Level
The final LCRI lowers the lead action level from 0.015 mg/L to
0.010 mg/L. When a water system exceeds the lead action level, it is
required to inform the public, take actions associated with CCT, and
employ public education measures to reduce lead exposure. For example,
a system may be required to install or adjust CCT to reduce lead that
leaches into drinking water. Actions resulting from a lowered lead
action level will improve public health benefits because they will
require systems to take actions to reduce lead exposure sooner. The EPA
also emphasizes the many final rule requirements that will result in
additional public health benefits irrespective of systemwide lead
levels, recognizing there is no safe level of lead in drinking water.
For example, the final rule requires full service line replacement and
public education provisions independent of a system's 90th percentile
lead level.
Strengthening Protections To Reduce Exposure
The final LCRI requires water systems with continually high lead
levels to conduct additional outreach to consumers and make filters
certified to reduce lead in drinking water available to all consumers.
These additional actions can reduce consumer exposure to higher levels
of lead in drinking water while the water system works to reduce
systemwide lead levels (e.g., achieving 100 percent replacement of lead
and GRR service lines, installing or re-optimizing optimal corrosion
control treatment (OCCT)), which may take years to fully implement.
Benefits and Costs Analysis
As part of its Health Risk Reduction and Cost Analysis (HRRCA), the
EPA evaluated quantifiable and nonquantifiable health risk reduction
benefits and costs associated with the final LCRI. At a two percent
discount rate, the EPA estimates the quantifiable annual benefits of
the final rule will be $13.49 to $25.14 billion and the quantifiable
annual costs of the rule will be $1.47 to $1.95 billion in 2022
dollars. The EPA Administrator confirms the determination made at
proposal that the quantified and nonquantifiable benefits of the final
LCRI justify the quantified and nonquantifiable costs.
To evaluate these benefits and costs, the EPA determined which
entities would be affected by the LCRI, quantified costs using
available data, and described nonquantifiable costs. The EPA quantified
benefits by estimating and monetizing avoided reductions in IQ, cases
of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, lower
birth weights in children, and cases of cardiovascular disease
premature mortality in adults associated with lead and GRR service line
replacement, CCT installation and re-optimization, the use of point-of-
use devices as a small system compliance option, and the temporary use
of point-of-use devices and water filters in systems with multiple lead
action level exceedances. Prior efforts to quantify benefits associated
with reducing lead in drinking water have focused on neurodevelopmental
outcomes in children because of the lifelong impact on their ability to
thrive. The current benefits assessment also incorporates recent
scientific analyses that allow better quantification of benefits to
adults associated with reductions in lead exposure.
There are many additional benefits of the LCRI that the EPA
assessed qualitatively. For example, the requirements for water systems
to issue public education (including using languages of the communities
where systems serve a large proportion of consumers with limited
English proficiency), to make the inventory of service line and
connector materials publicly available, and to make the service line
replacement plan publicly available will promote the public's behaviors
to reduce their exposure to lead in drinking water. Health benefits
qualitatively evaluated include reduced incidence of renal effects,
reproductive and developmental effects (apart from ADHD), immunological
effects, neurological effects (apart from children's IQ), and cancer.
In addition, persons served by systems required to install or re-
optimize OCCT under the final LCRI and living in homes with premise
plumbing containing lead will receive health benefits from reduced lead
exposure that were not quantified in the analysis of the final rule.
Increased use of CCT resulting from the final LCRI's lower lead action
level and improved tap sampling may have a beneficial secondary effect
of reducing copper levels and avoiding certain negative health impacts
of copper, such as acute gastrointestinal conditions and health effects
associated with Wilson's Disease. Other nonquantifiable co-benefits
associated with the increased use of corrosion inhibitors resulting
from the LCRI's lower lead action level and improved tap sampling
include extending the useful life of plumbing components and appliances
(e.g., water heaters), reduced plumbing maintenance costs, reduced
treated water loss from the distribution system due to leaks, and
reduced potential liability and damages from broken pipes in buildings.
To support eliminating LSLs, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (Pub. L. 117-58), also referred to as the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law (BIL), included $15 billion specifically appropriated for LSLR
projects and associated activities directly connected to the
identification and replacement of LSLs. The BIL also included over
$11.7 billion for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund General
Supplemental, which can also be used for lead service line replacement
as well as other drinking water projects. The agency notes the costs
cited above do not take into account this available funding source. The
EPA is also providing significant technical assistance to communities
through efforts such as the ``Get the Lead Out Initiative'' and ``Lead
Service Line Replacement Accelerators,'' which assist efforts to
conduct service line replacement.
Compliance and Public Process
Water systems must comply with the requirements of the LCRI
starting three years after promulgation of this final rule. The EPA is
requiring water systems to comply with select requirements introduced
in the 2021 LCRR that the agency did not propose to change in the LCRI,
starting on October 16, 2024. This includes the 2021 LCRR initial LSL
inventory, notification of service line material, and associated
reporting requirements. Water systems must also comply with the Tier 1
public notification (PN) requirement for a lead action level exceedance
that was introduced under the 2021 LCRR starting October 16, 2024.
Please see section V.B.3 of this preamble for a full discussion of the
provisions with a compliance date of October 16, 2024. The final LCRI
otherwise requires water systems to comply with the pre-2021 LCR (and
not the 2021 LCRR) between October 16, 2024, and the LCRI compliance
date so that water systems can directly transition from the regulatory
scheme of the LCR to the LCRI.
II. General Information
The final Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) builds upon the
previous lead and copper rules. The LCRI revises the most recent lead
and copper rule, the 2021 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR), which
was promulgated on January 15, 2021 (86 FR 4198, USEPA, 2021a). Key
revisions in the LCRI address the opportunities for
[[Page 86421]]
improvement identified in the ``Review of the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulation: Lead and Copper Rule Revisions'' (or LCRR review)
including proactively and equitably replacing all lead service lines
(LSLs), strengthening compliance with tap sampling to better identify
communities most at risk of elevated lead in drinking water to better
compel actions to reduce health risks, reducing the complexity of the
regulation, and ensuring that the rule is more understandable (86 FR
71574, USEPA, 2021b). The United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) developed the LCRI considering the input received in numerous
meaningful consultations and engagements over several years, including
during the LCRR review and in stakeholder outreach conducted to inform
the development of the proposed and final LCRI, along with almost
200,000 public comments submitted to the docket as well as oral
comments provided to the EPA during the public hearing held January 16,
2024, for the proposed LCRI.
A. What does the final LCRI require?
The LCRI requires full service line replacement of lead and
galvanized requiring replacement (GRR) service lines under the control
of the water system, regardless of the system's 90th percentile lead
level. Water systems are required to complete replacements within 10
years of the LCRI compliance date. There is a limited exception for
systems with a high proportion of service lines requiring replacement:
they are eligible for a deferred deadline if they meet a specified
threshold and receive State approval. Systems with deferred deadlines
and States must regularly assess whether they can complete the
replacement at a faster rate. Water systems must identify all service
lines of unknown composition (``unknown service lines'') to replace all
lead and GRR service lines by the replacement deadline. Systems must
also track lead connectors in their inventories and replace them
whenever encountered during normal operations. All water systems with
non-lead service lines in their inventories must validate the methods
used to categorize those service lines as non-lead with some
exceptions. All water systems with known or potential lead or GRR
service lines must prepare and make publicly accessible a service line
replacement plan which can facilitate the equitable replacement of all
lead or GRR service lines by the replacement deadline.
The final LCRI reduces the lead action level from 0.015 mg/L to
0.010 mg/L, which will result in more water systems installing and re-
optimizing optimal corrosion control treatment (OCCT) and providing
public education to reduce drinking water lead exposure. Systems that
exceed the lead action level three or more times in a five-year period
must take additional actions to provide public education and make
filters available.
The rule updates the tap sampling protocol by requiring systems to
collect a first-liter sample (in addition to the fifth-liter sample
required by the 2021 LCRR) at structures with LSLs and then use the
higher of the first- or fifth-liter sample values at the LSL sites when
calculating the 90th percentile. The first- and fifth-liter sample
values represent water that has been stagnant in premise plumbing
(plumbing within buildings) and within the service line, respectively,
and therefore, more accurately identify where higher lead levels might
be present compared to sampling the first liter or the fifth liter
alone. Systems must prioritize sampling at sites most likely to contain
lead and use this data to calculate the 90th percentile. The LCRI
requires most systems with lead and GRR service lines to start (or
continue) standard monitoring. Additionally, any system with a 90th
percentile lead level above the LCRI lead action level, based on the
system's results from the most recent tap monitoring period prior to
the compliance date, will need to start (or continue) standard
monitoring. The EPA updated the requirements for systems with
insufficient Tier 1 and Tier 2 sites to meet their minimum required
number of samples to use the highest sample results from Tiers 1, 2,
and the next highest available tiers (equal to the minimum required
number of samples) to calculate the 90th percentile. Sample site tiers
are used to prioritize sampling locations and were first introduced in
the 1991 LCR.
The LCRI requires States to set optimal water quality parameters
(OWQPs) for medium systems (serving greater than 10,000 persons and
fewer than or equal to 50,000 persons) that are required to optimize or
re-optimize corrosion control treatment (CCT). These systems must meet
those parameters to demonstrate that OCCT is being maintained. The rule
allows all systems to defer OCCT or re-optimized OCCT (but maintain any
existing CCT) if they can replace all lead and GRR service lines at a
minimum percent annual rate within five years or less. Water systems
with lead and GRR services lines and OCCT that are meeting their OWQPs
are not required to re-optimize their OCCT more than once following a
lead action level exceedance after the compliance date. After systems
remove all of their lead and GRR service lines, they must re-optimize
again if they exceed the lead action level. In addition, water systems
may be required to re-optimize by the State at any time. Systems not
required to re-optimize under the final rule still have to meet other
requirements, including for public education if there are multiple
action level exceedances (see sections IV.J and IV.K of this preamble).
The LCRI updates public education requirements, instituting changes
to content and delivery frequency for more proactive messaging about
lead in drinking water and actions individuals can take to reduce their
exposure. It includes requirements to make information about lead in
drinking water more accessible to consumers including individuals with
limited English proficiency. The LCRI also introduces new public
education requirements for lead and copper.
The LCRI revises the small system compliance flexibility provision
to eliminate LSLR as a compliance option, as all systems must conduct
mandatory service line replacement regardless of their 90th percentile
lead level. The eligibility threshold for the flexibility for community
water systems (CWSs) is lowered to those serving 3,300 or fewer
persons.
The LCRI retains the requirements from the 2021 LCRR for CWSs to
conduct sampling and public education in schools and child care
facilities but expands the available waivers to include sampling
efforts conducted prior to the rule compliance date, including sampling
conducted through the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
(WIIN) Act grant program. The LCRI also restructures and clarifies
areas of the rule that did not change to make the rule more
implementable.
Exhibit 1 compares the major differences among the pre-2021 Lead
and Copper Rule (LCR), 2021 LCRR, and the final LCRI. Asterisks (*) in
the pre-2021 LCR and 2021 LCRR column denote requirements that are
retained in the final LCRI, and these requirements are, therefore, not
repeated in the final LCRI column.
[[Page 86422]]
Exhibit 1--Comparison of the 2021 LCRR, Proposed LCRI, and Final LCRI Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-2021 LCR 2021 LCRR Final LCRI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Line Inventory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Systems were required to <bullet> All systems must develop an <bullet> All systems must
complete a materials evaluation by the initial lead service line (LSL) review specified
time of initial sampling. inventory by October 16, 2024, that information that describes
<bullet> No requirement to regularly includes all service lines, regardless connector materials and
update materials evaluation. of ownership, categorized as lead, non- locations.
lead, galvanized requiring replacement <bullet> Systems must
(GRR), and unknown.* include each identified
<bullet> The inventory must be made connector in their
publicly accessible and available baseline inventory by the
online for systems serving >50,000 LCRI compliance date.
persons.* <bullet> Connector material
<bullet> The publicly available categories include lead,
inventory must include a locational non-lead, unknown, and no
identifier for each lead and GRR connector present.
service line. <bullet> The inventory must
<bullet> The LSL inventory must be include a street address
updated based on the system's tap with each service line and
sampling frequency but no more than connector, if available.
annually. <bullet> The inventory must
be updated annually.
<bullet> Systems must
include in their
inventories the total
number of each type of
service line, the number
of lead and unknown
connectors, the number of
full lead and GRR service
line replacements, and the
number of partial lead and
GRR service line repla
cements.
<bullet> Systems must
respond to customer
inquiries on incorrect
material categorizations
within 60 days.
........................................ <bullet> Systems must
validate the accuracy of
their methods to
categorize non-lead
service lines in their
inventory no later than 7
years after the compliance
date by the end of the
calendar year unless on a
shortened or deferred
deadline.
[cir] The validation pool
includes all non-lead
service lines except for
those installed after the
applicable Federal, State,
or local lead ban;
visually inspected at a
minimum of two points on
the pipe exterior; or
previously replaced.
[cir] Systems may submit
previous validation
efforts in lieu of the
LCRI requirements if they
are at least as stringent
as the requirements, and
States must review and
approve of these previous
efforts.
<bullet> Systems must
identify all unknown
service lines by their
mandatory service line
replacement deadline.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Line Replacement
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement Plan Replacement Plan Replacement Plan
<bullet> No requirement. <bullet> All systems with at least one <bullet> All systems with
lead, GRR, or unknown service line must at least one lead, GRR, or
develop an LSLR plan by the compliance unknown service line must
date. develop the service line
<bullet> The plan must include a replacement plan by the
strategy to prioritize service line compliance date. The plan
replacement.* includes the elements from
the LCRR as well as two
new elements: (1) a
strategy to inform
customers and consumers
(persons served) about the
plan and replacement
program and (2) an
identification of any
legal requirements or
water tariff agreement
provisions that affect a
system's ability to gain
access to conduct full
service line replacement.
........................................ <bullet> The service line
replacement plan must
include additional plan
elements if the system has
at least one lead-lined
galvanized service line or
if the system is eligible
for a deferred deadline.
<bullet> Service line
replacement plan must be
publicly accessible; and
available online for
systems serving >50,000
persons.
<bullet> The plan must be
updated annually to
include any new or updated
information and submitted
to the State on an annual
basis.
........................................ <bullet> By the compliance
date, systems eligible for
and planning to use
deferred deadlines must
include in the plan
information on what the
system identifies as the
earliest deadline and
fastest feasible rate to
replace lead and GRR
service lines that is no
slower than 39 annual
replacements per 1,000
service connections.
[[Page 86423]]
........................................ <bullet> By the end of the
second program year, the
State is required to
determine in writing
whether a system with a
deferred deadline is
replacing lead and GRR
service lines at the
fastest feasible rate,
either by approving the
continued use of that
deferred deadline or by
setting the fastest
feasible rate for the
system. In addition to
annual updates, systems
with deferred deadlines
must submit their plan
every three years with
updated information about
why the replacement rate
is still the fastest
feasible. The State must
review this information
and determine in writing
if the system with a
deferred deadline is still
replacing lead and GRR
service lines at the
fastest feasible rate,
either by approving the
continued use of that
deferred deadline or by
setting the fastest
feasible rate.
LSLR LSLR Service Line Replacement
<bullet> Replacement program requirements <bullet> Replacement program <bullet> Replacement
are based on the lead 90th percentile requirements are dependent on P90 lead program requirements are
(P90) lead level, CCT installation, and/ level for CWSs serving >10,000 persons: independent of systems'
or source water treatment. [cir] If P90 > 0.015 mg/L: Must fully P90 lead levels.
<bullet> Systems conducting LSLR must replace 3 percent of lead and GRR <bullet> All CWSs and
annually replace at least 7 percent of service lines per year based upon a 2- NTNCWSs with one or more
LSLs in their distribution system. year rolling average (mandatory lead, GRR, or unknown
<bullet> Systems must replace the LSL replacement) for at least 4 consecutive service line in their
portion they own and offer to replace 6-month monitoring periods. inventory must replace
the private portion. Systems are not [cir] If P90 > 0.010 mg/L but <= 0.015 lead and GRR service lines
required to bear the cost of replacing mg/L: Implement a goal-based LSLR under their control within
the private portion.\a\ program and consult the primacy agency 10 years, unless subject
<bullet> Full LSLR, partial LSLR, and (or State) on replacement goals for 2 to a shortened or deferred
LSLs with lead sample results <= 0.015 consecutive 1-year monitoring periods. deadline.
mg/L (``test-outs'') count toward the 7 <bullet> CWSs serving <=10,000 persons <bullet> Systems must
percent replacement rate. and all non-transient, non-community replace service lines at a
<bullet> Systems can discontinue LSLR water systems (NTNCWSs) that select cumulative average annual
after 2 consecutive 6-month monitoring LSLR as their compliance option must rate of 10 percent, unless
periods at or below the lead action complete LSLR within 15 years if P90 > subject to a shortened or
level. 0.015 mg/L. See the Small System deferred deadline.
<bullet> Requires replacement of LSLs Flexibility section of this exhibit. <bullet> Cumulative average
only (i.e., no GRR service lines). <bullet> Annual LSLR rate is applied to replacement rate is
the number of lead and GRR service applied to the total
lines when the system first exceeds the number of unknown, lead,
trigger or action level plus the number and GRR service lines in
of unknown service lines at the the baseline inventory
beginning of the year. minus the number of
<bullet> Only full LSLR (replacement of unknown service lines that
the entire length of the service line) have been determined to be
counts toward mandatory rate* and goal- non-lead since the
based rate. baseline inventory.
<bullet> All systems must replace their <bullet> Systems that would
portion of an LSL if notified by have to annually replace
consumer of private side replacement more than 39 service lines
within 45 days of notification of the per 1,000 service
private replacement. If the system connections are eligible
cannot replace the system's portion for deferred deadlines
within 45 days, it must notify the longer than 10 years.
State and replace the system's portion <bullet> States are
within 180 days.* required to set a shorter
<bullet> Following each service line deadline for a system
replacement, systems must: where it determines that a
[cir] Provide pitcher filters or point- shorter deadline is
of-use devices and 6 months of feasible.
replacement cartridges to each customer <bullet> Where property
after replacement.* Provide pitcher owner consent is required
filters and cartridges before the for a system to access the
affected portion of the line or the service line, systems must
fully replaced service line is returned make a reasonable effort
to service.* (at least 4 attempts) to
[cir] Offer to collect a lead tap sample engage property owners
at locations served by the replaced about full service line
line within 3 to 6 months after replacement.
replacement.* <bullet> Systems conducting
partial service line
replacement, if not
prohibited by the rule,
must make a reasonable
effort (at least 4
attempts) to engage
property owners about full
service line replacements
for infrastructure
projects that impact
service lines and offer to
replace the remaining
portion of the service
line not under their
control within 45 days if
replaced in coordination
with an emergency
repair.\a\
<bullet> Requires replacement of lead
connectors when encountered.*
<bullet> Systems must make 2 good faith
efforts to engage customers about LSLR.
<bullet> Systems conducting partial LSLR
must offer to replace the remaining
portion of the service line.
<bullet> Systems must replace service
lines by a shorter deadline if
determined feasible by the State.*
[[Page 86424]]
LSL-Related Outreach LSL-Related Outreach Service Line-Related
<bullet> If a system replaces its portion <bullet> Notify consumers annually if Outreach
only: they are served by a lead, GRR, or <bullet> Provide notice and
[cir] Provide notification to affected unknown service line.* educational materials
residences within 45 days prior to <bullet> Provide notice and educational during water-related work
replacement on possible elevated short- materials to consumers during water- that could disturb lead,
term lead levels and measures to related work that could disturb LSLs. GRR, or unknown service
minimize exposure.* <bullet> Provide filters to consumers lines, including
[cir] Include offer to collect lead tap for disturbances to a lead, GRR, or disturbances due to
sample within 72 hours of replacement. unknown service line caused by inventorying efforts, to
[cir] Provide test results within 3 replacement of an inline water meter, consumers within 24 hours
business days after receiving results. water meter setter, or connector. or before the service line
<bullet> Systems subject to goal-based is returned to service,
program must: and to customers within 30
[cir] Conduct targeted outreach that days.
encourages consumers with LSLs to <bullet> Provide filters to
participate in the LSLR program. consumers for disturbances
[cir] Conduct an additional outreach to a lead, GRR, or unknown
activity if they fail to meet their service line caused by
goal. replacement of an inline
<bullet> Systems required to conduct water meter, water meter
LSLR must include information about the setter, connector, or
LSLR program in public education (PE) water main.
materials that are provided in response <bullet> If a CWS does not
to P90 > action level.* meet the mandatory service
line replacement rate, the
CWS must conduct
additional public outreach
activities to encourage
customers with lead, GRR,
and unknown service lines
to participate in the
service line replacement
program.
<bullet> Removes goal-based
program outreach
activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Level and Trigger Level
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> P90 level above lead action <bullet> P90 level above lead action <bullet> Removes the lead
level of 0.015 mg/L or copper action level of 0.015 mg/L or copper action trigger level.
level of 1.3 mg/L requires additional level of 1.3 mg/L requires more actions <bullet> P90 level above
actions. than the previous rule. lead action level of 0.010
<bullet> Lead action level exceedance <bullet> Defines lead trigger level as mg/L or copper action
requires 7 percent LSLR (includes P90 > 0.010 mg/L and triggers level of 1.3 mg/L requires
partial replacements), CCT additional planning, monitoring, and actions including
recommendation and possible study and treatment requirements. installing or re-
installation, and PE within 60 days <bullet> Lead action level exceedance optimizing CCT, and PE as
after the end of the monitoring period. requires 3 percent full LSLR, OCCT well as Tier 1 PN (for
installation or re-optimization, PE, lead action level
and public notification (PN) within 24 exceedances).
hours. <bullet> Mandatory full
<bullet> Trigger level exceedance service line replacement
requires goal-based LSLR and steps of lead and GRR service
taken towards CCT installation or re- lines is independent of
optimization. P90 lead levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead and Copper Tap Sampling
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample Site Selection Sample Site Selection Sample Site Selection
<bullet> Prioritizes collection of <bullet> Prioritizes collecting samples <bullet> Combines the tap
samples from sites with sources of lead from sites served by LSLs. All samples sample site selection
in contact with drinking water. must be collected from sites served by tiering criteria for CWSs
<bullet> Highest priority given to sites LSLs, if available.* and NTNCWSs.
served by copper pipes with lead solder <bullet> Equal priority to copper pipes <bullet> Removes galvanized
installed after 1982 or containing lead with lead solder, irrespective of service line or premise
pipes and sites served by LSLs. installation date.* plumbing formerly
<bullet> Systems must collect 50 percent <bullet> Adds 2 tiers to prioritize downstream of a lead
of samples from LSLs, if available. sampling at lead and GRR service line connector from Tier 3
sites above sites with copper with lead sites.
solder.* <bullet> Removes
requirement for
replacement sampling sites
to be selected within
reasonable proximity.
<bullet> Clarifies that
sites are considered no
longer available for
sampling after customer
refusal or non-response
after two outreach
attempts.
Sample Collection and Inclusion in 90th Sample Collection and Inclusion in 90th Sample Collection and
Percentile Calculation Percentile Calculation Inclusion in 90th
<bullet> Requires collection of the first- <bullet> Requires collection of the Percentile Calculation
liter sample after water has sat fifth-liter sample in homes with LSLs <bullet> Requires
stagnant for a minimum of 6 hours. after water has sat stagnant for a collection of the first-
minimum of 6 hours. and fifth-liter samples in
<bullet> Requires first-liter sample structures with LSLs after
collection in homes without LSLs.* water has sat stagnant for
<bullet> Requires systems with a minimum of 6 hours.
insufficient Tier 1 and 2 sites to meet <bullet> Requires systems
the minimum number of samples required with insufficient Tier 1
by calculating the P90 from all Tier 1 and 2 sites to meet the
and 2 sites and the highest samples minimum number of samples
from the next highest tier to equal the required by calculating
minimum number required. the P90 from the highest
<bullet> Prohibits inclusion of samples sample values from the
collected under find-and-fix in the P90 highest tiers sampled
calculation.* equal to the minimum
<bullet> Adds requirement that samples number required.
must be collected in wide-mouth <bullet> Requires the
bottles.* higher value of the first-
<bullet> Prohibits sampling instructions and fifth-liter lead
that include recommendations for concentration in
aerator cleaning/removal and pre- structures with LSLs to be
stagnation flushing prior to sample used to calculate the P90
collection.* value for lead.
<bullet> Prohibits
inclusion of samples
following service line
replacement in the P90
calculation. Prohibits the
inclusion of more than one
sample per site in each
P90 calculation.
<bullet> Revises the
definition of a wide-mouth
bottle.
[[Page 86425]]
Monitoring Frequency Monitoring Frequency Monitoring Frequency
<bullet> Samples are analyzed for both <bullet> Samples are analyzed for lead <bullet> Monitoring
lead and copper. and copper, only copper, or only lead. schedule is based on both
<bullet> Systems must collect standard This occurs when lead monitoring is the P90 for lead and
number of samples based on population; conducted more frequently or at more copper for all systems.
semi-annually unless they qualify for sites than copper, and at LSL sites Systems may retain or
reduced monitoring. where a fifth-liter sample is only qualify for reduced
<bullet> Systems can qualify for annual analyzed for lead.* monitoring based on the
or triennial monitoring at reduced <bullet> Lead monitoring schedule is number of consecutive tap
number of sites. Monitoring schedule based on the P90 level for all systems monitoring periods:
based on the number of consecutive years as follows: [cir] P90 <= action level
meeting the following criteria: [cir] P90 > 0.015 mg/L: Semi-annually at for 2 consecutive 6-month
[cir] Serves <=50,000 persons and P90 is the standard number of sites. periods: Annual monitoring
at or below the lead and copper action [cir] P90 > 0.010 mg/L but <= 0.015 mg/ at standard number of
levels. L: Annually at the standard number of sites for lead and reduced
[cir] Serves any population size, meets sites. number of sites for
State-specified optimal water quality [cir] P90 <= 0.010 mg/L: Annually at the copper.
parameters (OWQPs), and P90 <= lead standard number of sites and [cir] P90 < practical
action level. triennially at reduced number of sites quantitation limit (PQL)
<bullet> Triennial monitoring also using same criteria as the LCR except for 2 consecutive periods:
applies to any system with lead P90 <= copper P90 level is not considered. Triennial monitoring at
0.005 mg/L and copper P90 <= 0.65 mg/L <bullet> Initial standard monitoring the reduced number of
for 2 consecutive 6-month monitoring required for systems with lead and GRR sites for both lead and
periods. service lines, and any system that does copper.
<bullet> Based on rule criteria, systems not sample under the requirements of <bullet> Initial standard
serving <= 3,300 persons can apply for a the LCRR by the compliance date. monitoring schedule
9-year monitoring waiver.* <bullet> Systems must conduct standard required for most systems
monitoring if they exceed the action with lead and/or GRR
level, have a water quality parameter service lines in their
(WQP) excursion, and other criteria. inventory on the
compliance date.
<bullet> Additional
criterion for when systems
must start standard
monitoring: Systems with
no lead or GRR service
lines in their inventory
on the compliance date
must start standard
monitoring if they
identify a lead or GRR
service line in the
future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrosion Control Treatment (CCT) and Water Quality Parameters (WQPs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCT CCT CCT
<bullet> Systems serving > 50,000 persons <bullet> Specifies CCT requirements for <bullet> Systems with P90
were required to install treatment by systems with P90 lead level >0.010 mg/L lead level >0.010 mg/L:
January 1, 1997, with limited exception. but <= 0.015 mg/L: [cir] No CCT: Must install
<bullet> Systems serving <= 50,000 that [cir] No CCT: Must conduct a CCT study CCT regardless of their
exceed lead and/or copper action if required by the State. subsequent P90 levels if
level(s) are subject to CCT requirements [cir] With CCT: Must follow the steps they have started to
(e.g., CCT recommendation, study if for re-optimizing CCT, as specified in install CCT.
required by the State, CCT the rule. [cir] With CCT: Must re-
installation). They can discontinue CCT <bullet> Systems with P90 lead level optimize OCCT.
steps if no longer exceed both action >0.015 mg/L: [cir] Systems with OCCT and
levels for 2 consecutive 6-month [cir] No CCT: Must complete CCT lead and GRR service lines
monitoring periods. installation regardless of subsequent meeting OWQPs need only re-
<bullet> Systems must operate CCT to meet P90 levels if system has started to optimize OCCT once after
any OWQPs designated by the State that install CCT. the compliance date,
define optimal CCT. [cir] With CCT: Must re-optimize CCT. unless required to do so
<bullet> There is no requirement for <bullet> CWSs serving <= 10,000 persons by the State.
systems to re-optimize. and all NTNCWSs can select an option [cir] Systems with OCCT
other than CCT to address lead. See the that exceed the lead
Small System Flexibility section of action level after
this exhibit. removing all lead and GRR
service lines will need to
re-optimize again.
<bullet> CWSs serving <=
3,300 persons and all
NTNCWSs can select an
option other than CCT to
address lead. See the
Small System Flexibility
section of this exhibit.
<bullet> Deferred OCCT or
re-optimized OCCT for
systems that can complete
removal of 100 percent of
lead and GRR service lines
within 5 years or less of
the date they are
triggered into CCT steps.
Systems with CCT must
maintain CCT during the 5-
year-or-less service line
replacement program.
CCT Options CCT Options CCT Options
Includes alkalinity and pH adjustment, Removes calcium hardness as an option No changes from the LCRR.
calcium hardness adjustment, and and specifies any phosphate inhibitor
phosphate or silicate-based corrosion must be orthophosphate.*
inhibitor.
WQPs WQPs WQPs
<bullet> No CCT: pH, alkalinity, calcium, <bullet> Eliminates WQPs related to No changes from the LCRR.
conductivity, temperature, calcium hardness (i.e., calcium,
orthophosphate (if phosphate-based conductivity, and temperature).*
inhibitor is used), silica (if silica- <bullet> All other parameters are the
based inhibitor is used). same as in the LCR.*
<bullet> With CCT: pH, alkalinity, and
based on type of CCT either
orthophosphate, silica, or calcium.
WQP Monitoring WQP Monitoring WQP Monitoring
<bullet> Systems serving >50,000 persons <bullet> Systems serving >50,000 persons <bullet> Systems with CCT
must conduct regular WQP monitoring at must conduct regular WQP monitoring at (unless deemed optimized)
entry points and within the distribution entry points and within the serving >10,000 persons
system. distribution system. must conduct regular WQP
<bullet> Systems serving <= 50,000 <bullet> Systems serving <=50,000 monitoring at entry points
persons conduct monitoring only in those persons must continue WQP monitoring and within the
periods that exceed the lead or copper until they no longer exceed the lead distribution system.
action level. and/or copper action level(s) for 2 <bullet> Systems serving
<bullet> Contains provisions to sample at consecutive 6-month monitoring periods. <=10,000 persons and
reduced number of sites in distribution <bullet> To qualify for reduced WQP systems without CCT
system less frequency for all systems distribution monitoring, P90 lead level serving >10,000 persons
meeting their OWQPs. must be <= 0.010 mg/L and the system but <=50,000 persons that
must meet its OWQPs.* exceed the lead and/or
copper action level(s)
must conduct WQP
monitoring until they no
longer exceed lead and/or
copper action level(s) for
2 consecutive 6-month
monitoring periods.
<bullet> Systems without
CCT serving >10,000
persons but <=50,000
persons that exceed the
lead action level that are
required to install CCT,
must continue to conduct
WQP monitoring.
Sanitary Survey Review Sanitary Survey Review Sanitary Survey Review
Treatment must be reviewed during CCT and WQP data must be reviewed during No changes from the LCRR.
sanitary surveys; no specific sanitary surveys against most recent
requirement to assess CCT or WQPs. CCT guidance issued by the EPA.*
[[Page 86426]]
Find-and-Fix Find-and-Fix Distribution System and
No required follow-up samples or If individual tap samples >0.015 mg/L Site Assessment (DSSA)
additional actions if an individual lead, find-and-fix steps include: <bullet> Changes the name
sample exceeds the lead action level. <bullet> Conduct WQP monitoring at or from ``Find-and-Fix'' to
near the site >0.015 mg/L. ``Distribution System and
<bullet> Collect tap sample at the same Site Assessment'' to
tap sample site within 30 days.* describe this requirement
[cir] For LSL, collect any liter or more precisely.
sample volume.* <bullet> Requirements from
<bullet> Perform needed corrective the LCRR affect systems
action.* with individual tap
<bullet> Document customer refusal or samples >0.010 mg/L lead.
non-response after 2 attempts.* <bullet> Clarifies that the
<bullet> Provide information to local distribution system sample
and State health officials.* location must be within a
half mile radius of each
site with a result >0.010
mg/L.
<bullet> Water systems
without CCT are not
required to collect WQP
samples for the DSSA CCT
assessment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small System Flexibility
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No provisions for systems to elect an Allows CWSs serving <=10,000 persons and Allows CWSs serving <=
alternative treatment approach but sets all NTNCWSs to implement an alternate 3,300 persons and all
specific requirements for CCT and LSLR. compliance option to address lead with NTNCWSs with P90 levels >
State approval: lead action level and <=
<bullet> Systems with lead P90 > 0.010 copper action level to
mg/L recommend CCT, LSLR, provision and conduct the following
maintenance of point-of-use (POU) actions in lieu of CCT
devices, or replacement of all lead- requirements to address
bearing plumbing materials. lead with State approval:
<bullet> If the system's P90 lead level <bullet> Choose a
> 0.015 mg/L, the system must implement compliance option: (1)
the compliance option. provision and maintenance
of POU devices or (2)
replacement of all lead-
bearing plumbing
materials.
<bullet> Removes the
compliance option to
conduct LSLR in 15 years.
Maintains option for
systems following CCT
requirements:
<bullet> With CCT: Collect
WQPs and evaluate
compliance options and
OCCT.
<bullet> No CCT: Evaluate
compliance options and
CCT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Education and Outreach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Systems with P90 > lead action <bullet> Water systems must provide <bullet> Revises the
level must provide PE to customers about updated lead health effects language in mandatory lead health
lead sources, health effects, measures PN and PE materials. CWSs must provide effects language to
to reduce lead exposure, and additional updated health effects language in the improve completeness and
information sources. Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR). clarity.
<bullet> Systems with P90 > lead action <bullet> For water systems serving a <bullet> Water systems must
level must offer lead tap sampling to large proportion of consumers with provide the updated health
customers who request it. limited English proficiency, PE effects language in PN and
<bullet> Systems must provide lead materials must contain information in all PE materials. CWSs
consumer notice to individuals served at the appropriate language(s) regarding must provide updated
tested taps within 30 days of learning the importance of the materials or health effects language in
results. information on where consumers can get the CCR.
<bullet> For water systems serving a a translated copy or assistance in <bullet> For water systems
large proportion of consumers with other languages. serving a large proportion
limited English proficiency, PE <bullet> If P90 > lead action level: of consumers with limited
materials must contain information in [cir] LCRR PN and LCR PE requirements English proficiency, all
the appropriate language(s) regarding apply. PE materials must contain
the importance of the materials or [cir] Water systems must offer to sample information in the
information on where consumers can get a the tap for lead for any customer who appropriate language(s)
translated copy or assistance in other requests it. regarding the importance
languages. <bullet> Water systems must provide the of the materials and
lead consumer notice to consumers whose information on where
individual tap sample is >0.015 mg/L consumers can get a
lead as soon as practicable but no translated copy or
later than 3 calendar days. assistance in other
<bullet> CWSs must provide information languages.
to local and State health agencies.* <bullet> Water systems must
Also see the Public Notification, deliver consumer notice of
Consumer Confidence Report, and LSL- lead and copper tap
Related Outreach sections of this sampling results to
exhibit. consumers whenever their
tap is sampled as soon as
practicable but no later
than 3 business days after
receiving the results,
regardless of the level.
<bullet> If P90 > lead
action level:
[cir] LCRR PN requirements
apply.
[cir] Water systems must
conduct PE no later than
60 days after the end of
each tap sampling period
until the system no longer
exceeds the action level
unless the State approves
an extension.
[cir] Water systems must
deliver PE materials to
bill paying customers and
every service connection
address served.
........................................ <bullet> Water systems with
multiple lead action level
exceedances (at least 3
action level exceedances
in a 5-year period) must
conduct additional public
outreach activities and
make filters available.
Water systems must submit
a filter distribution plan
to the State within 60
days of the second action
level exceedance, and the
State will have 60 days to
review. The State has
discretion to allow the
system to discontinue
outreach activities and
filter provision earlier
if it completes actions to
reduce lead levels.
<bullet> Water systems must
offer to sample the tap
for lead for any consumer
with a lead, GRR, or
unknown service line who
requests it.
Also see the Public
Notification, Consumer
Confidence Report, and
Service Line Related
Outreach sections of this
exhibit.
[[Page 86427]]
Public Notification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> If P90 > action level: <bullet> If P90 > lead action level: <bullet> If P90 > lead
[cir] No PN required for P90 > action [cir] Systems must notify consumers of action level of 0.010 mg/
level. P90 > action level within 24 hours L:
<bullet> Tier 2 PN required for (Tier 1 PN). Systems must comply by [cir] LCRR Tier 1 PN
violations to Sec. Sec. 141.80 October 16, 2024. requirements apply, but
through 141.85. <bullet> Tier 2 PN required for for the LCRI action level
<bullet> Tier 3 PN required for violations to Sec. Sec. 141.80 of 0.010 mg/L.
violations to Sec. Sec. 141.86 (except paragraph (c)) through 141.84, <bullet> Tier 2 PN required
through 141.89. 141.85(a) through (c) and (h), and for violations to Sec.
Also see the Public Education and 141.93. Sec. 141.80 (except
Outreach section of this exhibit. <bullet> Tier 3 PN required for paragraph (c)) through
violations to Sec. Sec. 141.86 141.84, 141.85(a) through
through 141.90. (c) (except paragraph
Also see the Public Education and (c)(3)), (h), and (j), and
Outreach section of this exhibit. 141.93.
<bullet> Tier 3 PN required
for violations to Sec.
Sec. 141.86 through
141.90 and 141.92.
<bullet> Water systems must
provide updated lead
health effects language in
PN.
Also see the Public
Education and Outreach
section of this exhibit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Confidence Report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> All CWSs must provide <bullet> CWSs must provide updated <bullet> Revises the
educational material in the annual CCR. health effects language in the CCR. mandatory lead health
<bullet> All CWSs are required to effects language and
include information on how to access informational statement as
the LSL inventory and how to access the well as includes
results of all tap sampling in the CCR. additional information
<bullet> Revises the mandatory health about risk of lead
effects language to improve accuracy exposure in the
and clarity. informational statement
about lead in the CCR to
improve completeness and
clarity.
<bullet> CWSs must provide
updated health effects
language in the CCR.
<bullet> CWSs must include
a statement in the CCR
about the system sampling
for lead in schools and
child care facilities and
direct the public to
contact their school or
child care facility for
further information.
<bullet> CWSs with lead,
GRR, or unknown service
lines must include a
statement in the CCR about
how to access the service
line inventory and
replacement plan.
Also see the Public
Education and Outreach
section of this exhibit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in Source or Treatment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Systems on a reduced tap monitoring Systems on any tap monitoring schedule No changes from the LCRR.
schedule must obtain prior State must obtain prior State approval before
approval before changing their source or changing their source or treatment.
treatment. These systems must also resume a
standard lead and copper tap monitoring
schedule.*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Water Monitoring and Treatment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periodic source water monitoring for lead States can waive continued source water Updated cross-reference to
and copper is required for systems with: monitoring for lead and copper if the:* requirement for conducting
<bullet> Source water treatment; or <bullet> System has already conducted standard monitoring when
<bullet> P90 > action level and no source source water monitoring for a previous there is a source water
water treatment. P90 > action level; addition.
<bullet> State has determined that
source water treatment is not required;
and
<bullet> System has not added any new
water sources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead in Drinking Water at Schools and Child Care Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Does not include separate <bullet> CWSs must provide annual public Expands on LCRR
testing and education program for CWSs education materials to all schools and requirements to include:
at schools and child care facilities. licensed child care facilities they <bullet> Waivers for CWSs
<bullet> Schools and child care serve. to sample in schools and
facilities that are classified as <bullet> CWSs must conduct sampling at licensed child care
NTNCWSs must sample for lead and 20 percent of elementary schools and 20 facilities they serve
copper.* percent of licensed child care during the first 5-year
facilities they serve per year and testing cycle if the
conduct sampling at secondary schools facility has been sampled
on request for first testing cycle (5 between January 1, 2021,
years) and conduct sampling on request and the LCRI compliance
of all schools and child care date.
facilities thereafter. <bullet> Requires CWSs to
<bullet> Sample results must be provided include a statement about
to each sampled school/child care the opportunity for
facility, State, and local or State schools and licensed child
health department. care facilities to be
<bullet> Excludes schools and licensed sampled in the CCR.
child care facilities constructed on or <bullet> Excludes schools
after January 1, 2014. and licensed child care
<bullet> Waives sampling in schools and facilities constructed or
child care facilities that were sampled that had full plumbing
under a State or other program after replacement on or after
October 16, 2024. January 1, 2014 and that
are also not served by a
lead, GRR, or unknown
service line.
<bullet> Includes
clarifications on the
applicability of the
requirements and on the
content of public
education material CWSs
must provide to schools
and licensed child care
facilities.
[[Page 86428]]
Primacy Agency (or State) Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
States must report information to the EPA States must report information to the States must report
that includes, but is not limited to: EPA that includes, but is not limited information to the EPA
<bullet> All P90 lead levels for systems to: that includes, but is not
serving > 3,300 persons, and only levels <bullet> All lead and copper P90 levels limited to:
> 0.015 mg/L for smaller systems. for all system sizes.* <bullet> The current
<bullet> Only copper P90 levels above the <bullet> The number of lead, GRR, and numbers of lead, GRR,
copper action level for all systems. unknown service lines for every water unknown, and non-lead
<bullet> Systems that are required to system.* service lines, lead
initiate LSLR and the date replacement <bullet> The goal-based or mandatory connectors, and unknown
must begin. replacement rate and the date each connectors in each
<bullet> Systems for which OCCT has been system must begin LSLR. system's inventory.
designated. <bullet> OCCT status of all systems <bullet> The numbers and
States must keep records on information including OWQPs specified by the types of service lines
that includes, but is not limited to: State.* replaced and the
<bullet> Records of the currently <bullet> For systems triggered into replacement rate for every
applicable or most recent State source water treatment, the State- system conducting
determinations, including all supporting designated date or determination for no mandatory service line
information and an explanation of the treatment required.* replacement.
technical basis for each decision. States must keep records on information <bullet> The deadline for
State primacy requirements include, but that includes, but is not limited to: the system to complete
are not limited to: <bullet> LSLR plans.* replacement of all lead
<bullet> Designating OCCT. <bullet> Compliance sampling pools.* and GRR service lines.
<bullet> Designating source water <bullet> Determinations related to <bullet> The expected date
treatment methods. source water treatment.* of completion of service
<bullet> Verifying service line <bullet> Determinations related to line replacement.
replacement schedules. compliance alternatives for small CWSs <bullet> The lead P90
and NTNCWSs.* levels of systems with an
<bullet> LSL inventories.* action level exceedance
State primacy requirements include, but within 15 days of the end
are not limited to: of the monitoring period
<bullet> Reviewing service line or, if earlier, within 24
inventory.* hours of receiving the
<bullet> Approving LSLR goals. notice from the system.
<bullet> Determining if a faster LSLR <bullet> The result of the
rate is feasible.* State's determination as
<bullet> Defining school and child care to whether the deferred
program and determining if State or deadline is the fastest
local testing program is at least as feasible, the deadline at
stringent as Federal requirements. the fastest feasible rate,
<bullet> Verifying compliance with and the reasons for the
``Find-and-Fix'' requirements.* State's decision.
<bullet> Reviewing any change in source States must keep records on
water treatment.* information that includes,
but is not limited to:
<bullet> Samples that do
not meet the six-hour
minimum stagnation time.
<bullet> Determinations
concerning systems
eligible for deferred
deadlines for service line
replacement.
State primacy requirements
include, but are not
limited to:
<bullet> Identify State
laws that pertain to a
water system's access to
conduct full service line
replacement.
<bullet> Make
determinations about
systems eligible for
service line replacement
deferred deadlines.
<bullet> Make
determinations about which
water systems serve a
large proportion of
consumers with limited
English proficiency and
provide technical
assistance to those
systems required to meet
the requirements to
provide translated PE or
translation assistance to
their consumers.
<bullet> Review and approve
inventory validations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ See section IV.B.4 of this preamble for further information on cost sharing.
Note: P90 means 90th percentile level.
B. Does this action apply to me?
The entities regulated by this action are CWSs and non-transient
non-community water systems (NTNCWSs). A CWS, as defined in Sec.
141.2, is ``a public water system which serves at least fifteen service
connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least
twenty-five year-round residents.'' The definition in Sec. 141.2 for a
NTNCWS is ``a public water system that is not a [CWS] and that
regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons over 6 months per
year.'' The following table provides examples of the regulated entities
under this rule:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially affected
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public water systems.............. CWSs; NTNCWSs.
State and Tribal government Agencies responsible for developing,
agencies. ensuring compliance with, and
enforcing National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NPDWRs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities that could be affected by this
action. This table includes the types of entities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this action. To determine
whether your entity is regulated by this action, this final rule should
be carefully examined.
As part of this action for the LCRI, ``State'' refers to the agency
of the State, Tribal, or territorial government that has jurisdiction
over public water systems consistent with the definition of ``State''
in 40 CFR 141.2. During any period when a State or Tribal government
does not have primary enforcement responsibility pursuant to section
1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the term ``State'' means
the relevant Regional Administrator of the EPA. For questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
C. Dates for Compliance
Water systems must begin to comply with the LCRI three years after
promulgation of this final rule. In accordance with SDWA section
1412(b)(10), the Administrator, or a State (in the case of an
individual system), may allow up to two additional years to comply with
a treatment technique if the Administrator or State (in the case of an
individual system) determines that additional time is necessary for
capital improvements. Where a State, or the EPA where it has
[[Page 86429]]
primacy, chooses to provide such an extension, the system would have up
to five years from the rule's promulgation date to begin compliance
with the treatment technique. The EPA is not providing a two-year
extension nationwide because the EPA has not determined that an
additional two years is necessary for water systems nationwide to
complete capital improvements to begin compliance with the LCRI.
Starting on the compliance date, systems must begin mandatory service
line replacement programs that must be completed within 10 years for
the vast majority of systems. Systems must also begin conducting the
improved tap sampling and if their tap sampling results show they
exceeded the action level, systems may be required to install new or
re-optimized corrosion control treatment.
Under SDWA section 1416, States may exempt water systems from any
treatment technique requirement for no more than three years after the
otherwise applicable compliance date. For a small system that does not
serve more than 3,300 persons and which needs financial assistance for
the necessary improvements, an exemption may be renewed for one or more
two-year periods, but not to exceed a total of six years. No exemption
may be granted without a finding that:
<bullet> Due to compelling factors (which may include economic
factors, including qualification of the public water system as a system
serving a disadvantaged community pursuant to SDWA section 1452(d)),\4\
the public water system is unable to comply with such contaminant level
or treatment technique requirement, or to implement measures to develop
an alternative source of water supply;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The term ``disadvantaged community'' used in SDWA section
1416 here refers to the statutory definition of ``disadvantaged
community'' provided at SDWA section 1452(d)(3): ``[T]he term
`disadvantaged community' means the service area of a public water
system that meets affordability criteria established after public
review and comment by the State in which the public water system is
located. The Administrator may publish information to assist States
in establishing affordability criteria.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> The public water system was in operation on the effective
date of such contaminant level or treatment technique requirement, or,
for a system that was not in operation by that date, only if no
reasonable alternative source of drinking water is available to such
new system;
<bullet> The granting of the exemption will not result in an
unreasonable risk to health; and
<bullet> Management or restructuring changes (or both) cannot
reasonably be made that will result in compliance with this title, or
if compliance cannot be achieved, improve the quality of the drinking
water.
III. Background
A. Overview of Lead and Lead Exposures Through Drinking Water
Lead is toxic to humans and animals, causing harmful health
effects. Lead is a naturally occurring element found in small amounts
in the Earth's crust. Lead and lead compounds have been used in a wide
variety of products found in and around homes, including paint,
ceramics, pipes and plumbing materials, solders, gasoline, batteries,
ammunition, and cosmetics. Lead can enter drinking water when plumbing
materials that contain lead corrode, especially where the water is
highly acidic or has a low mineral content that is more likely to
corrode pipes and fixtures. The most common sources of lead in drinking
water are lead pipes, faucets, and fixtures. In homes with lead pipes
that connect the home to the water main (or other conduit for
distributing water to individual consumers or groups of consumers),
also known as lead service lines or LSLs, these pipes are typically the
most significant source of lead in water (Sandvig et al., 2008). Lead
pipes are more likely to be found in older cities and homes built
before 1986 (Laquatra, 2014). Among homes without LSLs, the most common
source of lead in drinking water is from brass or chrome-plated brass
faucets and plumbing with lead solder (Laquatra, 2014).
The LCRI regulates approximately 67,000 community water systems
(CWSs) and non-transient non-community water systems (NTNCWSs) in the
United States of varying sizes and containing varying numbers of LSLs
in their service area. A CWS is a public water system that supplies
water to the same population year-round. A NTNCWS is a public water
system that regularly supplies water to at least 25 of the same people
at least six months per year. Some examples are schools, factories,
office buildings, and hospitals which have their own water systems.
B. Human Health Effects of Lead and Copper
1. Lead
Exposure to lead can cause harmful health effects for people of all
ages, especially pregnant people, infants, and young children (Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2022a; CDC, 2022b; CDC,
2023). Lead has acute and chronic impacts on the body. Lead exposure
causes damage to the brain and kidneys and can interfere with the
production of red blood cells that carry oxygen to all parts of the
body (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 2020).
Developing fetuses, infants, and young children are most
susceptible to the harmful health effects of lead (ATSDR, 2020).
Exposure to lead is known to present serious health risks to the brain
and nervous system of children (USEPA, 2013; USEPA, 2024b). Young
children and infants are particularly vulnerable to the physical,
cognitive, and behavioral effects of lead due to their sensitive
developmental stages. There is no known safe level of exposure to lead.
Scientific studies have demonstrated that there is an increased risk of
health effects in children even when their blood lead levels are less
than 3.5 micrograms per deciliter (CDC, 2022c) and in adults even when
blood lead levels are less than 10 micrograms per deciliter (National
Toxicology Program (NTP), 2012). Low-level lead exposure is of
particular concern for children because their growing bodies absorb
more lead per pound than adults do, and their developing brains and
nervous systems are more sensitive to the damaging effects of lead
(ATSDR, 2020).
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates
that drinking water can make up at least 20 percent of a person's total
exposure to lead (56 FR 26548, USEPA, 1991). When a child is not
routinely exposed to other sources of lead (e.g., dust from legacy lead
paint or legacy contaminated soils), most of their exposure may come
from drinking water. Infants who consume mostly formula mixed with tap
water can, depending on the level of lead in the water and other
sources of lead in the home, receive 40 to 60 percent of their exposure
to lead from drinking water used in the formula (53 FR 31516, USEPA,
1988; Stanek et al., 2020). Scientists have linked lead's effects on
the brain with lowered intelligence quotient (IQ) and attention
disorders in children, among other health impacts (USEPA, 2024b; USEPA,
2013; Lanphear et al., 2019; Ji et al., 2018). In 1991, the EPA
established a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for lead of zero.
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requires the EPA to set MCLGs at the
level at which no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of
persons would occur, allowing for a margin of safety. The EPA
established the MCLG of zero in part due to lead being a probable
carcinogen and due to there being no clear threshold below which there
are no risks of some non-
[[Page 86430]]
carcinogenic health effects (56 FR 26460, USEPA, 1991).
Blood lead levels are an indication of current exposure. Over time,
lead can accumulate in the body. Lead is stored in a person's bones,
binding to calcium, and it can be released later in life. For example,
when calcium is mobilized in the pregnant person's body during
pregnancy, lead is released from the pregnant person's bones and can
pass to the fetus. Lead can also be passed through breastmilk to the
nursing infant or child. Lead exposure can result in serious health
effects to the developing fetus and infant. Studies document increased
risk of miscarriage (Xu et al., 2012; Tolunay et al., 2016), low birth
weight (Goto et al., 2021; Hu et al., 2021; Rodosthenous et al., 2017;
Taylor et al., 2015), and preterm birth (USEPA, 2024b; Fisher et al.,
2023). In utero and early childhood exposure to lead is associated with
increased risk to the baby's brain and/or nervous system, manifesting
as, for instance, an increased risk of learning or behavioral problems
in life (USEPA, 2024b; USEPA, 2013).
As noted above, studies also have documented an association between
adult blood lead levels and increased risk of cardiovascular disease,
manifesting as an increase in risk of cardiovascular disease premature
mortality. Occupational exposure to lead is associated with significant
health effects in adults as well, particularly renal and
gastrointestinal. The 2013 and 2024 Integrated Science Assessments for
Lead (USEPA, 2013; USEPA, 2024b), the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) National Toxicology Program (NTP) Monograph on
Health Effects of Low-Level Lead (NTP, 2012), the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) 2020 Toxicological Profile for
Lead (ATSDR, 2020), and peer-reviewed studies have documented
associations between lead and cancer (Wei and Zhu, 2020) as well as
lead and adverse cardiovascular (Park and Han, 2021), renal (Harari et
al., 2018), reproductive (Shi et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2020),
immunological (Krueger and Wade, 2016), and neurological effects
(Andrew et al., 2022). The EPA's Integrated Science Assessment for Lead
(USEPA, 2024b) and Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Chemical
Assessment Summary (USEPA, 2004a) provide additional health effects
information on lead. For a more detailed explanation of the health
effects associated with lead for children and adults, see appendix D of
the final Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) Economic Analysis
(USEPA, 2024a).
2. Copper
Copper is an essential trace element required for several metabolic
processes; however, excess copper intake is toxic and linked to various
adverse health effects. Acute gastrointestinal conditions are the most
common adverse health effects observed among adults and children.
Chronic exposure to copper is particularly a concern for people with
Wilson's disease, an autosomal recessive genetic disorder of copper
metabolism affecting 1 in 30,000 individuals (Ala et al., 2007). These
individuals are prone to copper accumulation in body tissue, which can
lead to liver damage, neurological, and/or psychiatric symptoms (Dorsey
and Ingerman, 2004). Additional information on the health effects
associated with copper are available in appendix E of the Final LCRI
Economic Analysis (USEPA, 2024a).
C. Regulatory History
Exercising its longstanding authority under SDWA, on June 7, 1991,
the EPA promulgated the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) with the goal of
improving public health by reducing lead and copper levels at consumer
taps (56 FR 26460, USEPA, 1991). The LCR established MCLGs of 0 mg/L
for lead and 1.3 mg/L for copper. In addition, the LCR established a
National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) consisting of
treatment technique requirements that include lead service line
replacement (LSLR), corrosion control treatment (CCT), source water
treatment, and public education. The LCR established requirements for
community water systems (CWSs) and non-transient non-community water
systems (NTNCWSs) to conduct monitoring at consumer taps. The rule
established action levels of 0.015 mg/L for lead and 1.3 mg/L for
copper. If more than 10 percent of tap sample results (i.e., the 90th
percentile value of tap sample concentrations), collected during any
monitoring period, exceed the action level, water systems must take
actions including installing and/or optimizing CCT, conducting public
education, treating source water if it contributes to lead and copper
levels at the tap, and replacing LSLs if the system continues to exceed
the action level after completing CCT steps and installing CCT. An
action level exceedance is not a violation of the rule; however,
failure to take the subsequent required actions (e.g., LSLR, CCT,
public education) results in a violation of the treatment technique or
monitoring and reporting requirements.
On January 12, 2000, the EPA promulgated minor revisions to the LCR
(LCRMR) (65 FR 1950, USEPA, 2000a). These minor revisions streamlined
the LCR, promoted consistent national implementation, and reduced the
reporting burden on affected entities. The LCRMR did not change the
MCLGs or action levels for lead and copper nor change the rule's basic
requirements. One of the provisions of the LCRMR required States to
report the 90th percentile lead value for all water systems serving
greater than 3,300 persons. States were required to report the 90th
percentile lead value for water systems serving 3,300 or fewer persons
only if the water system exceeds the action level. The new reporting
requirements became effective in 2002.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In 2004, the EPA published minor corrections to the LCR to
reinstate text that was inadvertently removed from the rule during
the previous revision (69 FR 38850, USEPA, 2004b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From 2000 to 2004, the District of Columbia experienced incidences
of elevated drinking water lead levels, prompting the EPA to undertake
a review of the LCR to determine ``whether elevated drinking water lead
levels were a national problem'' and to identify actions to improve
rule implementation (72 FR 57784, USEPA, 2007a; USEPA, 2007b; Brown et
al., 2011). The EPA specifically considered the number of systems that
failed to meet the lead action level, if a significant percentage of
the population received water that exceeded the action level, how well
the LCR worked to reduce drinking water lead levels, and if the rule
was being effectively implemented, particularly with respect to
monitoring and public education requirements. As part of the national
review, the EPA held four expert workshops to discuss elements of the
LCR, collected and evaluated lead concentration data and other
information required under the LCR, and evaluated State implementation
efforts to better understand challenges and needs experienced by States
and water systems. In March 2005, the EPA released a Drinking Water
Lead Reduction Plan, outlining a series of short- and long-term goals
to improve implementation of the LCR, including revisions to the LCR
(USEPA, 2005). On October 10, 2007, the EPA promulgated a set of short-
term regulatory revisions and clarifications (72 FR 57782, USEPA,
2007a). The short-term revisions strengthened implementation of the LCR
in the areas of monitoring, treatment, customer awareness, LSLR, and
improving compliance with the public education requirements.
[[Page 86431]]
Long-term issues, requiring additional research and input, were
identified for a subsequent set of rule revisions. The EPA conducted
extensive engagement with stakeholders to inform subsequent rule
development, including a 2011 Scientific Advisory Board (SAB)
consultation on the science of partial LSLR that found that partial
LSLR does not reliably reduce drinking water lead levels in the long
term and may cause short-term elevated drinking water lead levels
following the replacement (USEPA, 2011a). The EPA specifically sought
input from small entity stakeholders through the Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel (SBAR) process under section 609(b) of the RFA,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA). The EPA also requested that the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council (NDWAC) form a Working Group in 2014 to provide advice
to the NDWAC as it develops recommendations for the revisions to the
LCR (NDWAC, 2015). In 2016, the EPA released a white paper summarizing
NDWAC recommendations and identifying key areas for rule development,
noting that ``lead crises in Washington, DC, and in Flint, Michigan,
and the subsequent national attention focused on lead in drinking water
in other communities, have underscored significant challenges in the
implementation of the current rule, including a rule structure that for
many systems only compels protective actions after public health
threats have been identified'' (USEPA, 2016a). Notably, the white paper
discussed the issue of mandatory, proactive LSLR as an opportunity to
eliminate a primary source of lead in drinking water rather than only
replacing LSLs after a lead action level exceedance, and how to address
lead exposure risks resulting from partial LSLR. The recommendations
also emphasized the importance of enforceable goals for LSLR,
recognizing the significant lead exposure risks that can accompany
partial service line replacements. Other issues identified include the
need for stronger CCT requirements, including re-evaluation after
source water or treatment changes, improved tap sampling procedures to
address concerns about practices used to avoid action level
exceedances, and increased public transparency such as access to
information about LSLs and sharing of data.
The EPA intended to address these long-term issues in the 2021 Lead
and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR), which was promulgated on January 15,
2021 (86 FR 4198, USEPA, 2021a). The 2021 LCRR focuses on six key areas
for revision: identifying sites with significant sources of lead in
drinking water, strengthening CCT requirements, closing loopholes in
LSLR requirements, increasing sampling reliability, improving risk
communication, and introducing a new lead sampling requirement at
schools and child care facilities as part of public education.
Specifically, the 2021 LCRR includes new requirements for water systems
to develop, and make publicly accessible, LSL inventories and annually
notify consumers if they are served by an LSL, GRR service line, or
service line of unknown material. Additionally, the 2021 LCRR removes
provisions allowing partial service line replacement or ``test-outs''
(i.e., where a service line sample measures below the lead action
level) to count towards LSLR requirements. The rule also revises
monitoring requirements to prioritize sampling at sites most likely to
contain lead sources, require a fifth-liter sample be taken at LSL
sites, and prohibit the use of language in sampling instructions that
may result in samples that underestimate lead levels.
The 2021 LCRR also establishes a lead trigger level at 0.010 mg/L
to require systems to take actions before an action level exceedance,
including taking steps to plan for CCT installation, re-optimizing CCT
if the system already installed CCT, establishing a goal-based LSLR
program, and increasing monitoring frequency. The 2021 LCRR makes
several changes to the CCT requirements and establishes a requirement
for water systems to conduct follow-up actions at sites with individual
compliance sample concentrations exceeding 0.015 mg/L.
In the 2021 LCRR, the EPA also revised its Public Notification (PN)
Rule in 40 CFR part 141, subpart Q, to make changes to the reporting
requirements for action level exceedances. These changes implemented
the 2016 amendments to section 1414 of SDWA that required public
notification within 24 hours if the system exceeds the lead action
level. In the 2021 LCRR, the EPA also revised the Consumer Confidence
Report (CCR) Rule in 40 CFR part 141, subpart O, to require the report
to include the range of lead and copper tap sampling results and
information on how to access lead tap sampling results and the service
line inventory. The EPA also revised the mandatory lead health effects
language and informational statement about lead that must be included
in the CCR.
The 2021 LCRR adds new public education requirements, including
requirements to notify persons served by a known or suspected LSL and
timely (24 hour) notification of individuals when their lead tap
sampling results exceed the lead action level of 0.015 mg/L. The 2021
LCRR also requires systems above the trigger level to conduct goal-
based LSLR and also to conduct additional public outreach activities
about lead in drinking water and opportunities to replace LSLs if the
system fails to meet the goal replacement rate established after a
trigger level exceedance.
The 2021 LCRR also adds a new small system flexibility provision
for CWSs serving 10,000 or fewer persons and all NTNCWSs. Those systems
that exceeded the trigger level can choose one out of four compliance
options (i.e., CCT, LSLR, point-of-use devices, replacement of lead-
bearing plumbing) to implement if the system exceeds the lead action
level.
On January 20, 2021, President Joseph R. Biden issued Executive
Order 13990, Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring
Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis (86 FR 7037, January 20, 2021).
Executive Order 13990 required Federal agencies to ``review and . . .
take action to address the promulgation of Federal regulations and
other actions during the last 4 years that conflict[ed] with'' the
``national objectives,'' as provided in the executive order, including
to ``be guided by the best science and be protected by processes that
ensure the integrity of Federal decision-making'' to promote and
protect public health and advance environmental justice, among others.
The EPA was required to review the LCRR because the EPA promulgated the
LCRR within the time frame specified by the executive order, and the
LCRR addresses public health through drinking water.
Additionally, after promulgation of the LCRR, the EPA heard from
stakeholders on a range of concerns about the LCRR, including the lack
of requirements or incentives to replace all LSLs, the inclusion of the
trigger level that made the rule unnecessarily complicated, and the
implementation burdens on systems and States.
To allow the EPA to engage with stakeholders and review the LCRR
before it took effect, on March 12, 2021, the EPA published the
``National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Lead and Copper Rule
Revisions; Delay of Effective Date'' (86 FR 14003, USEPA, 2021c), which
delayed the effective date of the LCRR from March 16, 2021, to June 17,
2021. On the same day, the EPA published the ``National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations: Lead and
[[Page 86432]]
Copper Rule Revisions; Delay of Effective and Compliance Dates'' (86 FR
14063, USEPA, 2021d), which proposed further delaying the effective
date of LCRR to December 16, 2021, to allow the EPA to ``conduct a
review of the LCRR and consult with stakeholders, including those who
have been historically underserved by, or subject to discrimination in,
Federal policies and programs prior to the LCRR going into effect'' (86
FR 14063, USEPA, 2021d). On June 16, 2021, the EPA issued a final rule
delaying the LCRR effective date to December 16, 2021, and the
compliance date from January 16, 2024, to October 16, 2024, ``to
maintain the same time period between the effective date and the
compliance date in the LCRR'' (86 FR 31941, USEPA, 2021e).
As part of the LCRR review, the EPA held a series of virtual
engagements from April to August 2021 to obtain public input on the
LCRR. Consistent with Executive Order 13990, the EPA engaged with
States, Tribes, water systems, the public, environmental advocates, and
environmental justice organizations. The EPA also sought input from
community stakeholders in places that have concerns due to lead in
drinking water, particularly from individuals and communities that are
most at-risk of exposure to lead in drinking water.
During this process, the EPA hosted a series of 10 virtual
community roundtables with stakeholders in: Pittsburgh, PA; Newark, NJ;
Malden, MA; Washington, DC; Newburgh, NY; Benton Harbor and Highland
Park, MI; Flint and Detroit, MI; Memphis, TN; Chicago, IL; and
Milwaukee, WI. Each roundtable included a range of participants
representing local governments, community organizations, environmental
groups, local public water utilities, and public officials.
Participants shared their experiences with lead in their communities
and provided the EPA with oral and written comments on the LCRR. The
EPA also held a roundtable with representatives from Tribes and Tribal
communities, a national stakeholder association roundtable, a national
co-regulator meeting, two public listening sessions, and a meeting with
organizations representing elected officials. Summaries of the meetings
and written comments from the public can be found in the docket, EPA-
HQ-OW-2021-0255 at <a href="https://regulations.gov/">https://regulations.gov/</a>.
On December 17, 2021, the EPA published the results of the LCRR
review (86 FR 71574, USEPA, 2021b). The EPA described the comments
received as part of the public engagement efforts conducted as part of
the LCRR review and determined that there are regulatory and non-
regulatory actions the agency can take to reduce drinking water lead
exposure. While the EPA found that the LCRR improved public health
protection relative to the LCR, the agency also concluded that there
are significant opportunities to further improve the rule to support
the goal of proactively removing LSLs and protecting public health more
equitably (86 FR 71574, USEPA, 2021b). The EPA also announced in the
LCRR review that the effective date of the LCRR published on June 16,
2021, would continue to be December 16, 2021, to support near-term
development of actions to reduce lead in drinking water (86 FR 71574,
USEPA, 2021b). At the same time, the EPA committed to developing a new
proposed rule, the LCRI, to strengthen key elements of the rule. The
EPA identified the following policy objectives informed by the LCRR
review: ``Replacing 100 percent of lead service lines is an urgently
needed action to protect all Americans from the most significant source
of lead in drinking water systems; equitably improving public health
protection for those who cannot afford to replace the customer-owned
portions of their LSLs; improving the methods to identify and trigger
action in communities that are most at risk of elevated drinking water
lead levels; and exploring ways to reduce the complexity of the
regulations'' (86 FR 71574; USEPA, 2021b). The EPA also stated that it
did not expect to propose changes to the requirements for information
to be submitted in the initial LSL inventory or the associated October
16, 2024, compliance date. The EPA described the importance of
maintaining this date, stating that ``continued progress to identify
LSLs is integral to lead reduction efforts regardless of potential
revisions to the rule. The inventory provides critical information on
the locations of potentially high drinking water lead exposure within
and across public water systems, which will allow for quick action to
reduce exposure'' (86 FR 71579, USEPA, 2021b). Specifically, the EPA
noted that development of inventories nationwide over the near-term
would assist water systems, States, Tribes, and the Federal Government
in determining the prevalence of these lead sources and would, among
other things, enable water systems to begin planning for LSLR and apply
for funding.
On December 6, 2023, the EPA published the proposed LCRI for public
review and comment (84 FR 84878, USEPA, 2023a). The proposal included
advancements in protecting people from the health effects from
exposures to lead in drinking water. These advancements are based on
the science and existing practices utilized by drinking water systems.
Key provisions in the proposal include requiring virtually all water
systems across the country to replace LSLs within 10 years, locating
legacy lead pipes, improving tap sampling, lowering the lead action
level, and strengthening protections to reduce exposure. The EPA
proposed to retain the 2021 LCRR requirements and associated October
16, 2024, compliance date for the initial service line inventory;
notifications to consumers served by a lead, galvanized requiring
replacement (GRR), or lead status unknown service lines; Tier 1 public
notification of a lead action level exceedance; and associated
reporting requirements.
D. Statutory Authority
1. Establishment and Review of National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations
The EPA is publishing revisions to the NPDWR for lead and copper
under the authority of SDWA, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq., including sections
1412, 1413, 1414, 1417, 1445, and 1450. SDWA is the primary Federal law
that protects the tap water provided to consumers by water systems
across the country. Congress passed SDWA in 1974, responding to
``accumulating evidence that our drinking water contains unsafe levels
of a large variety of contaminants.'' Envtl. Def. Fund, Inc. v. Costle,
578 F.2d 337, 339 (D.C. Cir. 1978). In passing SDWA, Congress intended
to ensure ``that water supply systems serving the public meet minimum
national standards for protection of public health.'' H.R. Rep. No. 93-
1185, at 1 (1974), reprinted in 1974 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6454. The primary
regulatory tool for this protection is section 1412 of SDWA under which
the EPA is authorized to issue standards for drinking water served by
water systems. These standards--entitled ``National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations'' (NPDWRs)--are accompanied by ``maximum contaminant
level goal[s]'' (MCLG), which are set, for each contaminant, at the
level at which there are no known or anticipated adverse human health
effects with an adequate margin of safety. 42 U.S.C. 300g-1(a)(3) and
(b)(4). Lead and copper are subject to existing NPDWRs. Based on the
health effects described above, in 1991, the EPA established the MCLG
for lead at 0 mg/L, and the MCLG for copper at 1.3 mg/L.
[[Page 86433]]
SDWA section 1412(b)(9) states that ``The Administrator shall, not
less often than every 6 years, review and revise, as appropriate, each
national primary drinking water regulation promulgated under this
subchapter. Any revision of a national primary drinking water
regulation shall be promulgated in accordance with this section, except
that each revision shall maintain, or provide for greater, protection
of the health of persons.'' 42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(9). When the EPA
promulgates a revised NPDWR, the agency follows the applicable
procedures and requirements in section 1412 of SDWA, including those
related to: (1) the use of best available, peer-reviewed science and
supporting studies; (2) presentation of information on public health
effects that is comprehensive, informative, and understandable; and (3)
analysis of the health risk reduction benefits and costs. SDWA section
1412(b)(3)(A)-(C), 42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(3)(A)-(C).
2. Establishment of the Lead and Copper Rule as a Treatment Technique
Section 1412(b)(7)(A) of SDWA authorizes the EPA to ``promulgate a
national primary drinking water regulation that requires the use of a
treatment technique in lieu of establishing a maximum contaminant
level, if the Administrator makes a finding that it is not economically
or technologically feasible to ascertain the level of the
contaminant.'' 42 U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(7)(A).
In accordance with SDWA section 1412(b)(7)(A), in 1991, the EPA
promulgated the LCR, which established a treatment technique in lieu of
a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for lead and copper (56 FR 26460,
USEPA, 1991). The EPA's 1991 decision to promulgate a treatment
technique rule for lead and copper instead of an MCL was upheld by the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
American Water Works Association v. EPA, 40 F.3d 1266, 1270-71 (D.C.
Cir. 1994). For discussion on the EPA's findings and rationale
supporting the agency's determination to continue to regulate lead and
copper using a treatment technique rule, see section IV.A of this
preamble.
3. Prevention of Adverse Health Effects to the Extent Feasible
In establishing treatment technique requirements, the Administrator
is required to identify those treatment techniques ``which, in the
Administrator's judgment, would prevent known or anticipated adverse
effects on the health of persons to the extent feasible'' (SDWA section
1412(b)(7)(A)). ``Feasible'' is defined in section 1412(b)(4)(D) of
SDWA as ``feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment
techniques and other means which the Administrator finds, after
examination for efficacy under field conditions and not solely under
laboratory conditions, are available (taking cost into
consideration).'' Feasibility is based on the best technology,
treatment techniques, or other means, that have been tested beyond the
laboratory under full-scale conditions, as opposed to generally
available technology; the technology need not be in widespread, full-
scale use (SDWA section 1412(b)(4)(D)). Further, in selecting the best
available technology, treatment techniques, and other means, the EPA
evaluates the ability of the technology to reduce the level of the
contaminant, and the technological and economic feasibility of the
technologies being considered, as required under SDWA section
1412(b)(4)(D) (56 FR 26482, USEPA, 1991). In short, ``feasible'' in
this context means technically possible and affordable. See SDWA
section 1412 (b)(4)(D); City of Portland v. EPA, 507 F.3d 706 (D.C.
Cir. 2007) (upholding the EPA's treatment technique rule for
Cryptosporidium and the agency's interpretation that ``feasible'' means
technically possible and affordable). Therefore, to meet the statutory
standard, the EPA must evaluate three primary components for a
treatment technique: (1) the effectiveness of a technology, treatment
technique, or other means in reducing exposure to a contaminant to
protect public health; (2) the affordability of the technology,
treatment technique, or other means; and (3) whether the technology,
treatment technique, or other means is technically possible. Each of
these three components and the ``to the extent feasible'' standard in
the statute are discussed in sequential order in this section.
First, SDWA requires the EPA to establish NPDWRs to protect public
health to reduce exposure to drinking water contaminants. Notably, the
public health protection goal for NPDWRs under SDWA is the same for a
MCL and a treatment technique. SDWA requires the EPA set an MCL ``as
close to the maximum contaminant level goal [MCLG] as is feasible''
(SDWA section 1412(b)(4)(B)). Because the MCLG is set at the level at
which no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons
occur, SDWA's standard for a treatment technique rule--to ``prevent
known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons to the
extent feasible''--is essentially the same as the standard for an MCL
(SDWA section 1412(b)(4)(A) and section 1412(b)(7)(A)). As Congress
explained in SDWA legislative history, NPDWRs ``are to be protective of
public health. While cost and technology are factors to be considered .
. . the first priority of the Act is to protect human health by
reducing or preventing human exposure to potentially harmful
contaminants in drinking water.'' 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1566, 1570, S. REP.
99-56 (1985). In establishing NPDWRs, where an agency action is based
on science, SDWA directs the EPA to use the best available peer-
reviewed science and supporting studies conducted in accordance with
sound and objective scientific practices, as well as data collected by
accepted methods or best available methods (SDWA section
1412(b)(3)(A)).
Second, in evaluating feasibility under SDWA section 1412(b)(4)(D)
and section 1412(b)(7)(A), the EPA also must ``take costs into
consideration.'' The legislative history of this provision makes it
clear that this aspect of feasibility is to be evaluated relative to
``what may reasonably be afforded by large metropolitan or regional
public water systems'' (H.R. Rep. No. 93-1185 (1974), reprinted in 1974
U.S.C.C.A.N. 6454, 6471). See also S. Rep. No. 104-169, at 3 (1995)
(feasibility is based on best available technology affordable to
``large'' systems).\6\ The statutory framework for establishing an MCL
or treatment technique rule also supports this approach of considering
costs in determining the feasibility of an MCL or treatment technique
rule. If the EPA cannot identify any affordable technologies for a
particular category of small systems, the statute requires the EPA to
identify variance technologies that ``achieve the maximum reduction or
inactivation efficiency that is affordable'' and protective of public
health (SDWA section 1412(b)(15)(A) and (B)). As a result, the EPA may
not reject a treatment technique because it is unaffordable to small
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Where the term ``affordable'' appears throughout the
preamble to describe this aspect of the definition of ``feasible''
in SDWA section 1412(b)(4)(D), it refers to ``what may reasonably be
afforded by large metropolitan or regional public water systems.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, with respect to the technical possibility \7\ component of
the feasibility standard, for lead and copper drinking
[[Page 86434]]
water rules beginning with LCR, the EPA has consistently considered
``whether a technology has been shown to be effective'' by water
systems and ``is compatible with other water treatment processes'' (56
FR 26482, USEPA 1991). The EPA has evaluated additional factors for
lead and copper NPDWRs that may affect the ability of water systems to
administer and implement rules, depending on the unique technologies,
treatments, and other means available to reduce lead and copper in
drinking water. Specifically, the EPA has historically considered other
factors, such as the national availability of necessary capital
improvement resources and supplies, labor, and specialized expertise,
as supported by the best available information and the learned
experiences and expertise from water systems, States, and other
stakeholders. When promulgating a rule consisting of multiple treatment
technique requirements, the EPA considers whether each treatment
technique is feasible and whether implementation of the full suite of
treatment techniques is feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Note, given that the definition for ``feasible'' at SDWA
section 1412(b)(4)(D) provides for the use of ``treatment techniques
and other means'' in addition to ``technology,'' the terms
``technological'' and ``technical'' are used interchangeably herein
for purposes of discussing feasibility to be more inclusive of the
different types of treatment techniques that may be encompassed in a
NPDWR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the EPA assesses technical possibility, it may consider system
size. In contrast to affordability, which is evaluated relative to only
large metropolitan or regional water systems, the EPA evaluates
technical possibility without that limitation. As previously stated,
there is legislative history and case law that clearly provides
Congress intended the statute to be technology-forcing and thus, that
cost considerations were to be based on what is affordable only for
large metropolitan or regional water systems. Absent any further
limitation in SDWA, the best interpretation of the statute is to assess
what is technically possible for treatment techniques by evaluating
whether there are relevant, system-size-based considerations.
SDWA section 1412(b)(7)(A) also directs the EPA to evaluate the
most stringent or health protective level for a treatment technique
because treatment techniques must ``prevent known or anticipated
adverse effects on the health of persons to the extent feasible.'' See
City of Portland v. EPA, 507 F.3d 706 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (finding that
SDWA requires the EPA to choose a treatment technique that is the most
stringent feasible).
Interpreting the phrase ``prevent . . . to the extent feasible'' in
this section to require treatment techniques provide the most health
protection feasible accords with the plain text of SDWA section
1412(b)(7)(A), as well as SDWA section 1412 as a whole, and the
associated legislative history. First, in 1974, the statute required
the EPA to evaluate feasibility based on whether treatment techniques
are ``generally available'' with cost taken into account based on
``what may reasonably be afforded by large metropolitan or regional
public water systems. In 1986, however, ``generally available'' was
changed to ``best available'' in the definition of feasibility, ``to
assure that such standards reflect the full extent of current
technology capability to move toward achievement of the health effects
goal.'' 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1566, 1570-71, S. REP. 99-56 (1985).
Second, SDWA specifies that the EPA may promulgate treatment
techniques that are less stringent or health protective than feasible
only in two narrow circumstances. The first such circumstance is SDWA
section 1412(b)(5), under which the EPA may require the use of a
treatment technique to achieve a contaminant level other than the
feasible level if attaining the feasible level would result in an
increase in the health risk posed by drinking water by increasing the
concentration of other contaminants or by interfering with the efficacy
of drinking water treatment techniques or processes that are used to
comply with other NPDWRs. The second circumstance is SDWA section
1412(b)(6)(A), under which, if the EPA determines that the benefits of
a treatment technique would not justify the costs of compliance, the
EPA may promulgate a treatment technique for the contaminant that
maximizes health risk reduction benefits at a cost that is justified by
the benefits. As a result, interpreting ``prevent . . . to the extent
feasible'' at SDWA section 1412(b)(7)(A) as anything other than what is
the most stringent or health protective feasible level for a treatment
technique would make these two statutory exemptions meaningless and
unnecessary. See City of Portland v. EPA, 507 F.3d 706, 712 (D.C. Cir.
2007) (``But if `feasible' meant that the technique's benefits
justified its costs, [SDWA] section [1412](b)(6)(A)--which allows EPA
to use cost-benefit analysis to set less stringent standards than the
most feasible--would be surplusage.'' (Emphasis added)).
In summary, the best interpretation of the statutory standard for
treatment techniques requires consideration of the terms used and
defined in SDWA section 1412(b)(4) and section 1412(b)(7)(A), as
described in this part of the preamble. Specifically, under SDWA
section 1412(b)(7)(A), the EPA must prescribe the best available
technologies, treatment techniques, or other means that are effective
at preventing adverse health effects from lead and copper in drinking
water to the greatest extent that are both affordable for large
systems, and which are technically possible.
Beginning with the LCR in 1991, the EPA has consistently evaluated
feasibility for this treatment technique rule in accordance with SDWA
section 1412(b)(4) and section 1412(b)(7)(A). As the EPA explained in
the preamble to the 1991 LCR, ``[t]he goal of this rule is to provide
maximum human health protection by reducing the lead and copper levels
at consumers' taps to as close to the MCLG as is feasible'' (56 FR
26478, USEPA, 1991). Each of the best available technologies, treatment
techniques, and other means specified in the LCRI--service line
replacement, CCT, and public education--prevent known or anticipated
adverse health effects to the extent feasible.
Evaluating Feasibility for Each Treatment Technique
The LCRI is a treatment technique rule composed of four separate
``technologies, treatment techniques or other means,'' specifically:
service line replacement, CCT, public education, and source water
treatment.\8\ The EPA chose this approach because multiple
technologies, treatments, and other means are effective at reducing
public health risks associated with lead and copper contamination in
drinking water. Since the first proposed NPDWR for lead and copper, the
LCR, in 1988, the EPA has evaluated a combination of treatment
techniques to address lead contamination in drinking water, given the
complexity inherent in lead contamination and the need for a multi-
faceted approach to managing it (53 FR 31537, USEPA 1988; see section
IV.A of this preamble about the characterization and complex nature of
lead drinking water contamination). While the requirements for lead and
copper NPDWRs have changed over time based on the best available
information and the lived and learned experiences of water systems,
communities, and States, these NPDWRs have maintained the same four
treatment techniques for service line replacement, CCT, public
education, and source water treatment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Note, the EPA is not including a discussion of feasibility
for source water treatment, because it is not being amended by this
final rule. For the EPA's feasibility determination for source water
treatment, see the final LCR (56 FR 26482, USEPA 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with SDWA section 1412(b)(7)(A), the EPA evaluates
feasibility at the level of a treatment technique, rather than
evaluating the feasibility of each sub-element of a treatment technique
(``the Administrator
[[Page 86435]]
shall identify those treatment techniques which, in the Administrator's
judgment, would prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the
health of persons to the extent feasible. Such regulations shall
specify each treatment technique known to the Administrator which meets
the requirements of this paragraph, but the Administrator may grant a
variance from any specified treatment technique in accordance with
section 300g-4(a)(3) of this title.'' (emphasis added)). The EPA
reasonably followed the statutory standard to evaluate feasibility for
``each treatment technique . . . which meets the requirements'' at SDWA
section 1412(b)(7)(A).
4. Notice and Recordkeeping Requirements
Section 1414(c)(1) of SDWA requires public water systems to provide
public notice in certain specified situations, such as when the system
has failed to comply with an applicable treatment technique
requirement, or if the water system is subject to a variance or
exemption. SDWA section 1414(c)(2) states that the Administrator
``shall by regulation . . . prescribe the manner, frequency, form, and
content for giving notice.'' 42 U.S.C. 300g-3(c)(2). The EPA first
promulgated the PN Rule in 2000 and subsequently revised it with the
issuance of new or revised NPDWRs. This final rule includes revisions
to the PN Rule related to the LCRI.
Section 1414(c)(1)(D) of SDWA, as amended by the Water
Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act, requires public
water systems to provide notice to the public if the water system
exceeds the lead action level. 42 U.S.C. 300g-3(c)(1)(D). Section
1414(c)(2)(C) of SDWA specifies additional requirements related to the
public notice if the action level exceedance has the potential to have
serious adverse effects on human health as a result of a short-term
exposure, including that the public notice must ``be distributed as
soon as practicable, but not later than 24 hours'' after the water
system learns of the action level exceedance, and that the system must
report the exceedance to both the State and the Administrator within
that same time period (42 U.S.C. 300g-3(c)(2)(C)(i) and (iii)). If a
water system or State does not issue the required public notice for an
exceedance of the lead action level, SDWA section 1414(c)(2)(D) directs
the EPA to issue the required public notice ``not later than 24 hours
after the Administrator is notified of the exceedance.''
In the final rule preamble for the 2021 LCRR, the EPA determined
that a lead action level exceedance has the potential to have serious
adverse health effects on humans as a result of short-term exposure (86
FR 4240, USEPA, 2021a). The EPA also explained that it interprets SDWA
section 1414(c)(2)(C)(iii) to require systems to report only lead
action level exceedances to the Administrator because the EPA does not
have any obligation to issue a notice for other violations of drinking
water standards in States with primacy, and therefore, the EPA does not
need to be notified of those other situations.
SDWA section 1414(c)(4) requires the EPA to issue regulations to
require each CWS to provide a periodic report to each customer of the
system. The EPA first promulgated CCR regulations in 1998. (40 CFR part
141, subpart O) On May 24, 2024, the EPA promulgated significant
revisions to the CCR Rule. (89 FR 45980, USEPA, 2024c) This final rule
includes further revisions to the CCR Rule related to the LCRI.
SDWA section 1417(a)(2) provides that public water systems ``shall
identify and provide notice to persons that may be affected by lead
contamination of their drinking water'' where the contamination results
from the lead content of the construction materials of the public water
distribution system and/or corrosivity of the water supply sufficient
to cause leaching of lead. Notice must be provided ``notwithstanding
the absence of a violation of any national drinking water standard.''
42 U.S.C. 300g-6(a)(2)(A)(i) and (ii). This rule requires water systems
to identify, notify, and provide public education to persons when they
are served by construction materials that contain may lead (lead, GRR,
and unknown service lines) and when the corrosivity of the water supply
is sufficient to cause leaching of lead.
SDWA section 1445(a) provides that every person who is subject to a
requirement under SDWA or who is a grantee shall establish and maintain
records, make reports, conduct monitoring, and provide information to
the Administrator as reasonably required by regulation to assist the
Administrator in establishing regulations under SDWA, in determining
compliance with SDWA, in administering any financial assistance program
under SDWA, in evaluating the health risks of unregulated contaminants,
and in advising the public of such risks. In requiring public water
systems to monitor under SDWA section 1445(a), the Administrator may
take into consideration the system size and the contaminants likely to
be found in the system's drinking water. 42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a).
5. Primacy Enforcement of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
While the EPA always retains its independent enforcement authority,
pursuant to SDWA section 1413(a), the agency may authorize States,
Territories, and Tribes to have primary responsibility for
administration and enforcement of primary drinking water regulations
and related requirements applicable to public water systems within
their jurisdiction (``primacy'').\9\ Where the EPA has not approved
primacy, the EPA implements the drinking water standards. The EPA may
grant primacy when the agency determines that the State has adopted
regulations that are no less stringent than the promulgated NPDWR,
among other conditions. 42 U.S.C. 300g-2(a) and 40 CFR part 142. At
this time, 49 States and the Navajo Nation have primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems in their jurisdictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For purposes of simplicity in this preamble, the term
``primacy agencies'' and ``States'' are used interchangeably to
refer to States, Tribes, and Territories with primacy, and the
Regional Administrator of EPA, where the EPA is acting as the
primacy agency. The term ``State'' is defined in 40 CFR 141.2 to
mean the agency of the State or Tribal government which has
jurisdiction over public water systems. During any period when a
State or Tribal government does not have primary enforcement
responsibility pursuant to section 1413 of SDWA, the term ``State''
means the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The term ``State'' is defined in 40 CFR 142.2 to include one
of the States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands, the Trust Territory
of the Pacific islands, or an eligible Indian Tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To retain primary enforcement responsibility for public water
systems, States must adopt regulations that are no less stringent than
any new or revised NPDWRs promulgated in 40 CFR part 141 and request
the EPA to approve a program revision. States must submit complete and
final applications for approval of a program revision no later than two
years after promulgation of the new or revised regulation unless the
EPA grants the State a two-year extension. The EPA must approve or deny
complete and final State primacy applications within 90 days of
submission to the EPA. See 42 U.S.C. 300g-2(b)(2) and 40 CFR 142.12(d).
In some cases, a State that has an approved primacy program for each
existing NPDWR may qualify for interim primary enforcement authority
for a new or revised NPDWR while the EPA's decision on the primacy
application is
[[Page 86436]]
pending. See 42 U.S.C. 300g-2(c) and 40 CFR 142.12(e). SDWA section
1413(b)(1) requires the EPA to establish regulations governing the
primacy application and review process ``with such modifications as the
Administrator deems appropriate.'' In addition to revisions to the
NPDWR for lead and copper, the CCR Rule, and the PN Rule, this final
rule includes changes to the primacy requirements related to this rule.
SDWA section 1450 authorizes the Administrator to prescribe such
regulations as are necessary or appropriate to carry out the
Administrators functions under the Act. 42 U.S.C. 300j-9.
E. Anti-Backsliding Analysis of LCRI Relative to LCR and LCRR
Section 1412(b)(9) of SDWA is known as the ``anti-backsliding''
provision. Under this provision, the EPA is required to ensure that
``each revision'' of a national primary drinking water regulation
``shall maintain, or provide for greater, protection of the health of
persons.'' The EPA has analyzed this rule against this standard using a
framework that gives meaning to the text, structure, and purpose of the
anti-backsliding provision, and is the best reading of the statutory
provision. The term ``each revision'' is naturally read to refer to a
revision of a ``national primary drinking water regulation,'' meaning
that each new rule that revises the older regulation, shall maintain,
or provide for greater health protection. The plain meaning of
``revision'' is broad in scope and contemplates that one revision may
contain multiple parts. The word ``revision'' is defined as ``[t]he
action or an act of revising something; critical or careful examination
or perusal of a text, judgment, code, etc., with a view to making
corrections, amendments, or improvements.'' Revision, definition 2.a.
(in the context of a legal change), Oxford English Dictionary (3d ed.
2010). Thus, when analyzing whether ``each revision'' allows for
backsliding, SDWA section 1412(b)(9)'s plain meaning asks the EPA to
compare the whole of a new rule (i.e., the ``revision'' at issue)
against the whole of the prior rule to assess whether the revision
maintains or improves upon health protections.
This is particularly true for a treatment technique regulation. A
treatment technique rule is not centered on a single compliance level,
but rather on an integrated set of actions designed to reduce the
overall level of exposure to a contaminant. Therefore, in assessing
whether a new treatment technique rule maintains or provides for
greater health protection relative to the existing rule, the EPA
evaluates the treatment technique rule as a whole, not on a component-
by-component or provision-by-provision basis. As described in the 2021
LCRR rulemaking, the backsliding analysis for a treatment technique
rule is ``based on an assessment of public health protection as a
result of implementation of a rule as a whole, rather than a comparison
of numerical benchmarks within the treatment technique rule'' (86 FR
4216, USEPA, 2021a). Therefore, when analyzing the LCRI against the
anti-backsliding standard, the EPA assessed the level of public health
protection resulting from implementation of the whole of the final LCRI
(i.e., the ``revision''). Because water systems are required to comply
with the LCR until October 16, 2024, when water systems would have been
required to comply with the 2021 LCRR in the absence of the LCRI, the
EPA conducted two anti-backsliding analyses to compare the LCRI against
the whole of the LCR and then separately against the whole of the 2021
LCRR to assess whether the new rule will maintain or improve public
health protection relative to both prior baselines.
The EPA has found the final LCRI will improve public health
protection over either the LCR or 2021 LCRR in accordance with SDWA
section 1412(b)(9). Below is a more detailed breakdown of some of the
most significant components that make the LCRI, as a whole, more
protective than either the LCR or 2021 LCRR. The central feature of the
LCRI is the mandatory replacement of lead and GRR service lines
regardless of a water system's 90th percentile lead level. This is a
more health protective approach relative to either the LCR or 2021 LCRR
baseline because removing lead and GRR service lines eliminates a
significant source of lead from the distribution system. Replacing lead
and GRR service lines has been shown to significantly reduce lead
levels in drinking water (Camara et al., 2013; Deshommes et al., 2018;
Trueman et al., 2016), which improves public health by reducing the
associated health impacts from lead exposures.
The LCR only requires water systems to replace LSLs systemwide if a
system exceeds the lead action level and allows them to stop
replacements once their 90th percentile lead level is below the lead
action level. The 2021 LCRR requires systems to replace lead and GRR
service lines if they exceed the lead action level, and to initiate a
goal-based replacement program if they exceed the lead trigger level.
In contrast, the LCRI requires systemwide replacement of lead and GRR
service lines regardless of 90th percentile lead levels and at a faster
replacement rate. By eliminating these major lead sources, the LCRI
will result in significant public health benefits. While the EPA
projected that a total of 339,000 to 555,000 lead and GRR service lines
under control of water systems would be replaced under the 2021 LCRR
over a 35-year period, the LCRI requires replacement of all lead and
GRR service lines under control of the system (USEPA, 2020a, Exhibit C-
1) within 10 years for most water systems. This is a key element of the
LCRI and is intended to provide both broader and more certain lead risk
reduction than any of the prior lead rules. The EPA projects that all
lead and GRR service lines will be replaced under the LCRI over the
period covered by the economic analysis. Specifically, the EPA
estimates that 6.7 million lead and GRR service lines will be replaced
within the 10-year mandatory replacement window and the remaining
approximately 200,000 lines will be replaced in the following years for
systems with deferred replacement deadlines. Thus, the number replaced
among all systems nationwide is expected to be substantially greater
than under the 2021 LCRR (USEPA, 2024d). Note that under the LCRI, like
the 2021 LCRR, there are also about 2 million lead connectors that are
required to be replaced when they are encountered by the water system
(i.e., during water main replacement). For additional information on
the EPA's estimated numbers of lead content service lines see chapter
3, section 3.4.4, of the final LCRI Economic Analysis (USEPA, 2024a).
In addition, the LCRI makes changes to the treatment technique for
CCT that will maintain or improve public health protection. These
changes include lowering the lead action level to 0.010 mg/L from 0.015
mg/L under the LCR and the 2021 LCRR. The LCRI lead action level thus
requires water systems to take actions (e.g., install or re-optimize
CCT, conduct public education) both sooner and at lower lead levels
than under the LCR or the 2021 LCRR. Similarly, the LCRI's requirement
to use the higher result of the first- and fifth-liter tap samples at
LSL sites will result in more systems installing or re-optimizing
optimal corrosion control treatment (OCCT) one or more times after the
LCRI compliance date, as well as notifying and educating the public
about health risks from lead.
Several other changes to the LCRI warranted specific anti-
backsliding analysis. First, the EPA is revising the OCCT requirements
to no longer require
[[Page 86437]]
most systems with CCT that exceed the lead action level to re-optimize
their OCCT multiple times before they complete their service line
replacement program if they re-optimized once after the compliance date
for LCRI and are meeting their optimal water quality parameters
(OWQPs). However, the LCRI maintains or improves public health
protection for those systems. Public health protection will be
maintained because systems already conducting OCCT or having re-
optimized OCCT will be required to continue to operate that treatment.
Public health protections will also be maintained or improved because
the LCRI requires systems that continue to exceed the lead action level
to conduct additional public education activities and make filters
available if they have ``multiple lead action level exceedances'' (see
section IV.K of this preamble). The EPA anticipates additional health
benefits from this change to the CCT requirements because systems and
States can prioritize resources for these types of mitigation
activities and, most importantly, lead service line replacement. These
requirements will achieve greater public health benefits overall for
systems with lead service lines by facilitating the removal of the most
significant source of lead in drinking water and are more likely to
lower the level of lead in tap samples compared to repeating OCCT re-
optimization steps that may not achieve further reductions. Also, if
there have been no significant source water or treatment changes
(actions which themselves can require a CCT study), a new re-
optimization study is likely to yield the same outcomes as a previous
study. These systems will have re-optimized once after the compliance
date for the LCRI and persistently high lead levels can be mitigated by
targeted public education activities and the availability of filters.
In addition, the final LCRI requires systems that exceed the lead
action level after they have replaced all lead and GRR service lines to
install or re-optimize OCCT to tailor CCT based on the new conditions
where lead and GRR service lines are no longer the most significant
sources of lead. This can result in maintaining or improving health
protection because systems may achieve better performing CCT when the
study is designed to optimize treatment based on the new system
characteristics. Further, regardless of whether a system is conducting
service line replacement, the final LCRI maintains the rule provision
in Sec. 141.82(h) that allows the State to modify its decision for
OCCT or re-optimized OCCT on its own initiative or in response to a
request by a water system or other interested party.
In addition, the 2021 LCRR allows CWSs serving 10,000 persons or
fewer and all NTNCWSs which exceed the lead action level to choose
between four compliance options: replace lead and GRR service lines,
install and maintain OCCT, conduct full replacement of lead-bearing
plumbing, or install and maintain point-of-use devices, while systems
serving greater than 10,000 persons were required to replace lead and
GRR service lines and install or re-optimize CCT. The LCRI requires all
water systems with lead or GRR service lines to conduct mandatory
service line replacement regardless of lead levels. Accordingly, under
the LCRI, small water systems with lead and/or GRR service lines are
required to remove these significant sources of lead and may not choose
between service line replacement and other options to protect against
lead exposures if they exceed the lead action level. Instead, small
CWSs serving 3,300 persons or fewer (reduced from 10,000 persons or
fewer under the 2021 LCRR) and all NTNCWSs can choose among the
remaining three options if approved by the State. This reduced
threshold ensures appropriate application of the remaining options.
Thus, the LCRI provides greater protection of public health than the
2021 LCRR for small systems with lead or GRR service lines that exceed
the lead action level. As compared to the pre-2021 LCR, the LCRI
improves the level of public health protection provided by the rule for
systems without lead or GRR service lines that serve less than 3,300
persons that exercise this compliance flexibility; these systems will
be subject to the lower action level and improved public education,
including lead sampling at schools and child care facilities. For
systems with lead or GRR service lines that serve less than 3,300
persons that exercise this compliance flexibility, the lower action
level, coupled with a mandatory service line replacement requirement,
increases the level of health protection at those systems as compared
to the pre-2021 LCR.
The EPA is requiring additional improvements across other parts of
LCRI that will result in some actions taken both at lower lead levels
and other actions that must be taken regardless of lead levels to
better protect public health. Exhibit 1 in section II.A of this
preamble summarizes these changes and illustrates comparisons among the
pre-2021 LCR, the 2021 LCRR, and the final LCRI requirements.
As a whole, therefore, the LCRI improves public health protection
relative to the LCR or the 2021 LCRR. This conclusion is supported by a
comparison of the monetized health benefits. See chapter 5, section
5.6.2, and appendix F of the final LCRI Economic Analysis (USEPA,
2024a) for 2021 LCRR to LCRI monetized estimated health benefits
comparisons and appendix C, of the final LCRI Economic Analysis for
pre-2021 LCR to LCRI monetized estimated cost and health benefits
comparisons.
Through this revision of the NPDWR for lead and copper, the EPA is
requiring a more stringent and comprehensive set of lead reduction
requirements compared to the LCR or the 2021 LCRR, including mandatory
service line replacement; changes to the treatment technique for CCT;
and more robust and meaningful public education. Therefore, the EPA
expects the LCRI, as a whole, will improve public health protections
relative to the LCR and the 2021 LCRR in accordance with SDWA section
1412(b)(9).
As part of the anti-backsliding analysis that the LCRI, as a whole,
would improve public health protection relative to the LCR and the 2021
LCRR, the EPA also evaluated the impact of requiring water systems to
comply with the LCR instead of the 2021 LCRR (with some limited
exceptions) between October 16, 2024, and the compliance date of the
LCRI. Through the consultations the EPA conducted as part of the 2021
LCRR review, as well as the engagements and consultations the EPA held
to support the development of the proposed and final LCRI, including
public comments received, many stakeholders, including States and water
systems, provided feedback on the challenge of implementing successive
changes to the LCR over a short period of time, such as the inefficient
use of time and resources needed to prepare to implement requirements
that could be different or no longer apply in the rule's next iteration
and public confusion about rapidly changing requirements. Because of
these challenges, as explained further below, the EPA is requiring that
water systems continue to implement the pre-2021 LCR requirements
between promulgation of the LCRI and the compliance date of three years
after promulgation. In addition, the EPA is requiring water systems to
implement the 2021 LCRR requirements for the initial service line
inventory, notification to persons served by known or potential LSLs,
Tier 1 public notification of lead action level exceedances, and
associated reporting
[[Page 86438]]
requirements (see section V.B of this preamble for further discussion).
The EPA previously recognized that the LCRR is an improvement in
public health protection over the LCR, especially in light of the
inventory requirements of the 2021 LCRR. Notwithstanding the EPA's
elimination of certain LCRR compliance deadlines in the LCRI, the EPA
expects greater health benefits from the LCRI. The improvement of
public health attributable to the 2021 LCRR compared to the LCR is
based primarily on the changes to the treatment technique requirements
of LSLR, OCCT, and public education--actions that occur over extended
periods of time in response to tap sampling results that exceed certain
thresholds. The EPA does not expect those projected improvements from
the 2021 LCRR would have been realized between the October 16, 2024,
compliance date for the 2021 LCRR and the compliance date of the LCRI.
Moreover, the EPA expects that, if compliance with the entire 2021 LCRR
were required starting October 16, 2024, it would negatively affect
water systems' abilities to comply with the LCRI to realize the greater
health risk reduction benefits of the LCRI.
Since LCRI compliance is required in the third year of the 2021
LCRR implementation, systems and States would be simultaneously tasked
with implementation of two different rules at the same time they are
engaged in the startup activities for the LCRI. The startup activities
for water systems include reading and training on the rule to
understand its new requirements, creating a staffing plan, and securing
funds for compliance among other requirements such as developing a
baseline inventory and service line replacement plan. The startup
activities for a State include adopting State regulations, modifying
data systems, and conducting internal and external training. If water
systems are required to simultaneously implement the entire 2021 LCRR
for the first time and prepare for LCRI compliance, the EPA expects
that it would be beyond the capacity of water systems, States, and the
EPA where direct implementation occurs, and therefore, the expected
benefits of one or both rules would not be realized (see section V.B of
this preamble for further discussion).
Allowing water systems to transition from compliance with the LCR
to compliance with the LCRI, while requiring systems to comply with the
2021 LCRR's initial inventory requirements in the interim, will result
in more full service line replacements and, thus, broader and faster
health risk reduction than if adequate planning for LCRI compliance did
not take place because of the diversion of scarce system and State
resources towards short-term implementation of the 2021 LCRR.
F. White House Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan and the EPA's Strategy
To Reduce Lead Exposures and Disparities in U.S. Communities
The development of the LCRI is a key action of the Lead Pipe and
Paint Action Plan, released by the Biden-Harris Administration in 2021
(The White House, 2021). The aim of the plan is to mobilize resources
from across the Federal Government through funding made available from
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also referred to as the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), to reduce lead exposure from pipes
and paint containing lead. The plan includes a goal of eliminating all
LSLs and remediating lead paint.
In October 2022, the EPA published the ``Strategy to Reduce Lead
Exposures and Disparities in U.S. Communities'' (or ``Lead Strategy'')
to ``advance EPA's work to protect all people from lead with an
emphasis on high-risk communities'' (USEPA, 2022a). This agency-wide
Lead Strategy promotes environmental justice in communities challenged
with lead exposure and includes four key goals: (1) reduce community
exposures to lead sources; (2) identify communities with high lead
exposures and improve their health outcomes; (3) communicate more
effectively with stakeholders; and (4) support and conduct critical
research to inform efforts to reduce lead exposures an
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on October 30, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.