Revised State 

Implementation 

Guidance for the 

Consumer Confidence 

Report (CCR) Rule 
Office of Water (4606M)

EPA 816-R-09-010

www.epa.gov/safewater

April 2010
Disclaimer

This document provides guidance to states, Native American tribes, and U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) exercising primary enforcement responsibility 

under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and contains EPA’s current policy 

recommendations for complying with the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule. 

Throughout this document, the terms “state” and “states” are used to refer to all types of 

primacy agencies including U.S. territories, Native American tribes, and EPA. 

The statutory provisions and EPA regulations described in this document contain legally 

binding requirements. This document is not a regulation itself, nor does it change or 

substitute for those provisions and regulations. Thus, it does not impose legally binding 

requirements on EPA, states, or public water systems. This guidance does not confer legal 

rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public. 

While EPA has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in this 

guidance, the obligations of the regulated community are determined by statutes, 

regulations, or other legally binding requirements. In the event of a conflict between the 

discussion in this document and any statute or regulation, this document would not be 

controlling. 

The general description provided here may not apply to a particular situation based upon 

the circumstances. Interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the 

substance of this guidance and the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a 

particular situation. EPA and other decision makers retain the discretion to adopt 

approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in this guidance, 

where appropriate. 

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or 

recommendation for their use. 

This is a living document and may be revised periodically without public notice. EPA 

welcomes public input on this document at any time. Guidance provided in this document 

reflects provisions published on August 19, 1998 at 63 FR 44526; and as amended at 63 

FR 69475, December 16, 1998; 63 FR 69516, December 16, 1998; 64 FR 34733, June 29, 

1999; 65 FR 26022, 26023, and 26024, May 4, 2000; 65 FR 76749, December 7, 2000; 

66 FR 7064, January 22, 2001; 67 FR 1836, January 14, 2002; 67 FR 70855, November 

27, 2002; 67 FR 73011, December 9, 2002; 68 FR 14506, March 25, 2003; 69; 71 FR 

483, January 4, 2006; and 71 FR 65651 and 65652, November 8, 2006.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance i April 2010

Table of Contents 

Rule Requirements...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1.1 Development of the Consumer Confidence Report Rule .......................................................... 3

1.2 Requirements of the Rule: Public Water Systems........................................................................... 3

1.2.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates......................................................................................... 3

1.2.2 CCR Content and Report Delivery Requirements..................................................................... 4

1.3 Requirement of the Rule: States and Other Primacy Agencies........................................................ 6

1.3.1 Recordkeeping Requirements for States ................................................................................... 6

1.4 Key Dates of the Rule ...................................................................................................................... 6

Resources and Guidance ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.1 Technical Guidance Manuals......................................................................................................... 11

2.2 Rule Presentation ........................................................................................................................... 12

2.3 Factsheet and Quick Reference Guide ........................................................................................... 12

2.4 Questions & Answers .................................................................................................................... 12

State Implementation................................................................................................................................ 17

3.1 Overview of Implementation ......................................................................................................... 19

3.2 Identify Affected Systems and Requirements................................................................................ 19

3.2.1 General Provisions .................................................................................................................. 19

3.2.2 CCR Content Requirements.................................................................................................... 20

3.2.3 Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs............................................... 36

3.3 Communicate CCR Rule Requirements to Affected Systems....................................................... 43

3.3.1 Requirements and Target Notification Time Frames .............................................................. 43

3.3.2 Methods of Communication.................................................................................................... 44

3.4 Data Management Systems............................................................................................................ 48

3.5 Recordkeeping Requirements for States........................................................................................ 48

State Primacy Revision Application........................................................................................................ 49

4.1 State Primacy Program Revision ................................................................................................... 51

4.1.1 The Revision Process .............................................................................................................. 52

4.1.2 The Final Review Process....................................................................................................... 52

4.2 State Primacy Program Revision Extensions................................................................................. 55

4.2.1 The Extension Process............................................................................................................. 55

4.2.2 Extension Request Criteria...................................................................................................... 55
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance ii April 2010

4.2.3 Conditions of the Extension .................................................................................................... 55

4.3 State Primacy Package................................................................................................................... 59

4.3.1 The State Primacy Revision Checklist [40 CFR 142.12(c)(1)]............................................... 59

4.3.2 Text of the State’s Regulation................................................................................................. 60

4.3.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk................................................................................................... 60

4.3.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist [40 CFR 142.14 and 40 CFR 142.15]............ 60

4.3.5 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16].................................................................... 60

4.3.6 Attorney General’s Statement of Enforceability [40 CFR 142.12(c)(2)]................................ 61

4.4 Guidance for the Special Primacy Requirements of the CCR ....................................................... 63

4.4.1 Special Primacy Requirement for Adopting 40 CFR 141, Subpart O..................................... 63

4.4.2 Special Primacy Requirement for Providing Reports to the Public upon Request.................. 63

4.4.3 Special Primacy Requirement for Recordkeeping................................................................... 64

4.4.4 Special Primacy Requirement for Reporting CCR Violations................................................ 64

4.5 Guidance for State Flexibility........................................................................................................ 64

Violation Determination and Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Reporting ......... 67

5.1 Violation Determination ................................................................................................................ 69

5.2 SDWIS Reporting Summary.......................................................................................................... 70

5.3 Optional CCR Compliance Checklist ............................................................................................ 70

Consumer Confidence Report Examples................................................................................................ 75

6.1 CCR Examples for the Ground Water Rule ..................................................................................... 77

6.2 CCR Examples for Stage 2 DBPR ................................................................................................... 86

6.3 CCR Examples for LT2ESWTR ...................................................................................................... 96

Appendices

Appendix A – Primacy Revision Crosswalk. 

Appendix B – Consumer Confidence Report Rule (January 2010 edition). 

Appendix C – Rule Factsheets. 

Appendix D – Example Forms, Letters and Checklists.

Appendix E – Example CCR and Reporting Monitoring Data. 

Appendix F – Memorandum on Alternative MCL Reporting Format.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance iii April 2010

List of Tables 

Table 1-1. Required Information for the CCR.............................................................................................. 4

Table 1-2. Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs ................................................... 5

Table 1-3. Summary of Action Dates for the Consumer Confidence Report Rule....................................... 7

Table 4-1. State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for the CCR Rule .................................... 51

Table 4-2. State Primacy Revision Checklist.............................................................................................. 59

Table 4-3. Areas of State Flexibility for Content Requirements ................................................................ 65

Table 5-1. Optional CCR Compliance Checklist........................................................................................ 70

Table 6- 1. System E 2014 TTHM Monitoring Results.............................................................................. 87

Table 6-2. System F 2014 TTHM and HAA5 Monitoring Results (mg/L) ................................................90

Table 6-3. System G Bromate and Bromide Monitoring Results (mg/L)...................................................94
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance iv April 2010

List of Examples 

Example 3-1. CCR Certification - Example Format for Systems without Mailing Waivers...................... 38

Example 3-2. CCR Certification - Example Format for Systems with Mailing Waivers........................... 39

Example 3-3. Governor’s Mailing Waiver - State-Wide Example Format................................................. 41

Example 3-4. Governor’s Mailing Waiver - System-Specific Example Format ........................................ 42

Example 3-5. Sample CCR Notification Letter from the State to CWSs.................................................... 45

Example 4-1. Example Extension Request Checklist................................................................................. 57

Example 4-2. Example of Attorney General’s Statement........................................................................... 62

Example 6-1. Example of Detected Contaminant Table and Special Notice in the CCR for Source Water 

Fecal Contamination ................................................................................................................................... 79

Example 6-2. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Corrective Action..............................81

Example 6-3. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log Treatment of 

Viruses........................................................................................................................................................ 83

Example 6-4. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Source Water Sample(s) Following a 

Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result........................................................85

Example 6-5. Example of a Notice in the CCR for TTHM MCL Violation...............................................89

Example 6-6. Example of a Notice in the CCR for LRAA and Compliance Calculations for TTHM and 

HAA5 M&R Violations.............................................................................................................................. 92

Example 6-7. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Bromate M&R Violation............................................95

Example 6-8. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Action on Uncovered Finished Water 

Reservoir..................................................................................................................................................... 98

Example 6-9. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Notify the State before Making a Significant 

Change in Disinfection Practice................................................................................................................ 100

Example 6-10. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Provide or Install an Additional Level of 

Treatment .................................................................................................................................................. 102

Example 6-11. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Monitor for Cryptosporidium for Any 

Three Months............................................................................................................................................ 104

Example 6-12. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Submit a Source Water Monitoring 

Schedule 3 Months Prior to Date System is Required to Begin Monitoring ............................................106

Example 6-13. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Samples in Accordance with 

Sampling Schedule.................................................................................................................................... 108

Example 6-14. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Sample at an Appropriate Location .......110
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance v April 2010

List of Figures 

Figure 4-1. Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of Program Revisions.......... 54
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance vi April 2010

Acronyms 

AL Action Level

CCR Consumer Confidence Report

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CWS Community Water System

DBPP Disinfection Byproduct Precursor

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FBRR Filter Backwash Recycling Rule

FDA Food and Drug Administration

GWR Ground Water Rule

GWUDI Ground Water Under Direct Influence of Surface Water

HAA5 Five Haloacetic Acids

HQ EPA Headquarters 

ICR Information Collection Rule

IDSE Initial Distribution System Evaluation

LCR Lead and Copper Rule

LRAA Locational Running Annual Average

LT1ESWTR Long-Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule

LT2ESWTR Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule

M&R Monitoring and Reporting

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal

MDL Method Detection Limit

mg/L Milligrams per Liter

MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level

MRDLG Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal

mrem Millirem

N/A Not Applicable

NDWAC National Drinking Water Advisory Council

NOVs Notices of Violation

NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulation
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance vii April 2010

OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance

OGC Office of General Counsel

OGWDW Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water

ORC Office of Regional Counsel

pCi/L Picocuries per Liter

PN Public Notification

ppb Parts per Billion

PWSs Public Water Systems

PWSS Public Water System Supervision

Q&As Questions and Answers

RAA Running Annual Average

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System

Stage 1 DBPR Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule

Stage 2 DBPR Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule

SWAP Source Water Assessment Program

SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule

TCR Total Coliform Rule

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TT Treatment Technique

TTHM Total Trihalomethanes
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance viii April 2010

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance ix April 2010

Introduction 

The Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on August 19, 

1998, (63 FR 44512). The CCR became effective September 18, 1998 - 30 days after publication [40 CFR 

141.152(a)]. This Rule is updated as new rules are promulgated by U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). An electronic copy of the CCR Final Rule is available at: 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

This guidance document contains information that will aid states in implementing the CCR Rule. It also 

provides examples of ways in which systems can prepare and present data in the CCR. Throughout this 

document, the terms “state” and “states” are used to refer to all types of primacy agencies including states, 

U.S. territories, Native American tribes, and EPA Regions that maintain state primacy. 

The SDWA provisions and EPA regulations described in this document contain legally binding 

requirements. This document does not substitute for those requirements, nor is it a regulation itself. It 

does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, states, or the regulated community and may not 

apply to a particular situation based on the circumstances. EPA and state decision makers retain the 

discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that may differ from this guidance, where 

appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular facility will be made based on the applicable statutes 

and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the 

appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a particular situation. EPA will then consider 

whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance are appropriate in that situation 

based on the law and regulations. EPA may change this guidance in the future. 

This document includes six sections:

● Section 1 – Rule Requirements. 

● Section 2 – Resources and Guidance.

● Section 3 – State Implementation. 

● Section 4 – State Primacy Revision Application.

● Section 5 – Violation Determination and Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) 

Reporting.

● Section 6 – Consumer Confidence Report Examples

The Appendices of this guidance contain information and example formats that state and EPA may find 

useful in the primacy revision process. The Appendices are: 

● Appendix A – Primacy Revision Crosswalk. 

● Appendix B – Consumer Confidence Report Rule (January 2010 edition). 

● Appendix C – Rule Factsheets. 

● Appendix D – Example Forms, Letters and Checklists. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance x April 2010

● Appendix E – Example CCR and Reporting Monitoring Data. 

● Appendix F – Memorandum on Alternative MCL Reporting Format.

Please note that, in several sections, the guidance makes suggestions and offers alternatives that go 

beyond the minimum requirements indicated. EPA does this to provide information and/or suggestions 

that may be helpful to implementation efforts. Such suggestions are prefaced by “may” or “should” and 

are to be considered advisory. They are not required elements of the CCR Rule. 

Since this document was published in January 2001, EPA has promulgated the following rules:

● Arsenic Rule – January 22, 2001.

● Filter Backwash Recycling Rule – June 8, 2001.

● Long-Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR) – January 14, 2002. 

● Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2 DBPR) – January 4, 2006. 

● Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR) – January 5, 2006. 

● Ground Water Rule (GWR) – November 8, 2006. 

● Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) Short Term Regulatory Revisions and Clarifications (LCR 

Revisions) – October 10, 2007. 

These rules create new requirements that may be subject to inclusion in a CCR. (Note: If you have 

questions regarding compliance dates for any of these rules, refer to EPA’s Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater or Web sites listed in Section 2.1 of this document to obtain each rule’s guidance 

manual.) 

● Arsenic Rule: A system with a detection of arsenic above 5 parts per billion (ppb) or 0.005 

milligrams per liter (mg/L) and up to and including 10 ppb or 0.010 mg/L must include a short 

informational statement in the report. Systems that exceed the revised arsenic MCL of 10 ppb or 

0.010 mg/L on or after January 23, 2006, must report the violation and include the health effects 

language.

● Filter Backwash Recycle Rule: Systems must report in their CCR any treatment technique 

violation of failure to return recycle flows through the processes of the existing filtration system 

or to an alternate state-approved location (conventional and direct filtration systems only). 

● LT1ESWTR: A surface water system serving fewer than 10,000 people must report violations

related to this rule in their CCR. These include a single exceedance of the maximum turbidity 

limit, beginning construction of an uncovered finished water reservoir, failure to conduct 

disinfection profiling and benchmarking, failure to notify the state before making a change to a 

disinfection practice, and failure to monitor for turbidity. In addition, positive results of any 

Cryptosporidium monitoring must be reported in the CCR, whether taken for compliance with 

LT1ESWTR or voluntarily.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance xi April 2010

● Stage 2 DBPR: Based on a system’s schedule under the Stage 2 DBPR, systems will change 

from reporting their system-wide average under Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection 

Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) to their highest locational running annual average (LRAA) for 

total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and five haloacetic acids (HAA5). Systems will also report the 

range of individual sample results for all monitoring locations. If more than one location exceeds 

the TTHM or HAA5 maximum contaminant level (MCL), the system must include the locational

running annual average for all locations that exceed the MCL in its CCR. 

During the calendar year that the water system collected samples for the Initial Distribution 

System Evaluation (IDSE), systems must include IDSE sample results when reporting the range 

of TTHM and HAA5, but not the average. 

Systems must also report in their CCR if they failed to monitor for TTHMs and HAA5s.

● LT2ESWTR: Based on a system’s schedule under the LT2ESWTR, a surface water system must 

report violations related to this rule in their CCR which include: 

– Treatment technique violations for: failure to address an uncovered finished water 

reservoir (i.e., cover or treat); failure to determine and report a bin classification (filtered 

systems); failure to calculate and report a mean Cryptosporidium level (unfiltered 

systems); failure to provide, install or maintain a required level of additional treatment 

(filtered systems); failure to achieve the required inactivation level or maintain it once 

achieved (unfiltered systems); and failure to install a second disinfectant (unfiltered 

systems). 

– Monitoring and reporting violations for failure to monitor for Cryptosporidium for any 

three months, failure to monitor for E. coli and turbidity, and failure to notify the state 

before making a change to a disinfection practice. In addition, positive results of any 

Cryptosporidium monitoring must be reported in the CCR, whether taken for compliance 

with LT2ESWTR or voluntarily.

Note: Surface water systems that collected E. coli samples at the source under LT2ESWTR are 

not required to report these results in their CCR. However, they are required to discuss if they 

failed to monitor for E. coli at the source.

● GWR: Beginning with the report due July 1, 2010, a ground water system must report any 

detection of a fecal indicator (E. coli, enterococci, coliphage) at the source and provide special 

notice regarding the detection. A ground water system must also provide special notice for any 

significant deficiency that is uncorrected by the end of the calendar year. In addition, a ground 

water system must report violations of the GWR in its CCR which include: Treatment technique 

violations for failure to maintain 4-log treatment of viruses for more than 4 hours for systems 

required to treat to 4-log, failure to take corrective action within the required timeframe or be in 

compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule for a fecal indicatorpositive source sample, and failure to take corrective action within the required timeframe or be 

in compliance with a state-approved corrective action plan and schedule for a significant 

deficiency.

– Monitoring and reporting violations for failure to conduct source water monitoring for 

fecal indicators or failure to conduct compliance monitoring.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance xii April 2010

● LCR Revisions: Beginning with the report due July 1, 2009, systems whose states adopted the 

LCR Revisions before January 1, 2009, must include an educational statement about lead in every 

report released to the public. For systems whose states have not adopted the revisions by January 

1, 2009, the lead information statement must be included in reports due by July 1, 2010.

 
Section 1 

Rule Requirements 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 3 April 2010

1.1 Introduction 

The CCR Final Rule, published in the Federal Register on August 19, 1998, (63 FR 44512). The CCR

became effective September 18, 1998 - 30 days after publication [40 CFR 141.152(a)]. The CCR Rule has 

and will be updated as new rules are promulgated by EPA. An electronic copy of the CCR Final Rule is 

available at: www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

The CCR Rule is an important part of the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). 

Reports issued under the CCR Rule will give consumers information regarding their drinking water and 

opportunities to get involved in protecting their source(s) of drinking water. Under 40 CFR Part 141 

Subpart O, all community water systems (CWSs) are required to provide their customers with an annual 

water quality report or CCR. The purpose of this document is to provide states with guidance on 

implementation of the CCR Rule. 

The CCR Rule provides a framework that water suppliers will use to give consumers information about 

their drinking water, including the water source, contaminants detected in finished water, health effects of 

contaminants when violations occur, likely sources of detected contaminants, and availability of source 

water assessments. By understanding their water supplies, customers, especially those with special health 

needs, can make informed decisions regarding their use of drinking water. States and water suppliers 

should view these reports as a public information tool to not only educate and involve the public but also 

to promote a dialogue between customers and their drinking water utilities. It is an opportunity that water 

systems can use to their advantage to explain how their community’s drinking water supplies are 

protected. 

1.1.1 Development of the Consumer Confidence Report Rule 

The CCR Proposed Rule was issued on February 13, 1998. In the development of the proposal of the 

CCR Rule the EPA met extensively with a broad range of groups. In particular, EPA formed a working 

group under the aegis of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC) to analyze and debate 

issues related to the proposal. In addition, EPA convened a one-day meeting of a panel of experts in

public health and communication of risk-related information. These consultations helped EPA draft

proposed rule language, which was then reviewed by NDWAC. The provisions contained in the proposal 

included all the provisions for which NDWAC reached consensus. After EPA proposed the Rule, the 

Agency held a series of four focus groups. The purpose of the focus groups was to test various 

alternatives for the definitions of MCL and MCLG and to gauge the public’s reactions to health effects 

statements. In addition, focus group participants were asked to give their reaction to two CCRs that had 

actually been issued by community water systems. The availability of a report on the results of these 

focus groups was announced in the Federal Register on May 15, 1998, with a request for comments to be 

submitted to EPA no later than June 15, 1998. 

1.2 Requirements of the Rule: Public Water Systems 

1.2.1 Applicability and Compliance Dates 

Every CWS, defined as a system that serves at least 25 residents year round or that has at least 15 service 

connections used by year-round residents, must prepare and distribute a CCR annually [40 CFR 

141.151(b)]. CWSs must have delivered the first CCR to their customers by October 19, 1999. The 

second CCR was due by July 1, 2000, and subsequent reports by July 1, annually thereafter. A new CWS 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 4 April 2010

must deliver its first report by July 1 of the year after its first full calendar year in operation and annually 

thereafter.

A system may contract with a laboratory to provide monitoring data analysis or CCR development 

assistance. If the system chooses to use a laboratory to assist with the development of the CCR, the 

system must work with the laboratory to make sure that all of the required elements are included in the 

CCR. Otherwise, a system may need to add the missing elements. Regardless of whether the laboratory or 

system prepares the CCR, the system is ultimately responsible for the content and must always distribute 

the CCR to its customers.

Drinking water wholesale systems are CWSs that sell water to other CWSs (the purchasing system is 

often referred to as the “consecutive” system). Under the CCR Rule, a wholesale system must deliver 

relevant monitoring and compliance data to the consecutive system before reports are due to customers so 

that the consecutive system has lead-time to prepare a CCR. Wholesale systems must provide the 

information to the consecutive system no later than April 1 unless the wholesale system and the 

consecutive system mutually agree upon a different date and specify it in a contract between the two 

parties [40 CFR 141.152(d)]. Wholesale systems are not responsible for creating the report for the 

consecutive system, nor are they responsible for providing data on contaminants that the consecutive 

system monitors (such as total coliforms, lead, or TTHMs). In some cases, however, a consecutive system 

will contract with the wholesale system to produce the report. There are several options in this 

relationship. If the consecutive system had no new data to add, it could simply send out the wholesale 

system’s CCR with a cover letter explaining their relationship. If the consecutive system did need to add 

data, it might choose to reprint the wholesale system’s CCR with a new title/letterhead and extra data. 

Either of these options is acceptable. Regardless of who produces the report, the consecutive system is 

still responsible for ensuring that its customers receive a report containing all required content. 

1.2.2 CCR Content and Report Delivery Requirements 

The requirements of the CCR Rule can be divided into two categories: (1) report content requirements 

and (2) report delivery and recordkeeping requirements. The CCR Rule identifies eight required content 

items. These eight items of information are displayed in Table 1-1. Each item is discussed in more detail 

in Section 3. 

Table 1-1. Required Information for the CCR

Items Content Requirements Federal Citation

Item 1 Required Information about the Water System 40 CFR 

40 CFR 

40 CFR 

141.153(h)(2)

141.153(h)(3)

141.153(h)(4)

Item 2 Source(s) of Water 40 CFR 141.153(b)

Item 3 Definitions 40 CFR 141.153(c)

Item 4 Reporting Levels of Detected Contaminants 40 CFR 141.153(d)

Item 5 Information on Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and Other 

Contaminants

40 CFR 141.153(e)

Item 6 Compliance with Other Drinking Water Regulations 40 CFR 141.153(f)

40 CFR141.153(h)(6)
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 5 April 2010

Items Content Requirements Federal Citation

Item 7 Variances and Exemptions 40 CFR 141.153(g)

Item 8 Required Educational Information 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1) 

40 CFR 141.154

The CCR Rule also establishes eight report delivery and recordkeeping requirements for CWSs. Each 

requirement is shown in Table 1-2 and is discussed in more detail in Section 3. 

Table 1-2. Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs

Items Requirement Federal Citation

Item 1 CCR Delivery to Customers

Each CWS must mail or otherwise directly deliver one copy of the 

CCR to each customer, unless granted a mailing waiver. (Refer to

Item 7 for mailing waivers)

40 CFR 141.155(a)

Item 2 “Good Faith” Effort for Delivery to Non-Bill Paying Consumers

CWSs must make a “good faith” effort to reach those consumers 

who they serve but who do not get water bills, such as renters.

“Good faith” efforts mean using a mix of several methods 

recommended by the state.

40 CFR 141.155(b)

Item 3 Delivery of CCR and Certification to State

CWSs must mail to the state: (1) a copy of the CCR no later than 

the date the system is required to deliver the report to customers; 

and (2) within 3 months of the required CCR delivery date, a 

certification that the CCR was distributed to customers with 

information that is correct and consistent with compliance 

monitoring data previously submitted to the state.

40 CFR 141.155(c)

Item 4 CCR Delivery to Other Agencies 

CWSs must deliver the CCR to any other agency identified by the 

state no later than the required date to send the CCR to its 

customers.

40 CFR 141.155(d)

Item 5 CCR Availability to the Public

CWSs must make CCRs available to the public upon request.

40 CFR 141.155(e)

Item 6 CCR Availability on the Internet

CWSs serving 100,000 or more persons must post the CCR on a 

publicly-accessible Internet site.

40 CFR 141.155(f)
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 6 April 2010

Items Requirement Federal Citation

Item 7 Mailing Waiver for CWSs Serving Fewer Than 10,000 Persons

The Governor of a state or his/her designee, or the Tribal leader (if 

the Tribe has met 40 CFR 142.72 requirements) can waive the 

mailing requirement of 40 CFR 141.155(a). The Regional 

Administrator in consultation with the Tribal government can waive 

the mailing requirement in Indian country when no Tribe is deemed 

eligible.

40 CFR 141.155(g)

Item 8 CWS Keeping CCR Copies on File

CWSs must keep copies of their CCR on file for at least 3 years.

40 CFR 141.155(h)

1.3 Requirement of the Rule: States and Other Primacy Agencies

The following Rule requirements are from the CCR published in the Federal Register on August 19, 

1998, (63 FR 44512) and all subsequent additions to the Rule through June 2009. The CCR Rule will 

continue to be updated as new rules are promulgated by EPA. An electronic copy of the CCR Final Rule 

is available at: www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

In order to receive primacy for the CCR, states must adopt regulations no less stringent than the CCR 

requirements. States must have submitted revisions to their programs, regulations, or authorities no later 

than August 21, 2000, although states could have requested an extension of up to 2 years (i.e., until 

August 21, 2002). Guidance on primacy requirements is provided in Section 4.

The CCR is structured to give states flexibility to incorporate the Rule’s requirements into existing state 

programs that are diverse in scope. States are given flexibility in several areas of the CCR Rule, including 

some mailing waivers, additional public notice, and alternate form and content. Section 4.5 provides 

information to states on these flexibilities. 

1.3.1 Recordkeeping Requirements for States 

Under 40 CFR 142.16(f)(3), each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must maintain a copy 

of the report for each water system in the state for a period of 1 year. The state must also keep the 

corresponding certifications CWSs are required to send to the state under 40 CFR 141.155(c) for a period 

of 5 years. The certifications indicate that a copy of the CCR was distributed or made available (as 

appropriate) to customers by the due date; and that the report contained information correct and consistent 

with compliance monitoring data previously submitted to the state. Where state rules allow, systems may 

be asked to provide additional information on how the CCR was distributed.

1.4 Key Dates of the Rule

The CCR Final Rule, published in the Federal Register on August 19, 1998, became effective September 

18, 1998 - 30 days after publication [40 CFR 141.152(a)]. CWSs were required to deliver the first CCR to 

their customers within 13 months of the regulation’s effective date, or by October 19, 1999. Delivery of 

the second report was due by July 1, 2000, and subsequent reports by July 1 each year thereafter [40 CFR 

141.152(b)]. No later than the date the CCR is required to be delivered to customers, the CWS must also 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 7 April 2010

mail a copy of the CCR to the state, as well as any other agency or clearinghouse the state designates [40 

CFR 141.155(c) and 40 CFR 141.155(d)]. Each report must contain data used to determine compliance 

for the previous calendar year. For example, the CCR issued in 2011 must contain data from the 2010 

calendar year.

Within 3 months from the date the system is required to deliver its CCR to customers, the CWS must send 

a letter of certification to the state certifying that the system has: 

●

●

Distributed the CCR to its customers; and 

Used in the report information that is correct and consistent with compliance monitoring data 

previously submitted to the state [40 CFR 141.155(c)]. 

Certifications must be sent for the reports annually by October 1. A CWS can deliver the certification to 

the state at the same time it delivers the CCR to its customers.

New CWSs must prepare and deliver CCRs on the same schedule as existing systems and therefore have 

until July 1 after their first full calendar year of operation to deliver the first CCR to their customers [40 

CFR 141.152(c)]. The certification for the first report must be sent to the state by October 1 after the first 

full calendar year of operation. For each year thereafter, reports must be delivered by July 1, and 

certifications must be sent to the state by October 1. 

Under the CCR Rule, drinking water wholesale systems must provide data to consecutive systems no later 

than April 1 unless the wholesale system and consecutive system mutually agree upon a different date and 

specify it in a contract between the two parties [40 CFR 141.152(d)]. 

The timetable for the CCR Rule is presented in Table 1-3 and summarizes key compliance dates required 

(bold) by the CCR Rule as well as suggested action dates (shaded).

Table 1-3. Summary of Action Dates for the Consumer Confidence Report Rule

Key Date of Rule CCR Requirement

August 19, 1998 CCR Rule published in Federal Register (63 FR 44512)

September 18, 1998 CCR Rule effective

By April 19, 1999 For CWSs That Sell Water To Another CWS – Delivery of 

information for first CCR

By October 19, 1999 For Existing CWSs – Delivery of first CCR

By January 19, 2000 For Existing CWSs – Delivery of first certification

May 21, 2000 States are encouraged to submit final primacy applications or extension 

requests to EPA.

By April 1, 2000 For CWSs That Sell Water To Another CWS – Delivery of 

information for second CCR

By July 1, 2000 For Existing CWSs – Delivery of second CCR

August 21, 2000 Final primacy revision applications for CCR Rule must be

submitted to the EPA Regional Administrator, unless state is 

granted an extension.

By October 1, 2000 For Existing CWSs – Delivery of second certification
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 8 April 2010

Key Date of Rule CCR Requirement

May 21, 2002 States with approved extension agreements are encouraged to submit 

final primacy applications to EPA.

August 21, 2002 Final primacy applications must be submitted to the EPA Regional 

Administrator for systems with a full 2 year extension. [40 CFR 

142.12(b)(1)]

By April 1, annually For CWSs That Sell Water To Another CWS – Delivery of 

information for subsequent CCRs – The seller must provide the 

information to the buyer by this date, unless the buyer and seller 

enter into a contractual agreement specifying another date.

By July 1 annually For Existing CWSs – Delivery of subsequent CCRs

By July 1 after first full 

calendar operating year 

For New CWSs – Delivery of first CCR

By July 1 annually For New CWSs – Delivery of subsequent CCRs

By October 1 annually For Existing CWSs – Delivery of subsequent certifications

By October 1 after first full 

calendar operating year

For New CWSs – Delivery of first certification

By October 1 annually For New CWSs – Delivery of subsequent certifications
Section 2 

Resources and Guidance 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 11 April 2010

In addition to this Implementation Guidance Manual, a variety of resource materials and technical 

guidance documents have been prepared by EPA to facilitate understanding and implementing the CCR 

Rule. This section is an overview of each of these resources and includes instructions on how to obtain 

the documents. 

2.1 Technical Guidance Manuals

The following guidance manuals have been or are being developed to support the CCR Rule. These 

manuals will aid EPA, state agencies, and affected public water systems (PWSs) in implementing this 

Rule and will help ensure that the implementation among these groups is consistent. The following 

documents can be found on EPA’s Web site at: www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html

● Preparing Your Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Guidance For Water 

Suppliers. EPA 816-R-09-011, April 2010. This document provides information to assist drinking 

water systems with preparing and distributing CCRs. 

● Link Your CCR to EPA’s on-line CCR Catalog. A link provided on EPA Web site will guide 

water system in linking their CCR to the EPA Web site. 

● Talking to your Customers about Chronic Contaminants in Drinking Water. EPA 814-F-07-022, 

October 2007. This document provides guidance to water systems on the importance of 

communicating with the public about chronic contaminants – both regulated and unregulated. It 

also describes effective strategies for getting their message out. 

In addition to the guidance manuals developed to support the CCR Rule, EPA has developed other 

guidance manuals that may help states and affected PWSs with implementing the CCR Rule. 

● Implementation Guidance for the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule. EPA 816-R-04-006, June 

2004. www.epa.gov/safewater/filterbackwash.html. 

● Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR) Implementation Guidance. 

EPA 816-R-04-008, August, 2004. www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/lt1eswtr.html. 

● The Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2 DBPR) Implementation 

Guidance. EPA 816-R-07-007, August 2007. 

www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/stage2/compliance.html. 

● The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR) Implementation 

Guidance. EPA 816-R-07-006, August 2007. 

www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/lt2/compliance.html. 

● The Ground Water Rule (GWR) Implementation Guidance. EPA 816-R-09-004, January 2009. 

www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/compliancehelp.html. 

For more information, contact EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791, or refer to the 

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water Web site. The CCR guidance documents are located at

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html. The additional guidance documents can be obtained 

from www.epa.gov/safewater/regs.html. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 12 April 2010

2.2 Rule Presentation

Presentations that can be used for workshops on the CCR Rule are available in PowerPoint format on 

EPA’s Web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html. 

2.3 Factsheet and Quick Reference Guide

Factsheets and Quick Reference Guides for the CCR Rule may be useful for conveying basic information 

about the Rule to water systems, new personnel, and stakeholders. These stand alone documents are 

included in Appendix C of this guidance manual. They are:

● Consumer Confidence Report Rule: A Quick Reference Guide. EPA 816-F-09-009, August 2009. 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html

● Ground Water Rule Factsheet: Public Notification, Consumer Confidence Report, and Special 

Notice Requirements for Community Water Systems. EPA 816-F-08-026. June 2008. 

www.epa.gov/safewater/disinfection/gwr/compliancehelp.html. 

2.4 Questions & Answers

Questions and Answers (Q&As) on the CCR Rule are provided in this section. These questions have been 

asked of EPA through the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, implementation training, or other means. 

Report Content

Wholesalers

Q1. If a system buys water from another system, can the buying system (consecutive system) send 

out the selling system’s (wholesale system’s) report with the buying system’s additional 

information? Or does the buying system have to completely generate a whole new report?

A1. A buying system may redistribute its wholesale system’s CCR if the data is appropriate, 

and the consecutive system includes its own system-specific information. The consecutive 

system can also contract with the wholesale system to produce their CCR. Regardless of 

who prepares the report, the consecutive system is still responsible for ensuring that their 

customers receive a CCR containing all of the required content. 

Name and location of body (or bodies) or water [40 CFR 141.153(b)(1)(ii)] 

Q2. Does body (or bodies) of water refer to ground water sources as well as surface water 

sources? Also, what is required in identifying the location of the body of water?

A2. Yes, the body of water refers to both surface and ground water. The name of the aquifer(s) 

should be included in the CCR, if it is commonly known. For location information, the 

system may give a general description of the location of their wells. If many wells are 

located over a large area, the locational information can be more general.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 13 April 2010

Source water assessment [40 CFR 141.153(b)(2)] 

Q3. Is there a requirement for including notification about the availability of source water 

assessments on an annual basis?

A3. Yes, systems must include information about the availability of the most recent source 

water assessment information in the CCR each year and a brief summary of the system’s 

susceptibility to potential sources of contamination. New information (as it becomes 

available) should also be included in the CCR.

Definitions [40 CFR 141.153(c)] 

Q4. If a system had no detections of any contaminant and thus did not make any reference to an 

MCL or MCLG in its report, does it still have to include these definitions?

A4. Since the report is being used to educate customers, the definitions for MCL and MCLG 

must be included even if the terms are not used elsewhere in the report. We believe that it 

is unlikely for most systems to have no detections, especially for parameters such as 

fluoride and nitrate. Please remember when evaluating data that if sampling was not 

performed for a given parameter in the calendar year covered by the report, then data 

going back a maximum of five years must be used. In addition, if a system does not 

monitor as required, it must indicate that it is in violation of the monitoring requirements.

Detection of Contaminants [40 CFR 141.153(d)] 

Regulated Contaminants/Table

Q5. If the system does not detect a contaminant, does it have to list that contaminant in the table?

A5. Only the results for detected contaminants may be included in the main water quality 

table. Detected contaminants include: regulated contaminants subject to a maximum 

contaminant level (MCL), maximum residual disinfectant level (MRDL), action level 

(AL), or treatment technique (TT); and unregulated contaminants for which monitoring is 

required under 40 CFR 141.40. 

The intent of this provision is to avoid the situation where a system has a long table with 

more non-detects than detects shown. A system can highlight the fact that it tests for, and 

does not find, lots of contaminants, but it must do so outside of the main water quality 

table, in another section of the report. For example, a system could place the following 

explanation in the report: “In addition to the above constituents, we tested for 20 

additional organic chemicals for which the state and EPA have set standards. We found no 

detectable levels of those chemicals.”

Q6. Under LT2SWTR and GWR, there are several treatment technique (TT) violations. If the 

system has a TT violation, does it have to report it in the CCR?

A6. Yes, the CCR rule requires that all violations of TT be reported in the CCR reports. EPA 

recommends that systems include all TT violations in a table adjacent to the detected 

contaminant table as follows:
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 14 April 2010

TT 

Violation Explanation Length Steps Taken to Correct the Violation

Health Effect 

Language

Q7. You stated that the units must be changed to make the MCL number greater than 1.0. Would 

this also apply to results such as turbidity, when a change of units does not make sense? 

A7. You do not need to convert units for total coliform bacteria, fecal coliform, E. coli, total 

organic carbon, turbidity, radionuclides measured in mrem/year or pCi/L and asbestos as 

well as any other MCL currently reported as a whole number. All others require a 

conversion of units. The conversion factors can be found in Appendix A to Subpart O of 

the Rule. 

Q8. How are Total Organic Carbon (TOC) requirements to be reported? 

A8. Only TOC detects and treatment technique violations must be reported in the CCR. 

However, for systems reporting TOC, EPA recommends they report it as a percent 

removal.

Q9. What value should we use when averaging in results below minimum reporting limits?

A9. For purposes of averaging results, use the value reported by the laboratory even if this is 

below the detection limit. If the laboratory reported the value as non-detect use zero.

Q10. For secondary chemicals, if there is a detection but no exceedance of the MCL, how should 

they be reported if they are required to be reported? 

A10. Under federal requirements contaminants subject to a secondary maximum contaminant 

level, such as aluminum or color, are not required to be reported in the CCR. If a system 

chooses to include results of monitoring for contaminants subject to a secondary MCL, 

they must do so in a separate table.

Lead and Copper [40 CFR 141.153(d)(4)(vi)] 

Q11. Do these requirements apply to all systems or just to those exceeding either or both of the 

action levels for lead and copper? If it is the former (that it applies to all systems), if the 90th 

percentile level for either lead or copper is below the detection limit, can any reference to the 

contaminant be omitted or does it still have to be listed on the report with the notation that it 

was not detected?

A11. If lead/copper was detected, it must be included in the report. Even if the 90th percentile 

lead or copper levels are below the detection limit, the system may have still detected lead 

or copper.

Q12. It is not a violation if there is an AL exceedance. Do I need to include health effects language 

if my system exceeded the action level for lead/copper but did not have a violation?

A12. 40 CFR 141.153(d)(6), which requires systems to include health effects language in their 

water quality table(s) for data indicating violations of MCLs, MRDLs, or TT violations, 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 15 April 2010

does not specify inclusion of data that exceeds ALs. However, under the LCR Revisions, 

beginning with the report due July 1, 2009, systems whose states adopted the LCR 

Revisions before January 1, 2009, must include an educational statement about lead in 

every report released to the public (see Section 3.2.2.8 for required language). For systems

whose states have not adopted the revisions by January 1, 2009, the lead information 

statement must be included in reports due by July 1, 2010. 

Total Coliform [40 CFR 141.153(d)(4)(vii)]

Q13. If a system has no positive samples for the entire year, can it omit any reference to total 

coliform on the report or must it be listed with the notation that it was not detected?

A13. It can be omitted if it was not detected during the calendar year.

Fecal Coliform [40 CFR 141.153(d)(4)(viii)]

Q14. The Rule says the total number of positive samples must be reported. Is this the total for the 

entire year? If not, what period is it referring to?

A14. The total number of positive samples for the calendar year.

Q15. Does special notice for fecal indicator-positive source samples under the GWR complete the 

CCR requirement or must these also be reported in the detected contaminant list?

A15. If the fecal indicator detected has an MCL or TT, then it must be listed in the detected 

contaminants table. The additional information required under 40 CFR 141.153(h)(6) can 

be provided either in the table or elsewhere in the report.

Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and other contaminants [40 CFR 141.153(e)(1)] 

Q16. If a system performed monitoring but found nothing to indicate that Cryptosporidium was 

present in the source water or finished water, does the system have to include this information 

in the report?

A16. The system does not have to include that information. Only when monitoring results 

indicate that Cryptosporidium, radon, and other unregulated contaminants are present, 

does a system have to include that information. Systems may wish to include a statement 

that they tested for these contaminants but did not detect them.

Bottled water explanation [40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)] 

Q17. In order to comply with 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1) and provide a complete explanation for 

contaminants found in bottled water, is language from both 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(iv) and 40 

CFR 141.153(h)(1)(i) to (iii) required? Is the paragraph below enough?

All drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at least 

small amounts of some contaminants. The presence of contaminants does not necessarily 

indicate that the water poses a health risk. More information about contaminants and 

potential health effects can be obtained by calling the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 1-800-426-4791.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 16 April 2010

A17. The above paragraph is not enough to satisfy the requirements of the regulation. Language 

from 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(i) through (iii) or the equivalent must be included in the 

explanation as well as the language from 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(iv). Information on the 

sources of drinking water, contaminants that may be present in source water, and why 

EPA and FDA establish regulations must also be included in the explanation.

Report Delivery and Recordkeeping

Deadline for report and certification form [40 CFR 141.155(c)] 

Q18. The Rule states that the certification form is due three months after the report itself is due. 

Can we require the certification form to be due at the same time as the report?

A18. Yes, states can require the CWS to submit the report and certification letter together, and 

specify this in state rules.

Q19. Does a system need to list the "good-faith efforts" they made to reach non-bill-paying 

customers?

A19. The state may ask the CWS to indicate what “good faith efforts” they took to ensure 

delivery, but it is not required to do so. “Good Faith” efforts are in addition to the mailing.
Section 3 

State Implementation 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 19 April 2010

3.1 Overview of Implementation 

The requirements of the CCR Rule can be divided into two categories: (1) report content requirements 

and (2) report delivery and recordkeeping requirements. In this section of the guidance, detailed 

information on each category is presented.

CCR Content Requirements 

● Item 1 Required Information about the Water System 

● Item 2 Source(s) of Water

● Item 3 Definitions

● Item 4 Reporting Levels of Detected Contaminants 

● Item 5 Information on Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and Other Contaminants

● Item 6 Compliance with Other Drinking Water Regulations

● Item 7 Variances and Exemptions

● Item 8 Required Educational Information

Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs

● Item 1 CCR Delivery to Customers

● Item 2 “Good Faith” Effort for Delivery to Non-Bill Paying Consumers

● Item 3 Delivery of CCR and Certification to State

● Item 4 CCR Delivery to Other Agencies 

● Item 5 CCR Availability to the Public

● Item 6 CCR Availability on the Internet 

● Item 7 Mailing Waiver for CWSs Serving Fewer Than 10,000 Persons 

● Item 8 CWS Keeping CCR Copies on File

3.2 Identify Affected Systems and Requirements

3.2.1 General Provisions 

Every CWS, defined as a system that serves at least 25 residents year round or that has at least 15 service 

connections used by year-round residents, must prepare and distribute a CCR [40 CFR 141.151(b)]. A 

CWS that sells water to another CWS must provide the buyer with information such as monitoring results 

or other required water quality information that will enable the buyer to produce a CCR [40 CFR 

141.152(d)]. The selling system and the buyer may also be referred to as the wholesale system and the 

consecutive system, respectively.

Different provisions of the CCR Rule apply to different sizes of CWSs (e.g., mailing waivers). 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 20 April 2010

3.2.2 CCR Content Requirements 

3.2.2.1 Item 1: Required Information about the Water System 

[40 CFR 141.153(h)(2) to 40 CFR 141.153(h)(4)] 

The system must identify itself, and include the following additional information: 

● The telephone number of a contact person at the water system who can provide additional 

information and answer questions about the report [40 CFR 141.153(h)(2)].

● For communities with a large proportion of non-English speaking residents, provide information 

in the appropriate language(s) regarding the importance of the report or a telephone number or 

address where such residents may contact the system to obtain a translated copy of the report or 

assistance in the appropriate language [40 CFR 141.153(h)(3)]. The state will determine when a 

population of non-English speaking residents is sufficiently large to require systems to take 

special measures for these residents. 

● A listing of known opportunities for public participation in decision-making processes that may 

affect drinking water quality (e.g., time and place of regularly-scheduled board meetings) [40 

CFR 141.153(h)(4)]. If there are no regularly-scheduled meetings, the CWS must tell customers 

how they can get information once meetings are scheduled. CWSs such as mobile home parks or 

retirement/nursing homes, that do not have such meetings, must provide interested customers 

with the telephone number of a contact person at the water system as discussed in the first bullet 

under Item 1.

3.2.2.2 Item 2: Sources of Water 

[40 CFR 141.153(b)]

A CWS must report the type of water (e.g., ground water, surface water, or a combination of the two) and 

the commonly-used name(s) (if sources are named) and locations of water source(s) [40 CFR 

141.153(b)(1)]. EPA encourages systems to provide simple maps to help customers understand the 

source(s) of their water. For security reasons, systems are not required to list the exact location of the 

water source(s). 

Under Section 1453 of the 1996 SDWA Amendments, states were required to ensure that source water 

assessments were completed for all public water systems by the year 2003. These assessments include 

delineation, inventory, and susceptibility information. If a source water assessment has been completed, 

the system must notify customers in the CCR that an assessment is available and tell them where to obtain 

a copy [40 CFR 141.153(b)(2)]. If the CWS has an assessment that was provided or approved by the state, 

the CCR must also include a brief summary of the system’s susceptibility to potential sources of 

contamination using language provided by the state or written by the operator. Susceptibility is a 

combination of several factors and is intended as a preliminary tool to facilitate local source water 

protection planning. More information about the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), including a 

list of state source water contacts can be found at www.epa.gov/safewater. 

In cases where a CWS has the available information, EPA encourages the system to highlight potential 

significant sources of contamination in the source water area. Including this information in the CCR is an

opportunity for systems to provide customers with an explanation for why a contaminant is present in the 

source water. This allows customers to take informed risk management steps, for example, through
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 21 April 2010

individual actions or political pressure (e.g., watershed protection, advocacy for Total Maximum Daily 

Loads). 

Systems could also use the reports to highlight additional local assessment and protection efforts which 

are planned or in place including providing consumers with tips on ways they can protect the source water 

(e.g., disposing of motor oil properly). 

3.2.2.3 Item 3: Definitions 

[40 CFR 141.153(c)]

The CCR must include definitions of key regulatory terms that customers will need to understand the 

contaminant data. Each CCR must include the following definitions for Maximum Contaminant Level 

(MCL) and Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG): 

● Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in 

drinking water. MCLs are set as close to the MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment 

technology.

● Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG): The level of a contaminant in drinking water below 

which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety.

If the CCR contains information on a contaminant that is regulated using any of the following terms, it 

must include the applicable definitions: 

● Treatment Technique (TT): A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in 

drinking water.

● Action Level (AL): The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or 

other requirements which a water system must follow.

● Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL): The highest level of a disinfectant allowed in 

drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for 

control of microbial contaminants.

● Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG): The level of a drinking water 

disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect 

the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

If the CWS operates under a variance or exemption, the CCR must include the following definition for 

variances and exemptions: 

● Variances and Exemptions: State or EPA permission not to meet an MCL or a treatment 

technique under certain conditions.

3.2.2.4 Item 4: Reporting Levels of Detected Contaminants 

[40 CFR 141.153(d)]

One key element of the CCR is the table (or series of adjacent tables) that reports the levels of detected 

contaminants. The table(s) must contain specific data regarding any detected contaminants (with the 

exception of Cryptosporidium) including both regulated contaminants (contaminants subject to an MCL, 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 22 April 2010

MRDL, AL, or TT) and unregulated contaminants (contaminants for which monitoring is required under 

40 CFR 141.40). A detected contaminant is any “regulated” or “unregulated” contaminant detected at or 

above its method detection limit (MDL).

Any additional monitoring results which a CWS chooses to include in the CCR must be displayed 

separately. In other words, systems must not include any unregulated contaminants that are not listed in 

40 CFR 141.40 or contaminants that are regulated but not detected or are detected below the MDL in the 

detected contaminant table. 

Systems must report data from monitoring completed during the previous calendar year unless the system 

is on reduced monitoring or for another reason monitors less than once per year for regulated 

contaminants. In that situation, the system must include in the table(s) the date and results of the most 

recent sampling. For example, if a system monitors once every three years for a contaminant and detected 

that contaminant in the last sample, it would need to report the year the contaminant was sampled and the 

same detected level in each of the three years until it takes a new sample. The report must also contain a 

brief statement explaining that the data presented is from the most recent testing done in accordance with 

regulations. The statement may read as follows: 

As authorized and approved by EPA, the state has reduced monitoring requirements for 

certain contaminants to less often than once per year because the concentrations of these 

contaminants are not expected to vary significantly from year to year. Some of our data 

[e.g., for organic contaminants], though representative, is more than one year old. 

No data older than 5 years need to be included in the CCR. This includes data collected under the 

Information Collection Rule (ICR).

It should be noted that while the Court vacated the MCLG and MCL for nickel, systems are still required 

to monitor for nickel (refer to 60 FR 339329, June 29, 1995). EPA emphasizes that monitoring and 

analytical testing requirements for nickel remain in full force and effect. Therefore, nickel detections must 

be reported in the detected contaminant table. 

The table must contain the following: 

A. If the contaminant is regulated by an MCL or MRDL:

● The MCL or MRDL, expressed as a number equal to or greater than 1.0. For an 

illustration of how to convert MCL compliance values for CCRs, refer to Appendix A to 

Subpart O of the Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

Note: When rounding results to determine compliance with the MCL is allowed by the 

regulations, rounding should be done prior to multiplying the results by the factor listed 

in Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule. 

● The MCLG or MRDLG, expressed in the same units as the MCL or MRDL. The MCLGs 

and MRDLGs for applicable contaminants are listed in Appendix A to Subpart O of the 

Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

● The level of that contaminant expressed in the same units as the MCL and MCLG or 

MRDL and MRDLG.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 23 April 2010

B. If the contaminant is regulated by a treatment technique (TT):

● The letters “TT” in place of the MCL.

● The letters “N/A” (not applicable) in place of the MCLG when no MCLG is listed in 

Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

C. If the contaminant is regulated as an action level (AL):

● The AL expressed as a number equal to or greater than 1.0. 

● The MCLG expressed in the same units as the AL for copper and zero for lead.

D. If the contaminant is unregulated:

● The average level and range of results for that contaminant.

E. For regulated detected contaminants, the level of the contaminant must be reported, and for 

ease of comparison, should be presented alongside the associated MCL and MCLG or MRDL 

and MRDG. The data must be represented as follows (refer to Section 6 and Appendix E of 

this guidance to see examples of how to present monitoring data discussed in this section): 

1) If compliance is determined based on annual or less frequent sampling (for example, 

many inorganic chemical contaminants), include the highest detected level at any 

sampling point and the range of detected levels, if applicable. 

2) If compliance is determined based on a running annual average of all the samples taken 

from a sampling point (for example, inorganic contaminants specified in 40 CFR 

141.23(a)(4)(i) which are monitored more frequently than annual), include the highest 

average as reported to the state for compliance purposes and the range of detected levels.

3) For TTHM and HAA5 samples:

– If compliance is determined based on a system-wide running annual average (RAA) 

(under the Stage 1 DBPR), include the highest system-wide average and the detected 

range for the system. 

– If compliance is determined based on a locational running annual average (LRAA)

(under the Stage 2 DBPR), include the highest LRAA and the range of individual 

samples results for all monitoring locations. If more than one location exceeds the 

TTHM or HAA5 MCL, include the LRAA for all locations that exceed the MCL.

– If sampling for the Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) was conducted 

under the Stage 2 DBPR, systems must include IDSE sample results when reporting

the range of TTHM and HAA5, but not the average. 

– Note: The provision described in 40 CFR 141.154(e), which requires the inclusion of

health effects language for TTHMs in CCRs when TTHM results are detected above 

0.080 mg/L but below the MCL, is no longer applicable. It has been superseded by 

Stage 1 DBPR and Stage 2 DBPR (TTHM MCL of 0.080 mg/L). 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 24 April 2010

4) For turbidity results, the table(s) must contain the following:

– For turbidity regulated as a MCL for systems that must install filtration but have not

[40 CFR 141.13], include the highest monthly average. Although an explanation for 

why turbidity is measured is not required in this situation, a CWS may wish to 

include such an explanation in the CCR.

– For turbidity regulated as a TT for systems that have met criteria for avoiding 

filtration [40 CFR 141.71], include the highest single measurement found in any 

month. An explanation for why turbidity is measured should be included and could 

read as follows: 

Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is 

a good indicator of the quality of water. High turbidity can hinder the 

effectiveness of disinfectants.

– For turbidity regulated as a TT for systems that filter, include the highest single 

measurement and the lowest monthly percentage of samples meeting the turbidity 

limits specified in 40 CFR 141.73, §141.173 or §141.551 for the relevant filtration 

technology. An explanation of the reasons for measuring turbidity should be included 

and could read as follows: 

Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is 

a good indicator of the effectiveness of our filtration system.

Note: The regulation does not specify where the turbidity explanations should be 

placed in the report. However, due to space limitations within the table, a CWS may 

choose to place this explanation outside of the table, elsewhere in the report.

5) For lead and/or copper:

– Include the 90th percentile value from the most recent sampling (if it is a number 

greater than zero) and the number of sites that exceeded the action level (do not 

report related water quality parameter data).

6) For total coliforms, fecal coliforms and E. coli under the Total Coliform Rule (TCR):

– For systems that collect fewer than 40 samples per month, include the highest number 

of positive samples collected in any one month. 

– For systems that collect 40 or more samples per month, include the highest 

percentage of positive samples collected in any one month. 

– For fecal coliforms and E. coli, include the number of positive samples collected that 

year.

7) For fecal indicator-positive source samples under the GWR: 

– For E. coli, list the MCL and MCLG as zero.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 25 April 2010

– For enterococci or coliphage, list “TT” in the column for MCL and “N/A” in the 

column for MCLG.

– For all fecal indicator-positive ground water source samples (E. coli, enterococci, or 

coliphage), include the total number of positive samples for the year and special 

notice language in the table or elsewhere in the CCR. Refer to Section 3.2.2.6 for 

more information on special notice language requirements for fecal indicator-positive 

ground water source samples.

Note: Prior to promulgation of the GWR, Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule 

provided information for reporting of fecal coliform and E. coli indicating an MCL of 

zero and an MCLG of zero. This was based on compliance with the Total Coliform 

Rule. Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule also provided health effects language 

specific to fecal coliforms and E. coli. With the promulgation of the GWR, Appendix 

A to Subpart O required the addition of information for fecal indicators found at the 

ground water source. Fecal indicators include E. coli, enterococci and coliphage.

EPA was concerned that including E. coli in this table twice, with differing entries 

for MCL and differing health effects language, could potentially cause confusion to 

the regulated community and be contrary to the overarching intent of the CCR Rule, 

to provide the community with easily understood and straightforward information.

For this reason, the fecal indicators enterococci and coliphage were added to 

Appendix A to Subpart O, with “TT” listed in the MCL column and with health 

effects language specific to fecal indicators. The fecal coliform and E. coli entries

remain unchanged.

8) In addition to detected contaminants, the CCR Rule requires that all violations of 

treatment techniques be reported in a detected contaminant table(s). TT violations are 

listed below and are organized by rule (refer to Item 6 for specific information about 

failure to install adequate filtration or disinfection equipment or processes or a failure of 

those processes, violations associated with acrylamide and epichlorohydrin, and 

violations associated with LCR).

– Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) 

● Failure to install adequate filtration or disinfection equipment or processes.

● Failure of the filtration or disinfection equipment or process.

● TT violation associated with acrylamide and epichlorohydrin. 

● Failure to have redundant components for disinfection.

● Failure to maintain a distribution system disinfectant residual.

● Failure to maintain at least 0.2 ppm disinfectant residual at the entry point for 

more than 4 hours.

● Failure to meet inactivation requirements at the treatment plant (CT value).
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 26 April 2010

● Failure to meet watershed control program requirements.

– Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR) 

● Failure to return recycle flows through the processes of the existing filtration 

system or to an alternate state-approved location (conventional and direct 

filtration systems only). 

– LT2ESWTR

● Failure to cover an uncovered finished water reservoir, provide treatment of the 

reservoir’s discharge, or be in compliance with a state-approved schedule to 

cover the reservoir(s) or treat the reservoir(s) discharge by April 1, 2009. 

● Filtered systems

 Failure to determine and report bin classification.

 Failure to provide or install an additional level of treatment using a microbial 

toolbox option by the required date.

 Failure to achieve required treatment credit to meet the bin classification 

requirements using a microbial toolbox option.

● Unfiltered systems

 Failure to calculate and report mean Cryptosporidium level.

 Failure to install a second disinfectant to treat for Cryptosporidium by 

required date. 

 Failure to achieve required inactivation level by required date.

 Failure to maintain required inactivation level based on mean 

Cryptosporidium results. 

– LCR 

● Failure to meet corrosion control treatment, source water treatment, lead service 

line replacement, or public education requirements. 

– Stage 1 DBPR

● Failure to remove required amount of total organic carbon (TOC) [disinfection 

byproduct precursor (DBPP)] (conventional filtration systems only). 

– GWR

● Failure to maintain at least 4-log treatment of viruses for ground water systems 

that are required to treat. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 27 April 2010

● Failure to take corrective action, if necessary based on a fecal indicator-positive 

sample.

● Failure to take corrective action, if necessary based on a significant deficiency. 

EPA recommends that systems include TT violations listed in #8 above in a table 

adjacent to the main detected contaminant table [including those identified in 40 CFR 

141.153(f)(2) – 141.153(f)(4)]. The table must include an explanation of the violation, 

the length of the violation, any potential adverse health effects, and steps taken to correct 

the violation. The following is an example (see Section 6 and Appendix E for additional 

examples): 

TT Violation Explanation of 

the TT Violation

Length of the 

Violation

Steps Taken to 

Correct the 

Violation

Health Effect Language

Failure to 

remove 

required 

amount of total 

organic carbon 

(TOC) (DBPP)

System will need 

to explain the 

violation.

System will 

need to provide 

the length of 

the violation.

System will need 

to provide 

information on 

steps to correct the 

violation. 

Total organic carbon (TOC) has no health

effects. However, total organic carbon 

provides a medium for the formation of 

disinfection byproducts. These 

byproducts include trihalomethanes 

(THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs). 

Drinking water containing these 

byproducts in excess of the MCL may 

lead to adverse health effects, liver, or 

kidney problems, or nervous system 

effects, and may lead to an increased risk 

of getting cancer. 

9) If beta particles were detected at or below 50 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), report the 

detected level in pCi/L. So that consumers may have a standard against which to compare 

that detected level, the CCR should include “50 pCi/L*” in the MCL column (rather than 

the actual MCL of 4 mrem/year) and include a footnote to the table that says, "*EPA 

considers 50 pCi/L to be the level of concern for beta particles." If beta particles are 

detected above 50 pCi/L, the system must determine the actual radioactive constituents 

present in the water to calculate the dose exposure level in mrem/year, and must report 

both the detected level and MCL as mrem/year.

F. The likely source(s) of that contaminant, according to the best information known to the 

water system. Specific information regarding contaminants may be available in sanitary 

surveys and source water assessments and should be used when available to the operator. If 

the operator lacks specific information on the likely source, the report must include one or 

more of the typical sources for that contaminant listed in Appendix A to Subpart O of the 

Rule which are most applicable to the local situation.

As stated in the preamble to the final Rule (p. 44519), EPA’s intent is for this information to 

be as specific as possible. For example, the report should identify a specific point source, 

such as “Al’s Chicken Houses” or the “Super-Shiny Paper Mill” if possible but may use 

generic terms from Appendix A to Subpart O such as “farms” or “paper mills” in the absence 

of specific information from sanitary surveys, source water assessments, or other means. If 

none of the generic sources from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule are applicable to the 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 28 April 2010

system, a footnote may be added to the report indicating that to the best of the system’s 

knowledge none of the typical sources of contamination listed in the table(s) for that 

contaminant exist in the source water area(s). 

G. For any contaminant that violates an MCL, MRDL, or a TT, include a clear indication in the 

table(s) of the violation or exceedence. This indication could, for example, take the form of a 

different color type, a larger or heavier font, or a large star. Nearby, but not in the table(s), 

include a clear and easy to understand statement explaining not only the violation, but also 

the length of the violation, potential health effects because of the violation, and the actions 

that have been taken by the CWS to remedy the problem. The potential health effects 

language must be from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule which is available on the EPA 

Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

EPA recognizes that there may be cases where a state MCL may be more stringent than the 

Federal standard and recommends that systems use the CCR to inform their customers of 

such occurrences. This could be easily accomplished by highlighting the MCL through a 

different font or asterisk and explaining in a footnote to the table that the state standard is 

stricter. EPA also recommends that customers should be informed when there is no Federal 

standard and the state has developed its own standard. For example, EPA recommends 

secondary standards or non-enforceable guidelines regulating contaminants that may cause 

cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, 

and color) in drinking water. However, states may choose to adopt the secondary standards as 

enforceable standards. 

H. If the system distributes water to its customers from multiple hydraulically independent 

distribution systems fed from different raw water sources, include in the table(s) separate 

columns for detection data for each service area. Also include a description of the area served 

by each distribution system. Alternatively, systems could produce separate reports tailored to 

include data for each service area. 

I. If the system detects unregulated contaminants for which monitoring is required, the table(s) 

must contain the average of any monitoring results from the year and the range of detections.

The CCR may also include a brief explanation for why a system monitors for unregulated 

contaminants. The explanation may read as follows: 

Unregulated contaminants are those for which EPA has not established drinking 

water standards. The purpose of unregulated contaminant monitoring is to assist 

EPA in determining the occurrence of unregulated contaminants in drinking water 

and whether future regulation is warranted.

If a system was not required to monitor for unregulated contaminant under 40 CFR 141.40 in 

the previous calendar year, it does not need to report unregulated contaminant monitoring 

results in the CCR. 

Note: The most recent list of unregulated contaminants can be obtained on the EPA Web site 

at www.epa.gov/safewater/ucmr/index.html. 

J. If the system is required to provide Tier 3 public notice for a monitoring violation or other 

type of violation or situation, they can include the notice in their CCR. However, the system 

must meet the content requirements under the Public Notification Rule. In addition, they must 

meet the timing and delivery requirements for public notification such that Tier 3 public 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 29 April 2010

notice must be completed no later than 12 months from the date the violation or situation 

occurred. To minimize the timing conflict, systems can publish the CCR as soon after the end 

of the calendar year as possible or mail a separate public notice for the violations occurring in 

January through June of the current year in the same envelope as the CCR covering the 

previous calendar year’s violations. 

3.2.2.5 Item 5: Information on Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and Other Contaminants 

[40 CFR 141.153(e)]

If a system monitored for Cryptosporidium and/or radon and did not detect either, the system is not 

required to discuss the monitoring or the results of the monitoring in the report. However if monitoring 

indicated the presence of either of these contaminants, information about the monitoring and results of the 

monitoring must be included in the CCR and displayed outside of the table(s) reporting the levels of 

detected contaminants. 

Cryptosporidium 

If the system has performed any monitoring for Cryptosporidium as required by LT2ESWTR or for other 

reasons, which indicates that Cryptosporidium may be present either in its source water or finished water, 

the CCR must contain: 

● A summary of the results of the monitoring. 

● An explanation of the significance of the results. CWSs should tell customers if they need to be 

concerned by this information. A sample explanation is given below: 

Cryptosporidium is a microbial parasite which is found in surface water throughout the U.S.

Although filtration removes Cryptosporidium, the most commonly-used filtration methods 

cannot guarantee 100 percent removal. Our monitoring indicates the presence of these 

organisms in our source water and/or finished water. Current test methods do not allow us 

to determine if the organisms are dead or if they are capable of causing disease. Symptoms 

of infection include nausea, diarrhea, and abdominal cramps. Most healthy individuals are 

able to overcome the disease within a few weeks. However, immuno-compromised people 

have more difficulty and are at greater risk of developing severe, life threatening illness.

Immuno-compromised individuals are encouraged to consult their doctor regarding 

appropriate precautions to take to avoid infection. Cryptosporidium must be ingested for it 

to cause disease, and may be passed through means other than drinking water.

Radon 

If the system has performed any monitoring that indicates the presence of radon in its finished water, the 

CCR must contain:

● The results of the monitoring.

● An explanation of the significance of the results. The following is a possible explanation:

Radon is a radioactive gas that you cannot see, taste, or smell. It is found throughout the 

United States. Radon can move up through the ground and into a home through cracks and 

holes in the foundation. Radon can build up to high levels in all types of homes. Radon can 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 30 April 2010

also get into indoor air when released from tap water from showering, washing dishes, and 

other household activities. Compared to radon entering the home through soil, radon 

entering the home through tap water will in most cases be a small source of radon in indoor 

air. Radon is a known human carcinogen. Breathing air containing radon can lead to lung 

cancer. Drinking water containing radon may also cause increased risk of stomach cancer.

If you are concerned about radon in your home, test the air in your home. Testing is 

inexpensive and easy. Fix your home if the level of radon in your air is 4 picocuries per liter 

of air (pCi/l) or higher. There are simple ways to fix a radon problem that aren’t too costly.

For additional information, call your state radon program or call EPA’s Radon Hotline 

(800-SOS-RADON).

Other Contaminants

If the system has voluntarily performed additional monitoring and this monitoring indicates the presence 

of other non-regulated contaminants in the finished water, EPA strongly encourages CWSs to report any 

results that may indicate a health concern. EPA considers detects above a proposed MCL or health 

advisory level to indicate possible health concerns. The EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-

4791) and EPA Web site (www.epa.gov/safewater/hfacts.html) are resources for this information. For 

such contaminants, EPA recommends that the report include:

● The results of monitoring, and

● An explanation of the significance of the results noting the existence of a health advisory or a 

proposed regulation. 

If provided, this information must be displayed outside of the detected contaminants table(s).

3.2.2.6 Item 6: Compliance with Other Drinking Water Regulations

[40 CFR 141.153(f)]

If during the reporting period, the CWS was in violation of any of the following National Primary

Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) requirements, its CCR must include a clear and readily 

understandable explanation of the violation, any potential adverse health effects, and steps the CWS has 

taken to correct the violation. 

● Monitoring and reporting of compliance data.

● Recordkeeping of compliance data.

● Filtration and disinfection prescribed by Subpart H 40 CFR 141.70 to 40 CFR 141.75. 

For systems which have failed to install adequate filtration or disinfection equipment or 

processes, or have had a failure of such equipment or processes which constitutes a violation, the 

CCR must include the following language as part of the explanation of potential adverse health 

effects: 

Inadequately treated water may contain disease-causing organisms. These organisms 

include bacteria, viruses, and parasites which can cause symptoms such as nausea, cramps, 

diarrhea, and associated headaches.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 31 April 2010

● Lead and copper control requirements prescribed by Subpart I 40 CFR 141.80 to 40 CFR 141.85. 

For systems that fail to meet the requirements listed below, the CCR must include applicable 

language for lead, copper, or both, from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule which is available 

on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

– 40 CFR 141.80(d); §141.81; and §141.82 – Corrosion control treatment requirements.

– 40 CFR 141.83 – Source water treatment requirements.

– 40 CFR 141.84 – Lead service line replacement requirements.

– 40 CFR 141.85 – Public education requirements.

● Treatment techniques for Acrylamide and Epichlorohydrin prescribed by Subpart K 40 CFR 

141.110 to 40 CFR 141.111. 

For systems that violate Subpart K requirements, the CCR must contain the relevant language 

from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

● Special monitoring requirements as prescribed by 40 CFR 141.40 for unregulated contaminants 

and 40 CFR 141.41 for sodium.

● Violation of the terms of a variance, an exemption, or a state or federal administrative or judicial 

order. 

The Agency is not prescribing mandatory language to describe the health significance of monitoring and 

reporting violations; violations of recordkeeping or special monitoring requirements; or violations of a 

variance, or an exemption of a state or federal administrative or judicial order; because the explanation 

has to be tailored to the circumstances of the violation. In cases where there is a violation that presents a 

significant health threat, the CWS may use relevant language from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule 

which is available on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. Appendix E of 

this guidance contains an example CCR and information on how to report. 

Refer to Section 3.2.2.4 for suggestions on presenting the TT violations for filtration and disinfection, 

lead and copper, and acrylamide and epichlorihydrin.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 32 April 2010

Special Notice for a System Required to Comply with the GWR 

[40 CFR 141.153(h)(6)] 

The GWR requires that CWSs provide special notice in their CCRs for the following two situations:

Special Notice for Uncorrected Significant Deficiencies1

If a ground water system receives notice from the state of a significant deficiency, and that 

deficiency is not corrected by December 31st of the year covered by the system’s CCR, it must 

inform their customers in the next CCR. The CCR must include the following information for 

uncorrected significant deficiencies: 

● The nature of the significant deficiency and the date it was identified by the state.

● The state-approved plan and schedule for correction, including interim measures, 

progress to date, and any interim measures completed.

The system must continue to inform customers annually until the state determines the significant 

deficiency is corrected.

In addition, the state may also require the system to include in the CCR significant deficiencies 

that were corrected by the end of the calendar year. If the state directs the system to do this, the 

system must inform the customers of the significant deficiency, how it was corrected, and the date

it was corrected in the next CCR issued.

Special Notice for a Fecal Indicator-Positive Ground Water Source Sample

If a ground water system receives notice from a laboratory of a fecal indicator-positive ground 

water source sample and the sample is not invalidated by the state, it must inform its customers in 

the next CCR. The CCR must include the following information for a fecal indicator-positive 

ground water source sample:

● The source of the fecal contamination (if it is known) and the date(s) of the fecal 

indicator-positive source sample.

● If the fecal contamination has been addressed as prescribed by the requirements of the 

GWR and the date the contamination was addressed.

● For fecal contamination that has not been addressed, the state-approved plan and 

schedule for correction, including interim measures, progress to date, and any interim 

measures completed.

 

1 Significant Deficiency: A deficiency that may cause, or have the potential to cause the introduction of 

contamination into finished water. An example of a significant deficiency is an unscreened vent on a storage tank 

which left uncorrected may allow water, dirt, waste or other contaminants to enter the tank.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 33 April 2010

● The health effects language for fecal indicators. Refer to Appendix A to Subpart O of the 

Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html for health effects language. 

Since fecal indicator-positive ground water source samples must be included in the detected 

contaminant table, this special notice language can be included below the table or elsewhere in 

the report. Section 6 and Appendix E of this guidance contains an example on how to present 

fecal indicator- positive ground water source samples and the special notice text in a CCR.

The system must continue to inform customers annually until the fecal contamination in the 

ground water source is addressed as prescribed by the requirements of the GWR. 

3.2.2.7 Item 7: Variances and Exemptions 

[40 CFR 141.153(g)]

If the CWS is operating under a variance or exemption, the CCR must include:

● A section that explains that the system is operating under a variance or exemption, and the 

reasons it was issued.

● The date that it was issued and when it is up for renewal.

● A status report on what the system is doing to remedy the problem.

● A notice of any opportunity for public input in the review or renewal of the variance or 

exemption.

3.2.2.8 Item 8: Required Educational Information 

[40 CFR 141.153(h)(1); 40 CFR 141.154]

The CCR Rule provides additional health information that must be displayed prominently somewhere in 

the CCR. The first three are required for every CCR. They are: a brief explanation regarding contaminants

which may reasonably be expected to be found in drinking water, a discussion of vulnerability of some 

persons to contaminants, and information about lead in drinking water and its effects on children. The last 

two, information on arsenic and nitrate, are only required if those contaminants are found at the specified 

levels. 

Explanation of Contaminants in Drinking Water and Bottled Water 

This statement is an explanation that must contain the language of paragraph 40 CFR 

141.153(h)(1)(iv) shown below:

Drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at 

least small amounts of some contaminants. The presence of contaminants does not 

necessarily indicate that water poses a health risk. More information about 

contaminants and potential health effects can be obtained by calling the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791). 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 34 April 2010

CWSs must also include information contained in 40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(i) through 40 CFR 

141.153(h)(1)(iii) on sources of drinking water, contaminants that may be present in source 

water, and why EPA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) establish regulations for 

contaminants respectively. CWSs have the choice of using the EPA language provided in 40 CFR 

141.153(h)(1)(i) through (iii) or developing their own comparable language.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(i) - Sources of Drinking Water: 

The sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, 

lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels over the 

surface of the land or through the ground, it dissolves naturally-occurring minerals 

and, in some cases, radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from 

the presence of animals or from human activity.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(ii) - Contaminants That May Be Present in Source Water: 

Microbial Contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, which may come from 

sewage treatment plants, septic systems, agricultural livestock operations, and 

wildlife.

Inorganic Contaminants, such as salts and metals, which can be naturallyoccurring or result from urban stormwater runoff, industrial, or domestic 

wastewater discharges, oil and gas production, mining, or farming.

Pesticides and Herbicides, which may come from a variety of sources such as 

agriculture, urban stormwater runoff, and residential uses.

Organic Chemical Contaminants, including synthetic and volatile organic 

chemicals, which are by-products of industrial processes and petroleum production, 

and can also come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoff, and septic systems.

Radioactive Contaminants, which can be naturally-occurring or be the result of oil 

and gas production and mining activities.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(iii) - EPA and FDA Regulations: 

In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, EPA prescribes regulations which 

limit the amount of certain contaminants in water provided by public water systems.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations establish limits for contaminants 

in bottled water which must provide the same protection for public health.

Explanation of the Vulnerability of Some Populations to Contaminants in Drinking Water

This statement is an explanation that must contain the language of paragraph 40 CFR 141.154(a) 

shown below:

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking water than the 

general population. Immuno-compromised persons such as persons with cancer 

undergoing chemotherapy, persons who have undergone organ transplants, people 

with HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants can be 

particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 35 April 2010

water from their health care providers. EPA/Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) guidelines on appropriate means to lessen the risk of infection by 

Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the Safe 

Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791).

Information Statement about Lead in Drinking Water

This statement must contain the language of paragraph 40 CFR 141.154(d)(1) shown below or a 

system may write its own educational statement but only in consultation with the state: 

If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for 

pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials 

and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. [NAME OF UTILITY] 

is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of 

materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several 

hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by flushing your tap for 30 

seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are concerned 

about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in 

drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available 

from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at www.epa.gov/safewater/lead. 

Educational Information about Arsenic [40 CFR 141.154(b)] 

A CCR must also contain additional educational information about arsenic if detected at levels 

above 5 μg/l (50% of the MCL), but at or below the MCL. EPA requires that the appropriate 

educational statement be included in the report. 

While your drinking water meets EPA’s standard for arsenic, it does contain low 

levels of arsenic. EPA’s standard balances the current understanding of arsenic’s 

possible health effects against the costs of removing arsenic from drinking water. 

EPA continues to research the health effects of low levels of arsenic, which is a 

mineral known to cause cancer in humans at high concentrations and is linked to 

other health effects such as skin damage and circulatory problems. 

EPA believes that water systems should have the flexibility to tailor their information to specific 

local situations. Systems that want to use language significantly different than that provided by 

EPA must develop comparable language in consultation with the state. 

Note: Systems can add information on arsenic in conjunction with this educational statement, as 

long it does not detract from the educational nature of the report as specified in 40 CFR 

141.153(h)(5). For example, a system can explain that there could be other sources of arsenic 

from mining operations or pesticides that were used in the past. Additional information on health 

effects should be consistent with information provided in Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule 

which is available on the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

Educational Information about Nitrate [40 CFR 141.154(c)] 

A CCR must also contain additional educational information about nitrate if detected at levels 

above 5 mg/l (50% of the MCL), but below the MCL. EPA requires that the appropriate 

educational statement be included in the report. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 36 April 2010

Nitrate in drinking water at levels above 10 ppm is a health risk for infants of less 

than 6 months of age. High nitrate levels in drinking water can cause “blue baby 

syndrome.” Nitrate levels may rise quickly for short periods of time because of 

rainfall or agricultural activity. If you are caring for an infant you should ask advice

from your health care provider.

EPA believes that water systems should have the flexibility to tailor their information to specific 

local situations. Systems that want to use language significantly different than that provided by 

EPA must develop comparable language in consultation with the state. 

Note: Systems can add information on nitrate in conjunction with this educational statement, as 

long it does not detract from the educational nature of the report as specified in 40 CFR 

141.153(h)(5). Additional information on health effects should be consistent with information 

provided in Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule which is available on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/regulations.html. 

3.2.3 Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs 

3.2.3.1 Items 1-2: CCR Delivery to Customers “Good Faith” Effort for Delivery to Non-Bill Paying 

Consumers 

[40 CFR 141.155(a); 40 CFR 141.155(b)] 

CWSs are required to mail or otherwise directly deliver a copy of the CCR to each customer. EPA 

mandates direct delivery of CCRs to bill addressees, but EPA also expects CWSs to make serious and 

“good faith” efforts to reach non-bill paying consumers. A “good faith” effort means selecting the most 

appropriate methods to reach those consumers from a menu of options recommended by the state. These 

options include but are not limited to:

● Posting the CCR on the Internet using Web sites, email notifications, Podcasts, blogs, or Tweets.

● Mailing the CCR to postal patrons in metropolitan and rural areas.

● Advertising the availability of the CCR in news media.

● Publishing the CCR in a local newspaper.

● Posting the CCR in public places such as cafeterias or lunch rooms of public buildings.

● Delivering multiple copies of the CCR for distribution by single-biller customers such as 

apartment buildings or large private employers.

● Delivering the CCR to community organizations.

● Posting the CCR in libraries, schools, or post offices.

EPA does not intend to place an undue burden on the systems, but believes that it is in the systems’ 

interest to spread the word about the quality of its water as widely as possible. CWSs should know that 

there are a variety of options that can be tailored to each specific local situation to reach non-bill paying 

consumers. EPA would interpret the inclusion of a note in the CCR, asking recipients to share the 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 37 April 2010

information with non-bill paying consumers, as part of a “good faith” effort. A sample note may read as 

follows: 

Town Water System has included additional copies of our Consumer Confidence Report in 

this mailing. Town Water System would appreciate it if large volume water customers such 

as yourself post extra copies of these reports in conspicuous locations or distribute them to 

your tenants, residents, patients, students and/or employees. This action will allow 

individuals who consume the water Town Water System delivers, but are not billed 

customers, to learn about our water system.

3.2.3.2 Items 3-4: Delivery of CCR and Certification to State and CCR Delivery to Other Agencies 

[40 CFR 141.155(c); 40 CFR 141.155(d)]

The CWS must mail a copy of the CCR to the state, as well as any other agency or clearinghouse the state

designates, no later than the date the system is required to deliver the report to its customers. The mailing 

may be in an electronic or hard copy format. Examples of other agencies may include state and local 

public health or environment departments, public utility commissions, and consumer advocates’ offices.

Within 3 months from the date the system is required to deliver the CCR to customers, the CWS must 

send a letter of certification to the state certifying that the system has:

● Distributed the CCR to its customers, and 

● Used in the report information that is correct and consistent with compliance monitoring data 

previously submitted to the state. 

EPA recommends that states and CWSs view the certification letter as another opportunity to explain how 

the system is telling customers about the quality of the drinking water and the steps taken to protect 

sources of their water. Therefore, states are encouraged to have CWSs certify that they comply with all 

the regulatory requirements of Subpart O; include information on how they made a “good faith” effort to 

reach consumers that do not get water bills; include date(s) and method(s) of distribution, including 

names of newspapers, if applicable; list other means of making the report available to the public; and list 

the other agencies the CCR was sent to as directed by the state. 

For systems with mailing waivers, information on the newspaper and dates where the CCR was published 

for systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons may be included. For systems serving 500 persons or 

fewer, information on how customers were notified about the availability of the CCR, including posting 

locations may be included. The following are examples of certification forms (also provided in Appendix 

D of this guidance). Example 3-1 is a certification form for systems without a mailing waiver. Example 3-

2 is a certification form systems can use if they have a mailing waiver. Refer to Section 3.2.3.4 for more 

discussion on mailing waivers.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 38 April 2010

Example 3-1. CCR Certification - Example Format for Systems without Mailing Waivers 

CWS name:________________________________________________________________________

PWS I.D. no:_______________________________________________________________________

The community water system named above hereby confirms that its consumer confidence report has been

distributed to customers (and appropriate notices of availability have been given). Further, the system 

certifies that the information contained in the report is correct and consistent with the compliance 

monitoring data previously submitted to the state. 

Certified by:

Name___________________________________________________________

Title_____________________________________________________________

Phone #______________________________ Date______________________

***You are not required by EPA rules to report the following information, but you may want to provide it 

to your state. Check all items that apply. ***

____CCR was distributed by mail or other direct delivery. Specify other direct delivery methods:

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____"Good faith" efforts were used to reach non-bill paying consumers. Those efforts included the

following methods as recommended by the state: 

____posting the CCR on the Internet at www.________________________________

____mailing the CCR to postal patrons within the service area. (attach zip codes used)

____advertising availability of the CCR in news media (attach copy of announcement)

____publication of CCR in local newspaper (attach copy)

____posting the CCR in public places (attach a list of locations)

____delivery of multiple copies to single bill addresses serving several persons such as: 

apartments, businesses, and large private employers

____delivery to community organizations (attach a list)

____(for systems serving at least 100,000 persons) Posted CCR on a publicly-accessible Internet 

site at the address: www.____________________________________________

____Delivered CCR to other agencies as required by the state (attach a list)
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 39 April 2010

Example 3-2. CCR Certification - Example Format for Systems with Mailing Waivers 

CWS Name: 

PWS I.D. #: 

I confirm that the Consumer Confidence Report has been distributed to customers (or appropriate notices 

of availability have been given) and that the information is correct and consistent with the compliance 

monitoring data previously submitted to the state. 

System-specific details on distribution of the CCR to customers are outlined below. CCR or notice of 

availability was provided as specified for:

Systems Serving Fewer than 10,000 Persons

Published the CCR in the local newspaper(s). Attach a copy of the notice. List newspaper and 

dates below:

Informed customers the CCR will not be mailed. List methods of notification below:

Developed procedures to make reports available upon request. Specify below:

Systems Serving 500 Persons or Fewer 

List methods used to inform customers the CCR will not be mailed:

Developed procedures to make reports available upon request. Specify below:

Certified by: Name

Title

Phone # Date 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 40 April 2010

3.2.3.3 Items 5-6: CCR Availability to the Public and CCR Availability on the Internet 

[40 CFR 141.155(e); 40 CFR 141.155(f)]

CWSs must make their CCRs available to members of the public who request the report. This means that 

a system must send, fax, or otherwise deliver a copy of the report to any member of the public who 

requests it. Systems may choose to make their reports available in the newspaper, on a Web site, or in 

public places such as libraries, but this does not relieve them of the responsibility to send the reports to 

interested customers or other members of the public who may not have access to these other resources.

Each CWS serving 100,000 or more persons must post its current year’s CCR on a publicly-accessible 

site on the Internet.

3.2.3.4 Item 7: Mailing Waiver for CWSs Serving Fewer than 10,000 Persons 

[40 CFR 141.155(g)]

For systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons, the requirement that CWSs mail the CCR to their

customers can be waived. The following authorities can waive the mailing requirements: 

● The Governor of a state or his/her designee (e.g., state drinking water administrator if allowed by 

state law). 

● A Tribal leader if the Tribe has met the requirements under 40 CFR 142.72 for Tribal eligibility. 

● The EPA Regional Administrator on some Indian lands where no Tribe has been deemed eligible. 

States, in accordance with their laws, can establish specific criteria for obtaining and renewing the 

waivers. For example, a state can choose whether the waiver should be system-specific or apply to all 

systems in a given category. The following are examples of Governor’s mailing waivers (also provided in 

Appendix D of this guidance). Example 3-3 illustrates a state-wide Governor’s mailing waiver. Example 

3-4 illustrates a system-specific Governor’s mailing waiver. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 41 April 2010

Example 3-3. Governor’s Mailing Waiver - State-Wide Example Format 

Authority provided in Section 1414(c)(4)(C) of the Safe Drinking Water Act allows the Governor of the 

State of _____________________(insert Tribal agency if applicable) to allow community water systems 

serving fewer than 10,000 persons not to mail or otherwise provide direct delivery of the Consumer 

Confidence Reports (CCRs) to each customer.

The community water systems listed in Attachment A serve fewer than 10,000 persons [and otherwise 

meet all direct delivery waiver requirements - optional], a waiver is hereby granted [for the period 

beginning January 1 of the calendar year ______, and ending _________ - optional]. Each water system 

must: 

1) Inform customers it will not be providing copies of the CCR by mail or other direct delivery method.

2) Publish the report annually in one or more local newspapers serving areas in which the system’s 

customers are located. 

3) Make copies of the CCR available to the public upon request.

Authority provided in Section 1414(c)(4)(D) of the Safe Drinking Water Act allows the Governor of the 

State of _____________________(insert Tribal agency if applicable) to determine not to apply 

requirements 1 and 2 (listed above) to community water systems which serve 500 persons or fewer, if the 

system provides notice to its customers once a year that the CCR is available upon request. 

The community water systems listed in Attachment B serve 500 persons or fewer [and otherwise meet all 

direct delivery waiver requirements - optional], a waiver is hereby granted [for the period beginning 

January 1 of the calendar year ______, and ending _________ - optional]. Each water system must 

provide notice to customers of the availability of the report, at least once per year, by mail, door-to-door 

delivery, or posting. Any other methods authorized by the state should be listed.

All systems with mailing waivers are still required to:

● Complete a CCR in accordance with all content requirements. 

● Provide a copy of the CCR to the state and any other agency specified by the state. 

● Make copies of the CCR available to the public upon request.

Governor’s or His/Her Designee’s Signature Date
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 42 April 2010

Example 3-4. Governor’s Mailing Waiver - System-Specific Example Format 

Authority provided in Section 1414(c)(4)(C) of the Safe Drinking Water Act allows the Governor of the 

State of _____________________(insert Tribal agency if applicable) to allow community water systems 

serving fewer than 10,000 persons not to mail or otherwise provide direct delivery of the CCRs to each 

customer.

The community water system, ________________, serves fewer than 10,000 persons [and otherwise 

meets all direct delivery waiver requirements - optional], a waiver is hereby granted [for the period 

commencing January 1 of the calendar year ______, and ending _________ - optional]. The water system

must: 

1) Inform customers it will not be providing copies of the CCR by mail or other direct delivery method.

2) Publish the report annually in one or more local newspapers serving areas in which the system’s 

customers are located. 

3) Make copies of the CCR available to the public upon request.

Authority provided in Section 1414(c)(4)(D) of the Safe Drinking Water Act allows the Governor of the 

State of _____________________(insert Tribal agency if applicable) to determine not to apply 

requirements 1 and 2 (listed above) to community water systems which serve 500 persons or fewer, if the 

system provides notice to its customers once a year that the CCR is available upon request. 

The community water system, ________________, serves 500 persons or fewer [and otherwise meets all 

direct delivery waiver requirements established by the state - optional], a waiver is hereby granted [for the 

period commencing January 1 of the calendar year ______, and ending _________ - optional]. The water 

system must provide notice to customers of the availability of the report, at least once per year, by mail, 

door-to-door delivery, posting or any other means authorized by the state. 

All systems with mailing waivers are still required to:

● Complete a CCR in accordance with all content requirements. 

● Provide a copy of the CCR to the state and any other agency specified by the state. 

● Make copies of the CCR available to the public upon request

Governor’s or His/Her Designee’s Signature Date
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 43 April 2010

A system that has been granted a mailing waiver and serves fewer than 10,000 but more than 500 persons

must publish the report in at least one local newspaper. The system must also notify its customers that the 

reports will not be mailed and provide information on the availability of the report. This notice could take 

the form of a note in the water bill, an ad in the newspaper, or any other means approved by the state. The 

system must also make the report available to the public upon request. This means that a system must 

send, fax, or otherwise deliver a copy of the report to a member of the public who requests it. 

A system that has been granted a mailing waiver and serves 500 or fewer persons does not have to publish 

the report in a newspaper, nor inform customers the CCR will not be mailed, if they provide notice at 

least once per year that the report is available upon request. This means that if a member of the public 

requests it, the CWS must send or otherwise deliver a copy of the CCR. Methods of notification include 

but are not limited to: mail, door to door delivery, or posting the CCR in an appropriate public location 

such as city hall, libraries, or grocery store bulletin boards. 

Systems that have been granted mailing waivers are still required to follow other CCR Rule requirements 

such as delivery of the report to the state and any other agency the state designates and using “good faith” 

efforts to reach non-bill paying consumers. In addition, a system which has been granted a mailing waiver 

may choose at any time to mail its report to customers. 

3.2.3.5 Item 8: CWS Keeping CCR Copies on File 

[40 CFR 141.155(h)]

CWSs must keep copies of past reports on file for a minimum of 3 years. 

3.3 Communicate CCR Rule Requirements to Affected Systems

States should identify what actions they plan on taking and develop a schedule for carrying out those 

actions in order to implement the CCR Rule in a timely and effective manner. One key step for states 

implementing the CCR Rule should be communicating with those CWSs affected by the Rule and 

preparing them to comply with the relevant provisions. Systems should be notified of new requirements 

early enough to ensure their ability to budget for and schedule their compliance actions. The more this is 

done, the more prepared states and systems will be as compliance dates approach.

3.3.1 Requirements and Target Notification Time Frames 

States often notify systems of upcoming requirements using a form letter that may or may not be tailored 

to some degree. Based on the CCR Rule’s provisions, states may find it useful to draft and send out 

different form letters to different categories of systems. States should consider categorizing systems early 

on in their CCR Rule communication efforts so that each system is provided only with the provisions and 

deadlines that apply to them.

Some system categories that may be effective for drafting form letters regarding the CCR Rule are:

● CWSs.

● Wholesale CWSs.

● Consecutive CWSs. 

● CWSs serving fewer than 10,000 persons.

● CWSs serving 100,000 or more persons. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 44 April 2010

3.3.2 Methods of Communication 

Written Notice

Providing written notice of Rule requirements to CWSs serves two purposes: (1) the recipient system 

obtains a formal notice of upcoming regulatory requirements and a timeline for compliance, and (2) the 

state has a hard-copy document that it may file and use in subsequent compliance tracking efforts. 

Written notification can be in the form of a letter from the state to affected systems. The letter should 

include a summary of Rule requirements and timeframes and direct the reader to an appropriate contact if 

questions arise. States should consider including factsheets or other summary materials with the letter. 

Example 3-5 includes a written notice states could provide to systems (also in Appendix D of this 

guidance). 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 45 April 2010

Example 3-5. Sample CCR Notification Letter from the State to CWSs

Dear Community Water System (CWS) Owner/Operator,

I am writing to ask you to prepare a Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) and deliver it to 

your customers. Consumer awareness/right-to-know was a theme of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water 

Act (SDWA) Amendments. These amendments confirmed the importance of educating the consumer 

and added new responsibilities for water systems in this area. The CCR rule is the first new regulation 

from EPA in several years and the first to address the public right-to-know provisions of the 1996 

SDWA Amendments. 

The CCR rule requires all CWSs to provide drinking water quality reports to their customers

annually by July 1. The information included in the report must be from the previous calendar year. 

These reports or CCRs are intended to be short documents written for a non-technical audience and 

must contain information on:

● Source(s) of local water, and availability of source water assessment data.

● Levels of detected contaminants, corresponding Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), 

Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs), Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels 

(MRDLs), Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goals (MRDLGs), Treatment Techniques 

(TTs), Action Levels (ALs), and typical sources.

● Potential health effects of contaminants detected in violation of an MCL/MRDL/TT, or 

exceeding an Action Level (AL). 

● Opportunities for public participation in drinking water related decisions.

Water systems are free to enhance the reports in any useful way, but must follow the required 

minimum content and format criteria. Attachment 1 provides an overview of the CCR requirements 

and a list of resources to assist you in preparing CCRs. 

The CCR provides an excellent opportunity to showcase the good work your system does to 

provide customers with the highest quality drinking water. We recommend that CWSs begin preparing 

their first CCR well before the July deadline. In order to help systems meet the regulatory deadlines, 

EPA has developed a CCR implementation guidance document, a “how to” manual for CWSs on 

preparing CCRs, and a program called CCRiWriter to assist systems in creating their CCR. These 

materials can be found on EPA’s Web site at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html. 

In the interim, the Name of state’s Drinking Water Program will be conducting CCR training 

workshops and preparing educational/outreach materials for systems. We encourage you to take full 

advantage of the opportunity the CCR provides to tell the public about the quality of their drinking 

water because informed and involved consumers can be strong allies of water systems, large and 

small. 

Sincerely,

State Drinking Water Program 

Attachment
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 46 April 2010

Attachment 1 of Sample CCR Notification Letter from the State to CWSs

CCR Minimum Report Content Requirements

1. Required Information about the Water System 







System contact number for additional information.

For communities with a large proportion of non-English speaking residents (as determined by 

State) information in appropriate language about importance of CCR. 

Dates and times of public meetings.

2. Source(s) of Water





Type of water; commonly-used names; and location of water source(s).

Information on source water assessments, if available: notice of availability, obtaining a copy of 

the assessment, and susceptibility information.

3. Definitions for MCL, MCLG, and If Applicable MRDL, MRDLG, TT, AL, Variances and 

Exemptions

4. Reported Levels of Detected Contaminants 







For comparison must include the corresponding MCL, MCLG, MRDL, MRDLG, TT, or AL. 

Likely source(s) of detected contaminants.

Clear indication of any contaminant detected in violation of EPA standard as well as an 

explanation of the violation including the length, potential health effects, and actions take to 

remedy violation.

5. Information on Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and Other Contaminants Which May 

Indicate a Health Concern

6. Compliance with Other Drinking Water Regulations 





Explanation of violation, any potential health effects, and steps the system has taken to correct 

the violation.

Special notices for Ground Water Rule

8. Variances and Exemptions

 Explanation of variance or exemption; reasons for and dates of issue; and notice of public 

opportunity for public input in the review.

6. Required Educational Information











Explanation of contaminants in drinking water, including bottled water.

Explanation of the vulnerability of immuno-compromised populations (i.e., cancer patients, 

people with HIV/AIDs or other immune system disorders) to drinking water contaminants.

Explanation of contaminants and their presence in drinking water, if detected.

Educational statement for lead.

Educational statements for arsenic and nitrate when these contaminants are detected under 

conditions specified in the rule.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 47 April 2010

Report Delivery and Recordkeeping Requirements for CWSs

1. CCR Delivery to Customers

 Each CWS must mail or otherwise directly deliver one copy of the CCR to each customer, unless

granted a mailing waiver. (Refer to number 7 below)

2. “Good Faith” Effort for Delivery to Non-Bill Paying Consumers

 CWS must make a “good faith” effort to reach those consumers who they serve but who do not 

get water bills, such as renters. “Good faith” efforts mean using a mix of several methods 

recommended by the state.

3. Delivery of CCR and Certification to State

 CWS must mail to the state: (1) a copy of the CCR no later than the date the CWS is required to 

deliver the report to its customers; and (2) within 3 months of the required delivery date, mail 

certification to the state indicating that the CCR was distributed to customers with information 

that is correct and consistent with compliance monitoring data previously submitted.

4. CCR Delivery to Other Agencies 

 CWS must deliver the CCR to any other agency identified by the state no later than the required 

date to send the CCR to its customers.

5. CCR Availability to the Public

 CWS must make CCRs available to the public upon request.

6. CCR Availability on the Internet

 CWS serving 100,000 or more persons must post CCR on a publicly accessible Internet site.

7. Mailing Waiver for CWSs Serving Fewer than 10,000 Persons

 The Governor of a state may waive the mailing requirement for CWSs serving fewer than 10,000 

persons.

8. CWS Keeping CCR Copies on File

 CWS must keep copies of their CCR on file for at least 3 years. 

Additional Resources/Contact Information:

State Drinking Water Program phone number/email address

EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791)

EPA Web site www.epa.gov/safewater

American Water Works Association/local affiliate phone number/Web site/email address
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 48 April 2010

Section 2 of this guidance includes additional publications that are intended to be distributed to water 

systems through mailings, training sessions, and other educational forums. These publications (also 

available at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/compliancehelp.html) provide overviews of the CCR Rule to 

help systems understand the provisions of the Rule and determine which provisions apply. They also 

describe the benefits of the Rule. Although valuable, these resources do not substitute for official Rule 

language. States should consider including in the letter the Web site address where their regulatory 

language can be accessed. 

Slide Presentation

For some CWSs, written communication alone will not result in full comprehension of the CCR Rule 

requirements. Slide presentations can be used by state staff and other training providers to present the 

background of the Rule, its benefits, and its requirements. 

The EPA’s Drinking Water Academy developed a training session on the CCR Rule (available in 

Microsoft PowerPoint format). Copies of the presentation may be used to train other state personnel, 

technical assistance providers, water system personnel, and the public. EPA’s Drinking Water Academy 

slides are available electronically on the EPA Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/dwa/electronic/ccrmodule.html. 

Guidance Documents 

Guidance documents developed for the CCR Rule are useful for explaining Rule requirements and 

specific aspects of Rule implementation to system operators, including monitoring and compliance 

determination. The guidance documents can be used as stand-alone references or as supporting materials 

in CCR Rule training events. Refer to Section 2 for more information on these references. 

3.4 Data Management Systems

Although state data management systems vary to suit state-specific requirements and needs, EPA 

recommends that all states ensure that their data management systems are capable of efficiently tracking 

affected CWSs, compliance status, and other information needed to implement the CCR Rule. States 

using SDWIS/State should see the module incorporated in version 2.2. 

3.5 Recordkeeping Requirements for States

Under 40 CFR 142.16(f)(3), each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must maintain a copy 

of the report for each water system in the state for a period of 1 year. The state must also keep the 

corresponding certifications CWSs are required to send to the state under 40 CFR 141.155(c) for a period 

of 5 years. The certifications indicate that a copy of the CCR was distributed or made available (as 

appropriate) to customers by the due date; and that the report contained information correct and consistent 

with compliance monitoring data previously submitted to the state. Where state rules allow, systems may 

be asked to provide additional information on how the CCR was distributed.
Section 4 

State Primacy Revision 

Application 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 51 April 2010

40 CFR Part 142 sets out requirements for states to obtain and/or retain primary enforcement 

responsibility (primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program as authorized by 

Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The 1996 SDWA Amendments updated the 

process for states to obtain and/or retain primacy. On April 28, 1998, EPA promulgated the Primacy Rule 

to reflect these statutory changes (63 FR 23361).

4.1 State Primacy Program Revision 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 142.12, complete and final requests for approval of program revisions to adopt new 

or revised EPA regulations must be submitted to the EPA Administrator no later than 2 years after 

promulgation of new or revised federal regulations. Until EPA approves those applications, EPA Regions 

have responsibility for directly implementing the new or revised regulations although the state and EPA 

can agree to implement a Rule together during this period. 

States that have primacy for all existing National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) are 

considered to have interim primacy for any new or revised regulation. If a state is eligible for interim 

primacy, it will have full implementation and enforcement authority. Interim primacy for the CCR Rule 

would begin on the date the state submits its final and complete primacy revision application or the 

effective date of the new state regulation (whichever is later), and ends when EPA makes a final 

determination (refer to Table 4-1). 

A state may be granted an extension of up to 2 years to submit its application package. During any 

extension period, an extension agreement outlining the state’s and EPA’s responsibilities is required.

Table 4-1. State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for the CCR Rule 

EPA/State Action Time Frame

CCR promulgated August 19, 1998

Rule compliance date September 18, 1998

State and Region establish a process and agree upon a schedule for 

application review and approval (optional)

October 19, 1998

State, at its option, submits draft program revision package to Region

including: Preliminary Approval Request, Draft State Regulations 

and/or Statutes, Regulation Crosswalk

February 19, 1999

Regional (and Headquarters if necessary) review of draft Completed within 90 days of 

state submittal of draft 

(suggested)

State submits final program revision package to Region including:

● Adopted State Regulations

● Regulation Crosswalk

● 40 CFR 142.10 Primacy Update Checklist

● 40 CFR 142.14 and 40 CFR 142.15 Reporting and 

Recordkeeping

● 40 CFR 142.16 Special Primacy Requirements

● Attorney General’s Enforceability Certification

1 August 21, 2000

States with approved extensions submit complete and final program 

revision package

August 21, 20022
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 52 April 2010

EPA/State Action Time Frame

EPA final review and determination:

● Regional review [program and Office of Regional Counsel 

(ORC)]

● Headquarters concurrence and waivers [Office of Ground 

Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) and Office of 

Enforcement and Compliance Assistance (OECA)]

● Public notice 

● Opportunity for hearing

● EPA’s determination

Completed within 90 days of 

state submittal of final program 

revision package

45 days Region

45 days Headquarters(HQ)3

1. EPA suggests submitting an application by May 21, 2000, to ensure timely approval. EPA regulations allow states until 

August 21, 2000, for this submittal. An extension of up to 2 years may be requested by the state. 

2. EPA suggests submitting an application by May 21, 2002, for states with approved extensions to ensure timely approval. 

3. At least one state per Region. 

4.1.1 The Revision Process 

EPA recommends a two-step process for approval of state program revisions. The steps consist of 

submission of a draft request (optional) and submission of a complete and final request for program 

approval. Figure 4-1 diagrams these processes and their timing.

Draft Request—The state may submit a draft request for EPA review and tentative determination. The 

request should contain drafts of all required primacy application materials (with the exception of a draft 

Attorney General’s Statement). A draft request should be submitted as soon as practicable; EPA 

recommends submitting it within 6 months of Rule promulgation. EPA will make a tentative 

determination as to whether the state program meets the applicable requirements. EPA intends to make a 

tentative determination within 90 days.

Complete and Final Request—This submission must be in accordance with 40 CFR 142.12(c)(1) and 40 

CFR 142.12(c)(2) and include the Attorney General’s statement. The state should also include its 

response to any comments or program deficiencies identified in the tentative determination (if applicable). 

Submission of only a final request may make it more difficult for states to address any necessary changes 

within the allowable time for state Rule adoption.

EPA recommends that states submit their complete and final revision package within 21 months of Rule 

promulgation (or by May 21, 2000, for the CCR Rule). This will ensure that states will have interim 

primacy as soon as possible and will prevent backlogs of revision applications to adopt future federal 

requirements. 

The state and Region should agree to a plan and timetable for submitting the state primacy revision 

application as soon as possible after Rule promulgation—ideally within 2 months of promulgation.

4.1.2 The Final Review Process 

Once a state application is complete and final, EPA has a regulatory (and statutory) deadline of 90 days to 

review, and approve or disapprove the revised program. Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water 

(OGWDW) will conduct a detailed concurrent review of the first state package from each Region. The 

Regional office should submit its comments with the state’s package within 45 days for review by 

Headquarters (HQ). When the Region has identified all significant issues, OGWDW waives concurrence 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 53 April 2010

on all other state programs in that Region, although EPA HQ retains the option to review additional state 

programs as appropriate. The Office of General Counsel (OGC) has delegated its review and approval to 

the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC). 

In order to meet the 90-day deadline for packages undergoing review by HQ, the review period is equally 

split by giving the Regions and HQ 45 days each to conduct their respective reviews. For the first package

in each Region, Regions should forward copies of the primacy revision applications and their evaluations 

to the Drinking Water Protection Division Director in OGWDW no later than 45 days after state 

submittal. The Drinking Water Protection Division Director takes the lead on the HQ review process. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 54 April 2010

Figure 4-1. Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of Program Revisions 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 55 April 2010

4.2 State Primacy Program Revision Extensions 

4.2.1 The Extension Process 

Under 40 CFR 142.12(b), a state may request that the 2 year deadline for submitting the complete and 

final program revision package be extended for up to 2 additional years. The extension request must be 

submitted to EPA within 2 years of the date that EPA published the regulation. The Regional 

Administrator has been delegated authority to approve extension applications. Concurrence by HQ on 

extensions is not required.

Therefore, the state must either adopt regulations pertaining to the CCR Rule and submit a complete and 

final primacy revision application by August 21, 2000, or request an extension of up to 2 years by that 

date.

4.2.2 Extension Request Criteria 

For an extension to be granted under 40 CFR 142.12(b), the state must demonstrate that it is requesting 

the extension because it cannot meet the original deadline for reasons beyond its control and despite a 

good faith effort to do so. A critical part of the extension application is the state’s proposed schedule for 

submission of its complete and final request for approval of a revised primacy program. The application 

must also demonstrate at least one of the following:

(i) That the state currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised 

requirements;

(ii) That the state currently lacks the program capability adequate to implement the new or revised 

requirements; or,

(iii) That the state is requesting the extension to group two or more program revisions in a single 

legislative or regulatory action.

In addition, the state must be implementing the EPA requirements to be adopted in its program revision 

within the scope of its current authority and capabilities.

4.2.3 Conditions of the Extension 

Until the State Primacy Revision Application has been submitted, the state and EPA Regional office will 

share responsibility for implementing the primary program elements as indicated in the extension 

agreement. The state and the EPA Regional office should discuss these elements and address terms of 

responsibility in the agreement. PWSs should be notified of a contact person at the EPA Region if they 

want to ask questions or obtain information about the CCR Rule before the state has primacy.

These conditions will be determined during the extension approval process and are decided on a case-bycase basis. The conditions must be included in an extension agreement between the state and the EPA 

Regional office.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 56 April 2010

Conditions of an extension agreement may include:

● Informing PWSs of the new EPA (and upcoming state) requirements and the fact that the Region

will be overseeing implementation of the requirements until they approve the state program 

revisions or until the state submits a complete and final revision package if the state qualifies for 

interim primacy.

● Collecting, storing, and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance and 

operation data required by the EPA regulations.

● Assisting the Region in the development of the technical aspects of enforcement actions and

conducting informal follow-up on violations (e.g., telephone calls, letters).

● Providing technical assistance to PWSs.

● For states whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program capability 

adequate to implement the new requirements, taking steps agreed to by the Region and the state 

to remedy the deficiency during the extension period.

● Providing the Region with all the information required under 40 CFR 142.15 for state reporting.

Example 4-1 provides a checklist the Region can use to review state extensions or to create an extension 

agreement.

Until states have primacy, EPA is the primary enforcement authority; however, states historically have 

played a role in implementation for various reasons—most important because states have local 

knowledge, expertise, and established relationships with their systems. 

The state and EPA should be viewed as partners in this effort, working towards two very specific goals. 

The first goal is to achieve a high level of compliance with the regulation. The second goal is to facilitate 

successful implementation of the regulation during the transition period between when EPA has primacy 

and when the state has primacy, including interim primacy, for the Rule. In order to accomplish these 

goals and to ensure proper health protection, education, training, and technical assistance will need to be 

provided to water suppliers explaining their responsibilities under the CCR Rule. Water suppliers are also 

encouraged to refer to the CCR Rule guidance materials, reference guide, and factsheets listed in Section

2.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 57 April 2010

Example 4-1. Example Extension Request Checklist 

{Date}

{Regional Administrator}

Regional Administrator

U.S. EPA Region {Region}

{Street Address}

{City, State, Zip}

RE: Request/approval for an Extension Agreement

Dear {Regional Administrator}: 

The state of {state} is requesting an extension to the date that final primacy revisions are due to EPA for the 

Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule until {insert date - no later than August 21, 2002}, as allowed by 40 

CFR 142.12, and would appreciate your approval. Staff of the {State Department/Agency} have conferred with 

your staff and have agreed to the requirements listed below for this extension. This extension is being requested 

because the state of {state}: 







Is planning to group two or more program revisions into a single legislative or regulatory action. 

Currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised requirements. 

Currently lacks adequate program capability to implement the new or revised requirements. 

{State Department/Agency} will be working with EPA to implement the CCR Rule within the scope of its 

current authority and capability, as outlined in the six areas identified in 40 CFR 142.12(b)(3)(i-vi):

i) Informing public water systems (PWSs) of the new EPA (and upcoming state) requirements and the fact 

that EPA will be overseeing implementation of the requirements until EPA approves the state revision.

State EPA

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Provide copies of regulation and guidance to other state agencies, PWSs, technical assistance 

providers, associations, or other interested parties.

Educate and coordinate with state staff, PWSs, the public, and other water associations about the 

requirements of this regulation.

Notify affected systems of their requirements under the CCR Rule. 

Other:

ii) Collecting, storing, and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance and operation 

data required by the EPA regulations.

State EPA

____ ____ Devise a tracking system for PWS reporting pursuant to the CCR Rule. 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Keep PWSs informed of reporting requirements during development and implementation.

Report CCR Rule violation and enforcement information to SDWIS as required.

Other:

iii) Assisting EPA in the development of the technical aspects of the enforcement actions and conducting 

informal follow-up on violations (telephones calls, letters, etc.).

State EPA

____ ____ Issue notices of violation (NOVs) for treatment technique and monitoring/ reporting violations of 

the CCR Rule. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 58 April 2010

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Provide immediate technical assistance to PWSs with treatment technique, MCL and/or 

monitoring/reporting violations to try to bring them into compliance.

Refer all violations to EPA for enforcement if they have not been resolved within 60 days of the 

incident that triggered the violation. Provide information as requested to conduct and complete any 

enforcement action referred to EPA.

Other:

iv) Providing technical assistance to PWSs.

State EPA

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Conduct training within the state for PWSs on CCR Rule requirements.

Provide technical assistance through written and/or verbal correspondence with PWSs.

Provide on-site technical assistance to PWSs as requested and needed to ensure compliance with 

this regulation.

Coordinate with other technical assistance providers and organizations to provide accurate 

information and aid in a timely manner.

Other:

v) Providing EPA with all information prescribed by the State Reporting Requirements in 40 CFR 142.15.

State EPA

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Report any violations incurred by PWSs for this regulation each quarter.

Report any enforcement actions taken against PWSs for this regulation each quarter.

Report any variances or exemptions granted for PWSs for this regulation each quarter.

Other:

vi) For states whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program capability to implement the 

new or revised requirements, taking the following steps to remedy the capability deficiency.

State EPA

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

____ ____ 

Acquire additional resources to implement these regulations (list of specific steps being taken 

attached as {List A

Provide quarterly updates describing the status of acquiring additional resources.

}).

Other:

I affirm that the {State Department/Agency} will implement provisions of the CCR Rule as outlined above.

______________________________________________________________________________ 

{Agency Director or Secretary} Date

______________________________________________________________________________ 

{Name of State Agency}

I have consulted with my staff and approve your extension for the aforementioned regulation. I affirm that EPA 

Region {Region} will implement provisions of the CCR Rule as outlined above.

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Regional Administrator Date

EPA Region 

This Extension Agreement will take effect upon the date of the last signature.

{Region}
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 59 April 2010

4.3 State Primacy Package 

The Primacy Revision Application package should consist of the following sections:













State Primacy Revision Checklist

Text of the state’s Regulations 

Primacy Revision Crosswalk

State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist

Special Primacy Requirements 

Attorney General’s Statement of Enforceability

4.3.1 The State Primacy Revision Checklist [40 CFR 142.12(c)(1)] 

This section is a checklist of general primacy requirements, as shown in Table 4-2. In completing this 

checklist, the state must identify the program elements that it has revised in response to new federal 

requirements. If an element has been revised, the state should indicate a “Yes” answer in the 

“Revision to State Program” column and should submit appropriate documentation. For elements 

that did not require revision, the state need only list the citation and date of state adoption in the 

“Revision to State Program” column. During the application review process, EPA will insert findings and 

comments in the final column. 

The 1996 SDWA Amendments include new provisions for PWS definition and administrative penalty 

authority. States must adopt provisions at least as stringent as these new provisions, now codified at 40 

CFR 142.2 and 40 CFR 142.10. Failure to revise these elements can affect primacy for the CCR Rule. 

States must have primacy or interim primacy for all existing regulations before they can receive primacy 

for this regulation. States may bundle the primacy revision packages for multiple rules. If states choose to 

bundle requirements, the Attorney General’s Statement should reference all of the rules included. 

Table 4-2. State Primacy Revision Checklist 

Required Program Elements Revision to 

State Program

EPA 

Findings/Comments

40 CFR 142.10 Primary Enforcement

– Definition of Public Water System*

40 CFR 142.10(a) Regulations No Less Stringent

40 CFR 142.10(b)(1) Maintain Inventory

40 CFR 142.10(b)(2) Sanitary Survey Program

40 CFR 142.10(b)(3) Laboratory Certification Program 

40 CFR 142.10(b)(4) Laboratory Capability

40 CFR 142.10(b)(5) Plan Review Program

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(i) Authority to apply regulations

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(ii) Authority to sue in courts of competent 

jurisdiction

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(iii) Right of Entry
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 60 April 2010

Required Program Elements Revision to 

State Program

EPA 

Findings/Comments

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(iv) Authority to require records

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(v) Authority to require public notification 

40 CFR 142.10(b)(6)(vi) Authority to assess civil and criminal 

penalties

40 CFR 

142.10(b)(6)(vii)

Authority to require CWSs to provide 

CCRs

40 CFR 142.10(c) Maintenance of Records

40 CFR 142.10(d) Variance/Exemption Conditions (if 

applicable)**

40 CFR 142.10(e) Emergency Plans

40 CFR 142.10(f) Administrative Penalty Authority*

40 CFR 142.10(g) Electronic Reporting Regulations***

* New requirement from the 1996 Amendments. Regulations published in the April 28, 1998 Federal Register. 

** New regulations published in the August 14, 1998 Federal Register. 

*** New regulations published in the October 13, 2005 Federal Register. 

4.3.2 Text of the State’s Regulation 

Each primacy application package should include the appropriate text of the state’s regulations. 

4.3.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk 

The Primacy Revision Crosswalk, in Appendix A of this document, should be completed by states in 

order to identify state statutory or regulatory provisions that correspond to each federal requirement. If the 

state’s provisions differ from federal requirements, the state should explain how its requirements are “no 

less stringent.” 

 4.3.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist [40 CFR 142.14 and 40 CFR 

142.15] 

The CCR makes no changes to the state recordkeeping requirements and state reporting requirements in 

40 CFR 142.14 or 40 CFR 142.15. The CCR did add reporting and recordkeeping requires to 40 CFR 

142.16(f). These requirements are discussed in Section 4.4. 

4.3.5 Special Primacy Requirements [40 CFR 142.16] 

Special primacy conditions pertain to specific regulations where implementation of the Rule involves 

activities beyond general primacy provisions. States must include these Rule-distinct provisions in an 

application for approval or revision of their program. The Special Primacy Requirements section of the 

crosswalk is where the state has the opportunity to describe how it will satisfy these provisions. Section 

4.4 provides guidance on how states may choose to meet the Special Primacy Requirements of the CCR 

Rule. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 61 April 2010

4.3.6 Attorney General’s Statement of Enforceability [40 CFR 142.12(c)(2)] 

The complete and final primacy revision application must include an Attorney General’s Statement 

certifying that the state regulations were duly adopted and are enforceable (unless EPA has waived this 

requirement by letter to the state). The Attorney General’s Statement should also certify that the state 

does not have any audit privilege or immunity laws or, if it has such laws, that these laws do not prevent 

the state from meeting the requirements of the SDWA. If a state has submitted this certification with a 

previous revision package, then the state should indicate the date of submittal and the Attorney General 

need only certify that the status of the audit laws has not changed since the prior submittal. An example of 

an Attorney General’s Statement is presented in Example 4-2.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 62 April 2010

Example 4-2. Example of Attorney General’s Statement 

Model Language

I hereby certify, pursuant to my authority as (1) and in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act as 

amended, and (2), that in my opinion the laws of the [State/Commonwealth of (3)] [or tribal ordinances of 

(4)] to carry out the program set forth in the “Program Description” submitted by the (5) have been duly 

adopted and are enforceable. The specific authorities provided are contained in statutes or regulations 

that are lawfully adopted at the time this Statement is approved and signed and will be fully effective by 

the time the program is approved. 

I. For States with No Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws 

Furthermore, I certify that [State/Commonwealth of (3)] has not enacted any environmental audit 

privilege and/or immunity laws.

II. For States with Audit Laws that do Not Apply to the State Agency Administering the Safe 

Drinking Water Act 

Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the 

[State/Commonwealth of (3)] does not affect the ability of (3) to meet enforcement and information 

gathering requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act because the [audit privilege and/or immunity 

law] does not apply to the program set forth in the “Program Description.” The Safe Drinking Water Act 

program set forth in the “Program Description” is administered by (5); the [audit privilege and/or immunity 

law] does not affect programs implemented by (5), thus the program set forth in the “Program 

Description” is unaffected by the provisions of [State/Commonwealth of (3)] [audit privilege and/or 

immunity law].

III. For States with Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws that Worked with EPA to Satisfy 

Requirements for Federally Authorized, Delegated, or Approved Environmental Programs

Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the 

[State/Commonwealth of (3)] does not affect the ability of (3) to meet enforcement and information 

gathering requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act because [State/Commonwealth of (3)] has 

enacted statutory revisions and/or issued a clarifying Attorney General’s Statement to satisfy 

requirements for federally authorized, delegated, or approved environmental programs.

Seal of Office

 _______________________________________

 Signature

 _______________________________________

 Name and Title

 _______________________________________

 Date

(1) State Attorney General or attorney for the state if it has independent legal counsel.

(2) 40 CFR 142.11(a)(6)(i) for initial primacy applications or 40 CFR 142.12(c)(1)(iii) for primacy 

program revision applications.

(3) Name of state or commonwealth.

(4) Name of tribe.

(5) Name of state. 

4.3.6.1 Guidance for States on Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws 

In order for EPA to properly evaluate the state’s request for approval, the State Attorney General or 

independent legal counsel should certify that the state’s environmental audit immunity and/or privilege 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 63 April 2010

and immunity law does not affect its ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements 

under SDWA. This certification should be reasonably consistent with the wording of the state audit laws 

and should demonstrate how state program approval criteria are satisfied.

EPA will apply the criteria outlined in its “Statement of Principles” memo issued on February 14, 1997, 

(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/state/policy/policies.htm) to determine whether states with audit laws 

have retained adequate enforcement authority for any authorized federal programs. The principles 

articulated in the guidance are based on the requirements of federal law, specifically the enforcement and 

compliance and state program approval provisions of environmental statutes and their corresponding 

regulations. The Principles provide that if provisions of state law are ambiguous, it will be important to 

obtain opinions from the State Attorney General, or independent legal counsel, interpreting the law as 

meeting specific federal requirements. If the law cannot be so interpreted, changes to state laws may be 

necessary to obtain federal program approval. Before submitting a package for approval, states with audit 

privilege and/or immunity laws should initiate communications with appropriate EPA Regional offices to 

identify and discuss the issues raised by the state’s audit privilege and/or immunity law.

The guidance for states on Audit Law Privilege and/or Immunity Laws is currently under review. If 

amended, EPA will issue an addendum to this document with the revised guidance. 

4.4 Guidance for the Special Primacy Requirements of the CCR

In addition to adopting basic primacy requirements specified in 40 CFR 142, states are required to adopt 

primacy provisions pertaining to specific regulations where implementation of the Rule involves activities 

beyond general primacy provisions. The purpose of these provisions is to allow state flexibility in 

implementing a regulation that: (1) applies to specific system configurations within the particular state; 

and, (2) can be integrated with a state’s existing PWSS Program. States must include these Rule-distinct 

provisions in an application for approval or revision of their programs. 

4.4.1 Special Primacy Requirement for Adopting 40 CFR 141, Subpart O 

40 CFR 142.16(f)(1): Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must adopt the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 141, subpart O no later than August 21, 2000. States must 

submit revised programs to EPA for approval using the procedures in 40 CFR 142.12(b) 

through (d).

This Special Primacy Requirement addresses that when submitting a revised primacy program application 

the state’s must follow the revised primacy application procedures outline in 40 CFR 142.12(b) through 

40 CFR 142.12(d). These procedures address the timeframe in which packages must be submitted, the 

content of the application, and EPA’s review and approval procedures. This process is described in 

Section 4.1 through 4.3 of this guidance. 

4.4.2 Special Primacy Requirement for Providing Reports to the Public upon

Request

40 CFR 142.16(f)(2): Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must make

reports submitted to the states in compliance with 40 CFR 141.155(b) available to the public 

upon request.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 64 April 2010

This Special Primacy Requirement addresses that all states that receive primacy authority for the CCR 

must make copies of the CCRs submitted to the state by the systems available to the public upon request. 

4.4.3 Special Primacy Requirement for Recordkeeping

40 CFR 142.16(f)(3): Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must maintain 

a copy of the reports for a period of one year and the certifications obtained pursuant to 40 

CFR 141.155(b) for a period of 5 years.

This Special Primacy Requirement addresses the recordkeeping requirements for states. States are 

required to keep a copy of the CCR submit by the systems for one year and a copy of the certification 

submitted for 5 years. 

4.4.4 Special Primacy Requirement for Reporting CCR Violations 

40 CFR 142.16(f)(4): Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must report

violations of this subpart in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 142.15(a)(1).

This Special Primacy Requirement addresses the reporting requirement for states. States are required to 

submit to EPA information on any new CCR violations by systems. Information on system violations can 

be found in Section 5 of this guidance. 

4.5 Guidance for State Flexibility 

The CCR Rule sets baseline standards to ensure that all consumers receive reports that are nationally 

consistent and which include the same type and amount of basic information. Where the CCR Rule does 

not specify mandatory language or exact provisions, primacy states have discretion. Changes from the 

federal requirements in the following areas are allowed but must be spelled out in a state’s primacy 

revision application.

Governor’s Mailing Waiver: 

Under 40 CFR 141.155(g), the Governor of a state or their designee can waive the mailing requirement 

for CWSs serving fewer than 10,000 persons. The Rule states that a mailing waiver can be granted but 

states, in accordance with their laws, have the flexibility to establish criteria for obtaining and renewing a 

mailing waiver. For example, a state can choose whether the waiver should be system-specific or apply to 

all systems in a given category. 

Additional Public Notice:

Under 40 CFR 141.155(d), systems must deliver the report to any other agency or clearinghouse 

identified by the state. Examples of other agencies a state may identify include state and local public 

health or environment departments, public utility commissions, and consumer advocates.

Alternative Form and Content:

Under 40 CFR 141.151(e), primacy states may adopt by Rule, after notice and opportunity for public 

comment, alternative requirements for the form and content of reports. Only states that have submitted a 

complete and final primacy revision application can change form and content. Alternative requirements 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 65 April 2010

must provide for the same type and amount of information as specified in the federal Rule as well as 

provide an equivalent level of public information and education. 

MCL Reporting Format 

EPA requires that MCLs be reported as a number greater than or equal to one because it believes that the 

use of whole numbers makes it easier for consumers to compare the level of a contaminant in the system’s 

water with the MCL. Focus group research conducted by EPA and the American Water Works 

Association (AWWA) has shown that consumers understand whole numbers much more easily than 

decimals. Based on the focus group research, EPA does not believe that reporting the MCL in another 

format, such as compliance values, provides an equivalent level of public information and education as 

specified under 40 CFR 141.151(e) of the Rule. 

Although EPA strongly believes the required MCL reporting format presents the information most clearly 

and understandably, EPA believes there may be limited conditions under which states can adopt 

alternative format requirements for the MCL. Cynthia Dougherty, Director of the Office of Ground Water 

and Drinking Water, clarified in a memorandum dated June 29, 1999, what those limited conditions are.

Appendix F of this guidance contains a copy of the June 29, 1999, memorandum. 

The memorandum indicates EPA would consider approval of a primacy revision application that allowed 

MCL reporting in a format other than numbers greater than or equal to one upon a good faith state effort 

showing the state’s public favors the proposed reporting format. EPA believes there should be a high bar 

for public involvement that should include documented focus group research targeting members of 

communities served. Representatives from water systems and other drinking water professionals can be 

involved in the research, but they should not be considered the target audience. If the process shows that 

consumers find an alternative MCL format easier to understand, EPA would consider approving a state

primacy revision application including that format. States should include their EPA Region and a wide 

range of stakeholders in developing any focus group methodology. If a state intends to change the MCL 

presentation format, EPA recommends that the state submit a draft primacy revision application 

documenting the methodology and the focus group research and explaining the proposed changes.

Report Content 

A summary of areas where report content may be changed is given below in Table 4-3. 

Table 4-3. Areas of State Flexibility for Content Requirements

Citation Content Requirements Primacy States Have the Flexibility to...

40 CFR 141.153(b) Source Water Determine the level of detail required in the CCR to 

Assessment Information summarize the results of a completed source water 

assessment, in accordance with state priorities and 

protection goals.

40 CFR 141.153(c) Definitions: MCL, Alter the wording of the definitions.

MCLG, TT, AL, and 

Variances and Note: States must provide standard language that 

Exemptions meets the statutory intent of being “brief and plainly 

worded.”
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 66 April 2010

Citation Content Requirements Primacy States Have the Flexibility to...

40 CFR 141.153(d)(4)(ix) Likely Source(s) of 

Detected Contaminants

(Appendix A to Subpart 

O) 

Alter the wording of the language provided for 

typical sources in Appendix A to Subpart O of the 

Rule. 

Note: States must require systems to include 

generic information on specific sources where it is 

available.

40 CFR 141.153(d)(6)

40 CFR 141.153(f)(3)-

(f)(4)

Potential Adverse 

Health Effects for 

Regulated 

Contaminants

(Appendix A to Subpart 

O) 

Incorporate additional language before or after the 

health effects language in Appendix A to Subpart O 

of the Rule. The health effects language itself 

cannot be altered. 

Note: State regulations must require the use of a 

standard set of health effects language when a 

contaminant exceeds its MCL, TT, or AL. The 

language must, at a minimum, list the same health 

effects as in Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1) Explanation of 

Contaminants 

Reasonably Expected 

to be Found in Drinking 

Water, including Bottled 

Water

Alter the wording of the explanation.

Note: States must require the inclusion of an 

explanation of contaminants that may be in drinking 

water, including bottled water, and provide 

reference to EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline 

(800-426-4791).

40 CFR 141.154

40 CFR 141.154(a)

40 CFR 141.154(b) to (d)

Required Additional 

Health Information

Vulnerable Populations

Warning 

Educational Statements 

for Arsenic, Nitrate, and

Lead

Alter the wording for the educational statements for 

arsenic, nitrate, and lead. CWSs may further modify 

the educational statements after consultation with 

the state. Incorporate additional language before or 

after the vulnerable populations warning. The 

warning itself cannot be altered. 

Note: States must require the inclusion of a warning 

to vulnerable populations about the effects of 

Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants 

and information on how populations can protect 

themselves by referring to EPA/CDC guidelines.
Section 5 

Violation Determination and 

Safe Drinking Water 

Information System (SDWIS) 

Reporting 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 69 April 2010

5.1 Violation Determination

This section of the implementation guidance summarizes violations that can be incurred by water systems 

under the CCR Rule. There are two types of violations that states must report to the federal data system.

One violation is categorized as major and the other as minor. 

Major Violation 

● CCR Report Violation (failure to produce and/or deliver report). 

Minor Violation

● CCR Adequacy/Availability/Content Violation.

We do not expect significant numbers of the minor Adequacy/Availability/Content Violation to be 

reported to SDWIS for the first CCRs. However, after the first 2 reports, EPA expects states to track and 

report on all violations. 

A brief summary of the definitions for each violation type and return to compliance under the CCR Rule 

are given below. More detailed information on violation and compliance achieved definitions, and 

reporting requirements for each violation type can be found on the EPA Web site. 

CCR Report Violation: (Major)

● A CCR Report Violation occurs when the CWS fails to produce and deliver a copy of the CCR to 

the public and to the state by the due date specified in the Rule. The CWS must send a copy of 

the first report to the state by October 19, 1999. The state must receive subsequent reports by July 

1, each year thereafter. 

● In circumstances where states find that a system issued a report that is significantly deficient in 

content, contains falsified information, or that a system fails to adequately deliver the report, 

states should view these inadequacies as significant and report a major CCR Report Violation.

Return to Compliance: Based on direction from the state, the CWS must produce a CCR or revise 

the CCR that addresses all deficiencies identified by the state, delivered it and the certification to the 

state, and distributed the report in accordance with the regulation. 

CCR Adequacy/Availability/Content Violation: (Minor)

● A CCR Adequacy/Availability/Content Violation occurs when the CWS fails to include the 

required language, content, and/or meet the requirements to make reports available to the public 

as specified in the Rule. 

● Failure to provide certification to the state within 3 months of the CCR due date that the report 

contained correct information and was distributed in accordance with the Rule is a minor 

Adequacy/Availability/Content Violation.

● This type of violation means that the CCR has met some but not all of the requirements for either 

report content or distribution.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 70 April 2010

Return to Compliance: Based on direction from the state, the system may be required to revise or

redeliver its report. 

5.2 SDWIS Reporting Summary

There are two violation names and codes associated with the CCR Rules: 

CCR Violation SDWIS Code

CCR Report Violation: (Major) 71

CCR Adequacy/Availability/Content 

Violation: (Minor) 72

Detailed information on SDWIS reporting requirements for each violation type can be found on the EPA 

Web site. 

5.3 Optional CCR Compliance Checklist

Table 5-1, “CCR Compliance Checklist,” is an optional tool that may help CWSs and regulators 

determine whether they have satisfied the content and delivery requirements of the Rule. If a CWS can 

answer “Yes” to each of these items, then it is most likely that the system’s CCR meets content 

requirements and the requirements for CCR distribution.

Table 5-1. Optional CCR Compliance Checklist

Task Completed

Yes No

Report Delivery and Recordkeeping

Did State Receive:

● A copy of the CCR by the delivery date of October 19, 1999 for the first CCR 

and subsequent reports by July 1 annually thereafter?

● Certification by January 19, 2000 for the first CCR and subsequent 

certifications by October 1 annually thereafter?

Did the Certification Indicate and the CWS Ensure That: 

● The CCR was distributed to customers (i.e., CWS mailed or otherwise 

directly delivered reports)?

● The CCR contained information correct and consistent with compliance 

monitoring data previously submitted to state?
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 71 April 2010

Task Completed

Yes No

Did the CWS Make the CCR Available by:

● Using a “good faith” efforts to reach non-bill paying consumers?

● Delivering the CCR to other agencies as prescribed by the state? 

● Making the CCR available to the public upon request?

● Post the CCR on the Internet if serving 100,000 or more persons?

For CWSs with Mailing Waivers That Serve 500 or Fewer Persons, Did They:

● Publish CCR in at least one local newspaper?

● Notify customers that CCR will not be mailed?

● Make CCR available to the public upon request?

For CWSs with Mailing Waivers That Serve Fewer than 500 Persons, Did They:

● Provide notice to customers at least once during the year that the CCR is 

available to the public upon request?

Note: Systems with mailing waivers must complete the tasks identified within this block in addition to the 

other Rule requirements for report delivery, recordkeeping and content.

Content of CCR

Did the CCR Contain:

(1) Required Water System Information?

● Telephone number of a contact person.

● Information for non-English speaking populations, if appropriate.

● Information on public participation opportunities.

(2) Information on Source(s) of Water?

● Type, common name, and location of water source(s).

● Source water assessment information, if available. 

– Notice of availability of completed assessment. 

– Information on how customers can obtain assessment.

– A brief summary of the system’s susceptibility to potential sources of 

contamination.

(3) Definitions For:

● MCL and MCLG? (required)

● TT, AL, MRDL, MRDLG, Variances and Exemptions? (only if applicable)
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 72 April 2010

Task Completed

Yes No

(4)

●

●

●

●

●

Reported Levels of Detected Contaminants?

Highest contaminant level used to determine compliance

MCL and MCLG or equivalent

Range of levels found

Description of likely source(s)

Clear indication of any contaminant detected in violation of EPA standard as 

well as an explanation of the violation including the length, potential health 

effects, and actions take to remedy violation.

(5) Information on Monitoring for Cryptosporidium, Radon, and Other 

Contaminants? 

(6)

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Compliance with Other Drinking Water Regulations?

Monitoring and reporting of compliance data.

Recordkeeping of compliance data.

Filtration and disinfection prescribed by Subpart H.

Lead and copper control requirements.

Treatment techniques for acrylamide and epichlorohydrin prescribed by 

Subpart K.

Special monitoring requirements for inorganic and organic contaminants and 

sodium.

Violation of the terms of a variance, an exemption, or a state or Federal 

administrative or judicial order.

For these violations, the report must:

– Contain an explanation of violations, potential health effects, and steps 

the CWS has taken to correct the violations.

– Include language from Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule for violations 

of the filtration and disinfection requirements, the lead and copper control 

requirements and violations of the acrylamide and epichlorohydrin 

requirements.

(7) Required Information If CWS Is Operating under a Variance or Exemption?

(8) 

 

●

Required Educational Information? 

Explanation of the vulnerability of some populations to contaminants in 

drinking water:

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking 

water than the general population. Immuno-compromised persons 

such as persons with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, persons 

who have undergone organ transplants, people with HIV/AIDS or 

other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants can be 

particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice 

about drinking water from their health care providers. EPA/Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines on appropriate 

means to lessen the risk of infection by Cryptosporidium and other 

microbial contaminants are available from the Safe Drinking Water 

Hotline (800-426-4791).
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 73 April 2010

Task Completed

Yes No

● Explanation of contaminants which may be reasonably expected to be found 

in drinking water, including bottled water:

Drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected 

to contain at least small amounts of some contaminants. The 

presence of contaminants does not necessarily indicate that water 

poses a health risk. More information about contaminants and 

potential health effects can be obtained by calling the EPA’s Safe 

Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791).

● Information on: sources of drinking water, contaminants that may be present 

in source water, and EPA/FDA regulations. 

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(i) - Sources of Drinking Water:

The sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) 

include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. 

As water travels over the surface of the land or through the ground, it 

dissolves naturally-occurring minerals and, in some cases, 

radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from the 

presence of animals or from human activity.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(ii) - Contaminants That May Be Present in 

Source Water:

Microbial Contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, which may 

come from sewage treatment plants, septic systems, agricultural 

livestock operations, and wildlife.

 

Pesticides and Herbicides, which may come from a variety of 

sources such as agriculture, urban stormwater runoff, and residential 

uses.

Inorganic Contaminants, such as salts and metals, which can be 

naturally-occurring or result from urban stormwater runoff, industrial, 

or domestic wastewater discharges, oil and gas production, mining, 

or farming.

Organic Chemical Contaminants, including synthetic and volatile 

organic chemicals, which are by-products of industrial processes and 

petroleum production, and can also come from gas stations, urban 

stormwater runoff, and septic systems.

Radioactive Contaminants, which can be naturally-occurring or be 

the result of oil and gas production and mining activities.

40 CFR 141.153(h)(1)(iii) - EPA and FDA Regulations:

In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, EPA prescribes 

regulations which limit the amount of certain contaminants in water 

provided by public water systems. Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) regulations establish limits for contaminants in bottled water 

which must provide the same protection for public health.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 74 April 2010

Task Completed

Yes No

● Informational statements on arsenic and nitrate if those contaminants are 

detected under conditions prescribed in the Rule and lead: 

– Arsenic at levels above 5 μg/l (50% of the MCL), but below the MCL.

– Nitrate at levels above 5 mg/l (50% of the MCL), but below the MCL.

– Lead (always required) 

If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, 

especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking 

water is primarily from materials and components associated with 

service lines and home plumbing. [NAME OF UTILITY] is 

responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot 

control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When 

your water has been sitting for several hours, you can minimize the 

potential for lead exposure by flushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 

minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are 

concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your 

water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, 

and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the 

Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at www.epa.gov/safewater/lead.
Section 6 

Consumer Confidence Report 

Examples 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 77 April 2010

The following section provides examples of CCRs for three rules: 

• GWR

• Stage 2 DBPR

• LT2ESWTR

These examples address the CCR requirements for systems that are required to report information in their 

CCR pertaining to these rules including detected contaminant data and/or violations. Some of the 

examples have been updated from the examples provided in the each rule implementation guidance to 

incorporate EPA’s current thinking on an effective way to present this information. In the examples 

provided, language in italics is required by 40 CFR Appendix A to Subpart O of the Rule. 

EPA has developed CCRiWriter to help CWSs quickly create their CCRs. The CCRiWriter is a webbased program and requires internet access to use. The Web site address for the CCRiWriter is

www.ccriwriter.com. A direct link can also be accessed from EPA’s Web site at 

www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/tools.html. 

6.1 CCR Examples for the Ground Water Rule

This section provides CCR excerpts that satisfy notification requirements of the GWR. The following 

scenarios are addressed:

• Scenario 1: A Source Water Sample is Positive for a Fecal Indicator. 

• Scenario 2: A System Fails to Take Corrective Action Following a Significant Deficiency. 

• Scenario 3: A System Fails to Maintain at Least 4-log Treatment of Viruses. 

• Scenario 4: A System Fails to Collect a Source Water Sample. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 78 April 2010

Scenario 1: A Source Water Sample is Positive for a Fecal Indicator

System Description – System A

System A is a community GWS serving 1,500 people. The system has two wells in use year-round and 

does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.

Situation

On April 2, 2010, the system collects its two routine monthly TCR samples for April. The system is 

notified by the laboratory on the afternoon of April 4 that one of its routine samples is total coliformpositive. On the morning of April 5, the system collects samples from both wells and delivers the samples 

to the laboratory for analysis. The analysis shows that one of the two source water samples is positive for 

E. coli. 

CCR Requirements

A CWS must include the fecal indicator-positive result in the detected contaminant table in the CCR due 

by July 1, 2011. Special notice is also required and the system must include: the source of the fecal 

contamination, if known; the date of the positive sample; if the fecal contamination has been addressed, or 

if it has not been addressed, the state-approved plan and schedule for correction including interim 

measures, progress to date, and any interim measures completed; and the potential health effects. Example 

6-1 fulfills the CCR requirements for this scenario.

Note: In the example below, the system would have also been required to report their total coliformpositive sample in their report. That result is not shown in this example.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 79 April 2010

Example 6-1. Example of Detected Contaminant Table and Special Notice in the CCR for Source 

Water Fecal Contamination

Water Quality Data

Contaminant MCL MCLG Your 

Water Range Sample 

Year Violation Typical 

Sources

E. coli (at the 

ground water 

source)* 

0 0 1 Positive 

Sample ND-1 2010 No

Human or 

animal 

fecal 

waste

*System A detected E. coli in their source water sample; the sample was collected in response to a total coliform-positive 

routine sample collected on April 2, 2010. More information about this situation is provided in the Situation section. 

Situation

• On April 4, 2010, we were informed that one of our routine total coliform samples collected on April 

2, 2010, was total coliform-positive. As required by the Ground Water Rule, we collected samples 

from both of our sources, Wells 1 and 2 on April 5, 2010, and had them analyzed for fecal 

contamination. The sample for Well 1 tested positive for E. coli. 

• Health Effects: Fecal coliforms and E. coli are bacteria whose presence indicates that the water 

may be contaminated with human or animal wastes. Microbes in these wastes can cause short-term 

effects, such as diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. They may pose a special 

health risk for infants, young children, some of the elderly, and people with severely compromised 

immune systems.

• In response, we immediately discontinued use of Well 1 and sent notices to all of our customers 

within 24 hours. We carefully considered our options and developed a plan with the State 

Department of Public Health to extend the well’s casing higher above the ground, replace the well 

cap, and install treatment (chlorination). As we stated in the most recent update on this issue, 

treatment was installed on June 1, 2010. Well 1 was placed back in service at that time.

Note: If the system had sampled for (and found) enterococci or coliphage as their fecal indicator, the table 

would read as shown in the example below. 

Contaminant MCL MCLG Your 

Water Range Sample Year Violation Source

Enterococci (at the 

ground water 

source)*

TT NA 1 positive 

sample ND-1 2010 No

Human or 

animal fecal 

waste

Coliphage (at the 

ground water 

source)* 

TT NA 1 positive 

sample ND-1 2010 No

Human or 

animal fecal 

waste

* Special notice required text and health effects language would be provided in the CCR – possibly in a 

footnote to the table as shown in the example above.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 80 April 2010

Scenario 2: A System Fails to Take Corrective Action Following a Significant Deficiency

System Description – System B 

System B is a community GWS serving 1,500 people. The system has one well in use year-round and 

does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer. 

During a sanitary survey on June 1, 2013, the state identifies a significant deficiency—the system 

operator’s certification has lapsed. The system is notified of the deficiency in a letter from the state on 

June 10, 2013. The state directs System B to take immediate corrective action by bringing on a new, 

certified operator or having the current operator take all necessary steps to renew certification as soon as 

possible. The system is told it must complete corrective action within 120 days of receiving written 

notification from the state of the significant deficiency, or by October 8, 2013. By October 8th, the 

system’s operator has still not been recertified and the system has not hired a new certified operator. The 

system is notified of its violation on November 15, 2013, for failure to take corrective action within 120 

days of receiving written notice. System B finally hires a certified operator on December 20, 2013.

Situation

Treatment technique violations must be included in a system’s CCR with an explanation of the violation, 

the length of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, and the steps taken to correct the violation. 

CCR Requirements

In this scenario, since the system corrected the significant deficiency before the end of the calendar year, 

the system is not required to provide special notice regarding this deficiency in the CCR. However, the 

state can still require special notice even if the significant deficiency is corrected. In this scenario the state 

does not require special notice. 

EPA recommends that systems include this type of violation in a table following the main detected 

contaminant table. This format is shown in Example 6-2. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 81 April 2010

Example 6-2. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Corrective Action

TT Violation Explanation Length

Steps Taken 

to Correct 

the Violation

Health Effects 

Language

Corrective 

action for a 

significant 

deficiency

During a Sanitary Survey on 

June 1, 2013, we were 

notified by the State 

Department of Health that 

our system required a 

properly certified operator. 

We were required to 

recertify our operator or hire 

a new, properly certified 

operator within 120 days.

We did not do this within the 

required timeframe.

2 months

We hired a 

properly 

certified 

operator in 

December 

2013.

Inadequately treated 

or inadequately 

protected water may 

contain diseasecausing organisms. 

These organisms can 

cause symptoms 

such as diarrhea, 

nausea, cramps, and 

associated 

headaches.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 82 April 2010

Scenario 3: A System Fails to Maintain at Least 4-log Treatment of Viruses

System Description – System C 

System C is a community GWS serving 8,500 people. The system has two wells in use year-round. In 

2010, System C installed chlorine treatment at both wells as a corrective action to address a significant 

deficiency identified by the state. System C also began compliance monitoring at that time. 

During a sanitary survey on January 10, 2011, the state determines that due to a malfunctioning chlorine 

pump, the system has not been providing 4-log treatment of viruses at one of its wells for at least 2 weeks. 

The problem is identified during the sanitary survey and the system is officially notified of its failure to 

consistently provide 4-log treatment in a letter from the state on February 1, 2011. The state also directs 

System C to take corrective action to restore 4-log treatment as soon as possible.

Situation

Treatment technique violations must be included in a system’s CCR with an explanation of the violation, 

the length of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, and the steps taken to correct the violation. 

CCR Requirements

EPA recommends that systems include this type of treatment technique violation in a table following the 

main detected contaminant table. This format is shown in Example 6-3. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 83 April 2010

Example 6-3. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Maintain at Least 4-Log Treatment of 

Viruses

TT Violation Explanation Length Steps Taken to Correct 

the Violation

Health Effects 

Language

Failed to 

maintain 4-log 

treatment of 

viruses

On January 10, 

2011, state 

inspection of our 

water system 

identified a 

malfunctioning 

chlorine pump. As a 

result, the water 

from one of our 

wells (Well 1) was 

not adequately 

disinfected for 2 

weeks.

2 Weeks

As directed by the 

Department of Public 

Health, we took immediate 

action to resolve this 

problem by repairing the 

malfunctioning chlorine 

pump. Regular testing 

since the pump was 

repaired has demonstrated 

that we are once again 

providing water that meets 

the State’s standards for 

disinfection to our 

customers.

Inadequately 

treated or 

inadequately 

protected water 

may contain 

disease-causing 

organisms. These 

organisms can 

cause symptoms 

such as diarrhea, 

nausea, cramps, 

and associated 

headaches.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 84 April 2010

Scenario 4: A System Fails to Collect a Source Water Sample

System Description – System D 

System D is a community GWS serving 10,000 people. The system has four wells in use year-round and 

does not provide 4-log treatment of viruses before or at the first customer.

Situation

On December 15, 2011, the system is notified by the laboratory that one of its routine monthly total 

coliform samples is total coliform-positive. The system collects three repeat samples as required under the 

TCR, but does not collect any source water samples. On January 2, 2012, the state notifies the system that 

it is in violation of the GWR requirements. On January 4, 2012, System D collects samples from all four 

wells to have them tested for fecal indicators. None of the samples tested positive for fecal indicators.

CCR Requirements

Since System D is a CWS, it could use the CCR to meet the Tier 3 public notification requirements for 

this violation if the CCR is released within 1 year of the system’s learning of the violations. For this 

particular example, the system became aware of the monitoring and reporting (M&R) violation on 

January 2, 2012, but the violation occurred in December 2011. Therefore public notification requirements 

can also be met since the public will be informed of the violation in the CCR produced for calendar year 

2011. 

Example 6-4 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR to meet both the CCR and 

PN Rule requirements. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 85 April 2010

Example 6-4. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Source Water Sample(s) 

Following a Routine Total Coliform-Positive Distribution System Sample Result

Violation

• We are required to monitor your drinking water for specific contaminants on a regular basis. 

Results of regular monitoring are an indicator of whether or not our drinking water meets health 

standards. During December 2011, we did not complete all required monitoring or did not test 

according to required methods for fecal indicators and, therefore, cannot be sure of the quality 

of our drinking water during that time. 

• On December 15, 2011, we were informed by our laboratory that one of our routine 

bacteriological samples for December tested positive for total coliform. We were required to 

collect follow-up samples within 24 hours of learning of the total coliform-positive sample. 

Follow-up samples needed to be tested for fecal indicators from all sources that were active at 

the time the total coliform-positive sample was collected. We failed to collect the follow-up 

sample within 24 hours. 

• On January 4, 2012, source water samples were collected for fecal indicators. All samples were 

negative for fecal indicators. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 86 April 2010

6.2 CCR Examples for Stage 2 DBPR

This section provides CCR excerpts that satisfy notification requirements of the Stage 2 DBPR. The 

following scenarios are addressed:

• Scenario 5: TTHM MCL Violation. 

• Scenario 6: LRAA and Compliance Calculations for TTHM and HAA5 M&R Violations. 

• Scenario 7: Bromate M&R Violation. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 87 April 2010

Scenario 5: TTHM MCL Violation

System Description - System E 

System E is a small Subpart H system that uses two large ground water wells determined to be under the 

direct influence of surface water. The system treats the water from each well with bag and cartridge 

filtration and by disinfection with chlorine on a full-time basis. The system utilizes two 

filtration/disinfection treatment plants known as WTP 1 and WTP 2.

Population Served: 8,200

Source #1: Well 1

Treatment: Filtration, chlorine

Source #2: Well 2

Treatment: Filtration, chlorine

This system was required to comply with the TTHM and HAA5 RAA requirement under the Stage 1 

DBPR but is now required to comply with the LRAA requirement on Schedule 4 under Stage 2 DBPR. 

System E conducted E. coli monitoring under the LT2ESWTR and was able to avoid Cryptosporidium

monitoring, so it must begin complying with Stage 2 DBPR by October 1, 2013. Note that for compliance 

with Stage 2 DBPR, System E is required to collect two dual sample sets per quarter at representative 

high TTHM and HAA5 sites. 

The operator takes the dual samples during times when the disinfection systems are operating under 

normal conditions and collects the samples at the locations and according to the schedule specified in the 

provisions of the system’s Compliance Monitoring Plan. 

Situation

Table 6- 1 summarizes the Stage 2 DBPR TTHM monitoring results for four quarters at two sites 

beginning January 1, 2014. System E’s operator collects their scheduled set of two TTHM samples (at 

locations defined in the Compliance Monitoring Plan) each quarter. The operator enters the values on the 

TTHM monitoring forms and calculates a quarterly arithmetic average concentration for each sampling 

location.

Table 6- 1. System E 2014 TTHM Monitoring Results 

Total Trihalomethane 

Monitoring Results (in ppb) January 2014 April 2014 July 2014 October 2014

Site 1 Quarterly Results 50 67 149 46

Site 1- LRAA* 59 62 82 78

Site 2 Quarterly Results 40 55 113 60

Site 2- LRAA* 42 49 71 67

*Reported LRAA for quarters 1-3 are based on results from previous quarters not reported on this table.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 88 April 2010

System E has completed a full year of monitoring under Stage 2 DBPR and must use this data to compute 

LRAAs at each location. (After this time, the system will compute LRAAs each quarter.) The operator 

sums quarterly TTHM results and divides by 4 to determine LRAA compliance with the Stage 2 DBPR 

MCL of 0.08 mg/L (MCL in CCR units: 80 ppb). The TTHM result for location 1 is 149 ppb which 

causes the LRAA to be above the MCL at 82 ppb; therefore, the operator must report an MCL violation in 

the CCR. 

CCR Requirements

MCL violations must be listed in the main detected contaminant table and include an explanation of the 

violation, the length of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, and actions taken by the system 

to address the violation (see Example 6-5). 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 89 April 2010

Example 6-5. Example of a Notice in the CCR for TTHM MCL Violation

Water Quality Data

Contaminant MCL MCLG Your 

Water Range Sample 

Year Violation Source

TTHMs [Total 

trihalomethanes] 

(ppb) (LRAA) 

Site 1

80 NA

82

(highest 

LRAA)

46 - 149 2014 Yes*

By-product 

of drinking 

water 

disinfection

TTHMs [Total 

trihalomethanes] 

(ppb) (LRAA) 

Site 2

80 NA 71 40 - 113 2014 No

By-product 

of drinking 

water 

disinfection

*System E exceeded the MCL for TTHMs in October. The system’s locational running annual average 

(LRAA) for Site 1 was 82 ppb. More information about this violation is provided in the violation section.

Violation

• Testing results from 3rd quarter sampling (October 2014) shows that our system exceeds 

the standard, or maximum contaminant level (MCL), for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs). 

The standard for TTHMs is 80 ppb averaged at an individual monitoring location over the 

year. In October 2014, our TTHM level at Site 1 was 82 ppb. TTHMs, which are four 

volatile organic chemicals, form when disinfectants react with natural organic matter in 

the water. We are working to minimize the formation of TTHMs while ensuring an 

adequate level of disinfection to protect customers from exposure to bacteria. 

• We have since taken samples at this location and throughout the system and had them 

tested. They show that we meet the standards.

• Some people who drink water containing trihalomethanes in excess of the MCL over 

many years may experience problems with their liver, kidneys, or central nervous systems, 

and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 90 April 2010

Scenario 6: LRAA and Compliance Calculations for TTHM and HAA5 M&R Violations

System Description - System F 

System F is a small Subpart H system serving 8,900 people. They are on Schedule 4 and the requirements 

of Stage 2 DBPR are applicable on or before October 1, 2014, because System F is required to monitor

for Cryptosporidium under the LT2ESWTR. 

The system uses surface water treated at a conventional filtration plant. The system uses chlorine as a 

chemical disinfectant applied at one location and must monitor TTHM and HAA5 according to the 

requirements of 40 CFR 141.621(a). Under the Stage 2 DBPR, samples must be taken in the distribution 

system at a frequency of two dual sample sets every 90 days. One quarterly set must be taken during the 

peak historical month for DBP concentrations. All monitoring must take place at the locations 

recommended to the primacy agency in the IDSE Report submitted under 40 CFR 141.600 through 40 

CFR 141.605.

Population Served: 8,900 

Source: Surface water 

Treatment: Conventional filtration, chlorine

Situation

Table 6-2 presents a summary of System F’s TTHM and HAA5 monitoring results.

Table 6-2. System F 2014 TTHM and HAA5 Monitoring Results (mg/L) 

2014 2015

Parameter JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

TTHM

MCL = 

0.080 mg/L

Site 1 0.068 0.070 0.070 

Site 2 0.072 0.070 0.068 

HAA5

MCL =

0.060 mg/L

Site 1 0.042 0.055 0.038 

Site 2 0.040 0.060 0.046 

2015 2016

Parameter JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN LRAA

TTHM

MCL = 

0.080 mg/L

Site 1 NS 0.069

Site 2 NS 0.070

HAA5

MCL =

0.060 mg/L 

Site 1 NS 0.045

Site 2 NS 0.049

NS=No sample taken

LRAA=Locational running annual average
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 91 April 2010

In August 2015, System F reviews the data for the first year of compliance monitoring for the Stage 2 

DBPR. However, System F did not complete the necessary monitoring of TTHM and HAA5 in the fourth 

quarter, July 2015. The system did resume monitoring in the next quarter.

System F’s sampling record shows a major M&R violation in 2015 resulting from a failure to take the 

required samples. In this case, when only two samples per quarter are required, the failure to sample for 

one quarter is a major M&R violation and must be reported to SDWIS for both TTHM and HAA5.

CCR Requirements

Since System F is a CWS, it could use the CCR to meet the Tier 3 public notice requirements for this

violation if the CCR is released within 1 year of the system’s learning of the violation. For this particular 

example, the system became aware of the monitoring violation on August 15, 2015. Therefore, public 

notification requirements can be met if the CCR produced for calendar year 2015 is released prior to July 

1, 2016 (the CCR for calendar year 2015 is required to be released by July 1, 2016, for compliance with 

the CCR Rule). In this situation, additional public notification would not be required. However, whether 

public notification is provided by the CCR for calendar year 2015 or by other means, this violation would 

still have to be reported by the system in the CCR produced for calendar year 2015, since all violations of 

National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar year in which the 

violation occurred. 

Example 6-6 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR to meet both CCR and PN

Rule requirements. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 92 April 2010

Example 6-6. Example of a Notice in the CCR for LRAA and Compliance Calculations for TTHM 

and HAA5 M&R Violations

Violation

•

•

•

We are required to monitor your drinking water for specific contaminants on a regular basis. 

Results of regular monitoring are an indicator of whether or not our drinking water meets 

health standards. During July 2015, we did not complete all required monitoring or did not 

test according to required methods for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and haloacetic acids 

(HAA5) and, therefore, cannot be sure of the quality of our drinking water during that time. 

Our system is required to take samples for TTHMs and HAA5s every quarter. TTHMs and 

HAA5s are a group of chemicals that are formed when chlorine or other disinfectants used to 

control microbial contaminants in drinking water react with naturally occurring organic and 

inorganic matter in water. As stated above, we did not collect our quarterly samples in July 

2015. However, using the data we did collect over the past year, we are not in violation of the 

standard for either TTHMs (80 ppb) or HAA5s (60 ppb). 

To resolve this issue, we have set-up new procedures at the system to ensure all samples are 

collected and analyzed according to our monitoring plan. We resumed collecting samples in 

October 2015. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 93 April 2010

Scenario 7: Bromate M&R Violation

System Description - System G 

System G is a small Subpart H CWS that serves 4,700 people. They have one surface water source, and 

treat with a direct filtration plant that uses both ozone and chlorine as disinfectants. Because they use 

ozone, under the Stage 1 DBPR, System G was required to monitor for bromate at the entrance to the 

distribution system from their plant. The routine monitoring frequency was monthly, but the system was 

able to qualify for reduced monitoring of quarterly sampling because their monthly source water bromide 

RAA levels were less than 0.05 mg/l.

Population Served: 4,700

Source: Surface water

Treatment: Softening plant, ozone, chlorine

After March 31, 2009, if System G wants to continue reduced monitoring for bromate, they must qualify 

using the new criteria under the Stage 2 DBPR. To meet the new criteria for reduced monitoring, System 

G needs to conduct monthly monitor for bromate for 1 year using Method 317.0 Revision 2.0, 326.0, or 

321.8. Note that systems cannot use Method 300.1 to qualify for reduced monitoring. 

In April 2009, System G discontinues its bromide sampling and begins sampling monthly for bromate 

using one of the new sampling methods. By March 2010, System G has a full year of monthly samples, 

and their RAA is 0.0015. This is below 0.0025 mg/L so the system now qualifies for reduced bromate 

sampling. In the second quarter of 2010, the system begins quarterly monitoring. However, in December 

2010, their Bromate RAA is 0.0060 mg/L which exceeds 0.0025 mg/l. The system should have resumed 

monthly monitoring at that point. 

Situation

On April 12, 2011, the state sent System G a letter indicating that their records showed that the system 

had failed to resume routine monitoring. System G began routine monitoring that month.

Table 6-3 summarizes System G’s bromate monitoring results.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 94 April 2010

Table 6-3. System G Bromate and Bromide Monitoring Results (mg/L)

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

2008 

Bromide 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.002 

Bromate

2009 

Bromide 0.01

Bromate 0.0010 0.0020 0.0015 0.0016 0.0010 0.0020 0.0010 0.0005 0.0010 0.0025 

2010 

Bromide

Bromate 0.0020 0.0020 0.0010 0.0020 0.0025 0.0060 

2011 Bromate NS NS 0.0010 0.0020 0.0025 0.0018 0.0010 0.0023 0.0026 0.0024 0.0020

2012 Bromate 0.0010 0.0010 0.0020 0.0022 0.0010 0.0020

Note: RAAs are calculated on a quarterly basis for Bromide and Monthly for Bromate. RAA = Running Annual 

Arithmetic Average 

NS = No samples taken 

System G is not eligible for a reduction in monitoring frequency after the month of December 2010 

because the bromate RAA (0.0030 mg/L) is greater than 0.0025 mg/L for the four most recent quarters. 

Beginning in January 2011, System G is required to begin monitoring monthly for bromate. Since System 

G did not collect another bromate sample until March 2011, System G is in violation of the M&R

requirement.

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

CCR Requirements

Example 6-7 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 95 April 2010

Example 6-7. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Bromate M&R Violation

Violation

• Since we use ozone as a disinfectant, our system monitors for bromate. Bromate is a chemical 

that is formed when a system uses ozone to disinfect drinking water and it reacts with 

naturally occurring bromide in source water.

• Our system qualified to reduce the number of samples required to monitor for bromate in 

March 2010. We were allowed to take 1 sample per quarter rather than 1 sample per month. In 

December 2010, the running annual average exceeded 0.0025 mg/L and we no longer 

qualified for reduced quarterly bromate monitoring. Beginning in January 2011, we failed to 

begin monitoring monthly for bromate. Therefore, we cannot be sure of the quality of the 

water during that time.

• We began monitoring monthly for bromate in April 2011 and will continue to monitor on this 

schedule until reduced monitoring is again appropriate.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 96 April 2010

6.3 CCR Examples for LT2ESWTR

This section provides CCR excerpts that satisfy notification requirements of the LT2ESWTR. The 

following scenarios are addressed:

• Scenario 8: Failure to Take Action on Uncovered Finished Water Reservoir. 

• Scenario 9: Failure to Notify the State before Making a Significant Change in Disinfection 

Practice. 

• Scenario 10: Failure to Provide or Install an Additional Level of Treatment.

• Scenario 11: Failure to Monitor for Cryptosporidium for Any Three Months.

• Scenario 12: Failure to Submit a Source Water Monitoring Schedule 3 Months Prior to Date 

System is Required to Begin Monitoring. 

• Scenario 13: Failure to Collect Samples in Accordance with Sampling Schedule. 

• Scenario 14: Failure to Sample at an Appropriate Location. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 97 April 2010

Scenario 8: Failure to Take Action on Uncovered Finished Water Reservoir

System Description - System I

System I is a Subpart H system serving 12,000 people. The system has five finished water reservoirs, two 

of which are uncovered.

Situation

On April 1, 2008, System I submits plans to the state detailing how and when it plans to cover its two 

uncovered finished water reservoirs. Systems are required to have a cover or treatment in place for all 

uncovered finished water reservoirs by April 1, 2009, or on a schedule approved by the state. However, 

System I does not cover its finished water reservoirs until January 27, 2010, returning to compliance with 

the LT2ESWTR one year after the schedule submitted to the state.

System I incurred a treatment technique violation as a result of the system’s failure to have both of its 

uncovered finished water reservoirs covered by April 1, 2009. The system could have chosen to either 

cover the reservoir or treat the discharge from its uncovered finished water reservoirs to achieve 

inactivation and/or removal of 4.0-log virus, 3.0-log Giardia lamblia, and 2.0-log Cryptosporidium by the 

April 1, 2009, compliance date. System I also could have asked the state to approve an alternative 

schedule. However, since System I failed to implement any of the above options with regard to its 

finished water reservoirs before the April 1, 2009, deadline, the system is in violation of the LT2ESWTR.

CCR Requirements

Treatment technique violations must be included in a system’s CCR with an explanation of the violation, 

the length of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, and steps taken to correct the violation. 

EPA recommends that systems include this type of treatment technique violation in a table following the 

main detected contaminant table. This format is shown in Example 6-8.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 98 April 2010

Example 6-8. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Take Action on Uncovered Finished 

Water Reservoir

TT Violation Explanation Length

Steps Taken to 

Correct the 

Violation

Health Effects

Uncovered and 

untreated 

finished water 

reservoirs

Two of our finished 

water reservoirs were 

not covered and the 

discharge was not 

treated. We were 

required to address 

this situation by April 

1, 2009.

9 months

The system began 

a project to install 

covers on the 

reservoirs in May 

2009. The project 

was completed on 

January 27, 2010.

Inadequately protected 

or inadequately treated 

water may contain 

disease causing 

organisms. These 

organisms can cause 

symptoms such as 

diarrhea.

Note: Because there is no standard health effects language provided for this treatment technique, the 

system could write language specific to the violation. The health effects language provided is an example 

of what might be included. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 99 April 2010

Scenario 9: Failure to Notify the State before Making a Significant Change in Disinfection Practice

System Description - System J 

System J is a large Subpart H system serving 109,000 people. It currently uses a conventional filtration 

treatment plant as defined in 40 CFR 141.2 and chlorinates its water at the entry to the presedimentation 

basin and after the filtration process. System J created a disinfection profile under 40 CFR 141.708.

Situation

On January 1, 2010, System J modifies its disinfection process by eliminating the presedimentation basin 

chlorine application point and increasing the post-filtration chlorine dose. The PWS developed a 

disinfection profile that contains all the elements described in 40 CFR 141.708(a)(1) through 40 CFR 

141.708(a)(3), however, the system did not submit the plan to the state before making the change. System 

J submitted the plan to the state on March 1, 2010.

Although System J appropriately prepared the necessary significant disinfection practice modification 

plan, it did not notify the state prior to changing disinfection practices. System J has incurred an M&R

violation as a result of the system’s failure to notify the state prior to making a significant change to its 

treatment process.

CCR Requirements

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

Example 6-9 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 100 April 2010

Example 6-9. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Notify the State before Making a 

Significant Change in Disinfection Practice

Violation

•

•

•

On January 1, 2010, we stopped adding chlorine to the early stages of our treatment process 

and increased the amount of chlorine we add before the water is distributed to consumers. We 

prepared a plan with specific information on the proposed changes, including a description of 

the proposed changes, specific disinfection records, and an analysis of how the proposed 

change would affect the levels of disinfection in our system. However we did not submit a 

copy of the plan to the state before making the changes.

A change to our disinfection practices without state approval did not adversely impact our 

water quality and we continue to meet all treatment requirements. 

We submitted our plan to the state on March 1, 2010. The state approved the changes to the 

disinfection process on April 1, 2010, at which time the violation was resolved.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 101 April 2010

Scenario 10: Failure to Provide or Install an Additional Level of Treatment

System Description - System K

System K is a small Subpart H system using surface water and serving 7,500 people. It currently uses a 

conventional filtration treatment plant as defined in 40 CFR 141.2 and uses chlorine as its primary 

disinfectant.

System K, which monitors for Cryptosporidium under LT2ESWTR, meets its source water monitoring 

requirements since it begins 24 months of monthly source water monitoring by April 1, 2010. System K

finishes this monthly monitoring for its initial round of source water monitoring by April 1, 2012. The 

system determines that its Cryptosporidium bin concentration is 0.9 oocysts/L, which results in a bin 

classification of 2. System K therefore needs to provide an additional 1.0-log of Cryptosporidium

treatment by October 1, 2014, or be in compliance with a state-approved alternative schedule. System K

chooses to install UV disinfection to achieve the necessary treatment credits. Since UV will meet Giardia

and Cryptosporidium requirements, System K may be able to decrease the amount of chlorine currently 

used. The system is required to submit its plans to the state for approval. After receiving approval of its 

plan from the state, System K proceeds with the installation. However, the installation is not completed 

until April 1, 2015, and the system did not obtain an extension. 

Situation

System K has incurred a treatment technique violation. The system was required to provide an additional 

level of treatment to address Cryptosporidium by October 1, 2014. This system did not meet this deadline 

and did not obtain an extension.

Treatment technique violations must be included in a system’s annual CCR with an explanation of the 

violation, the length of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, and steps taken to correct the 

violation. 

CCR Requirements

EPA recommends that systems include this type of treatment technique violation in a table following the 

main detected contaminant table. This format is shown in Example 6-10.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 102 April 2010

Example 6-10. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Provide or Install an Additional Level 

of Treatment

Steps Taken to 

TT Violation Explanation Length Correct the Health Effects

Violation

Treatment not 

installed by 

required date

We were required to 

install and have 

treatment operating 

to provide additional 

Cryptosporidium

removal by October 

1, 2014. We did not 

meet this deadline.

6 months

Installation of the 

U.V. disinfection 

system was 

completed on April 

1, 2015. 

Inadequately protected 

or inadequately treated 

water may contain 

disease causing 

organisms. These 

organisms can cause 

symptoms such as 

diarrhea.

Note: Because there is no standard health effects language provided for this treatment technique, the 

system could write language specific to the violation. The health effects language provided is an example 

of what might be included. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 103 April 2010

Scenario 11: Failure to Monitor for Cryptosporidium for Any Three Months

System Description - System L

System L is a small Subpart H system serving 3,000 people that uses a small lake as a source. Small

systems that provide filtration or are required to provide filtration must initially conduct 1 year of 

bi-weekly sampling (one sample every 2 weeks) for E. coli, beginning October 1, 2008. These systems 

are triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring only if the initial E. coli monitoring indicates a mean 

concentration greater than 10 E. coli/100 mL for systems using a reservoir or lake as their primary source. 

The small systems that exceed these E. coli trigger values must either monitor for Cryptosporidium

twice-per-month for 1 year, or at least monthly for 2 years beginning April 1, 2010.

System L begins conducting E. coli monitoring on October 1, 2008. After 1 year of monitoring, System L

determines that its annual mean E. coli concentration is 31 E. coli/100 mL. Based on the annual mean 

concentration of E. coli determined by the initial source water monitoring (31 E. coli/100 mL is greater 

than 10 E. coli/100 mL), System L is required to begin source water monitoring for Cryptosporidium at 

least monthly for 2 years no later than April 1, 2010. 

Situation

Three months laps and System L does not conduct any further source water monitoring and does not 

intend to install additional treatment or implement another toolbox option to achieve 5.5-log of treatment 

for Cryptosporidium. Therefore, System L has incurred a M&R violation for failure to conduct

Cryptosporidium monitoring for any three months. 

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

CCR Requirements

Example 6-11 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 104 April 2010

Example 6-11. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Monitor for Cryptosporidium for Any 

Three Months

Violation

• Our water system recently failed to conduct additional source water monitoring as required. 

We were required to begin source water monitoring for Cryptosporidium at least once each 

month for 2 years no later than April 1, 2010. We did not begin collecting the required source 

water samples for Cryptosporidium until August 2, 2010. Therefore, we cannot be sure of the 

quality of the water during that time.
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 105 April 2010

Scenario 12: Failure to Submit a Source Water Monitoring Schedule 3 Months Prior to Date System is 

Required to Begin Monitoring

System Description - System M

System M is an unfiltered Subpart H system serving 2,500 people that meets all the criteria for avoiding 

filtration found in 40 CFR 141.71.

System M submits a sampling schedule to the state for the initial round of source water monitoring 

January 1, 2010, however, it forgets about the second round of source water monitoring that is required 

and does not submit a sampling schedule. On March 1, 2019, one month before System M is required to 

begin the second round of source water monitoring, a neighboring water system reminds System M that it 

is required to conduct a second round of source water monitoring. 

Situation

System M has incurred a M&R violation for failing to submit a sampling schedule to the state for the 

second round of source water monitoring before January 1, 2019 (i.e., 3 months before the second round 

of source water monitoring), even if it conducts the required monitoring and reported the results to the 

state. 

System M resolves the violation by developing a sampling schedule and submitting it the state on March 

10, 2019. The system fulfills its source water M&R requirements in accordance with the schedule in 40 

CFR 141.701(c).

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

CCR Requirements

Example 6-12 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 106 April 2010

Example 6-12. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Submit a Source Water Monitoring 

Schedule 3 Months Prior to Date System is Required to Begin Monitoring

Violation

•

•

We were required to submit a source water monitoring schedule by January 1, 2019, three

months before the date we were required to begin source water monitoring (April 1, 2019). 

We failed to do this. 

On March 10, 2019, we developed a sampling schedule and submitted it to the State 

Department of Public Health. This issue has now been resolved. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 107 April 2010

Scenario 13: Failure to Collect Samples in Accordance with Sampling Schedule

System Description - System N

System N is a small filtered Subpart H system serving 9,000 people.

System N has two qualified operators. While System N is conducting its required source water monitoring

for E. coli, the operator that usually collects the bi-weekly E. coli sample goes on vacation for 1 month. 

System N’s other operator decides to wait until his/her colleague returns to work to continue the required 

source water monitoring instead of collecting the samples themselves. Therefore, System N does not 

collect samples for the month of December 2008.

Situation

System N has incurred a M&R violation for failing to sample within 2 days before, or 2 days after the 

scheduled dates. The LT2ESWTR allows systems that face “extreme conditions,” situations “that may 

pose danger to the sampler,” “unforeseen” situations, or situations that “cannot be avoided” to sample as 

close to the scheduled date as is feasible and to submit an explanation for the alternative sampling date 

with the analytical results. A vacationing operator does not satisfy any of these scenarios.

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

CCR Requirements

Example 6-13 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 108 April 2010

Example 6-13. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Collect Samples in Accordance with 

Sampling Schedule

Violation

•

•

Our system is required to collect bi-weekly source water samples for E. coli. We failed to 

collect two source water samples in December 2008 in accordance with our sampling 

schedule. Therefore, we cannot be sure of the quality of the water during that time.

In January 2009, we negotiated with the state a schedule for sampling in December 2009. 

These samples were collected as required and no additional treatment needs are necessary for 

our system. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 109 April 2010

Scenario 14: Failure to Sample at an Appropriate Location

System Description - System O

System O is a large Subpart H system serving 15,000 people. System O uses bank filtration to meet the 

source water filtration requirement of 40 CFR 141.173(b). The water body adjacent to the collector well 

is a large river.

On April 1, 2008, System O begins to conduct monthly monitoring for Cryptosporidium. System O

collects its first two samples from the well, after bank filtration. The system source water monitoring plan 

indicated it would collect samples from the river. 

Situation

System O has incurred a M&R violation. Systems using bank filtration as an alternative filtration to meet 

the Giardia lamblia and virus inactivation and Cryptosporidium removal requirements of 40 CFR 

141.173(b) or 40 CFR 141.552(a) must take surface water samples prior to bank filtration. Only unfiltered 

Ground Water Under Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDI) systems meeting the filtration 

avoidance criteria in 40 CFR 141.71 and bank filtered systems that receive no treatment credit for bank 

filtration can collect samples from the well (after bank filtration). 

The state identifies the sample location error and directs the system to begin sampling from the adjacent 

river, beginning June 1, 2008. The state further directs the system to collect source water samples for 

April and May of 2010 (at the end of the 2-year monitoring period) to ensure representative samples are 

obtained for each calendar month for 2 years.

All violations of National Primary Drinking Water Rules must be reported in the CCR for the calendar 

year in which the system incurred the violation. 

CCR Requirements

Example 6-14 illustrates how this M&R violation can be reported in the CCR. 
CCR Rule Implementation Guidance 110 April 2010

Example 6-14. Example of a Notice in the CCR for Failure to Sample at an Appropriate Location

Violation

•

•

Our system uses bank filtration to meet the Giardia lamblia and virus inactivation and 

Cryptosporidium removal requirements and must take surface water samples. On April 1, 

2008, we began to conduct monitoring for Cryptosporidium, however, the first two samples 

collected were collected at the wrong location in the system. 

On May 10, 2008, we determined the samples were collected at the wrong location. The 

sampling location has been corrected and the samples will now be collected at the appropriate 

location. The situation is now resolved. This issue had no affect on the treatment system or the 

quality of the water we provide.