Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31939 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED ARIZONA REGULATIONS—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Article 3 (Permits and Permit Revisions) 

R18–2–301 ............ Definitions ......................................... February 1, 2020 ... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–302 ............ Applicability; Registration; Classes 

of Permits.

March 21, 2017 ..... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–302.01 ....... Source Registration Requirements .. February 1, 2020 ... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

* * * * * * * 

R18–2–304 ............ Permit Application Processing Procedures.February 1, 2020 ... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–306 ............ Permit Contents ................................ March 21, 2017 ..... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–306.01 ....... Permits Containing Voluntarily Accepted Emission Limitations and 

Standards.

March 21, 2017 ..... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

* * * * * * * 

R18–2–317 ............ Facility Changes Allowed Without 

Permit Revisions—Class I.

August 7, 2012 ...... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–317.01 ....... Facility Changes that Require a Permit Revision—Class II.August 7, 2012 ...... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–317.02 ....... Procedures for Certain Changes that 

Do Not Require a Permit Revision—Class II.

August 7, 2012 ...... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–319 ............ Minor Permit Revisions .................... March 21, 2017 ..... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

R18–2–320 ............ Significant Permit Revisions ............. March 21, 2017 ..... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

* * * * * * * 

R18–2–334 ............ Minor New Source Review ............... February 1, 2020 ... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

Article 4 (Permit Requirements for New Major Sources and Major Modifications to Existing Major Sources) 

*******

R18–2–406 ............ Permit Requirements for Sources 

Located in Attainment and 

Unclassifiable Areas.

February 1, 2020 ... [INSERT Federal Register 

CITATION], June 16, 2021.

Submitted on July 22, 2020. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 52.145, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.145 Visibility protection. 

* * * * * 

(b) Regulations for visibility new 

source review. The provisions of § 52.28 

are hereby incorporated and made part 

of the applicable plan for the State of 

Arizona only for those stationary 

sources under the permitting 

jurisdiction of the Pima County 

Department of Environmental Quality or 

the Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department. The provisions of § 52.28 

also remain the applicable plan for any 

Indian reservation lands, and any other 

area of Indian country where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction, located within the 

State of Arizona. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–12431 Filed 6–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 141 and 142 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2017–0300; FRL–10024–33– 

OW] 

RIN 2040–AG15 

National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations: Lead and Copper Rule 

Revisions; Delay of Effective and 

Compliance Dates 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is delaying until 

December 16, 2021, the effective date of 

the National Primary Drinking Water 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
31940 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulations: Lead and Copper Rule 

Revisions (LCRR), which was published 

in the Federal Register on January 15, 

2021. EPA is also delaying the January 

16, 2024 compliance date established in 

the LCRR to October 16, 2024. The delay 

in the effective date is consistent with 

presidential directives issued on 

January 20, 2021, to the heads of Federal 

agencies to review certain regulations, 

including the LCRR. The delay will 

allow sufficient time for EPA to 

complete its review of the rule in 

accordance with those directives and 

conduct important consultations with 

affected parties. The delay in the 

compliance date of the LCRR ensures 

that any delay in the effective date will 

not reduce the time provided for 

drinking water systems and primacy 

states to take actions needed to assure 

compliance with the LCRR. 

DATES: Effective date: This final rule is 

effective December 16, 2021. 

Delayed effective date: As of June 16, 

2021, the effective date of the final rule 

published on January 15, 2021, at 86 FR 

4198, and then delayed in a rule 

published March 12, 2021, at 86 FR 

14003, is furthered delayed until 

December 16, 2021. 

Compliance date: The compliance 

date for the final rule published on 

January 15, 2021, at 86 FR 4198, is 

delayed until October 16, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OW–2017–0300. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available electronically through https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Kempic, Standards and Risk 

Management Division, Office of Ground 

Water and Drinking Water, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave NW, Mail Code 

4607M, Washington, D.C. 20460; 

telephone number: (202) 564–4880 (TTY 

800–877–8339); email address: 

kempic.jeffrey@epa.gov. For more 

information visit https://www.epa.gov/ 

dwreginfo/lead-and-copper-rule. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action 

On January 15, 2021, EPA published 

in the Federal Register the ‘‘National 

Primary Drinking Water Regulation: 

Lead and Copper Rule Revisions’’ (86 

FR 4198) (LCRR) with an effective date 

of March 16, 2021, and a compliance 

date of January 16, 2024. On January 20, 

2021, President Biden issued the 

‘‘Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis.’’ (86 FR 7037, January 25, 2021) 

(Executive Order 13990). Section 1 of 

Executive Order 13990 states that our 

nation has an abiding commitment to 

empower our workers and communities; 

promote and protect our public health 

and the environment; and conserve our 

national treasures and monuments, 

places that secure our national memory. 

Where the Federal Government has 

failed to meet that commitment in the 

past, it must advance environmental 

justice. In carrying out this charge, the 

Federal Government must be guided by 

the best science and be protected by 

processes that ensure the integrity of 

Federal decision-making. It is, therefore, 

the policy of the Administration to 

listen to the science, to improve public 

health and protect our environment, to 

ensure access to clean air and water, to 

limit exposure to dangerous chemicals 

and pesticides, to hold polluters 

accountable, including those who 

disproportionately harm communities of 

color and low-income communities, to 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to 

bolster resilience to the impacts of 

climate change, to restore and expand 

our national treasures and monuments, 

and to prioritize both environmental 

justice and the creation of the wellpaying union jobs necessary to deliver 

on these goals. Section 2 of Executive 

Order 13990 directs the heads of all 

Federal agencies to immediately review 

regulations that may be inconsistent 

with, or present obstacles to, the policy 

set forth in Section 1 of Executive Order 

13990. The January 20, 2021 White 

House ‘‘Fact Sheet: List of Agency 

Actions for Review,’’ identified the 

LCRR as an agency action to be 

reviewed in conformance with 

Executive Order 13990 (https://

www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ 

statements-releases/2021/01/20/factsheet-list-of-agency-actions-for-review/). 

In conducting its review, EPA will 

carefully consider the concerns raised 

by stakeholders, including 

disadvantaged communities that have 

been disproportionately impacted, states 

that administer national primary 

drinking water regulations, consumer 

and environmental organizations, water 

systems, and other organizations. 

Stakeholders have a range of concerns 

about the LCRR. For example, a primary 

source of lead exposure in drinking 

water is lead service lines. Stakeholders 

have raised concerns that despite the 

significance of this source of lead, the 

LCRR fails to require, or create adequate 

incentives, for public water systems to 

replace all of their lead service lines. In 

addition, stakeholders have raised 

concerns that portions of many lead 

service lines are privately owned and 

disadvantaged homeowners may not be 

able to afford the cost of replacing their 

portion of the lead service line and may 

not have this significant source of lead 

exposure removed if their water system 

does not provide financial assistance. 

Other stakeholders have raised concerns 

regarding the significant costs public 

water systems and communities would 

face to replace all lead service lines. 

Based upon information from the 

Economic Analysis for the Final Lead 

and Copper Rule, EPA estimates that 

there are between 6.3 and 9.3 million 

lead service lines nationally and the 

cost of replacing all of these lines is 

between $25 and $56 billion. 

Another key element of the LCRR 

relates to requiring public water systems 

to conduct an inventory of lead service 

lines so that systems know the scope of 

the problem, can identify potential 

sampling locations, and can 

communicate with households that are 

or may be served by lead service lines 

to inform them of the actions they may 

take to reduce their risks. Some 

stakeholders have raised concerns that 

the LCRR’s inventory requirements are 

not sufficiently rigorous to ensure that 

consumers have access to useful 

information about the locations of lead 

service lines in their community. Other 

stakeholders have raised concerns that 

water systems do not have accurate 

records about the composition of 

privately owned portions of lead service 

lines and also concerns about public 

water systems publicly releasing 

information regarding privately owned 

property. 

A core component of the LCRR is 

maintaining an ‘‘action level’’ of 15 

parts per billion (ppb), which serves as 

a trigger for certain actions by public 

water systems such as lead service line 

replacement and public education. The 

LCRR did not modify the existing lead 

action level but established a 10 ppb 

‘‘trigger level’’ to require public water 

systems to initiate actions to decrease 

their lead levels and take proactive steps 

to remove lead from the distribution 

system. Some stakeholders support this 

new trigger level, while others argue 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31941 

1 In this action, EPA uses the term ‘‘compliance 

date’’ to refer to the date water systems must 

comply with national primary drinking water 

regulations (referred to as the ‘‘effective date’’ in 

Section 1412(b)(10) of the SDWA) and the term 

‘‘effective date’’ to refer to when the rule is codified 

into the Code of Federal Regulations (see Section 

553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act and 1 

CFR 18.17). 

that EPA has unnecessarily complicated 

the regulation. Some stakeholders 

suggest that the agency should eliminate 

the new trigger level and instead lower 

the 15 ppb action level. 

Some stakeholders have indicated 

that the agency has provided too much 

flexibility for small water systems and 

that it is feasible for many of the 

systems serving 10,000 or fewer 

customers to take more actions to 

reduce drinking water lead levels than 

those actions under the LCRR. Other 

stakeholders have highlighted the 

limited technical, managerial, and 

financial capacity of small water 

systems and support the flexibilities 

provided by the LCRR to all of these 

small systems. 

Stakeholders have divergent views of 

the school and childcare sampling 

provisions of the LCRR; some believe 

that the sampling should be more 

extensive, while others do not believe 

that community water systems should 

be responsible for provisions and that 

such a program would be more 

effectively carried out by the school and 

childcare facilities. 

Finally, some stakeholders have 

expressed concerns that the agency did 

not provide adequate opportunities for a 

public hearing and did not provide a 

complete or reliable evaluation of the 

costs and benefits of the proposed 

LCRR. 

In addition, the LCRR has been 

challenged in court by the Natural 

Resources Defense Council, Newburgh 

Clean Water Project, NAACP, Sierra 

Club, United Parents Against Lead, and 

the Attorneys General of New York, 

California, Illinois, Maryland, 

Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, 

Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and the 

District of Columbia. Those cases have 

been consolidated in Newburgh Clean 

Water Project, et al. v EPA, No. 21–1019 

(D.C. Cir.). EPA also received a letter on 

March 4, 2021, from 36 organizations 

and 5 individuals requesting that EPA 

suspend the March 16, 2021 effective 

date of the LCRR to review the rule and 

initiate a new rulemaking. EPA also 

received a letter on February 4, 2021, 

from the American Water Works 

Association requesting that EPA not 

delay the rule. 

Consistent with Executive Order 

13990 and the Memorandum for the 

Heads of Executive Departments and 

Agencies titled, ‘‘Regulatory Freeze 

Pending Review’’ (86 FR 7424, January 

28, 2021), EPA decided to review the 

LCRR. EPA published a final rule on 

March 12, 2021 (86 FR 14003), which 

provided for a short delay of the LCRR’s 

effective date from March 16, 2021 to 

June 17, 2021, to allow the agency to 

seek comment on a separate proposal, 

also published on March 12, 2021 (86 

FR 14063), to extend the effective date 

further to December 16, 2021. EPA 

explained that the further delay was 

needed to allow the agency adequate 

time to conduct a thorough review of 

the complex set of LCRR requirements 

and to assess whether the regulatory 

changes are inconsistent with, or 

present obstacles to, the policy set forth 

in Section 1 of Executive Order 13990, 

and to consult with stakeholders, 

including those who have been 

historically underserved by, or subject 

to discrimination in, Federal policies 

and programs prior to the LCRR going 

into effect. In the proposal, EPA also 

sought comment on an extension of the 

compliance dates by nine months from 

January 16, 2024, to September 16, 

2024. 

The LCRR’s effective date (i.e., when 

the rule is codified into the Code of 

Federal Regulations) is different from 

the compliance dates. Section 

1412(b)(10) of the Safe Drinking Water 

Act (SDWA) specifies that drinking 

water regulations shall generally take 

effect (i.e., require compliance) three 

years after the date the regulation is 

promulgated.1 This 3-year period is 

used by states to adopt laws and 

regulations in order to obtain primary 

enforcement responsibility (primacy) for 

the rule and by water systems to take 

any necessary actions to meet the 

compliance deadlines in the rule. EPA 

is extending the January 16, 2024 

compliance date in the LCRR by nine 

months to October 16, 2024, to 

correspond to the delay in the effective 

date. EPA set the compliance date to 

October 16, 2024, to be consistent with 

its intent, described in the proposal, to 

provide a full nine month delay, to 

maintain the same time period between 

the effective date and the compliance 

date in the LCRR, published on January 

15, 2021. EPA expects that the duration 

of the compliance date extension will 

provide drinking water systems with 

adequate time to take actions needed to 

assure compliance with the LCRR after 

it takes effect. 

EPA recognizes that under Section 

1413(a)(1) and 40 CFR 142.12(b), states 

must submit complete and final requests 

for approval of program revisions to 

adopt new or revised EPA regulations 

not later than two years after 

promulgation of the LCRR (with the 

possibility for an extension of up to two 

years based on certain criteria in EPA’s 

regulations). After completion of the 

stakeholder engagement process, EPA 

will consider whether to let the rule 

take effect on December 16, 2021, with 

a compliance deadline of October 16, 

2024, or whether the agency intends to 

initiate a new rulemaking to withdraw 

or modify the LCRR. At that time, EPA 

and states will have greater clarity with 

respect to the primary enforcement 

(primacy) application process and 

relevant timeframes. If EPA decides to 

withdraw the LCRR before it takes 

effect, then there will be no revised 

regulation that triggers the duty for 

primacy agencies to submit a program 

revision to EPA since the previous 

regulation (i.e., those regulations that 

are in place until such time that the 

LCRR takes effect) will remain in effect. 

If EPA modifies the LCRR, the agency 

will establish a new deadline for 

primacy applications as a part of that 

regulatory action. If EPA decides to 

make no further changes to the rule, the 

agency intends to use the date on which 

EPA announces that decision in the 

Federal Register—no later than 

December 16, 2021—as the 

promulgation date for the LCRR for 

purposes of the primacy revision 

application deadline under 40 CFR 

142.12(b)(1). Accordingly, EPA 

recommends that states consider each of 

these possibilities in their planning and 

resource allocation decision-making and 

that states do not submit primacy 

applications to the agency at this time 

because EPA is not expecting to begin 

review of primacy packages until there 

is more certainty as to the agency’s path 

forward on the LCRR. 

II. Importance of EPA’s Review of the 

LCRR for Protection of Public Health 

The impact of lead exposure, 

including from drinking water, is a 

public health issue of paramount 

importance and its adverse effects on 

children and the general population are 

serious and well known. For example, 

exposure to lead is known to present 

serious health risks to the brain and 

nervous system of children. Lead 

exposure causes damage to the brain 

and kidneys and can interfere with the 

production of red blood cells that carry 

oxygen to all parts of the body. Lead has 

acute and chronic impacts on the body. 

The most robustly studied and most 

susceptible subpopulations are the 

developing fetus, infants, and young 

children. Even low-level lead exposure 

is of particular concern to children 

because their growing bodies absorb 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
31942 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

more lead than adults do, and their 

brains and nervous systems are more 

sensitive to the damaging effects of lead. 

EPA estimates that drinking water can 

make up 20 percent or more of a 

person’s total exposure to lead. Infants 

who consume mostly formula mixed 

with tap water can, depending on the 

level of lead in the system and other 

sources of lead in the home, receive 40 

to 60 percent of their exposure to lead 

from drinking water used in the 

formula. Scientists have linked lead’s 

effects on the brain with lowered 

intelligence quotient (IQ) and attention 

disorders in children. Young children 

and infants are particularly vulnerable 

to lead because the physical and 

behavioral effects of lead occur at lower 

exposure levels in children than in 

adults. During pregnancy, lead exposure 

may affect prenatal brain development. 

Lead is stored in the bones and it can 

be released later in life. Even at low 

levels of lead in blood, there is an 

increased risk of health effects in 

children (e.g., less than 5 micrograms 

per deciliter) and adults (e.g., less than 

10 micrograms per deciliter). 

The 2013 Integrated Science 

Assessment for Lead and the Health and 

Human Services National Toxicology 

Program Monograph on Health Effects of 

Low-Level Lead have both documented 

the association between lead and 

adverse cardiovascular effects, renal 

effects, reproductive effects, 

immunological effects, neurological 

effects, and cancer. EPA’s Integrated 

Risk Information System (IRIS) 

Chemical Assessment Summary 

provides additional health effects 

information on lead. 

Because of disparities in the quality of 

housing, community economic status, 

and access to medical care, lead in 

drinking water (and other media) 

disproportionately affects lower-income 

people. Minority and low-income 

children are more likely to live in 

proximity to lead-emitting industries 

and to live in urban areas, which are 

more likely to have contaminated soils, 

contributing to their overall exposure. 

Additionally, non-Hispanic black 

individuals are more than twice as 

likely as non-Hispanic whites to live in 

moderately or severely substandard 

housing, which is more likely to present 

risks from deteriorating lead based 

paint. The disparate exposure to all 

sources of environmental lead 

experienced by low-income and 

minority populations may be 

exacerbated because of their more 

limited resources for remediating lead 

service lines, which if present in a 

home, can be a significant source of lead 

exposure. 

For example, stakeholders have raised 

concerns that, to the extent water 

systems rely on homeowners to pay for 

replacement of customer-owned 

portions of lines, lower-income 

homeowners may be unable to afford to 

replace lines, resulting in disparate 

levels of protection. In addition, a 

higher incidence of renting among 

lower-income people may prevent 

residents from removing lines where the 

property owner does not consent or 

finance replacement of the customerowned portion of the line. Moreover, the 

crisis in Flint, Michigan, has brought 

increased attention to the challenge of 

lead in drinking water systems across 

the country. 

Prior to EPA’s actions to delay the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR, litigants and stakeholders had 

expressed a wide range of concerns 

about the LCRR’s requirements that 

addressed both the rule’s ability to 

protect public health and the 

implementation burden that will be 

placed on systems and states. Specific 

components of the rule for which 

concerns have been raised include: The 

15 parts per billion (ppb) action level; 

the 10 ppb trigger level; the lead service 

line inventory requirements, the lead 

service line replacement requirements; 

the flexibility given to small systems; 

and the sampling of drinking water at 

schools and child care facilities. 

Given the paramount significance to 

the public’s health for ensuring that lead 

in drinking water is adequately 

addressed under the SDWA, and the 

concerns raised by litigants and other 

stakeholders about the LCRR, it is 

critically important that EPA’s review of 

the LCRR be deliberate and have the 

benefit of meaningful engagement with 

the affected public, including 

overburdened and underserved 

communities disproportionately 

affected by exposure to lead, prior to the 

rule going into effect. 

III. Summary of Public Comments on 

the Extension of the Effective and 

Compliance Dates of the LCRR and 

EPA’s Responses 

In the proposed rulemaking, EPA 

solicited public comment on ‘‘the 

duration of the effective date and 

compliance date extensions and 

whether the compliance date extension 

should apply to the entire LCRR or 

certain components of the final rule.’’ A 

summary of the comments received on 

the extensions, as well as the agency’s 

responses is provided in this section. 

The majority of commenters 

expressed support for the delay of the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR. These commenters, representing 

states, water systems, environmental 

and public health organizations, 

provided a number of reasons for their 

support as well as suggestions for how 

EPA should utilize the additional time. 

Commenters indicated that the delay 

would allow time for the agency to 

conduct a more thorough and complete 

review, collect and analyze new data, 

engage with stakeholders, and hold 

public meetings to solicit further 

comment on the LCRR as it relates to 

state and local implementation of 

drinking water standards, public health 

protections, lead in school drinking 

water issues, and specifically to listen to 

people who are living in communities 

disproportionately affected by exposure 

to lead and underserved communities 

suffering from lead-contaminated 

drinking water about their 

recommendations for the rule. Several 

commenters urged EPA to suspend the 

March 16, 2021 effective date of the 

LCRR to review the rule and initiate a 

new rulemaking to address issues with 

the rule published in the Federal 

Register on January 15, 2021 at 86 FR 

4198. Commenters also expressed 

support for the 9-month compliance 

date extension from the current 

compliance date of January 16, 2024. 

Commenters stated that if the rule’s 

effective date were delayed from March 

16, 2021, to December 16, 2021, the 

compliance date should be delayed the 

same amount of time, ensuring that 

utilities do not lose any of the time they 

had been expecting to have available to 

implement the rule once there is 

regulatory certainty. Additional 

commenters indicated that the 

extension of the compliance date would 

allow resource-constrained systems and 

communities needed time to implement 

the regulatory requirements of the LCRR 

in general, and more specifically, the 

lead service line (LSL) inventory and 

school and child care facility 

monitoring requirements. Two 

commenters indicated that the 

compliance date should be delayed as 

long as possible. 

EPA agrees with commenters that 

support a delay of the effective date of 

the LCRR to December 16, 2021. This 

time is necessary and sufficient to 

accommodate a thorough review of the 

requirements of the LCRR and engage 

with a wide range of stakeholders, 

including disproportionally affected and 

underserved communities on the issue 

of controlling lead in drinking water. 

The additional 6-month delay of the 

June 17, 2021 effective date to December 

16, 2021, is necessary to develop, 

publicize, and implement a public 

engagement process that accommodates 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31943 

the significant and widespread public 

interest in this rulemaking, coupled 

with the time needed to compile and 

evaluate input received during the 

public engagement process and make a 

decision as to whether to let the LCRR 

as published take effect or initiate a 

rulemaking to withdraw or modify the 

rule. EPA is currently implementing a 

public engagement plan that includes 

public listening sessions, community, 

tribal, and stakeholder roundtables, and 

a co-regulator meeting in addition to 

receiving written public comment on 

the LCRR as part of its engagement 

process. EPA believes that the extension 

of the effective date to December 16, 

2021, is sufficient for the review of the 

LCRR in accordance with Executive 

Order 13990. 

EPA also agrees with commenters that 

support the 9-month delay of the 

compliance date. The SDWA typically 

provides a 3-year time period for 

drinking water systems and states to 

assure compliance with new or revised 

drinking water standards. If the 

compliance date is not delayed, systems 

and states would expend resources now 

to assure compliance with the LCRR by 

January 16, 2024, particularly given the 

significant effort required to develop the 

LSL inventory, LSL replacement plan, 

and to re-evaluate the tap sampling 

locations used in their sampling pool, 

all of which are required before the 

compliance date and underpin the 

implementation of the larger 

requirements of the LCRR. EPA 

estimated in the economic analysis of 

the final LCRR that systems and states 

would spend between $57–60 million, 

in 2016 dollars, in the first year 

following promulgation of the rule, 

working towards compliance by January 

16, 2024. The majority of these funds 

are spent by systems to read and 

understand the new regulatory 

requirements, develop implementation 

plans, train staff, and participate in 

trainings and technical assistance 

interactions with the states; and by 

states to adopt the rule and develop the 

changes needed to their implementation 

programs, modify their data systems, 

provide training to their staff, and 

provide training and technical 

assistance to the regulated systems. 

If EPA determines to initiate a 

rulemaking to withdraw the LCRR or 

significantly revise it as a result of the 

Executive Order 13990 review process, 

then these compliance expenditures 

might be unnecessary to comply with 

applicable regulatory requirements. 

Without a delay in the effective and 

compliance dates of the rule, states and 

regulated entities may make decisions 

and spend scarce resources on 

compliance obligations that could 

change at the end of EPA’s review 

period. To avoid imposing unnecessary 

costs on water systems and states, and 

to allow systems and states sufficient 

time to prepare for compliance once 

regulatory certainty has been achieved, 

EPA has determined to delay both the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR to December 16, 2021, and 

October 16, 2024, respectively. 

EPA received a small number of 

comment letters that, in general, 

supported a delay in the effective date 

and compliance dates, but did not want 

the agency to delay the implementation 

of some of the regulatory requirements 

they felt would increase public health 

protection. These commenters indicated 

that the following improvements could 

be implemented during EPA’s 

reconsideration of the other aspects of 

the LCRR: The LSL inventory 

requirements, improved corrosion 

control treatment requirements, and 

strengthened monitoring provisions, 

including provisions that would prevent 

sampling that is likely to underestimate 

the actual lead levels in drinking water. 

Other commenters indicated that any 

delay to the LCRR effective date and 

compliance date must apply to the 

entire LCRR given the interrelated 

nature of the different aspects of the 

rule. According to these commenters, 

having the compliance date extension 

apply to the LCRR in its entirety will 

simplify communication, reduce 

complexity and confusion, improve 

compliance by the regulated 

community, and provide additional 

time to obtain the data management 

tools and resources required to 

implement the rule. 

Because there is only one effective 

date for the LCRR, it can take effect or 

be withdrawn only in its entirety. EPA 

cannot selectively allow some aspects of 

the rule to become effective in advance 

of other parts of the rule without 

undertaking a separate notice and 

comment rulemaking. While EPA could 

establish different compliance dates for 

different parts of the LCRR as part of a 

notice and comment rulemaking, the 

agency has determined not to do so at 

this time because it would predetermine the outcome of the public 

stakeholder process, create confusion 

for implementing authorities and 

regulated entities, impose potentially 

unnecessary costs, and undermine the 

re-evaluation process by diverting 

agency and stakeholder resources that 

would otherwise be devoted to the reevaluation process. EPA is currently 

seeking input on all aspects of the rule 

as part of the stakeholder engagement 

process. To proceed with 

implementation of selected portions of 

the rule during EPA’s review of the 

entire rule would be both impractical 

and inconsistent with the agency’s 

stated intention to re-evaluate the LCRR 

in light of stakeholder input on the 

entire LCRR. Moreover, as explained in 

the proposal, stakeholders have raised 

concerns with nearly all aspects of the 

LCRR, including the LSL inventory 

requirements. Therefore, EPA has 

determined to delay the effective date 

and all of the compliance dates in the 

rule at this time. 

EPA received a total of four comment 

letters indicating opposition to the 

extensions of the effective and 

compliance dates, and an additional two 

that did not explicitly support or oppose 

the delay in the effective and 

compliance dates of the LCRR. In 

general, the commenters opposing the 

extensions stated that delaying the 

effective and compliance dates would 

delay the public health improvements 

that would be achieved with 

implementing the LCRR, in part or in 

total, as finalized on January 15, 2021. 

The comments opposing a delay in 

the compliance deadline include the 

following, from the Association of 

Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA), 

which stated that it ‘‘has concerns that 

EPA’s proposal to delay the effective 

date . . . would postpone the 

significant public health improvements 

that will be achieved by implementing 

the rule as finalized.’’ They go on to 

state, ‘‘the benefits of this [delay] must 

be weighed against the costs of 

postponing the public health 

improvements that will be achieved 

when water systems begin to comply 

with the final rule in its current form.’’ 

AMWA identifies the customer-initiated 

LSL replacement provision, the LSL 

inventory, and the school and child-care 

testing provisions as public health 

improvements that would be postponed 

by a delay of the rule effective and 

compliance dates. Also, the Kentucky 

and Tennessee Water Utility Councils 

(KY/TN WUC) of the American Water 

Works Association stated that they ‘‘are 

concerned that extending the dates of 

the Rule could delay the enhanced 

awareness, detection, communication, 

and elimination of potential lead 

exposure in communities.’’ Another 

public commenter opposed the effective 

and compliance date extensions, 

arguing that EPA should instead 

simultaneously implement and revise 

the LCRR because of certain aspects of 

the rule that the commenter claims 

‘‘would provide immediate public 

health benefits’’—such as the LSL 

inventory and associated public 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
31944 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

notification requirements, as well as 

changes in the sampling requirements. 

Similarly, one anonymous commenter 

argued that to delay the rule is 

tantamount to repeal of the rule and that 

EPA has not analyzed the effects on 

human health of the delay that the 

LCRR was designed to benefit, or 

considered why it is worth forgoing the 

benefits of the rule for nine months in 

exchange for evaluation of the LCRR 

which, the commenter claims, could be 

done without delaying the compliance 

dates. The commenter also claims that 

EPA has failed to provide a meaningful 

opportunity for the public to comment 

‘‘[b]ecause of these substantive 

oversights, including the failure to 

consider the merits of the LCRR and the 

deficiencies of the preexisting 

requirements in its proposal that would 

allow those preexisting requirements to 

remain in effect for a longer period of 

time.’’ 

The KY/TN WUC opposed the delay 

of the LCRR effective and compliance 

dates, noting that EPA has already 

conducted extensive outreach during 

the development of the LCRR, stating, 

‘‘EPA’s thorough and extensive review 

and stakeholder engagement process 

resulted in a final Rule that strengthens 

every aspect of the current rule and 

accelerates actions that can reduce lead 

in drinking water.’’ This concept of EPA 

having already conducted extensive 

outreach was echoed by AMWA, noting 

that the agency ‘‘has been discussing 

options for the rule with these 

communities, other stakeholders, and 

the public since at least 2010.’’ 

However, AMWA ‘‘agrees that 

engagement with at-risk communities is 

critical.’’ The commenter opposing the 

delay and arguing that EPA should 

simultaneously implement and revise 

the LCRR, also expressed support for 

EPA’s effort to seek additional 

stakeholder input on the LCRR. Another 

comment letter, from the American 

Water Works Association (AWWA) 

recommended that EPA consider the 

extensive outreach that the agency has 

already conducted on the LCRR. 

EPA received two comment letters 

that did not explicitly support or oppose 

the delay in the effective and 

compliance dates of the LCRR. One 

comment letter, jointly signed by the 

U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National 

League of Cities, and the National 

Association of Counties, indicated that 

the LCRR as published on January 15, 

2021, at 86 FR 4198 ‘‘satisfactorily 

addressed the local government 

perspective in both protecting public 

health and reducing lead contamination 

of drinking water.’’ Another comment 

letter from AWWA requests that the 

effective and compliance dates be 

extended in an amount commensurate 

with the additional time used for 

stakeholder outreach. AWWA noted that 

the ‘‘[u]ncertainty . . . which is 

naturally generated through 

reconsideration efforts’’ will make it 

difficult for public water systems to 

prepare for compliance and make 

investments needed to meet the 

interrelated requirements of the rule, as 

such efforts may prove to be wasted or 

wasteful if the Rule ultimately changes 

in its particulars.’’ Accordingly, AWWA 

requests that ‘‘all extensions to the 

effective date of the LCRR and any 

subsequent agency activity that seeks to 

change the LCRR should be 

accompanied by an extension to the 

compliance timeframes.’’ AMWA, 

though opposing the delays in the LCRR 

implementation, also expressed support 

for an extension of the compliance dates 

by nine months if EPA delays the June 

17, 2021 effective date of the rule. 

For reasons discussed in the proposal 

and this action, EPA disagrees with the 

commenters asserting that the LCRR, as 

published on January 15, 2021, at 86 FR 

4198, should take effect on June 17, 

2021. EPA provided a reasoned 

explanation in the proposal for the 

delayed effective and compliance dates 

while the agency conducts this reevaluation. The explanation identified 

EPA’s concern that water systems and 

states could unnecessarily expend 

significant resources on compliance 

with a rule that may ultimately be 

withdrawn or substantially modified 

and, which many commenters have 

urged, may not be a sufficient 

improvement in public health 

protection in comparison to the existing 

protection of the LCR, or even possibly 

reduce public health protections. 

This action will enable EPA to engage 

with communities, stakeholders, tribes, 

and states to gather more information 

about their concerns with the LCRR and 

to share information about actions that 

can reduce drinking water lead 

exposure. The LCRR virtual engagement 

process is providing benefits in three 

ways. First, the engagement is 

increasing public and community 

awareness of the potential harmful 

health effects of lead and the ways 

individuals and communities may 

proactively reduce their exposure. 

Because the effective implementation of 

drinking water lead reduction 

requirements, such as LSL replacement, 

depends on the actions of both water 

systems and private citizens, the 

increased awareness fostered by EPA’s 

LCRR review outreach activities will 

improve the implementation of the 

LCRR and/or a future lead in drinking 

water regulatory action. Second, the 

information gained by the agency from 

listening to the public and communities 

that have been dealing with lead in 

drinking water issues across the country 

will provide EPA with new information 

that will help in the development of 

more effective implementation guidance 

for the LCRR or any future revisions of 

the LCRR. Information gathered from 

this process may be especially useful for 

the guidance on developing the initial 

LSL inventory and the LSL replacement 

plan. Third, the delay of the effective 

date, to engage with communities, will 

allow the agency to potentially develop 

future regulatory revisions to the Lead 

and Copper Rule, consistent with 

Executive Order 13990, that will be 

more effective at reducing the lead in 

drinking water in real world 

communities and better at targeting 

disadvantaged underserved 

communities. 

EPA’s economic analysis of the LCRR 

supports the conclusion that the 

relatively-short delay in the effective 

date and compliance dates for this rule, 

in particular, will not significantly 

reduce the benefits of the LCRR. The 

economic analysis of the final LCRR 

estimated that the annual total 

incremental cost of the regulatory 

requirements, in 2016 dollars, would 

range from $161 to $335 million at the 

3 percent discount rate, and $167 to 

$372 million at the 7 percent discount 

rate. The annual total incremental 

monetized benefits, in 2016 dollars, of 

the final rule were estimated to be 

between $223 to $645 million, at a 3 

percent discount rate, and $39 to $119 

million at the 7 percent discount rate. 

The delay of the original compliance 

date, of January 16, 2024, by nine 

months pushes back in time both the 

cost born by complying entities and the 

monetized benefits received by the 

public as a result of lower lead levels in 

drinking water, by nine months, 

assuming all other environmental and 

regulatory conditions remain the same. 

EPA selected the conservative 

assumption of modeling a one year 

delay in the regulatory costs and 

benefits impacts. The estimated annual 

total incremental cost of the rule given 

the one-year delay ranged from $153 to 

$320 million, at the 3 percent discount 

rate, and $155 to $346 million at the 7 

percent discount rate, in 2016 dollars. 

The monetized annual incremental 

benefits, in 2016 dollars, given a oneyear delay of the compliance date would 

range from $213 to $616 million, at the 

3 percent discount rate, and $37 to $111 

million at the 7 percent discount rate. 

The estimated change in the monetized 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31945 

incremental annualized social costs and 

benefits of the delay in the compliance 

date are approximately of equal size 

over the 35-year period of analysis ($7 

to $27 million for costs and $3 to $29 

million for benefits in 2016 dollars), but, 

as previously discussed, the expected 

first year (post rule effective date) 

expenditures by systems and states 

would be between $57–60 million, in 

2016 dollars. These first-year 

expenditures to prepare for regulatory 

compliance with the LCRR could be 

unnecessary if EPA determines to 

initiate a rulemaking to withdraw or 

significantly revise the LCRR as a result 

of the Executive Order 13990 review 

process. The estimated first year (post 

rule effective date) benefits are zero 

given that the regulatory requirements 

that produce monetized benefits are not 

implemented until the compliance date 

three years after the effective date. 

Moreover, EPA notes that there is an 

existing National Primary Drinking 

Water Rule, the Lead and Copper Rule, 

that will continue to provide public 

health protection and benefits during 

this short delay in the most recent 

revisions to that rule. Water systems 

will continue to implement the LCR, 

which includes requirements to monitor 

for lead and optimize corrosion control 

treatment. 

Given the relatively small impact to 

the stream of monetized social costs and 

benefits over the 35-year period of 

analysis, which has the potential to 

dramatically change based on the results 

of EPA’s Executive Order 13990 review 

process, the significant and potentially 

unnecessary implementation expenses 

estimated in the first year following the 

original effective date, of March 16, 

2021; the need to provide systems and 

states sufficient time to prepare for 

compliance; the potential positive gains 

to implementation and collection of 

new information; and, the existing 

safeguards to protect against lead 

contamination in drinking water, EPA 

has determined to delay both the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR to December 16, 2021, and 

October 16, 2024, respectively. 

EPA also disagrees with those 

commenters that suggested EPA let the 

LCRR take effect on June 17, 2021, and 

then initiate a process to revise it. 

Although EPA carefully considered 

whether to allow the rule to take effect 

on June 17, 2021, while postponing the 

compliance dates for only certain 

aspects of the rule, EPA has determined 

not to do so at this time because it 

would pre-determine the outcome of the 

public stakeholder process, create 

confusion for implementing authorities 

and regulated entities, impose 

potentially unnecessary costs, and 

undermine the re-evaluation process by 

diverting EPA and stakeholder resources 

that would otherwise be devoted to the 

re-evaluation process. Moreover, as 

explained in the proposal, stakeholders 

have raised concerns with nearly all 

aspects of the LCRR, including the LSL 

inventory requirements. Accordingly, 

EPA has determined that this approach, 

to let the rule take effect while 

postponing compliance dates for some 

aspects of the rule, is not appropriate at 

this time. 

EPA agrees that in developing the 

LCRR it has already conducted 

extensive stakeholder engagements. 

However, to the extent commenters are 

suggesting that additional stakeholder 

input is not warranted at this time, the 

agency disagrees. EPA did not conduct 

any public meetings on the LCRR 

revisions in the two years prior to 

promulgation of the final rule, which 

includes the time period between the 

proposal and the final rule. Similarly, in 

the two years preceding promulgation of 

the final rule, EPA did not conduct any 

targeted meetings to get input on the 

proposed revisions from communities 

historically underserved by, or subject 

to discrimination in, Federal policies 

and programs, or those communities 

that have been significantly affected by 

lead in drinking water. The information 

shared by these communities could 

prove to be valuable in understanding 

potential rule implementation issues 

that could lead to improved and more 

effective LCRR requirements and 

implementation guidance. As discussed 

previously, EPA agrees with 

commenters that the delay of the 

effective date warrants a delay in the 

compliance dates for the rule. EPA’s reevaluation of the LCRR creates 

regulatory uncertainty during the 3-year 

time period typically provided for 

drinking water systems and states to 

assure compliance with new or revised 

drinking water standards. If the 

compliance date is not delayed, systems 

and states would expend resources now, 

to assure compliance with the LCRR by 

January 16, 2024. EPA estimated in the 

economic analysis of the final LCRR that 

systems and states would spend 

between $57–60 million, in 2016 

dollars, in the first year following 

promulgation of the rule working 

towards compliance. If EPA were to 

initiate a rulemaking to withdraw or 

significantly revise the LCRR, then these 

compliance expenditures would be 

unnecessary to comply with applicable 

regulatory requirements. Therefore, EPA 

is delaying the compliance date of the 

LCRR to October 16, 2024, to avoid 

imposing these potentially unnecessary 

costs on water systems and states, and 

to allow systems and states sufficient 

time to prepare for compliance once 

regulatory certainty has been achieved. 

EPA has complied with the applicable 

Administrative Procedure Act and 

SDWA requirements for this rule. If EPA 

decides that further regulatory changes 

are necessary, EPA will comply with the 

applicable requirements of the 

Administrative Procedure Act and the 

SDWA, and conform to the relevant 

EOs, including EOs 13132 and 13175, 

regarding federalism and tribal 

consultations, respectively. 

Many commenters on the proposal to 

extend the effective and compliance 

dates also provided input on all aspects 

of the LCRR, including the action and 

trigger levels, LSL inventories, LSL 

replacement requirements, as well as 

the requirements for optimal corrosion 

control treatment, tap sampling, public 

education and notification, and school 

sampling, and EPA’s compliance with 

both the substantive and procedural 

requirements for promulgation of a 

revised drinking water regulation. The 

extent and breadth of these comments 

demonstrates the significant concern 

that stakeholders, from a range of 

perspectives, have with the LCRR and 

the procedures EPA followed in 

promulgating the rule. EPA appreciates 

this input on the LCRR and is 

considering these comments as part of 

its re-evaluation process. 

IV. Final Rule Revisions 

This final rule extends the effective 

date of the National Primary Drinking 

Water Regulations: Lead and Copper 

Rule Revisions (LCRR) to December 16, 

2021. This rule also extends the 

compliance date to October 16, 2024. 

The significant factual, legal, and 

policy issues identified by stakeholders 

and litigants, and summarized in 

Section II of this document, warrant 

careful and considerate review of the 

rule, as well as relief from the 

compliance deadlines as EPA considers 

these issues. After publication of the 

final National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulation, states and water systems 

commence activities to achieve 

compliance with the rule by the 

deadline established in the LCRR based 

on the requirements of Section 

1412(b)(10) of the SDWA. Under the 

final rule promulgated on January 15, 

2021, water systems will begin the 

actions to prepare LSL inventories, and, 

as appropriate, to prepare LSL 

replacement plans. The postponement 

of compliance dates through this action 

is intended as a stopgap measure to 

prevent the unnecessary expenditure of 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
31946 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

resources by water systems on those 

efforts until EPA completes its review of 

the LCRR and can provide some 

certainty that the regulatory 

requirements will not be changed. 

Without a delay in the effective and 

compliance dates of the rule, regulated 

entities may make decisions and spend 

scarce resources on compliance 

obligations that could change at the end 

of EPA’s review period. 

Section 1412(b)(9) of the SDWA 

authorizes EPA to review and revise 

national primary drinking water rules 

‘‘as appropriate’’ and directs that any 

revision ‘‘shall maintain, or provide for 

greater, protection of the health of 

persons.’’ 42 U.S.C. 300g–1(b)(9). This 

delay is consistent with EPA’s exercise 

of this discretionary authority to revise 

its drinking water rules. 

EPA will engage with stakeholders 

during this time period to evaluate the 

rule and determine whether to initiate a 

process to revise components of the 

rule. If EPA decides to withdraw the 

LCRR, the agency will propose, take 

comment on, and issue a withdrawal 

prior to December 16, 2021. If EPA 

decides it is appropriate to modify the 

LCRR, it will consider whether those 

modifications warrant further 

extensions to compliance dates for the 

requirements that will be modified to 

provide time to promulgate those 

revisions before water systems and 

states must take actions to comply. If 

EPA decides to revise the LCRR, the 

agency will follow the requirements of 

the SDWA and other applicable statues 

and EOs to propose and promulgate 

those revisions. 

V. Compliance With the Administrative 

Procedure Act 

Section 553(d) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 

5, generally provides that rules may not 

take effect until 30 days after they are 

published in the Federal Register. The 

purpose of this APA provision is to 

‘‘give affected parties a reasonable time 

to adjust their behavior before the final 

rule takes effect.’’ Omnipoint Corp. v. 

Fed. Commc’n Comm’n, 78 F.3d 620, 

630 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United 

States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 

1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting legislative 

history). However, when an agency 

grants or recognizes an exemption or 

relieves a restriction, affected parties do 

not need a reasonable time to adjust 

because the effect is not adverse. Thus, 

APA Section 553(d) allows an effective 

date less than 30 days after publication 

for any rule that ‘‘grants or recognizes 

an exemption or relieves a restriction’’ 

(see 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). An accelerated 

effective date may also be appropriate 

for good cause pursuant to APA Section 

553(d)(3) where an agency can ‘‘balance 

the necessity for immediate 

implementation against principles of 

fundamental fairness, which require 

that all affected persons be afforded a 

reasonable amount of time to prepare for 

the effective date of its ruling.’’ 

Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d at 1105. 

EPA has determined that this final 

rule is effective immediately upon 

publication because it relieves a 

restriction by extending the effective 

date and compliance deadlines of the 

LCRR, thereby providing water systems 

with additional time to come into 

compliance. In addition, there is good 

cause for immediate implementation of 

these provisions because, as previously 

explained, the impact of this rule is to 

ensure that water systems do not 

unnecessarily expend resources to come 

into compliance with the LCRR until 

EPA concludes its review and 

stakeholder engagement process and 

makes a decision as to whether to revise 

the LCRR in whole or in part or to let 

it take effect as published on January 15, 

2021. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is a significant regulatory 

action that was submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review. Any changes made in response 

to OMB recommendations have been 

documented in the docket. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. OMB has previously approved the 

information collection activities 

contained in the existing regulations 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2040–0204. This action delays of the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR until December 16, 2021 and 

October 16, 2024, respectively, and does 

not alter any of the information 

collection activities required under the 

LCRR. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

EPA certifies that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. In making this 

determination, the impact of concern is 

any significant adverse economic 

impact on small entities. An agency may 

certify that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves regulatory burden, has 

no net burden or otherwise has a 

positive economic effect on the small 

entities subject to the rule. This action 

delays compliance with the regulatory 

requirements of the LCRR and does not 

impose any additional requirements on 

either large or small entities. EPA has 

therefore concluded that this action will 

have no net regulatory burden for all 

directly regulated small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the National 

Government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. The Executive order 

defines tribal implications as ‘‘actions 

that have substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian Tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes.’’ The 

delay of the effective and compliance 

dates of the LCRR until December 16, 

2021 and October 16, 2024, respectively, 

will not have a substantial direct effect 

on one or more tribes, change the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and tribes, or affect the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that are economically 

significant, per the definition of 

‘‘covered regulatory action’’ in Section 

2–202 of the Executive order. This 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31947 

action is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 because the delays of the effective 

and compliances dates, until December 

16, 2021 and October 16, 2024, 

respectively, do not have a significant 

economic impact. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution or use of energy. 

EPA has concluded that the delay of the 

effective and compliance dates of the 

LCRR, which were published in the 

Federal Register on January 15, 2021, 

until December 16, 2021 and October 

16, 2024, respectively, is not likely to 

have adverse energy effects. This 

conclusion is based on the fact that 

delaying the regulatory requirements of 

the LCRR will reduce near term demand 

for energy commodities that would be 

required to install and operate corrosion 

control equipment, remove LSLs, or 

produce and deliver public education 

materials. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EPA believes that it is not feasible to 

determine whether this action has 

disproportionately high and adverse 

effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous 

peoples, as specified in Executive Order 

12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The purpose of this rule is to extend 

effective date of the LCRR to December 

16, 2021, to allow EPA to conduct a 

review of the LCRR, under Executive 

Order 13990, and consult with 

stakeholders, including those who have 

been historically underserved by, or 

subject to discrimination in, Federal 

policies and programs prior to the LCRR 

going into effect. Because EPA is still in 

the collection process of potentially 

significant environmental justice 

information on the distributional 

impacts of drinking water lead-related 

regulatory requirements, it is not 

feasible to determine with certainty the 

impact of the delay of the effective and 

compliance dates of the LCRR. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

This action is subject to Subtitle E of 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (also 

known as the Congressional Review Act 

or CRA), and EPA will submit a rule 

report to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the 

United States. The Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs has determined 

that this action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141 

Environmental protection, Copper, 

Drinking water, Indians—lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Lead 

service line, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Water 

supply. 

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends 40 CFR part 141 as 

follows: 

PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY 

DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 141 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g–1, 300g–2, 

300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6, 300j–4, 

300j–9, and 300j–11. 

■ 2. Amend § 141.80 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 141.80 General requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(2) The requirements of this subpart 

are effective as of December 16, 2021. 

(3) Community water systems and 

non-transient, non-community water 

systems must comply with the 

requirements of this subpart no later 

than October 16, 2024, except where 

otherwise specified in §§ 141.81, 141.84, 

141.85, 141.86, and 141.90, or where an 

exemption in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 142, subpart C or F, has been 

established by the Administrator. 

(4)(i) Between December 16, 2021, 

and October 16, 2024, community water 

systems and non-transient, noncommunity water systems must comply 

with 40 CFR 141.80 through 141.91, as 

codified on July 1, 2020. 

(ii) If an exemption from subpart I of 

this part has been issued in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 142, subpart C or F, 

prior to December 16, 2021, then the 

water systems must comply with 40 

CFR 141.80 through 141.91, as codified 

on July 1, 2020, until the expiration of 

that exemption. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 141.84 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) introductory 

text to read as follows: 

§ 141.84 Lead service line inventory and 

replacement requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(1) All water systems must develop an 

initial inventory by October 16, 2024, 

and submit it to the primacy agency in 

accordance with § 141.90(e). 

* * * * * 

(b) Lead service line replacement 

plan. All water systems with one or 

more lead, galvanized requiring 

replacement, or lead status unknown 

service lines in their distribution system 

must, by October 16, 2024, submit a 

lead service line replacement plan to the 

State in accordance with § 141.90(e). 

The lead service line replacement plan 

must be sufficiently detailed to ensure 

a system is able to comply with the lead 

service line replacement requirements 

in accordance with this section. The 

plan must include a description of: 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 141.86 by revising 

paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) 

introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 141.86 Monitoring requirements for lead 

and copper in tap water. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) All water systems with lead service 

lines, including those deemed 

optimized under § 141.81(b)(3), and 

systems that did not conduct monitoring 

that meets all requirements of this 

section (e.g., sites selected in 

accordance with paragraph (a) of this 

section, samples collected in accordance 

with paragraph (b) of this section, etc.) 

between January 15, 2021, and October 

16, 2024, must begin the first standard 

monitoring period on January 1 or July 

1 in the year following October 16, 

2024, whichever is sooner. Upon 

completion of this monitoring, systems 

must monitor in accordance with 

paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) Systems that conducted 

monitoring that meets all requirements 

of this section (e.g., sites selected in 

accordance with paragraph (a) of this 

section, samples collected in accordance 

with paragraph (b) of this section, etc.) 

between January 15, 2021, and October 

16, 2024, and systems that have 

completed monitoring under paragraph 

(d)(1)(i) of this section, must continue 

monitoring as follows: 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 141.90 by revising 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) to read to read 

as follows: 

§ 141.90 Reporting requirements. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
31948 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

(1) No later than October 16, 2024, the 

water system must submit to the State 

an inventory of service lines as required 

in § 141.84(a). 

(2) No later than October 16, 2024, 

any water system that has inventoried a 

lead service line, galvanized requiring 

replacement, or lead status unknown 

service line in its distribution system 

must submit to the State, as specified in 

§ 141.84(b), a lead service line 

replacement plan. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–12600 Filed 6–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0073; FRL–10023–91] 

Purpureocillium Lilacinum Strain PL11; 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of 

Purpureocillium lilacinum strain PL11 

in or on all food commodities when 

used in accordance with label directions 

and good agricultural practices. LAM 

International Corporation submitted a 

petition to EPA under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 

requesting an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of Purpureocillium 

lilacinum strain PL11 under FFDCA 

when used in accordance with this 

exemption. 

DATES: This regulation is effective June 

16, 2021. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

August 16, 2021, and must be filed in 

accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also 

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0073, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. 

Due to the public health concerns 

related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is 

closed to visitors with limited 

exceptions. The staff continues to 

provide remote customer service via 

email, phone, and webform. For the 

latest status information on EPA/DC 

services and docket access, visit https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Smith, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; main telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Publishing 

Office’s 

e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgibin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/ 

Title40/40tab_02.tpl. 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2016–0073 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing and must be received 

by the Hearing Clerk on or before 

August 16, 2021. Addresses for mail and 

hand delivery of objections and hearing 

requests are provided in 40 CFR 

178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing (excluding 

any Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. 

Information not marked confidential 

pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be 

disclosed publicly by EPA without prior 

notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your 

objection or hearing request, identified 

by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2016–0073, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. 

II. Background 

In the Federal Register of August 24, 

2018 (83 FR 42818) (FRL–9982–37), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a 

pesticide tolerance petition (PP 8F8690) 

by LAM International Corporation, 117 

South Parkmont St., Butte, MT 59701. 

The petition requested that 40 CFR part 

180 be amended by establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of 

Purpureocillium lilacinum strain PL11 

in or on all food commodities. That 

document referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared by the petitioner LAM 

International Corporation, which is 

available in the docket via http://

www.regulations.gov. One comment was 

received on the notice of filing. EPA’s 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES