```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 238 (Friday, December 11, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76897-76923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30824]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 141

[EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0218; FRL-9935-74-OW]
RIN 2040-AF10

Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) 
for Public Water Systems and Announcement of a Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of public meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a 
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) rule that requires public water systems 
to collect occurrence data for contaminants that may be present in tap 
water but are not yet subject to EPA's drinking water standards set 
under SDWA. This rule, revised every five years as required by SDWA, 
benefits public health by providing EPA and other interested parties 
with scientifically valid data on the national occurrence of selected 
contaminants in drinking water, such as cyanotoxins associated with 
harmful algal blooms. This data set is one of the primary sources of 
information on occurrence, levels of exposure and population exposure 
the Agency uses to develop regulatory decisions for emerging 
contaminants in the public drinking water supply. This proposal 
identifies eleven analytical methods to support water system monitoring 
for a total of 30 chemical contaminants/groups, consisting of ten 
cyanotoxins/groups; two metals; eight pesticides plus one pesticide 
manufacturing byproduct (hereinafter collectively referred to as 
``pesticides''); three brominated haloacetic acid groups of 
disinfection byproducts; three alcohols; and three semivolatile organic 
chemicals. EPA is also announcing a public webinar to discuss this 
proposal of the fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 9, 2016. Under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the information 
collection provisions are best assured of consideration if the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or 
before January 11, 2016. The public webinar will be held on January 13, 
2016, from 1:00 p.m.. to 4:30 p.m., eastern time. Persons wishing to 
participate in the webinar must register

[[Page 76898]]

by January 10, 2016, as described in section II.M.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2015-0218, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda D. Parris, Standards and Risk 
Management Division (SRMD), Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water 
(OGWDW) (MS 140), Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin 
Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268; telephone number: (513) 569-
7961; or email address: parris.brenda@epa.gov; or Melissa Simic, SRMD, 
OGWDW (MS 140), Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin Luther 
King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; telephone number: (513) 569-7864; 
or email address: simic.melissa@epa.gov. For general information, 
contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Callers within the United 
States can reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791. The Hotline is open 
Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays, from 10 a.m. to 4 
p.m., eastern time. The Safe Drinking Water Hotline can also be found 
on the Internet at: http://water.epa.gov/drink/hotline/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What action is the Agency taking and why?
    C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
    D. What is the estimated cost of this proposed action?
II. Background
    A. How has EPA implemented the Unregulated Contaminant 
Monitoring Program?
    B. How are the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), the UCMR 
program, the Regulatory Determination process and the NCOD 
interrelated?
    C. What notable changes are being proposed for UCMR 4?
    D. How did EPA prioritize candidate contaminants and what 
contaminants are proposed for UCMR 4?
    E. What is the proposed applicability date?
    F. What are the proposed UCMR 4 sampling design and timeline of 
activities?
    1. Sampling Frequency, Timing
    2. Sampling Locations
    3. Phased Sample Analysis for Microcystins
    4. Representative Sampling
    5. Summary
    G. What are reporting requirements for UCMR 4?
    1. Data Elements
    2. Duplicate Samples
    H. What are Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) and how were they 
determined?
    I. How do laboratories become approved to conduct UCMR 4 
analyses?
    1. Request to Participate
    2. Registration
    3. Application Package
    4. EPA's Review of Application Package
    5. Proficiency Testing
    6. Written EPA Approval
    J. What documents are being incorporated by reference?
    1. Methods From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    2. Methods From ``ASTM International''
    3. Methods From ``Standard Methods for the Examination of Water 
& Wastewater''
    4. Methods From ``Standard Methods Online''
    5. Method From ``Ohio EPA''
    K. What is the states' role in the UCMR program?
    L. What stakeholder meetings have been held in preparation for 
UCMR 4?
    M. How do I participate in the upcoming stakeholder meeting?
    1. Webinar Participation
    2. Webinar Materials
    N. How did EPA consider Children's Environmental Health?
    O. How did EPA address Environmental Justice?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR 
Part 51
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
IV. References

Abbreviations and Acronyms

[mu]g/L Microgram per liter
ADDA (2S, 3S, 8S, 9S, 4E, 6E)-3-amino-9-methoxy-2,6,8-trimethyl-10-
phenyl-4, 6-decadienoic acid
ASDWA Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
ASTM ASTM International
CAS Chemical Abstract Service
CBI Confidential Business Information
CCC Continuing Calibration Check
CCL Contaminant Candidate List
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLDA Chlorine Dioxide Applied After SR Sample Location
CLDB Chlorine Dioxide Applied Before SR Sample Location
CWS Community Water System
DBPR Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
DSMRT Distribution System Maximum Residence Time
ELISA Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EPTDS Entry Point to the Distribution System
FR Federal Register
GC Gas Chromatography
GC/ECD Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture Detection
GC/MS Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
GW Ground Water
GWUDI Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water
HAAs Haloacetic Acids
HAA5 Dibromoacetic Acid, Dichloroacetic Acid, Monobromoacetic Acid, 
Monochloroacetic Acid, Trichloroacetic Acid
HAA6Br Bromochloroacetic Acid, Bromodichloroacetic Acid, 
Dibromoacetic Acid, Dibromochloroacetic Acid, Monobromoacetic Acid, 
Tribromoacetic Acid
HAA9 Bromochloroacetic Acid, Bromodichloroacetic Acid, 
Chlorodibromoacetic Acid, Dibromoacetic Acid, Dichloroacetic Acid, 
Monobromoacetic Acid, Monochloroacetic Acid, Tribromoacetic Acid, 
Trichloroacetic Acid
HPXA Hydrogen Peroxide Applied After Source Water Sample Location
HPXB Hydrogen Peroxide Applied Before Source Water Sample Location
IC-MS/MS Ion Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
ICP-MS Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
ICR Information Collection Request
IDC Initial Demonstration of Capability
IS Internal Standard
LFB Laboratory Fortified Blank

[[Page 76899]]

LRB Laboratory Reagent Blank
LCMRL Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level
LC/ECI-MS/MS Liquid Chromatography/Electrospray Ionization/Tandem 
Mass Spectrometry
LC/MS/MS Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
LT2 Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
M Million
MRL Minimum Reporting Level
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NCOD National Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database
NPDWRs National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NTNCWS Non-transient Non-community Water System
OGWDW Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PA Partnership Agreement
PEMA Permanganate Applied After Source Water Sample Location
PEMB Permanganate Applied Before Source Water Sample Location
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PT Proficiency Testing
PWS Public Water System
QCS Quality Control Sample
QH Quality HAA Sample
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SDWARS Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System
SDWIS/Fed Federal Safe Drinking Water Information System
SM Standard Methods
SMP State Monitoring Plan
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SPE Solid Phase Extraction
SR Source Water
SRF Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
SRMD Standards and Risk Management Division
SUR Surrogate Standard
SVOCs Semivolatile Organic Chemicals
SW Surface Water
TNCWS Transient Non-Community Water System
TOC Total Organic Carbon
UCMR Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Public water systems (PWSs) would be regulated by this proposed, 
fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4). PWSs are 
systems that provide water for human consumption through pipes, or 
other constructed conveyances, to at least 15 service connections or 
that regularly serve an average of at least 25 individuals daily at 
least 60 days out of the year. Under this proposal, all large community 
and non-transient non-community water systems (NTNCWSs) serving more 
than 10,000 people would be required to monitor. A community water 
system (CWS) means a PWS that has at least 15 service connections used 
by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round 
residents. A NTNCWS means a PWS that is not a CWS and that regularly 
serves at least 25 of the same people over six months per year. A 
nationally representative sample of CWSs and NTNCWSs serving 10,000 or 
fewer people would also be required to monitor (see ``Statistical 
Design and Sample Selection for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 
Regulation'' (USEPA, 2001b) for a description of the statistical 
approach for the nationally representative sample). As is generally the 
case for UCMR monitoring, transient non-community water systems 
(TNCWSs) (i.e., non-community water systems that do not regularly serve 
at least 25 of the same people over six months per year) would not be 
required to monitor under UCMR 4. States, territories and tribes, with 
primary enforcement responsibility (primacy) to administer the 
regulatory program for PWSs under SDWA, can participate in the 
implementation of UCMR 4 through Partnership Agreements (PAs) (see 
discussion of PAs in section II.K). Primacy agencies with PAs can 
choose to be involved in various aspects of the UCMR 4 monitoring for 
PWSs they oversee; however, the PWS remains responsible for compliance. 
Potentially regulated categories and entities are identified in the 
following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Examples of
           Category             potentially regulated      NAICS \a\
                                       entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, local, & tribal          States, local and                 924110
 governments.                    tribal governments
                                 that analyze water
                                 samples on behalf of
                                 PWSs required to
                                 conduct such
                                 analysis; states,
                                 local and tribal
                                 governments that
                                 directly operate
                                 CWSs and NTNCWSs
                                 required to monitor.
Industry......................  Private operators of              221310
                                 CWSs and NTNCWSs
                                 required to monitor.
Municipalities................  Municipal operators               924110
                                 of CWSs and NTNCWSs
                                 required to monitor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ NAICS = North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table summarizes the types of entities that EPA is aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. If you are uncertain 
whether your entity is regulated by this action after carefully 
examining the definition of PWS found in Sec. Sec.  141.2 and 141.3, 
and the applicability criteria found in Sec.  141.40(a)(1) and (2) of 
Title 40 in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), please consult the 
contacts listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.

B. What action is the Agency taking and why?

    EPA is proposing a rule to require PWSs to analyze drinking water 
samples for unregulated contaminants that do not have health based 
standards set under SDWA and to report their results to EPA. This will 
be the fourth national monitoring effort under the UCMR program (see 
section II.D). The monitoring provides data to inform future regulatory 
actions to protect public health.
    The public will benefit from information about whether or not 
unregulated contaminants are present in their drinking water. If 
contaminants are not found, consumer confidence in their drinking water 
will improve. If contaminants are found, illnesses may be avoided when 
subsequent actions, such as regulations, reduce or eliminate those 
contaminants.

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    As part of its responsibilities under SDWA, EPA implements section 
1445(a)(2), Monitoring Program for Unregulated Contaminants. This 
section, as amended in 1996, requires that once every five years, 
beginning in August 1999, EPA issue a list of no more than 30 
unregulated contaminants to be monitored by PWSs. SDWA requires that 
EPA enter the monitoring data into the Agency's publically available 
National Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD). EPA's UCMR program 
must ensure that systems serving a population larger than 10,000 
people, as well as a nationally representative

[[Page 76900]]

sample of PWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people, are required to monitor. 
EPA must vary the frequency and schedule for monitoring based on the 
number of persons served, the source of supply and the contaminants 
likely to be found. EPA is using this authority as the basis for 
monitoring 29 of the 30 contaminants/groups proposed under this rule.
    Section 1445(a)(1)(A) of SDWA, as amended in 1996, requires that 
every person who is subject to any SDWA requirement establish and 
maintain such records, make such reports, conduct such monitoring and 
provide such information as the Administrator may reasonably require by 
regulation to assist the Administrator in establishing SDWA 
regulations. Pursuant to this provision, EPA can also require the 
monitoring of contaminants already subject to EPA's drinking water 
standards. EPA is using this authority as the basis for monitoring one 
of the chemical groups (Haloacetic Acids 5 (HAA5)) proposed under this 
rule. Sample collection and analysis for HAA5 can be done concurrent 
with the unregulated HAA monitoring described in section II.F 
(resulting in no substantive additional burden) and would allow EPA to 
better understand co-occurrence between regulated and unregulated 
disinfection byproducts.
    Hereinafter, all 30 proposed contaminants/groups are collectively 
referred to as ``contaminants.''

D. What is the estimated cost of this proposed action?

    EPA estimates the total average national cost of this proposed 
action will be $25.3 million per year from 2017-2021. EPA has 
documented the assumptions and data sources used in the preparation of 
this estimate in the Information Collection Request (ICR) (USEPA, 
2015a). EPA proposes using eleven analytical methods (eight EPA-
developed analytical methods, one state-developed methodology and two 
alternate equivalent consensus organization-developed methods) to 
analyze samples for 30 UCMR 4 chemical contaminants. EPA's estimate of 
the analytical cost for the UCMR 4 contaminants and related indicators 
is $2,562 per sample set. EPA calculated these costs by summing the 
laboratory unit cost of each method. Exhibit 1 presents a breakdown of 
EPA estimated annual average national costs. Estimated PWS (i.e., large 
and very large) and EPA costs reflect the analytical cost (i.e., non-
labor) for all UCMR 4 methods. EPA pays for the analytical costs for 
all systems serving a population of 10,000 or fewer people. Laboratory 
analysis and sample shipping account for approximately 80% of the total 
national cost for UCMR 4 implementation. EPA estimated laboratory unit 
costs based on consultations with multiple commercial drinking water 
laboratories and, in the case of new methods, a review of the costs of 
analytical methods similar to those proposed in this action. The cost 
of the laboratory methods includes shipping as part of the cost for the 
analysis.
    EPA expects that states would incur labor costs associated with 
voluntary assistance with UCMR 4 implementation. EPA estimated state 
costs using the relevant assumptions from the State Resource Model that 
was developed by the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators 
(ASDWA) (ASDWA, 2013) to help states forecast resource needs. Model 
estimates were adjusted to account for actual levels of state 
participation under UCMR 3. State participation is voluntary; thus, the 
level of effort is expected to vary among states and would depend on 
their individual agreements with EPA.
    EPA assumes that one-third of the systems would monitor during each 
of the three monitoring years from January 2018 through December 2020. 
The total estimated annual costs (labor and non-labor) would be 
incurred as follows:

           Exhibit 1--Estimated Average Annual Costs of UCMR 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Avg. annual cost
                      Respondent                        all respondents
                                                        (2017-2021) \ 1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Systems (25-10,000), including labor \2\ only              $0.16 m
 (non-labor costs \3\ paid for by EPA)...............
Large Systems (10,001-100,000), including labor and              $15.7 m
 non-labor costs.....................................
Very Large Systems (100,001 and greater), including               $4.3 m
 labor and non-labor costs...........................
States, including labor costs related to                         $0.50 m
 implementation coordination.........................
EPA, including labor for implementation, non-labor                $4.7 m
 for small system testing............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    AVERAGE ANNUAL NATIONAL TOTAL....................            $25.3 m
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Totals may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
\2\ Labor costs pertain to systems, states and EPA. Costs include
  activities such as reading the rule, notifying systems selected to
  participate, sample collection, data review, reporting and record
  keeping.
\3\ Non-labor costs would be incurred primarily by EPA and by very large
  and large PWSs. They include the cost of shipping samples to
  laboratories for testing and the cost of the laboratory analyses.

    Additional details regarding EPA's cost assumptions and estimates 
can be found in the ``DRAFT Information Collection Request for the 
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4)'' (USEPA, 2015a) ICR 
Number 2192.07, which presents estimated cost and burden for the 2017-
2019 period, consistent with the 3-year time frame for ICRs. Estimates 
of costs over the entire 5-year UCMR 4 sequence of 2017-2021 are 
attached as an appendix to the ICR. Copies of the ICR and its appendix 
may be obtained from the EPA public docket for this proposed rule, 
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0218.

II. Background

A. How has EPA implemented the unregulated contaminant monitoring 
program?

    EPA published the list of contaminants for the first UCMR (UCMR 1) 
in the Federal Register (FR) on September 17, 1999 (64 FR 50556, 
(USEPA, 1999)), the second UCMR (UCMR 2) on January 4, 2007 (72 FR 368, 
(USEPA, 2007)) and the third UCMR (UCMR 3) on May 2, 2012 (77 FR 26072, 
(USEPA, 2012c)). EPA established a three-tiered approach for monitoring 
contaminants under the UCMR program that takes into account the 
availability of analytical methods, the source of water supply and the 
contaminants likely to be found. Assessment Monitoring for ``List 1'' 
contaminants typically relies on analytical methods, techniques or 
technologies that are in common use by drinking water laboratories. 
Screening Survey monitoring for ``List 2''

[[Page 76901]]

contaminants typically relies on newer analytical methods that are not 
as commonly used, such that laboratory capacity to perform List 2 
analyses may be limited. Finally, Pre-Screen Testing for ``List 3'' 
contaminants is often associated with analytical methods that are very 
recently developed and/or are particularly complex. In addition to 
method complexity and laboratory capacity, EPA considers sampling 
frequency and/or the relevant universe of PWSs when deciding which of 
the three tiers is appropriate for a contaminant.
    EPA designed the Assessment Monitoring sampling approach (USEPA, 
2001b) to ensure that sample results would yield a high level of 
confidence and a low margin of error. The design for a nationally 
representative sample of small systems called for the sample to be 
stratified by water source type (ground water (GW) or surface water 
(SW)), service size category and state (where each state is allocated a 
minimum of two systems in its state monitoring plan (SMP)).
    This action proposes 30 contaminants for List 1, Assessment 
Monitoring from 2018-2020, with pre-monitoring activity in 2017 and 
post-monitoring activity in 2021. EPA developed this proposal after 
considering input from an EPA-state workgroup as well as other 
stakeholders.

B. How are the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), the UCMR program, the 
Regulatory Determination process and the NCOD interrelated?

    Under the 1996 amendments to SDWA, Congress established a stepwise, 
risk-based approach for determining which contaminants would become 
subject to drinking water standards. Under the first step, EPA is 
required to publish, every five years, a list of contaminants that are 
not yet regulated but which are known or anticipated to occur in PWSs; 
this is the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). Under the second step, 
EPA must require, every five years, monitoring of up to 30 unregulated 
contaminants to determine their occurrence in drinking water systems; 
this is the UCMR program. Under the third step, EPA is required to 
determine, every five years, whether or not at least five contaminants 
from the CCL warrant regulation, based in part on the UCMR occurrence 
information; this is known as a Regulatory Determination where the 
following questions are evaluated:
    (1) Which contaminants may have an adverse effect on human health?
    (2) Which contaminants are known to occur or are likely to occur in 
drinking water with a frequency and at levels of public health concern?
    (3) Does regulation of such contaminants present a meaningful 
opportunity for risk reduction? Finally, SDWA requires EPA to issue 
national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs) for contaminants 
the Agency determines should be regulated.
    The CCL process identifies contaminants that may require 
regulation, while the UCMR program helps provide the data necessary for 
the Regulatory Determination process outlined above. The data collected 
through the UCMR program are stored in the NCOD to facilitate analysis 
and review of contaminant occurrence, and support the Administrator's 
determination on whether regulation of a contaminant is in the public 
health interest, as required under SDWA section 1412(b)(1). UCMR 
results can be viewed by the public at: http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr.

C. What notable changes are being proposed for UCMR 4?

    This proposed action refines the existing UCMR, as reflected in the 
Code of Federal Regulations, to address the contaminants proposed for 
UCMR 4 monitoring and to reflect lessons learned through prior 
experience implementing UCMRs. EPA's proposed approach and rationale 
for changes are described in the following sections. Key aspects of the 
UCMR program that would remain the same, and are outside the scope of 
today's proposal, include direct implementation of the rule by EPA; the 
number and types of systems included in Assessment Monitoring for the 
majority of the proposed contaminants; and EPA funding for the small 
system testing. Proposed changes include the list of UCMR 4 
contaminants, the analytical methods, monitoring time frame, sampling 
locations, the revised data elements outlined in Exhibit 2 and 
conforming and editorial changes, such as those necessary to remove 
requirements solely related to UCMR 3. A track-changes version of the 
rule language comparing UCMR 3 to the proposed changes for UCMR 4 is 
included in the public docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW 2015-0218) for 
this proposed rule (USEPA, 2015h).

                                 Exhibit 2--Notable Changes Proposed for UCMR 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        CFR Rule section
----------------------------------------------------------------  Description of rule change     Corresponding
                Number                     Title/Description                                    preamble section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   141.40(a)(3)..................  Analytes to be monitored  Revises Table 1 to include a               II.D
                                        and related               new list of contaminants
                                        specifications.           and associated analytical
                                                                  methods.
Sec.  Sec.   141.35(a) and 141.40(a).  Applicability...........  Revises the Federal Safe                   II.E
                                                                  Drinking Water Information                II.F
                                                                  System (SDWIS/Fed)
                                                                  applicability date (i.e.,
                                                                  the date used to determine
                                                                  which systems are subject
                                                                  to monitoring) to December
                                                                  31, 2015.
                                                                 Revises the monitoring dates
                                                                  to January 2018 through
                                                                  December 2020.

[[Page 76902]]

 
Sec.   141.40(a)(4)..................  Sampling design           Updates Table 2 to change                  II.F
                                        requirements--Frequency.  the sample collection time
                                                                  frame to March--November,
                                                                  and excludes December--
                                                                  February. Additionally,
                                                                  updates the frequency such
                                                                  that, with the exception of
                                                                  cyanotoxins, monitoring
                                                                  would occur every two
                                                                  months (bi-monthly) for SW
                                                                  or ground water under the
                                                                  direct influence of surface
                                                                  water (GWUDI) systems and
                                                                  every six months for GW
                                                                  systems.
                                                                 Updates Table 2 to include
                                                                  monitoring requirements for
                                                                  cyanotoxins for PWSs with
                                                                  SW and GWUDI sources at a
                                                                  frequency of twice a month
                                                                  for four consecutive months
                                                                  (for a total of eight
                                                                  cyanotoxin sampling events).
Sec.   141.40(a)(4)..................  Sampling design           Specifies revised sampling                 II.F
                                        requirements--Location.   locations for Assessment
                                                                  Monitoring, including HAA5
                                                                  Stage 2 compliance and/or
                                                                  distribution system maximum
                                                                  residence time (DSMRT)
                                                                  locations for the
                                                                  brominated haloacetic acids
                                                                  (HAAs), and source water
                                                                  intake locations for total
                                                                  organic carbon (TOC), total
                                                                  microcystins (i.e. the sum
                                                                  of congeners as measured by
                                                                  ADDA-ELISA), pH and
                                                                  temperature.
Sec.   141.35(e).....................  Reporting requirements--  Updates, revises, adds and               II.G.1
                                        Data elements.            removes data elements to
                                                                  account for the
                                                                  contaminants being
                                                                  proposed, and requires the
                                                                  reporting of quality
                                                                  control data by all
                                                                  laboratories.
Sec.   141.40(a)(4)(ii)(F)...........  Small systems sampling    Removes the requirement for              II.G.2
                                        requirements--Duplicate   small system duplicate
                                        samples.                  quality control samples,
                                                                  although EPA may in the
                                                                  future select a subset of
                                                                  systems to collect
                                                                  duplicate samples if the
                                                                  Agency becomes aware of a
                                                                  need to include this type
                                                                  of quality control.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. How did EPA prioritize candidate contaminants and what contaminants 
are proposed for UCMR 4?

    In establishing the proposed list of contaminants for UCMR 4, EPA 
started with a priority set of contaminants from the draft fourth 
Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 4), which includes 100 chemicals or 
chemical groups and 12 microbes (80 FR 6076, February 4, 2015 (USEPA, 
2015b)). The evaluation and selection process that led to the draft CCL 
4 carried forward the final list of CCL 3 contaminants (except for 
those with regulatory determinations), requested and evaluated 
contaminant nominations from the public and evaluated any new data from 
previous negative regulatory determinations for potential inclusion on 
CCL 4 (77 FR 27057, May 8, 2012 (USEPA, 2012b)).
    EPA selected the proposed UCMR 4 contaminants using a stepwise 
prioritization process. The first step included identifying 
contaminants that: (1) Were not monitored under UCMR 2 or UCMR 3; (2) 
are anticipated to have significant occurrence nationally; and (3) are 
expected to have a completed, validated drinking water method in time 
for rule proposal. This resulted in a set of 45 draft CCL 4 
contaminants and another set of related non-CCL analytes with potential 
health effects of concern that can be measured concurrently using the 
analytical methods for the CCL contaminants. Including related non-CCL 
analytes creates a more cost-effective design and reduces the 
likelihood of needing to include them in a subsequent UCMR.
    The next step was to select contaminants associated with one or 
more of the following considerations: an available health assessment to 
facilitate regulatory determinations; high public concern; critical 
health endpoints (e.g., likely or suggestive carcinogen); active use 
(e.g., pesticides); and an occurrence data gap. This step identified 31 
CCL contaminants, and 18 related non-CCL analytes that can be measured 
using the analytical methods for the CCL contaminants.
    During the final step, EPA considered workgroup and stakeholder 
input; looked at cost-effectiveness of the method/contaminant groups; 
considered implementation factors (e.g., laboratory capacity); and 
further evaluated health, occurrence, and persistence/mobility data to 
identify a proposed list of 30 UCMR 4 contaminants.
    Further information on this prioritization process, as well as 
contaminant-specific information (source, use, production, release, 
persistence, mobility, health effects and occurrence), that EPA used to 
select the proposed analyte list, is contained in ``UCMR 4 Candidate 
Contaminants--Information Compendium'' (USEPA, 2015i). Copies of the 
Compendium may be obtained from the EPA public docket for this proposed 
rule, under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0218.
    EPA invites comment on the proposed UCMR 4 contaminants and their 
associated analytical methods identified in Exhibit 3, as well as any 
other priority contaminants commenters wish to recommend. In 
particular, the Agency welcomes comments on the following contaminants 
that were considered by the workgroup, but not included in the proposed 
list because they were deemed a lower UCMR 4 priority than the 
contaminants identified in Exhibit 3: Legionella pneumophila and 
Mycobacterium avium (both are part of the draft CCL 4); ammonia 
(considered as an indicator of distribution system nitrification 
potential); and the pesticides vinclozolin, hexazinone and disulfoton 
(additional analytes in EPA Method 525.3). More specific information on 
why these contaminants were not included on the proposed list can be 
found in the Information Compendium (USEPA, 2015i) cited

[[Page 76903]]

above. In your comments, please identify the following: Any new 
contaminant(s) that you think the Agency should include in UCMR 4 
monitoring; any contaminant(s) in Exhibit 3 that you think represent a 
lower priority than your new recommendation(s) or that should otherwise 
be removed from the list; the recommended analytical method(s) for any 
new contaminant(s) that you propose; and other relevant details (e.g., 
reporting level, sampling location and sampling frequency). Comments 
that provide supporting data or rationale are especially helpful to the 
Agency.

                 Exhibit 3--30 Proposed UCMR 4 Analytes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             List 1 Analytes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  One Cyanotoxin Group Using ELISA \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
total microcystins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Seven Cyanotoxins Using EPA Method 544 (SPE LC/MS/MS) \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
microcystin-LA                              microcystin-RR
microcystin-LF                              microcystin-YR
microcystin-LR                              Nodularin
microcystin-LY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Two Cyanotoxins Using EPA Method 545 (LC/ECI-MS/MS) \3\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
anatoxin-a                                  Cylindrospermopsin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Two Metals Using EPA Method 200.8 (ICP-MS) \4\ or Alternate SM \5\ or
                                ASTM \6\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Germanium                                   Manganese
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Nine Pesticides Using EPA Method 525.3 (SPE GC/MS) \7\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane                 Profenofos
chlorpyrifos                                Tebuconazole
Dimethipin                                  total permethrin (cis- &
                                             trans-)
Ethoprop                                    Tribufos
Oxyfluorfen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Three Brominated HAA Groups Using EPA Method 552.3 (GC/ECD) or 557 (IC/
                         ECI-MS/MS) \8\ \9\ \10\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HAA5                                        HAA9
HAA6Br
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Three Alcohols Using EPA Method 541 (GC/MS) \11\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-butanol                                   2-propen-1-ol
2-methoxyethanol
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Three Semivolatile Organic Chemicals (SVOCs) Using EPA Method 530 (GC/
                                MS) \12\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
butylated hydroxyanisole                    quinolone
o-toluidine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ELISA Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) (Ohio EPA, 2015). EPA
  anticipates having an EPA ELISA method available by the publication of
  the final rule and anticipates that this method will be similar to the
  Ohio EPA methodology. Monitoring includes measuring for pH using one
  of the following methods: EPA Method 150.1 and 150.2 (USEPA, 1983a and
  1983b), ASTM D1293-12 (ASTM, 2012a), SM 4500-H+ B (SM, 2005c), SM 4500-
  H+ B-00 (SM Online, 2000a). Monitoring also includes measuring for
  water temperature using one of the following methods: SM 2550 (SM,
  2005a) or SM 2550-10 (SM Online, 2010).
\2\ EPA Method 544 (Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) Liquid chromatography/
  tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)) (USEPA, 2015f). This method would
  only be used if analyses by ELISA (for ``total microcystins'') yielded
  results above reporting limits.
\3\ EPA Method 545 (Liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization/tandem
  mass spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS)) (USEPA, 2015g).
\4\ EPA Method 200.8 (Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-
  MS)) (USEPA, 1994).
\5\ Standard Methods (SM) 3125 (SM, 2005b) or SM 3125-09 (SM Online,
  2009).
\6\ ASTM International (ASTM) D5673-10 (ASTM, 2010).
\7\ EPA Method 525.3 (SPE Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS))
  (USEPA, 2012a).
\8\ EPA Method 552.3 (GC/Electron capture detection (ECD)) (USEPA, 2003)
  and EPA Method 557 (Ion chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem
  mass spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS)) (USEPA, 2009b). HAA5 includes:
  dibromoacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid,
  monochloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid. HAA6Br includes:
  bromochloroacetic acid, bromodichloroacetic acid, dibromoacetic acid,
  dibromochloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, tribromoacetic acid.
  HAA9 includes: bromochloroacetic acid, bromodichloroacetic acid,
  chlorodibromoacetic acid, dibromoacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid,
  monobromoacetic acid, monochloroacetic acid, tribromoacetic acid,
  trichloroacetic acid.
\9\ Regulated HAAs (HAA5) are included in the proposed monitoring
  program to gain a better understanding of co-occurrence with currently
  unregulated disinfection byproducts.
\10\ Brominated HAA monitoring also includes sampling for indicators TOC
  and bromide using methods approved for compliance monitoring. TOC
  methods include: SM 5310B, SM 5310C, SM 5310D (SM, 2005d, 2005e,
  2005f), or SM 5310B-00, SM 5310C-00, SM 5310D-00 (SM Online, 2000b,
  2000c, 2000d), EPA Method 415.3 (Rev. 1.1 or 1.2) (USEPA, 2005,
  2009a). Bromide methods include: EPA Methods 300.0 (Rev. 2.1), 300.1
  (Rev. 1.0), 317.0 (Rev. 2.0), 326.0 (Rev. 1.0) (USEPA, 1993, 1997,
  2001a, 2002) or ASTM D 6581-12 (ASTM, 2012b).
\11\ EPA Method 541 (GC/MS) (USEPA, 2015e).
\12\ EPA Method 530 (GC/MS) (USEPA, 2015d).

[[Page 76904]]

E. What is the proposed applicability date?

    EPA proposes (in Sec.  141.40(a)) a new applicability date of 
December 31, 2015. That is, the determination of whether a PWS is 
required to monitor under UCMR 4 is based on the type of system (e.g., 
CWS, NTNCWS, etc.) and its retail population served, as indicated by 
the SDWIS/Fed inventory on December 31, 2015. If a PWS believes its 
retail population served in SDWIS/Fed is inaccurate, the system should 
contact its state to verify its population as of the applicability date 
and request a correction if necessary. The 5-year UCMR 4 program would 
take place from January 2017 through December 2021.

F. What are the proposed UCMR 4 sampling design and timeline of 
activities?

    The proposed rule identifies sampling and analysis for List 1 
contaminants within the 2018 to 2020 time frame. Preparations prior to 
2018 are expected to include coordination of laboratory approval, 
selection of representative small systems, development of SMPs and 
establishment of monitoring schedules. EPA anticipates that there is 
enough laboratory capacity to meet the needs of Assessment Monitoring. 
Exhibit 4 illustrates the major activities that we expect will take 
place in preparation for and during the implementation of UCMR 4.

                                Exhibit 4--Proposed Timeline of UCMR 4 Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               2017                       2018               2019               2020                2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After proposed rule publication:             [larr] Assessment Monitoring [rarr]            Complete reporting
 EPA                                                                                         and analysis of
 laboratory approval program                         List 1 Contaminants                     data.
 begins.
After final rule publication: EPA/    All large systems serving more than 10,000 people;
 state
 primacy authorities (1) develop       800 small systems serving 10,000 or fewer people
 SMPs
 (including the nationally                             for cyanotoxins;
 representa-
 tive sample); and (2) inform          800 small systems serving 10,000 or fewer people
 PWSs/
 establish monitoring plans.                   for the 20 additional chemicals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To minimize the impact of the rule on small systems (those serving 
10,000 or fewer people), EPA pays for the sample kit preparation, 
sample shipping fees and analysis costs for these systems. In addition, 
no small system would be required to monitor for both cyanotoxins and 
the 20 additional UCMR chemicals. Consistent with prior UCMRs, large 
systems (those serving more than 10,000 people) pay for all costs 
associated with their monitoring. A summary of the estimated number of 
systems subject to monitoring is shown in Exhibit 5.

                             Exhibit 5--Systems To Participate in UCMR 4 Monitoring
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 National sample assessment monitoring
                                        ------------------------------------------------------  Total number of
 System size (number of people served)                                 20 Additional List 1     systems per size
                                           10 List 1 cyanotoxins            chemicals               category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Systems: \1\
    25-10,000..........................  800 randomly selected SW   800 randomly selected SW,              1,600
                                          or GWUDI systems.          GWUDI and GW systems.
Large Systems: \2\
    10,001 and over....................  All SW or GWUDI systems    All SW, GWUDI and GW                   4,292
                                          (1,987).                   systems (4,292).
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total..........................  2,787....................  5,092....................              5,892
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Total for small systems is additive because these systems would only be selected for one component of UCMR 4
  sampling (10 cyanotoxins or 20 additional chemicals). EPA would pay for all analytical costs associated with
  monitoring at small systems.
\2\ Large system counts are approximate. The number of large systems is not additive. All SW and GWUDI systems
  would monitor for cyanotoxins; those same systems would also monitor for the 20 additional List 1 chemicals,
  as would the large GW systems.

1. Sampling Frequency, Timing
    The number of samples for SW, GWUDI and GW systems would generally 
be consistent with those during prior UCMR cycles, with the exceptions 
noted for the monitoring of cyanotoxins. Water systems would be 
required to collect samples during the monitoring time frame of March 
through November (excluding December, January and February). With the 
exception of cyanotoxin monitoring, sampling would take place every two 
months for SW and GWUDI systems (a total of four sampling events), and 
at 6-month intervals for GW systems (a total of two sampling events). 
For cyanotoxin monitoring, SW and GWUDI systems would collect samples 
twice a month for four consecutive months (total of eight sampling 
events). GW systems would be excluded from cyanotoxin monitoring.
    The Assessment Monitoring sampling time frame would take place 
during the compressed period of March through November to better 
reflect the times of year when contaminants are more likely to occur in 
drinking water. Populations of cyanobacteria generally peak when water 
temperature is highest (Graham et al., 2008). Seasonality of pesticide 
occurrence in surface waters has been well documented, and generally 
relates to the timing of pesticide applications in the watershed, 
rainfall or irrigation patterns and watershed size (USGS, 2014; Ryberg 
and Gilliom, 2015). Based on this information, EPA anticipates that 
sampling in the December through February time period would not 
accurately reflect occurrence for some of the contaminants, 
particularly cyanotoxins and pesticides. Industry and laboratory 
stakeholders have also observed that the traditional UCMR approach has 
the potential to underestimate exposure for some contaminants because 
of seasonal occurrence (Roberson and Eaton, 2014). Therefore, EPA is 
proposing that no sampling take place during those winter months, 
except for resampling purposes. EPA welcomes comments on this approach.
    Large system schedules (year and months of monitoring) would 
initially be determined by EPA in conjunction

[[Page 76905]]

with the states (as described in section II.K) and these PWSs would 
have an opportunity to modify this schedule for planning purposes or 
other reasons (e.g., to conduct monitoring during the months the system 
or the state believes are most vulnerable, spread costs over multiple 
years, a sampling location will be closed during the scheduled month of 
monitoring, etc.). PWSs would not be permitted to reschedule monitoring 
specifically to avoid sample collection during a suspected vulnerable 
period. EPA proposes to schedule and coordinate small system monitoring 
by working closely with partnering states. SMPs provide an opportunity 
for states to review and revise the initial sampling schedules that EPA 
proposes (see discussion of SMPs in section II.K).
2. Sampling Locations
    Sample collection for the UCMR 4 contaminants would take place at 
the entry point to the distribution system (EPTDS), with the following 
exceptions/additions. Sampling for ``total microcystins'' (i.e., the 
sum of congeners as measured by ADDA-ELISA) would also take place at 
the source water intake (concurrent with the collection of cyanotoxin 
samples at the EPTDS) unless the PWS purchases 100 percent of their 
water. ``Consecutive systems'' would only sample for cyanotoxins at 
their EPTDS. Measurements for temperature and pH would take place at 
the source water intake (concurrent with total microcystin sampling). 
HAA sampling would take place in the distribution system. Sampling for 
TOC and bromide would take place at a single source water intake 
(concurrent with HAA sampling in the distribution system). The 
indicator data, along with the disinfectant type and water treatment 
information, would aid in the understanding of brominated HAA and 
cyanotoxin occurrence and treatment efficacy.
    For purposes of total microcystin sampling, temperature and pH 
measurement, and TOC and bromide sampling, EPA defines source water 
under UCMR as untreated water entering the water treatment plant (i.e., 
at a location prior to any treatment). Systems that are subject to the 
Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2) would use their 
source water sampling site(s) that have been identified under that rule 
(71 FR 654, January 5, 2006 (USEPA, 2006a)). Systems subject to the 
Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR) would use 
their TOC source water sampling site(s) (63 FR 69390, December 16, 1998 
(USEPA, 1998c)). TOC source water sampling site(s) were set under Stage 
1 DBPR and remain unchanged under Stage 2 DBPR. If a system has two 
different source water sampling locations for LT2 and Stage 1 DBPR, the 
system would be permitted to select the sample point that best 
represents the definition of source water sample location(s) for UCMR.
    EPA proposes that PWSs monitor for HAAs only in the distribution 
system. If the system's treatment plant/water source is subject to 
sampling requirements under Sec.  141.622 (monitoring requirements for 
Stage 2 DBPR), the water systems must collect samples for the HAAs at 
the sampling locations identified under that rule (71 FR 388, January 
4, 2006 (USEPA, 2006b)). If a treatment plant/water source is not 
subject to Stage 2 DBPR monitoring, then the water system must collect 
HAA distribution system samples at a location that represents the 
DSMRT. UCMR 4 HAA samples and HAA5 Stage 2 DBPR compliance monitoring 
samples may be collected by the PWS at the same time. However, in such 
cases, PWSs would be required to arrange for UCMR 4 HAA samples to be 
analyzed by a UCMR 4 approved laboratory using EPA Method 552.3 or 557 
(compliance methods used for analysis of Stage 2 DBPR samples).
3. Phased Sample Analysis for Microcystins
    EPA is proposing a phased sample analysis approach for microcystins 
to reduce analytical costs (i.e., PWSs must collect all required 
samples for each sampling event but not all samples may need to be 
analyzed). Two samples would be collected for ADDA ELISA (one source 
water intake sample and one EPTDS), and one sample would be collected 
for EPA Method 544 at the EPTDS. Initially, source water intake samples 
(collected by ``non-consecutive'' SW and GWUDI PWSs) would be analyzed 
for total microcystins as defined by an ADDA specific ELISA 
methodology. ADDA ELISA is a widely used screening assay that allows 
for the aggregate detection of numerous microcystin congeners; it does 
not allow for measurement of the individual congeners (USEPA, 2015c; 
Fischer et al., 2001; McElhiney and Lawton, 2005; Zeck et al., 2001). 
If the source water intake ELISA result is less than 0.3 micrograms per 
liter ([mu]g/L) (i.e., the reporting limit for total microcystins), 
then the other collected samples (from the EPTDS) would not be analyzed 
for that sample event and only the source water result would be 
reported to EPA. If the ELISA result from the source water intake is 
greater than or equal to 0.3 [mu]g/L, the result would be reported to 
EPA and the sample from the EPTDS would then also be analyzed for total 
microcystins by ELISA. ELISA analysis of the EPTDS sample would be the 
first step for consecutive systems. If the EPTDS ELISA result is less 
than 0.3 [mu]g/L, then no additional analyses would be required for 
that particular sample event and the result would be reported to EPA. 
If the EPTDS ELISA result is greater than or equal to 0.3 [mu]g/L, then 
that result would be reported to EPA and the other microcystin sample 
collected at the EPTDS would be analyzed using EPA Method 544 to 
identify and quantify six particular microcystin congeners and a 
related toxin, nodularin. Method 544 uses liquid chromatography with 
tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) to quantify and speciate 
microcystin congeners at low concentrations. Using Method 544 to 
analyze EPTDS samples that tested positive for microcystins by ELISA is 
expected to help EPA and the states to establish the degree to which 
particular congener occurrence compares with total microcystin 
occurrence as measured by ADDA ELISA (USEPA, 2015c).
    This phased sample analysis approach for microcystins has the 
potential to achieve significant cost savings. A similar approach is 
not practical for cylindrospermopsin and anatoxin-a samples. Therefore, 
EPA proposes that cylindrospermopsin and anatoxin-a sampling be 
conducted simultaneously with the microcystins, twice a month for four 
consecutive months only at the EPTDS, and that the samples be analyzed 
using EPA Method 545.
4. Representative Sampling
    As during past UCMRs and as described in Sec.  141.35(c)(3), the 
proposed rule would allow large GW systems that have multiple EPTDSs, 
with prior approval, to sample at representative sampling locations 
rather than at each EPTDS. Representative sampling plans approved under 
prior UCMRs will be recognized as valid for UCMR 4 and these systems 
must submit a copy of documentation from their state or EPA that 
approves their alternative sampling plan. Any new GW representative 
monitoring plans must be submitted to be reviewed by the state or EPA 
within 120 days from publication of the final rule. Once approved, 
these representative EPTDS locations, along with previously approved 
EPTDS locations from prior UCMRs, must be loaded into the Safe Drinking 
Water

[[Page 76906]]

Accession and Review System (SDWARS) by December 31, 2017.
5. Summary
    With the exception of the increased sample frequency, phased sample 
analysis for microcystins, revised sampling locations and the 
compressed monitoring schedule, the approach to UCMR 4 Assessment 
Monitoring remains consistent with that established for UCMR 3.
    EPA invites comments regarding the cyanotoxin monitoring approach 
and the usefulness of collecting temperature and pH data (concurrently 
with the ELISA sample) at the source water intake, as well as 
designating source water type (e.g., lakes/reservoirs or flowing 
streams), as potential indicators of cyanotoxin occurrence. EPA also 
invites comments on the appropriateness of other potential cyanotoxin 
indicators, recognizing that the cost of any additional indicator 
monitoring would need to be weighed with consideration given to the 
likelihood of any other parameters serving as effective indicators.
    Finally, EPA recognizes the trade-off between PWS burden and 
occurrence-data representativeness, and has attempted to strike a 
reasonable balance in selecting the affected PWSs and establishing the 
monitoring frequency. The Agency welcomes comment on this particular 
point, including input regarding the appropriateness of collecting 
occurrence data from fewer PWSs. This could include employing the 
Screening Survey approach used in UCMR 3 or an alternative design. EPA 
requests that commenters suggesting alternatives describe how their 
proposed approach would be nationally representative of the frequency 
and level of contaminant occurrence.

G. What are reporting requirements for UCMR 4?

1. Data Elements
    EPA proposes the following changes to the reporting requirements 
listed in Table 1 of Sec.  141.35(e) to account for the UCMR 4 
contaminants being proposed and the associated indicators. 
Additionally, EPA proposes to collect quality control information 
related to sample analysis. This information would further ensure that 
methods are followed as written, and would provide continuous quality 
assurance of data reported. EPA collected this information for small 
systems in previous UCMRs and found that doing so helps ensure that 
laboratories consistently follow the methods.
     Add Public Water System Name. New data element to be 
assigned once by the PWS.
     Add Public Water System Facility Name. New data element to 
be assigned once by the PWS for every facility identification code.
     Add Public Water System Facility Type. New data element to 
be assigned once by the PWS for every facility.
     Update Sampling Point Identification Code. Added ``source 
water'' as an example of applicable sampling locations.
     Add Sampling Point Name. New data element to be assigned 
once by the PWS for every sampling point identification code.
     Update Sample Point Type Code. Add source water (SR) to 
account for brominated HAA indicators and microcystin monitoring at the 
intake to the treatment plant.
     Update Disinfectant Type. Adding the following primary 
disinfectant/oxidation practices: Permanganate applied before SR sample 
location (PEMB) and after (PEMA), hydrogen peroxide applied before SR 
sample location (HPXB) and after (HPXA), and chlorine dioxide applied 
before SR sample location (CLDB) and after (CLDA).
     Add Treatment Information. New data element to capture 
treatment associated with the water being sampled.
     Add Disinfectant Residual Type. New data element to 
capture disinfectant residual type information associated with the 
water being sampled.
     Add Extraction Batch Identification Code. New data element 
to allow evaluation of quality control elements associated with 
extraction of samples in methods where extraction is required.
     Add Extraction Date. New data element identifying the date 
of sample extraction.
     Add Analysis Batch Identification Code. New data element 
to allow evaluation of quality control elements associated with 
analyzing samples.
     Add Analysis Date. New data element identifying the start 
date of sample analysis.
     Update Sample Analysis Type. The following elements are 
proposed as quality assurance measures:
    [cir] Continuing calibration check (CCC), an element that verifies 
the accuracy of method calibration;
    [cir] Internal standard (IS), an element that measures the relative 
response of contaminants;
    [cir] Laboratory fortified blank (LFB), an element that verifies 
method performance in the absence of a sample matrix;
    [cir] Laboratory reagent blank (LRB), an element that verifies the 
absence of interferences in the reagents and equipment;
    [cir] Quality control sample (QCS), an element that verifies the 
accuracy of the calibration standards;
    [cir] Quality HAA (QH), HAA sample collected and submitted for 
quality control; and,
    [cir] Surrogate standard (SUR), an element that assesses method 
performance for each extraction.
     Update Analytical Result--Value. Update to ``Analytical 
Result--Measured Value.'' The measured value is the analytical result 
for the contaminant.
     Add Additional Value. This element is used for quality 
control samples and is the amount of contaminant added to a QCS.
     Update Sample Event Code. Revise sample event codes to 
uniquely identify sampling events with specific codes for cyanotoxin 
and additional chemical monitoring.
2. Duplicate Samples
    Currently, Sec.  141.40(a)(4)(ii)(F), requires EPA to randomly 
select a small percentage of small water systems to collect duplicate 
water samples for quality control purposes. Based on experience from 
previous UCMRs, this requirement did not provide significant useful 
information and EPA proposes to remove the requirement for the 
collection of duplicate samples from UCMR 4.

H. What are Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) and how were they 
determined?

    The analyte minimum reporting level (MRL) is a quantitation level 
designed to be an estimate of the reporting level that is achievable, 
with 95% confidence, by a capable analyst/laboratory at least 75% of 
the time, using the prescribed method. Demonstration of the ability to 
reliably make quality measurements at or below the MRL is intended to 
ensure that high quality results are being reported by participating 
laboratories. MRLs are generally established as low as is reasonable 
(and are typically lower than the current health reference levels and 
health advisories), so that the occurrence data reported to EPA will 
support sound decision making, including those cases where new 
information might lead to lower health reference levels. EPA 
established the proposed MRL for each analyte/method by obtaining data 
from several laboratories performing ``lowest concentration minimum 
reporting level'' (LCMRL) studies. For further information on the LCMRL 
and MRL

[[Page 76907]]

process, see ``Technical Basis for the Lowest Concentration Minimum 
Reporting Level (LCMRL) Calculator'' (USEPA, 2010), available on the 
Internet at (http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods). EPA will consider raising MRLs if the Agency 
becomes aware of evidence that a proposed MRL is unattainable or 
impractical.

I. How do laboratories become approved to conduct UCMR 4 analyses?

    The proposed rule would require EPA approval for all laboratories 
conducting analyses for UCMR 4. EPA anticipates following the 
traditional Agency approach to approving UCMR laboratories, which would 
require laboratories seeking approval to: (1) Provide EPA with data 
that demonstrate a successful completion of an initial demonstration of 
capability (IDC) as outlined in each method; (2) verify successful 
performance at or below the MRLs as specified in this action; (3) 
provide information about laboratory operating procedures; and (4) 
successfully participate in an EPA proficiency testing (PT) program for 
the analytes of interest. Audits of laboratories may be conducted by 
EPA prior to and/or following approval. The ``UCMR 4 Laboratory 
Approval Requirements and Information Document'' (USEPA, 2015j) will 
provide guidance on the EPA laboratory approval program and the 
specific method acceptance criteria.
    EPA may supply analytical reference standards for select analytes 
to participating/approved laboratories when reliable standards are not 
readily available through commercial sources.
    The structure of the proposed UCMR 4 laboratory approval program is 
the same as that employed in previous UCMRs, and would provide an 
assessment of the ability of laboratories to perform analyses using the 
methods listed in Sec.  141.40(a)(3), Table 1. The UCMR 4 laboratory 
approval process is designed to assess whether laboratories possess the 
required equipment and can meet laboratory-performance and data-
reporting criteria described in this action. Laboratory participation 
in the UCMR laboratory approval program is voluntary. However, as in 
previous UCMRs and as proposed for UCMR 4, EPA would require PWSs to 
exclusively use laboratories that have been approved under the program. 
EPA expects to post a list of approved UCMR 4 laboratories to: http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr. Laboratories are encouraged to apply for UCMR 4 
approval as early as possible, as EPA anticipates that large PWSs 
scheduled for monitoring in the first year will be making arrangements 
for sample analyses soon after the final rule is published. The 
anticipated steps and requirements for the laboratory approval process 
are listed in the following paragraphs, steps 1 through 6.
1. Request To Participate
    Laboratories interested in the UCMR 4 laboratory approval program 
would first email EPA at: UCMR_Sampling_Coordinator@epa.gov to request 
registration materials. EPA expects to accept such requests beginning 
December 11, 2015. EPA anticipates that the final opportunity for a 
laboratory to complete and submit the necessary registration 
information will be 60 days after final rule publication.
2. Registration
    Laboratory applicants provide registration information that 
includes: laboratory name, mailing address, shipping address, contact 
name, phone number, email address and a list of the UCMR 4 methods for 
which the laboratory is seeking approval. This registration step 
provides EPA with the necessary contact information, and ensures that 
each laboratory receives a customized application package.
3. Application Package
    Laboratories that wish to participate complete and return a 
customized application package that includes the following: IDC data, 
including precision, accuracy and results of MRL studies; information 
regarding analytical equipment and other materials; proof of current 
drinking water laboratory certification (for select compliance 
monitoring methods); and example chromatograms for each method under 
review.
    As a condition of receiving and maintaining approval, the 
laboratory is expected to confirm that it will post UCMR 4 monitoring 
results and quality control data that meet method criteria (on behalf 
of its PWS clients) to EPA's UCMR electronic data reporting system, 
SDWARS.
4. EPA's Review of Application Package
    EPA will review the application packages and, if necessary, request 
follow-up information. Laboratories that successfully complete the 
application process become eligible to participate in the UCMR 4 PT 
program.
5. Proficiency Testing
    A PT sample is a synthetic sample containing a concentration of an 
analyte or mixture of analytes that is known to EPA, but unknown to the 
laboratory. To be approved, a laboratory is expected to meet specific 
acceptance criteria for the analysis of a UCMR 4 PT sample(s) for each 
analyte in each method, for which the laboratory is seeking approval. 
EPA intends to offer up to four opportunities for a laboratory to 
successfully analyze UCMR 4 PT samples. Up to three of these studies 
will be conducted prior to the publication of the final rule, and at 
least one study will be conducted after publication of the final rule. 
This allows laboratories to complete their portion of the laboratory 
approval process prior to publication of the final rule and receive 
their approval immediately following the publication of the final rule. 
A laboratory is expected to pass one of the PT studies for each 
analytical method for which it is requesting approval, and will not be 
required to pass a PT study for a method it already passed in a 
previous UCMR 4 PT study. EPA does not expect to conduct additional PT 
studies after the start of system monitoring; however, laboratory 
audits will likely be ongoing throughout UCMR 4 implementation. Initial 
laboratory approval is expected to be contingent on successful 
completion of a PT study. Continued laboratory approval is contingent 
on successful completion of the audit process and satisfactorily 
meeting all the other stated conditions.
6. Written EPA Approval
    After successfully completing the preceding steps 1 through 5, EPA 
expects to send each laboratory a letter listing the methods for which 
approval is pending (i.e., pending promulgation of the final rule if 
the PT studies have been conducted prior to that time), or for which 
approval is granted (if after promulgation of the final rule). 
Laboratories receiving pending approval are expected to be granted 
approval without further action following promulgation of the final 
rule if no changes have been made to the rule that impact the 
laboratory approval program. EPA expects to contact the laboratory if 
changes are made between the proposed and final rules that warrant 
additional action by the laboratory.

J. What documents are being incorporated by reference?

    The following methods are being incorporated by reference into this 
section for UCMR 4 monitoring. All approved material except for the 
Standard Method Online, is available for inspection electronically at 
http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID No. OW-2015-0218), or from the 
sources listed for each method. EPA has worked to make these methods 
and documents

[[Page 76908]]

reasonably available to interested parties. The versions of the EPA and 
non-EPA methods that may be used to support monitoring under this rule 
are as follows:
1. Methods From the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    The following methods are from the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.
    (i) EPA Method 150.1 ``pH Electrometric, in Methods for Chemical 
Analysis of Water and Wastes,'' 1983, EPA/600/4-79/020. Available on 
the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov. This is an EPA method for 
measuring pH in water samples using a meter with a glass electrode and 
reference electrode or a combination electrode. The proposal includes 
measurement of pH as a potential indicator for cyanotoxins.
    (ii) EPA Method 150.2 ``pH, Continuous Monitoring (Electrometric), 
in Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,'' 1983, EPA/600/
4-79/020. Available on the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov. This is an 
EPA method for measuring pH of in-line water samples using a continuous 
flow meter with a glass electrode and reference electrode or a 
combination electrode.
    (iii) EPA Method 200.8 ``Determination of Trace Elements in Waters 
and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma--Mass Spectrometry,'' Revision 
5.4, 1994. Available on the Internet at https://www.nemi.gov. This is 
an EPA method for the analysis of elements in water by ICP-MS and is 
proposed to measure germanium and manganese.
    (iv) EPA Method 300.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion 
Chromatography Samples,'' Revision 2.1, 1993. Available on the Internet 
at http://www.nemi.gov. This is an EPA method for the analysis of 
inorganic anions in water samples using ion chromatography (IC) with 
conductivity detection. The proposal includes measurement of bromide as 
a potential indicator for HAAs.
    (v) EPA Method 300.1 ``Determination of Inorganic Anions in 
Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography,'' Revision 1.0, 1997. Available 
on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is an EPA method for the 
analysis of inorganic anions in water samples using IC with 
conductivity detection.
    (vi) EPA Method 317.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
with the Addition of a Postcolumn Reagent for Trace Bromate Analysis,'' 
Revision 2.0, 2001, EPA 815-B-01-001. Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is an EPA method for the analysis of inorganic 
anions in water samples using IC with conductivity detection.
    (vii) EPA Method 326.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
Incorporating the Addition of a Suppressor Acidified Postcolumn Reagent 
for Trace Bromate Analysis,'' Revision 1.0, 2002, EPA 815-R-03-007. 
Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is an EPA method for 
the analysis of inorganic anions in water samples using IC with 
conductivity detection.
    (viii) EPA Method 415.3 ``Determination of Total Organic Carbon and 
Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and Drinking Water,'' 
Revision 1.1, 2005, EPA/600/R-05/055. Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods. 
This is an EPA method for the analysis of TOC in water samples using a 
conductivity detector or a nondispersive infrared detector.
    (ix) EPA Method 415.3 ``Determination of Total Organic Carbon and 
Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and Drinking Water,'' 
Revision 1.2, 2009, EPA/600/R-09/122.Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods. 
This is an EPA method for the analysis of TOC in water samples using a 
conductivity detector or a nondispersive infrared detector.
    (x) EPA Method 525.3 ``Determination of Semivolatile Organic 
Chemicals in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Capillary 
Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),'' Version 1.0, 
February 2012, EPA/600/R-12/010. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods. This 
is an EPA method for the analysis of semivolatile organic chemicals in 
drinking water using SPE and GC/MS and is proposed to measure nine 
pesticides (alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane, chlorpyrifos, dimethipin, 
ethoprop, oxyfluorfen, profenofos, tebuconazole, total cis- and trans- 
permethrin, and tribufos).
    (xi) EPA Method 530 ``Determination of Select Semivolatile Organic 
Chemicals in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Gas 
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),'' Version 1.0, January 2015, 
EPA/600/R-14/442. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods. This is an EPA 
method for the analysis of semivolatile organic chemicals in drinking 
water using SPE and GC/MS and is proposed to measure butylated 
hydroxyanisole, o-toluidine, and quinoline.
    (xii) EPA Method 541 ``Determination of 1-Butanol, 1,4-Dioxane, 2-
Methoxyethanol and 2-Propen-1-ol in Drinking Water by Solid Phase 
Extraction and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry,'' November 2015, 
EPA 815-R-15-011. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is 
an EPA method for the analysis of selected alcohols and 1,4-dioxane in 
drinking water using SPE and GC/MS and is proposed to measure 1-
butanol, 2-methoxyethanol and 2-propen-1-ol.
    (xiii) EPA Method 544 ``Determination of Microcystins and Nodularin 
in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/
Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS),'' Version 1.0, February 2015, EPA/
600/R-14/474. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods. This is an EPA method for 
the analysis of selected cyanotoxins in drinking water using SPE and 
LC-MS/MS with electrospray ionization (ESI) and is proposed to measure 
six microcystins (microcystin-LA, microcystin-LF, microcystin-LR, 
microcystin-LY, microcystin-RR, and microcystin-YR) and nodularin.
    (xiv) EPA Method 545 ``Determination of Cylindrospermopsin and 
Anatoxin-a in Drinking Water by Liquid Chromatography Electrospray 
Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS),'' April 2015, EPA 
815-R-15-009. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is 
an EPA method for the analysis of selected cyanotoxins in drinking 
water using LC-MS/MS with electrospray ionization (ESI) and is proposed 
to measure cylindrospermopsin and anatoxin-a.
    (xv) EPA Method 552.3 ``Determination of Haloacetic Acids and 
Dalapon in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Microextraction, 
Derivatization,

[[Page 76909]]

and Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture Detection,'' Revision 1.0, 
July 2003, EPA 815-B-03-002. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is an EPA method for the analysis of haloacetic acids and 
dalapon in drinking water using liquid-liquid microextraction, 
derivatization, and GC with electron capture detection (ECD) and is 
proposed to measure three HAA groups (HAA5, HAA6Br and HAA9).
    (xvi) EPA Method 557 ``Determination of Haloacetic Acids, Bromate, 
and Dalapon in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography Electrospray 
Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS),'' Version 1.0, 
September 2009, EPA 815-B-09-012. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods. This is an EPA method for the analysis of haloacetic acids, 
bromate, and dalapon in drinking water using IC-MS/MS with electrospray 
ionization (ESI) and is proposed to measure three HAA groups (HAA5, 
HAA6Br and HAA9).
2. Methods From ``ASTM International''
    The following methods are from ``ASTM International'', 100 Barr 
Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
    (i) ASTM D1293-12 ``Standard Test Methods for pH of Water.'' 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D1293.htm. This is an ASTM method for measuring pH in water 
samples using a meter and associated electrodes.
    (ii) ASTM D5673-10 ``Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by 
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry,'' approved August 1, 
2010. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D5673.htm. This is an ASTM method for the analysis of 
elements in water by ICP-MS and is proposed to measure germanium and 
manganese.
    (iii) ASTM D6581-12 ``Standard Test Methods for Bromate, Bromide, 
Chlorate, and Chlorite in Drinking Water by Suppressed Ion 
Chromatography.'' Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6581.htm. This is an ASTM method for the 
analysis of inorganic anions in water samples using IC with 
conductivity detection. The proposal includes measurement of bromide as 
a potential indicator for HAAs.
3. Methods From ``Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & 
Wastewater''
    The following methods are from ``Standard Methods for the 
Examination of Water & Wastewater'', 21st edition (2005), American 
Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
    (i) SM 2550 ``Temperature.'' This is a Standard Method for 
temperature measurements using a thermometer (mercury). The proposal 
includes measurement of temperature as a potential indicator for 
cyanotoxins.
    (ii) SM 3125 ``Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass 
Spectrometry.'' This is a Standard Method for the analysis of metals 
and metalloids in water by ICP-MS and is proposed for the analysis of 
germanium and manganese.
    (iii) SM 4500-H+ B ``pH Value in Water by Potentiometry Using a 
Standard Hydrogen Electrode.'' This is a Standard Method for measuring 
pH of water samples using a meter, standard hydrogen electrode, and 
reference electrode.
    (iv) SM 5310B ``The Determination of Total Organic Carbon by High-
Temperature Combustion Method.'' This is a Standard Method for the 
analysis of TOC in water samples using a a conductivity detector or a 
nondispersive infrared detector.
    (v) SM 5310C ``Total organic carbon by Persulfate-UV or Heated-
Persulfate Oxidation Method.'' This is a Standard Method for the 
analysis of TOC in water samples using conductivity detector or a 
nondispersive infrared detector.
    (vi) SM 5310D ``Total organic carbon by Wet-Oxidation Method.'' 
This is a Standard Method for the analysis of TOC in water samples 
using a conductivity detector or a nondispersive infrared detector.
4. Methods From ``Standard Methods Online''
    The following methods are from ``Standard Methods Online,'' 
available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
    (i) SM 2550-10 ``Temperature.'' This is a Standard Method for 
temperature measurements using a thermometer (fluid filled or 
electronic).
    (ii) SM 3125-09 ``Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass 
Spectrometry (Editorial revisions, 2011).'' This is a Standard Method 
for the analysis of metals and metalloids in water by ICP-MS and is 
proposed to measure germanium and manganese.
    (iii) SM 4500-H+ B-00 ``pH Value in Water by Potentiometry Using a 
Standard Hydrogen Electrode.'' This is a Standard Method for measuring 
pH in water samples using a meter, standard hydrogen electrode, and 
reference electrode.
    (iv) SM 5310B-00 ``The Determination of Total Organic Carbon by 
High-Temperature Combustion Method.'' This is a Standard Method for the 
analysis of TOC in water samples using a conductivity detector or a 
nondispersive infrared detector.
    (v) SM 5310C-00 ``Total organic carbon by Persulfate-UV or Heated-
Persulfate Oxidation Method.'' This is a Standard Method for the 
analysis of TOC in water samples using a conductivity detector or a 
nondispersive infrared detector.
    (vi) SM 5310D-00 ``Total organic carbon by Wet-Oxidation Method.'' 
This is a Standard Method for the analysis of TOC in water samples 
using a conductivity detector or a nondispersive infrared detector.
5. Method From ``Ohio EPA''
    The following methodology is from Ohio EPA, Columbus, OH.
    (i) ELISA SOP ``Ohio EPA Total (Extracellular and Intracellular) 
Microcystins--ADDA by ELISA Analytical Methodology,'' Version 2.0. 
January 2015, available on the Internet at http://www.epa.ohio.gov/Portals/28/documents/habs/HAB_Analytical_Methodology.pdf. This is an 
Ohio EPA method for the analysis of cyanotoxins (microcystins and 
nodularin) in drinking water using an ELISA technique. The proposal 
includes measurement of ``total microcystins'' using this technique.

K. What is the states' role in the UCMR program?

    UCMR is a direct implementation rule (i.e., EPA has primary 
responsibility for its implementation) and state participation is 
voluntary. Under previous UCMRs, specific activities that individual 
states, tribes and territories agreed to carry out or assist with were 
identified and established exclusively through Partnership Agreements 
(PAs). Through PAs, states, tribes and territories can help EPA 
implement the UCMR program and help ensure that the UCMR data are of 
the highest quality possible to best support Agency decision making. 
Under UCMR 4, EPA expects to continue to use the PA process to 
determine and document the following: The process for review and 
revision of the SMPs; replacing and updating system information; review 
and approval of proposed ground water representative monitoring plans; 
notification and instructions for

[[Page 76910]]

systems; and compliance assistance. EPA recognizes that states/primacy 
agencies often have the best information about PWSs in their state and 
encourages states to partner.
    SMPs include tabular listings of the systems that EPA selected and 
the proposed schedule for their monitoring. Initial SMPs also typically 
include instructions to states for revising and/or correcting system 
information in the SMPs, including modifying the sampling schedules for 
small systems. EPA expects to incorporate revisions from states, 
resolve any outstanding questions and return the final SMPs to each 
state.

L. What stakeholder meetings have been held in preparation for UCMR 4?

    EPA incorporates stakeholder involvement into each UCMR cycle. 
Specific to the development of UCMR 4, EPA held two public stakeholder 
meetings and is announcing a third in this proposal (see sections II.L 
and II.M). EPA held a meeting focused on drinking water methods for CCL 
contaminants on May 15, 2013, in Cincinnati, Ohio. Participants 
included representatives of state agencies, laboratories, PWSs, 
environmental organizations and drinking water associations. Meeting 
topics included an overview of the regulatory process (CCL, UCMR and 
Regulatory Determination) and drinking water methods under development, 
primarily for CCL contaminants (see USEPA, 2013 for presentation 
materials). EPA held a second stakeholder meeting on June 25, 2014, in 
Washington, DC. Attendees representing state agencies, tribes, 
laboratories, PWSs, environmental organizations and drinking water 
associations participated in the meeting via webinar and in person. 
Meeting topics included a status update on UCMR 3; UCMR 4 potential 
sampling design changes relative to UCMR 3; UCMR 4 candidate analytes 
and rationale; and the laboratory approval process (see USEPA, 2014 for 
meeting materials).

M. How do I participate in the upcoming stakeholder meeting?

    EPA will hold the third public stakeholder meeting (via webinar) on 
January 13, 2016. Topics will include the proposed UCMR 4 monitoring 
requirements, analyte selection and rationale, analytical methods, the 
laboratory approval process and ground water representative monitoring 
plans.
1. Webinar Participation
    Those who wish to participate in the public webinar must register 
in advance no later than 5:00 p.m., eastern time on January 10, 2016, 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7326881974233959170. To 
ensure adequate time for public statements, individuals or 
organizations interested in making a statement should identify their 
interest when they register. We ask that only one person present on 
behalf of a group or organization, and that the presentation be limited 
to ten minutes. Any additional statements from attendees will be taken 
during the webinar if time permits; alternatively, official comments 
can be submitted to the docket. The number of webinar connections 
available for the meeting is limited and will be available on a first-
come, first-served basis. Further details about registration and 
participation in the webinar can be found on EPA's Unregulated 
Contaminant Monitoring Program Meetings and Materials Web page at 
http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials.
2. Webinar Materials
    Meeting materials are expected to be sent by email to all 
registered attendees prior to the public webinar. EPA will post the 
materials on the Agency's Web site for persons who are unable to attend 
the webinar. Please note, these materials could be posted after the 
webinar.

N. How did EPA consider Children's Environmental Health?

    Executive Order 13045 does not apply to UCMR 4, however, EPA's 
Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children is applicable (See III.G. 
Executive Order 13045). By monitoring for unregulated contaminants that 
may pose health risks via drinking water, UCMR furthers the protection 
of public health for all citizens, including children. EPA considered 
children's health risks during the proposed rule development process 
for UCMR 4, including the decision-making process for prioritizing 
candidate contaminants, and included a representative from EPA's Office 
of Children's Health Protection as a participant on the UCMR 4 
workgroup.
    The objective of UCMR 4 is to collect nationally representative 
drinking water data on a set of unregulated contaminants. Wherever 
feasible, EPA collects occurrence data for contaminants at levels below 
current ``reference concentrations'' (e.g., health advisories and 
health reference levels). By setting reporting levels as low as we 
reasonably can, the Agency positions itself to better address updated 
risk information in the future, including that associated with unique 
risks to children. EPA requests comments regarding any further steps 
that may be taken to evaluate and address health risks to children 
within the scope of UCMR 4.

O. How did EPA address Environmental Justice?

    EPA did not identify any disproportionately high or adverse human 
health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous 
populations in the process of developing the proposed rule for UCMR 4 
(See III.J. Executive Order 12898). By seeking to identify unregulated 
contaminants that may pose health risks via drinking water from all 
PWSs, UCMR furthers the protection of public health for all citizens. 
EPA recognizes that unregulated contaminants in drinking water are of 
interest to all populations and structured the rulemaking process and 
implementation of the proposed UCMR 4 rule to allow for meaningful 
involvement and transparency. EPA organized public meetings/webinars to 
share information regarding the development of UCMR 4; coordinated with 
tribal governments; and convened a workgroup with representatives from 
the EPA Regions, EPA Program Offices, EPA's Office of Research and 
Development and several states.
    EPA proposes to continue to collect U.S. Postal Service Zip Codes 
for each PWS's service area, as collected under UCMR 3, to support an 
assessment of whether or not minority, low-income and/or indigenous-
population communities are uniquely impacted by particular drinking 
water contaminants. EPA solicits comment on additional actions the 
Agency could take to further address environmental justice within the 
UCMR program. EPA welcomes, for example, comments regarding sampling 
and/or modeling approaches, and the feasibility and utility of applying 
these approaches to determine disproportionate impacts.

III. 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 not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to OMB.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The ICR document that 
the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2192.07. You can find 
a

[[Page 76911]]

copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly 
summarized here.
    The information that EPA proposes to collect under this rule 
fulfills the statutory requirements of section 1445(a)(2) of SDWA, as 
amended in 1996. The data will describe the source of the water, 
location and test results for samples taken from PWSs. The information 
collected will support Agency decisions as to whether or not to 
regulate particular contaminants under SDWA. Reporting is mandatory. 
The data are not subject to confidentiality protection.
    The annual burden and cost estimates described in this section are 
based on the implementation assumptions described in section II.F. 
Respondents to UCMR 4 include 1,600 small PWSs (800 for cyanotoxin 
monitoring and a different set of 800 for monitoring the additional 20 
chemicals), the ~4,292 large PWSs and the 56 states and primacy 
agencies (~5,948 total respondents). The frequency of response varies 
across respondents and years. System costs (particularly laboratory 
analytical costs) vary depending on the number of sampling locations. 
For cost estimates, EPA assumed that systems would conduct sampling 
evenly across March 2018 through November 2020, excluding December, 
January or February of each year, except for resampling purposes (i.e., 
one-third of the systems in each year of monitoring). Because the 
applicable ICR period is 2017-2019, one year of monitoring activity 
(i.e., 2020) is not captured in the ICR estimates; this will be 
addressed in a subsequent ICR renewal for UCMR 4.
    Small PWSs that are selected for UCMR 4 monitoring would sample an 
average of 6.7 times per PWS (i.e., number of responses per PWS) across 
the 3-year ICR period. The average burden per response for small PWSs 
is estimated to be 2.8 hours. Large PWSs (those serving 10,001 to 
100,000 people) and very large PWSs (those serving more than 100,000 
people) would sample and report an average of 11.4 and 14.1 times per 
PWS, respectively, across the 3-year ICR period. The average burden per 
response for large and very large PWSs is estimated at 6.1 and 9.9 
hours, respectively. States are assumed to have an annual average 
burden of 366.5 hours related to coordination with EPA and PWSs. In 
aggregate, during the ICR period, the average response (e.g., responses 
from PWSs and states) is associated with a burden of 6.9 hours, with a 
labor plus non-labor cost of $1,705 per response.
    The annual average per-respondent burden hours and costs for the 
ICR period are: Small PWSs--6.2 hours, or $171, for labor; large PWSs--
23.3 hours, or $682, for labor, and $6,047 for analytical costs; very 
large PWSs--46.5 hours, or $1,248, for labor, and $16,298 for 
analytical costs; and states--244.3 hours, or $11,598, for labor. 
Annual average burden and cost per respondent (including both systems 
and states) is estimated to be 23.4 hours, with a labor plus non-labor 
cost of $3,470 per respondent. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
rules in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the Agency's need for this information, accuracy of 
the burden estimates or to provide suggested methods for minimizing 
respondent burden, reference the public docket for this rule, which 
includes the ICR. Submit any comments related to the ICR to EPA and 
OMB. See the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for 
where to submit comments to EPA and OMB. OMB is required to make a 
decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after December 11, 
2015. Comments should be sent to OMB by January 11, 2016 for the 
comment to be appropriately considered. The final rule will contain 
responses to any OMB or public comments on the information collection 
requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on 
small entities, EPA considered small entities to be PWSs serving 10,000 
or fewer people, because this is the system size specified in SDWA as 
requiring special consideration with respect to small system 
flexibility. As required by the RFA, EPA proposed using this 
alternative definition in the FR, (63 FR 7606, February 13, 1998 
(USEPA, 1998b)), requested public comment, consulted with the Small 
Business Administration and finalized the alternative definition in the 
Consumer Confidence Reports rulemaking, (63 FR 44512, August 19, 1998 
(USEPA, 1998a)). As stated in that Final Rule, the alternative 
definition would be applied to future drinking water rules, including 
this rule.
    The evaluation of the overall impact on small systems, summarized 
in the preceding discussion, is further described as follows. EPA 
analyzed the impacts for privately-owned and publicly-owned water 
systems separately, due to the different economic characteristics of 
these ownership types, such as different rate structures and profit 
goals. However, for both publicly- and privately-owned systems, EPA 
used the ``revenue test,'' which compares annual system costs 
attributed to the rule to the system's annual revenues. EPA used median 
revenue data from the 2006 CWS Survey for public and private water 
systems. The revenue figures were updated to 2014 dollars, and to 
account for 3 percent inflation. EPA assumes that the distribution of 
the sample of participating small systems will reflect the proportions 
of publicly- and privately-owned systems in the national inventory. The 
estimated distribution of the representative sample, categorized by 
ownership type, source water and system size, is presented in Exhibit 
6.

               Exhibit 6--Number of Publicly- and Privately-Owned Small Systems Subject to UCMR 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              System size (number of people served)                 Publicly-owned    Privately-owned  Total \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Ground Water
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under....................................................                21                64         85
501 to 3,300.....................................................               161                62        223
3,301 to 10,000..................................................               179                41        220
                                                                  ----------------------------------------------
    Subtotal GW..................................................               361               167        528
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Surface Water (and GWUDI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under....................................................                18                21         39

[[Page 76912]]

 
501 to 3,300.....................................................               241                86        327
3,301 to 10,000..................................................               548               158        706
                                                                  ----------------------------------------------
    Subtotal SW..................................................               807               265      1,072
                                                                  ----------------------------------------------
        Total of Small Water Systems.............................             1,168               432      1,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category.

    The basis for the proposed UCMR 4 RFA certification is as follows: 
For the 1,600 small water systems that would be affected, the average 
annual cost for complying with this rule represents no more than 0.8% 
of system revenues (the highest estimated percentage is for GW systems 
serving 500 or fewer people, at 0.8% of its median revenue). Exhibit 7 
presents the yearly cost to small systems and to EPA for the small 
system sampling program, along with an illustration of system 
participation for each year of UCMR 4.

                                                  Exhibit 7--Implementation of UCMR 4 at Small Systems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Cost description                2017              2018                      2019                      2020               2021      Total \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Costs to EPA for Small System Program (Assessment Monitoring)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               $0  $5,971,948..............  $5,971,948..............  $5,971,948..............         $0   $17,915,845
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Costs to Small Systems (Assessment Monitoring)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                0  $273,210................  $273,210................  $273,210................          0      $819,631
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Total Costs to EPA and Small Systems for UCMR 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                0  $6,245,159..............  $6,245,159..............  $6,245,159..............          0   $18,735,476
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         System Monitoring Activity Timeline \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Monitoring: Cyanotoxins....  .........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  .........           800
Assessment Monitoring: 20 Additional    .........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  1/3 PWSs Sample.........  .........           800
 Chemicals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Totals may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
\2\ Total number of systems is 1,600. No small system conducts Assessment Monitoring for both cyanotoxins and the 20 additional chemicals.

    PWS costs are attributed to the labor required for reading about 
UCMR 4 requirements, monitoring, reporting and record keeping. The 
estimated average annual burden across the 5-year UCMR 4 implementation 
period of 2017-2021 is 2.8 hours at $103 per small system. Average 
annual cost, in all cases, is less than 0.8% of system revenues. By 
assuming all costs for laboratory analyses, shipping and quality 
control for small entities, EPA incurs the entirety of the non-labor 
costs associated with UCMR 4 small system monitoring, or 96% of total 
small system testing costs. Exhibit 8 and Exhibit 9 present the 
estimated economic impacts in the form of a revenue test for publicly- 
and privately-owned systems.

                    Exhibit 8--UCMR 4 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Publicly-Owned Systems
                                                   [2017-2021]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Average         Average
                                                 Annual  number   annual hours     annual cost     Revenue test
     System size (number of people served)         of  systems     per system      per system        \2\ (%)
                                                  impacted \1\     (2017-2021)     (2017-2021)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Ground Water Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under..................................               4             1.6             $59             0.16
501 to 3,300...................................              32             1.7              63             0.04
3,301 to 10,000................................              36             1.9              67             0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Surface Water (and GWUDI) Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under..................................               4             3.3             118             0.17
501 to 3,300...................................              48             3.3             118             0.04

[[Page 76913]]

 
3,301 to 10,000................................             109             3.4             123             0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category.
\2\ The Revenue Test was used to evaluate the economic impact of an information collection on small government
  entities (e.g., publicly-owned systems); costs are presented as a percentage of median annual revenue in each
  size category.

                   Exhibit 9--UCMR 4 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Privately-Owned Systems
                                                   [2017-2021]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Average         Average
                                                 Annual  number   annual hours     annual cost     Revenue test
     System size (number of people served)         of  systems     per system      per system        \2\ (%)
                                                  impacted \1\     (2017-2021)     (2017-2021)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Ground Water Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under..................................              13             1.6             $59             0.81
501 to 3,300...................................              12             1.7              63             0.05
3,301 to 10,000................................               8             1.9              67             0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Surface Water (and GWUDI) Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 and under..................................               4             3.3             118             0.29
501 to 3,300...................................              17             3.3             118             0.04
3,301 to 10,000................................              32             3.4             123             0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PWS counts were adjusted to display as whole numbers in each size category.
\2\ The Revenue Test was used to evaluate the economic impact of an information collection on small government
  entities (e.g., privately-owned systems); costs are presented as a percentage of median annual revenue in each
  size category.

    The Agency has determined that 1,600 small PWSs (for Assessment 
Monitoring), or approximately 4.2% of all small systems, would 
experience an impact of no more than 0.8% of revenues; the remainder of 
small systems would not be impacted.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA has attempted to 
reduce this impact by assuming all costs for analyses of the samples 
and for shipping the samples from small systems to laboratories 
contracted by EPA to analyze UCMR 4 samples (the cost of shipping is 
now included in the cost of each analytical method). EPA has set aside 
$2.0 million each year from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund 
(SRF) with its authority to use SRF monies for the purposes of 
implementing this provision of SDWA. Thus, the costs to these small 
systems will be limited to the labor associated with collecting a 
sample and preparing it for shipping.
    I certify 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. Although EPA has concluded 
that this action will have no significant net regulatory burden for 
directly regulated small entities, the Agency continues to be 
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small 
entities and welcomes comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an annual unfunded mandate of $100 
million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

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.
    Consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA 
and state and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on 
the proposed rule from state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs 
on federally recognized tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. As 
described previously, this proposed rule requires monitoring by all 
large PWSs. Information in the SDWIS/Fed water system inventory 
indicates there are approximately 17 large tribal PWSs (ranging in size 
from 10,001 to 40,000 customers). EPA estimates the average annual cost 
to each of these large PWSs, over the 5-year rule period, to be $4,037. 
This cost is based on a labor component (associated with the collection 
of samples), and a non-labor component (associated with shipping and 
laboratory fees), and represents less than 1.2% of average revenue/
sales for large PWSs. UCMR also requires monitoring by a nationally 
representative sample of small PWSs. EPA estimates that less than 2% of 
small tribal systems will be selected as a nationally representative 
sample for Assessment Monitoring. EPA estimates the average annual cost 
to small tribal systems over the 5-year rule period to be $103. Such 
cost is based on the labor associated with collecting a sample and 
preparing it for shipping

[[Page 76914]]

and represents less than 0.8% of average revenue/sales for small PWSs. 
All other small-PWS expenses (associated with shipping and laboratory 
fees) are paid by EPA.
    EPA consulted with tribal officials under the EPA Policy on 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes early in the process 
of developing this proposed rule to permit them to have meaningful and 
timely input into its development. A summary of that consultation is 
provided in the electronic docket listed in the ADDRESSES section at 
the beginning of this notice. EPA specifically solicits additional 
comment on this proposed rule from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because EPA does not think the environmental health or safety risks 
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. 
This action's health and risk assessments are addressed in section II.N 
of the preamble.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR Part 51

    This action involves technical standards. EPA proposes to use 
methods developed by the Agency, three major voluntary consensus method 
organizations and the Ohio EPA to support UCMR 4 monitoring. The 
voluntary consensus method organizations are Standard Methods, 
Association of Analytical Communities International and ASTM 
International. EPA identified acceptable consensus method organization 
standards for the analysis of manganese and germanium. Additionally, 
EPA identified an Ohio EPA method for the analysis of total 
microcystins using ADDA by ELISA. EPA therefore proposes using a 
collection of analytical methods published by these parties for the 
UCMR 4 analytes. In addition, there are several consensus standards 
that are approved for compliance monitoring that will be available for 
use in the analysis of TOC and bromide, and for the measurement of 
temperature and pH. A summary of each method along with how the method 
specifically applies to UCMR 4 can be found in section II.J of the 
preamble.
    All of these standards are reasonably available for public use. The 
Agency methods are free for download on EPA's Web site. The methods in 
the Standard Method 21st edition are consensus standards, available for 
purchase from the publisher, and are commonly used by the drinking 
water community. The methods in the Standard Method Online are 
consensus standards, available for purchase from the publisher's Web 
site, and are commonly used by the drinking water community. The 
methods from ASTM International are consensus standards, are free for 
download from the publisher's Web site, and are commonly used by the 
drinking water community. The Ohio EPA method is free for download on 
their Web site and is increasingly being used by the drinking water 
community.
    EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking; 
the Agency specifically invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable voluntary consensus standards and explain why such standards 
should be used in this rule.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed 
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income 
or indigenous populations. The results of this evaluation are contained 
in section II.O of this preamble and an additional supporting document 
has been placed in the docket.

IV. References

ASDWA. 2013. Insufficient Resources for State Drinking Water 
Programs Threaten Public Health: An Analysis of State Drinking Water 
Programs' Resources and Needs. December 2013.
ASTM. 2010. ASTM D5673-10--Standard Test Method for Elements in 
Water by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. Approved 
August 1, 2010. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D5673.htm.
ASTM. 2012a. ASTM D1293-12--Standard Test Methods for pH of Water. 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D1293.htm.
ASTM. 2012b. ASTM D6581-12--Standard Test Methods for Bromate, 
Bromide, Chlorate, and Chlorite in Drinking Water by Suppressed Ion 
Chromatography. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6581.htm.
Fischer, W.J., Garthwaite, I., Miles, C.O., Ross, K.M., Aggen, J.B., 
Chamberlin, A.R., Towers, N.R., Dietrich, D.R. 2001. Congener-
Independent Immunoassay for Microcystins and Nodularins. 
Environmental Science & Technology, 35 (24), pp 4849-4856. Available 
for purchase on the Internet at http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es011182f.
Graham, J.L., Loftin, K.A., Ziegler, A.C., and Meyer, M.T. 2008. 
Guidelines for Design and Sampling for Cyanobacterial Toxin and 
Taste-and-Odor Studies in Lakes and Reservoirs: U.S. Geological 
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008-5038. Available on the 
Internet at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5038/.
McElhiney, J., and Lawton, L.A. 2005. Detection of the 
Cyanobacterial Hepatotoxins Microcystins. Toxicology and Applied 
Pharmacology, 203 (3): 219-230. Available for purchase on the 
Internet at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2004.06.002.
Ohio EPA. 2015. Ohio EPA Total (Extracellular and Intracellular) 
Microcystins--ADDA by ELISA Analytical Methodology. Version 2.0. 
January 2015. Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.ohio.gov/Portals/28/documents/habs/HAB_Analytical_Methodology.pdf.
Roberson, J.A., and Eaton, A. 2014. Retrospective Analysis of 
Mandated National Occurrence Monitoring and Regulatory Decisions. 
Journal of the American Water Works Association, 106 (3): E116-E128. 
Available on the Internet at http://dx.doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0040.
Ryberg, K.R., and Gilliom, R.J. 2015. Trends in Pesticide 
Concentrations and Use for Major Rivers of the United States. 
Science of the Total Environment, 538: 431-444. Available for 
purchase on the Internet at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.06.095.
SM Online. 2000a. SM 4500-H+ B-00--pH Value in Water by 
Potentiometry Using a Standard Hydrogen Electrode. Standard Methods 
Online. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM Online. 2000b. SM 5310B-00--The Determination of Total Organic 
Carbon by High-Temperature Combustion Method. Standard Methods 
Online. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM Online. 2000c. SM 5310C-00--Total organic carbon by Persulfate-UV 
or Heated-Persulfate Oxidation Method. Standard Methods Online. 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM Online. 2000d. SM 5310D-00--Total organic carbon by Wet-Oxidation 
Method. Standard Methods Online. Available for purchase on the 
Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM Online. 2009. SM 3125-09--Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/
Mass Spectrometry (Editorial revisions, 2011). Standard Methods 
Online. Available for

[[Page 76915]]

purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM Online. 2010. SM 2550-10--Temperature. Standard Methods Online. 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
SM. 2005a. SM 2550--Temperature. Standard Methods for the 
Examination of Water & Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public 
Health Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
SM. 2005b. SM 3125--Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass 
Spectrometry. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & 
Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public Health Association, 800 I 
Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
SM. 2005c. SM 4500-H+ B--pH Value in Water by Potentiometry Using a 
Standard Hydrogen Electrode. Standard Methods for the Examination of 
Water & Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public Health 
Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
SM. 2005d. SM 5310B--The Determination of Total Organic Carbon by 
High-Temperature Combustion Method. Standard Methods for the 
Examination of Water & Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public 
Health Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
SM. 2005e. SM 5310C-00--Total Organic Carbon by Persulfate-UV or 
Heated-Persulfate Oxidation Method. Standard Methods for the 
Examination of Water & Wastewater, 21st edition. American Public 
Health Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
SM. 2005f. SM 5310D--Total Organic Carbon by Wet-Oxidation Method. 
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater, 21st 
edition. American Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20001-3710.
USEPA. 1983a. EPA Method 150.1--pH Electrometric, in Methods for 
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. EPA/600/4-79/020. Available 
on the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov.
USEPA. 1983b. EPA Method 150.2--pH, Continuous Monitoring 
(Electrometric), in Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and 
Wastes. EPA/600/4-79/020. Available on the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov.
USEPA. 1993. EPA Method 300.0--Determination of Inorganic Anions by 
Ion Chromatography Samples. Revision 2.1. Available on the Internet 
at http://www.nemi.gov.
USEPA. 1994. EPA Method 200.8--Determination of Trace Elements in 
Waters and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. 
Revision 5.4. Available on the Internet at https://www.nemi.gov/.
USEPA. 1997. EPA Method 300.1--Determination of Inorganic Anions in 
Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography. Revision 1.0. 1997. Available 
on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 1998a. National Primary Drinking Water Regulation: Consumer 
Confidence Reports; Final Rule. Federal Register. Vol. 63, No. 160, 
p. 44512, August 19, 1998.
USEPA. 1998b. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Consumer 
Confidence Reports; Proposed Rule. Federal Register. Vol. 63, No. 
30, p. 7606, February 13, 1998.
USEPA. 1998c. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: 
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts; Final Rule. Federal 
Register. Vol. 63, No. 241, p. 69390, December 16, 1998.
USEPA. 1999. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 
Regulation for Public Water Systems; Final Rule. Federal Register. 
Vol. 64, No. 180, p. 50556, September 17, 1999.
USEPA. 2001a. EPA Method 317.0--Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
with the Addition of a Postcolumn Reagent for Trace Bromate 
Analysis. Revision 2.0. EPA 815-B-01-001. Available on the Internet 
at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2001b. Statistical Design and Sample Selection for the 
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999). EPA 815-R-01-
004, August 2001.
USEPA. 2002. EPA Method 326.0--Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
Incorporating the Addition of a Suppressor Acidified Postcolumn 
Reagent for Trace Bromate Analysis. Revision 1.0. EPA 815-R-03-007. 
Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2003. EPA Method 552.3--Determination of Haloacetic Acids and 
Dalapon in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Microextraction, 
Derivatization, and Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture 
Detection. Revision 1.0. EPA 815-B-03-002, July 2003. Available on 
the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2005. EPA Method 415.3--Determination of Total Organic Carbon 
and Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and Drinking 
Water. Revision 1.1. EPA/600/R-05/055, February 2005. Available on 
the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
USEPA. 2006a. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 
2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule; Final Rule. Federal 
Register. Vol. 71, No. 3, p. 654, January 5, 2006.
USEPA. 2006b. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Stage 2 
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule; Final Rule. Federal 
Register. Vol. 71, No. 3, p. 388, January 4, 2006.
USEPA. 2007. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR) 
for Public Water Systems Revisions. Federal Register. Vol. 72, No. 
2, p. 368, January 4, 2007.
USEPA. 2009a. EPA Method 415.3--Determination of Total Organic 
Carbon and Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and 
Drinking Water. Revision 1.2. EPA/600/R-09/122, September 2009. 
Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
USEPA. 2009b. EPA Method 557--Determination of Haloacetic Acids, 
Bromate, and Dalapon in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography 
Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS). 
Version 1.0. EPA 815-B-09-012, September 2009. Available on the 
Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2010. Technical Basis for the Lowest Concentration Minimum 
Reporting Level (LCMRL) Calculator. EPA 815-R-11-001, December 2010. 
Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2012a. EPA Method 525.3--Determination of Semivolatile 
Organic Chemicals in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and 
Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). 
Version 1.0. EPA/600/R-12/010, February 2012. Available on the 
Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
USEPA. 2012b. Request for Nominations of Drinking Water Contaminants 
for the Fourth Contaminant Candidate List. Federal Register. Vol. 
77, No. 89, p. 27057, May 8, 2012.
USEPA. 2012c. Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 
Regulation (UCMR 3) for Public Water Systems; Final Rule. Federal 
Register. Vol. 77, No. 85, p. 26071, May 2, 2012.
USEPA. 2013. Meetings and Materials for the Unregulated Contaminant 
Monitoring Program. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr/unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule-ucmr-meetings-and-materials.
USEPA. 2014. Stakeholder Meeting Slides Regarding Revisions to the 
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation.
USEPA. 2015a. DRAFT Information Collection Request for the 
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4). October 2015. EPA 
815-B-15-003.
USEPA. 2015b. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 4--Draft. 
Federal Register, Vol. 80, No. 23, p. 6076, February 4, 2015.
USEPA. 2015c. Drinking Water Health Advisory for the Cyanobacterial 
Microcystin Toxins. EPA 820-R-15-100, June 2015. Available on the 
Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/microcystins-report-2015.pdf.
USEPA. 2015d. EPA Method 530--Determination of Select Semivolatile 
Organic Chemicals in Drinking Water by

[[Page 76916]]

Solid Phase Extraction and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/
MS). Version 1.0. EPA/600/R-14/442, January 2015. Available on the 
Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
USEPA. 2015e. EPA Method 541--Determination of 1-Butanol, 1,4-
Dioxane, 2-Methoxyethanol and 2-Propen-1-ol in Drinking Water by 
Solid Phase Extraction and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. EPA 
815-R-15-011, November 2015. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2015f. EPA Method 544--Determination of Microcystins and 
Nodularin in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid 
Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Version 1.0. 
EPA-600-R-14/474, February 2015. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
USEPA. 2015g. EPA Method 545--Determination of Cylindrospermopsin 
and Anatoxin-a in Drinking Water by Liquid Chromatography 
Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS). EPA 
815-R-15-009, April 2015. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
USEPA. 2015h. Proposed Revisions to CFR parts 141.35 and 141.40. EPA 
815-B-15-006, November 2015. Available in EPA public docket (under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0218) on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
USEPA. 2015i. UCMR 4 Candidate Contaminants--Information Compendium. 
EPA 815-B-15-005, November 2015.
USEPA. 2015j. UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval Requirements and 
Information Document. EPA 815-B-15-004, November 2015.
USGS. 2014. Pesticides in Surface Waters: Seasonality of Pesticides 
in Surface Waters. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-039-97. 
Available on the Internet at http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/pubs/fs97039/sw5.html.
Zeck, A., Weller, M.G., Bursill, D., Niessner, R. 2001. Generic 
Microcystin Immunoassay Based on Monoclonal Antibodies Against Adda. 
Analyst, 126: 2002-2007. Available for purchase on the Internet at 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/B105064H.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Incorporation by reference, 
Indian-lands, Intergovernmental relations, Radiation protection, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water supply.

    Dated: November 30, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 
CFR part 141 as follows:

PART 141--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

0
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.

Subpart D--Reporting and Recordkeeping

0
2. In Sec.  141.35:
0
a. Revise the third sentence in paragraph (b)(1).
0
b. Revise the second and third sentences in paragraph (b)(2).
0
c. Remove ``October 1, 2012,'' and add in its place ``December 31, 
2017,'' in paragraph (c)(1).
0
d. Revise the second and third sentences in paragraph (c)(2).
0
e. Revise the last sentence in paragraph (c)(3)(i).
0
f. Revise the fifth sentence in paragraph (c)(3)(ii).
0
g. Remove ``October 1, 2012,'' and add in its place ``[WITHIN 120 DAYS 
FROM PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE],'' in paragraph (c)(4).
0
h. Revise paragraphs (c)(5)(i), (c)(6) introductory text, (d)(2), and 
(e).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  141.35  Reporting for unregulated contaminant monitoring results.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * * Information that must be submitted using EPA's electronic 
data reporting system must be submitted through: http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr. * * *
    (2) * * * If you have received a letter from EPA or your State 
concerning your required monitoring and your system does not meet the 
applicability criteria for UCMR established in Sec.  141.40(a)(1) or 
(2), or if a change occurs at your system that may affect your 
requirements under UCMR as defined in Sec.  141.40(a)(3) through (5), 
you must mail or email a letter to EPA, as specified in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section. The letter must be from your PWS Official and 
must include your PWS Identification (PWSID) Code along with an 
explanation as to why the UCMR requirements are not applicable to your 
PWS, or have changed for your PWS, along with the appropriate contact 
information. * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * * You must provide your sampling location(s) and associate 
each source water location with its entry point location(s) by December 
31, 2017, using EPA's electronic data reporting system. You must 
submit, verify or update the following information for each sampling 
location, or for each approved representative sampling location (as 
specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section regarding representative 
sampling locations): PWSID Code; PWS Name; PWS Facility Identification 
Code; PWS Facility Name; PWS Facility Type; Water Source Type; Sampling 
Point Identification Code; Sampling Point Name; and Sampling Point Type 
Code; (as defined in Table 1 of paragraph (e) of this section).
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * * You must submit a copy of the existing alternate EPTDS 
sampling plan or your representative well proposal, as appropriate, 
[DATE 120 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE], as specified in 
paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (ii) * * * You must submit the following information for each 
proposed representative sampling location: PWSID Code; PWS Name; PWS 
Facility Identification Code; PWS Facility Name; PWS Facility Type; 
Sampling Point Identification Code; and Sampling Point Name (as defined 
in Table 1, paragraph (e) of this section). * * *
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) General rescheduling notification requirements. Large systems 
may change their monitoring schedules up to December 31, 2017, using 
EPA's electronic data reporting system, as specified in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section. After this date has passed, if your PWS cannot 
sample according to your assigned sampling schedule (e.g., because of 
budget constraints, or if a sampling location will be closed during the 
scheduled month of monitoring), you must mail or email a letter to EPA, 
as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, prior to the 
scheduled sampling date. You must include an explanation of why the 
samples cannot be taken according to the assigned schedule, and you 
must provide the alternative schedule you are requesting. You must not 
reschedule monitoring specifically to avoid sample collection during a 
suspected vulnerable period. You are subject to your assigned UCMR 
sampling schedule or the schedule that you revised on or before 
December 31, 2017, unless and until you receive a

[[Page 76917]]

letter from EPA specifying a new schedule.
* * * * *
    (6) Reporting monitoring results. For UCMR samples, you must report 
all data elements specified in Table 1 of paragraph (e) of this 
section, using EPA's electronic data reporting system. You also must 
report any changes, relative to what is currently posted, made to data 
elements 1 through 9 to EPA, in writing, explaining the nature and 
purpose of the proposed change, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of 
this section.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Reporting sampling information. You must provide your sampling 
location(s) and associate each source water location with its entry 
point location(s) by December 31, 2017, using EPA's electronic data 
reporting system, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If 
this information changes, you must report updates, including new 
sources and sampling locations that are put in use before or during the 
PWS' UCMR sampling period, to EPA's electronic data reporting system 
within 30 days of the change, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section. You must record all data elements listed in Table 1 of 
paragraph (e) of this section on each sample form and sample bottle, as 
appropriate, provided to you by the UCMR Sampling Coordinator. You must 
send this information as specified in the instructions of your sampling 
kit, which will include the due date and return address. You must 
report any changes made in data elements 1 through 9 by mailing or 
emailing an explanation of the nature and purpose of the proposed 
change to EPA, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (e) Data elements. Table 1 defines the data elements that must be 
provided for UCMR monitoring.

   Table 1--Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Reporting Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Data element                          Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Public Water System         The code used to identify each PWS. The
 Identification (PWSID) Code.   code begins with the standard 2-
                                character postal State abbreviation or
                                Region code; the remaining 7 numbers are
                                unique to each PWS in the State. The
                                same identification code must be used to
                                represent the PWS identification for all
                                current and future UCMR monitoring.
2. Public Water System Name..  Unique name, assigned once by the PWS.
3. Public Water System         An identification code established by the
 Facility Identification Code.  State or, at the State's discretion, by
                                the PWS, following the format of a 5-
                                digit number unique within each PWS for
                                each applicable facility (i.e., for each
                                source of water, treatment plant,
                                distribution system, or any other
                                facility associated with water treatment
                                or delivery). The same identification
                                code must be used to represent the
                                facility for all current and future UCMR
                                monitoring.
4. Public Water System         Unique name, assigned once by the PWS,
 Facility Name.                 for every facility ID (e.g., Treatment
                                Plant).
5. Public Water System         That code that identifies that type of
 Facility Type.                 facility as either:
                               CC = consecutive connection
                               DS = distribution system
                               IN = source water intake
                               SS = sampling station
                               TP = treatment plant
                               OT = other
6. Water Source Type.........  The type of source water that supplies a
                                water system facility. Systems must
                                report one of the following codes for
                                each sampling location:
                               SW = surface water (to be reported for
                                water facilities that are served all or
                                in part by a surface water source at any
                                time during the twelve-month period).
                               GW = ground water (to be reported for
                                water facilities that are served
                                entirely by a ground water source).
                               GU = ground water under the direct
                                influence of surface water (to be
                                reported for water facilities that are
                                served all or in part by ground water
                                under the direct influence of surface
                                water at any time during the twelve-
                                month sampling period), and are not
                                served at all by surface water during
                                this period.
7. Sampling Point              An identification code established by the
 Identification Code.           State, or at the State's discretion, by
                                the PWS, that uniquely identifies each
                                sampling point. Each sampling code must
                                be unique within each applicable
                                facility, for each applicable sampling
                                location (i.e., entry point to the
                                distribution system, source water intake
                                or distribution system sample at maximum
                                residence time). The same identification
                                code must be used to represent the
                                sampling location for all current and
                                future UCMR monitoring.
8. Sampling Point Name.......  Unique sample point name, assigned once
                                by the PWS, for every sample point ID
                                (e.g., Entry Point).
9. Sampling Point Type Code..  A code that identifies the location of
                                the sampling point as either:
                               SR = source water taken from plant
                                intake; untreated water entering the
                                water treatment plant (i.e., a location
                                prior to any treatment).
                               EP = entry point to the distribution
                                system.
                               MR = distribution system sample at
                                maximum residence time.
10. Disinfectant Type........  All of the primary disinfectants/oxidants
                                that have been added in the treatment
                                plant to the water being sampled. To be
                                reported by systems for each sampling
                                point.
                               PEMB = Permanganate (applied before SR
                                sample location)
                               PEMA = Permanganate (applied after SR
                                sample location)
                               HPXB = Hydrogen peroxide (applied before
                                SR sample location)
                               HPXA = Hydrogen peroxide (applied after
                                SR sample location)
                               CLGA = Gaseous chlorine
                               CLOF = Offsite Generated Hypochlorite
                                (stored as a liquid form)
                               CLON = Onsite Generated Hypochlorite
                               CAGC = Chloramine (formed from gaseous
                                chlorine)
                               CAOF = Chloramine (formed from offsite
                                hypochlorite)
                               CAON = Chloramine (formed from onsite
                                hypochlorite)
                               CLDB = Chlorine dioxide (applied before
                                SR sample location)
                               CLDA = Chlorine dioxide (applied after SR
                                sample location)
                               OZON = Ozone

[[Page 76918]]

 
                               ULVL = Ultraviolet light
                               OTHD = All other types of disinfectant/
                                oxidant
                               NODU = No disinfectant/oxidant used
11. Treatment Information....  Treatment information associated with the
                                water being sampled.
                               CON = Conventional (non-softening)
                               SCO = Softening conventional
                               RBF = River bank filtration
                               PSD = Pre-sedimentation
                               INF = In-line filtration
                               DFL = Direct filtration
                               PCF = Precoat filtration
                               SSF = Slow sand filtration
                               BIO = Biological filtration
                               REC = Reactor clarification (e.g. solids
                                contact clarification, slurry
                                recirculation clarification,
                                Aciflo[supreg])
                               SBC = Sludge blanket clarification (e.g.
                                Pulsator[supreg], Super
                                Pulsator[supreg], contact adsorption
                                clarifiers, floc-blanket clarifiers)
                               ADC = Adsorption clarification (contact
                                adsorption clarification)
                               UTR = Unfiltered treatment
                               PAC = Application of powder activated
                                carbon
                               GAC = Granular activated carbon (not part
                                of filters in CON, SCO, INF, DFL, or
                                SSF)
                               AIR = Air stripping (packed towers,
                                diffused gas contactors)
                               POB = Pre-oxidation/disinfection with
                                chlorine (applied before SR sample
                                location)
                               POA = Pre-oxidation/disinfection with
                                chlorine (applied after SR sample
                                location)
                               MFL = Membrane filtration
                               IEX = Ionic exchange
                               UVT = Ultraviolet light
                               AOX = Advanced oxidation (ultraviolet
                                light with hydrogen peroxide and/or
                                ozone)
                               DAF = Dissolved air floatation
                               CWL = Clear well/finished water storage
                                without aeration
                               CWA = Clear well/finished water storage
                                with aeration
                               ADS = Aeration in distribution system
                                (localized treatment)
                               OTH = All other types of treatment
                               NTU = No treatment used
12. Disinfectant Residual      Secondary disinfectant type added in the
 Type.                          distribution system for each finished
                                water sample.
                               CL2 = Chlorine (i.e., originating from
                                addition of free chlorine only)
                               CLM = Chloramines (originating from with
                                addition of chlorine and ammonia or pre-
                                formed chloramines)
                               CAC = Chlorine and chloramines (if being
                                mixed from chlorinated and chloraminated
                                water)
                               NOD = No disinfectant residual
13. Sample Collection Date...  The date the sample is collected,
                                reported as 4-digit year, 2-digit month,
                                and 2-digit day (YYYY/MM/DD).
14. Sample Identification      An alphanumeric value up to 30 characters
 Code.                          assigned by the laboratory to uniquely
                                identify containers, or groups of
                                containers, containing water samples
                                collected at the same sampling location
                                for the same sampling date.
15. Contaminant..............  The unregulated contaminant for which the
                                sample is being analyzed.
16. Analytical Method Code...  The identification code of the analytical
                                method used.
17. Extraction Batch           Laboratory assigned extraction batch ID.
 Identification Code.           Must be unique for each extraction batch
                                within the laboratory for each method.
                                For CCC samples report the Analysis
                                Batch Identification Code as the value
                                for this field. For methods without an
                                extraction batch, leave this field null.
18. Extraction Date..........  Date for the start of the extraction
                                batch (YYYY/MM/DD). For methods without
                                an extraction batch, leave this field
                                null.
19. Analysis Batch             Laboratory assigned analysis batch ID.
 Identification Code.           Must be unique for each analysis batch
                                within the laboratory for each method.
20. Analysis Date............  Date for the start of the analysis batch
                                (YYYY/MM/DD).
21. Sample Analysis Type.....  The type of sample collected and/or
                                prepared, as well as the fortification
                                level. Permitted values include:
                               CF = concentration fortified; the
                                concentration of a known contaminant
                                added to a field sample reported with
                                sample analysis types LFSM, LFSMD, LFB,
                                CCC and QCS.
                               CCC = continuing calibration check; a
                                calibration standard containing the
                                contaminant, the internal standard, and
                                surrogate analyzed to verify the
                                existing calibration for those
                                contaminants.
                               FS = field sample; sample collected and
                                submitted for analysis under this rule.
                               IS = internal standard; a standard that
                                measures the relative response of
                                contaminants.
                               LFB = laboratory fortified blank; an
                                aliquot of reagent water fortified with
                                known quantities of the contaminants and
                                all preservation compounds.
                               LRB = laboratory reagent blank; an
                                aliquot of reagent water treated exactly
                                as a field sample, including the
                                addition of preservatives, internal
                                standards, and surrogates to determine
                                if interferences are present in the
                                laboratory, reagents, or other
                                equipment.
                               LFSM = laboratory fortified sample
                                matrix; a UCMR field sample with a known
                                amount of the contaminant of interest
                                and all preservation compounds added.
                               LFSMD = laboratory fortified sample
                                matrix duplicate; duplicate of the
                                laboratory fortified sample matrix.
                               QCS = quality control sample; a sample
                                prepared with a source external to the
                                one used for initial calibration and
                                CCC. The QCS is used to check
                                calibration standard integrity.
                               QH = quality HAA; HAA sample collected
                                and submitted for quality control
                                purposes.
                               SUR = surrogate standard; a standard that
                                assesses method performance for each
                                extraction.
22. Analytical Results--Sign.  A value indicating whether the sample
                                analysis result was:

[[Page 76919]]

 
                               (A...................  ELISA.................  0.3 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS and SR.........  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
anatoxin-a.........................  64285-06-9............  EPA 545...............  0.03 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
cylindrospermopsin.................  143545-90-8...........  EPA 545...............  0.09 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-LA.....................  96180-79-9............  EPA 544...............  0.008 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-LF.....................  154037-70-4...........  EPA 544...............  0.006 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-LR.....................  101043-37-2...........  EPA 544...............  0.02 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-LY.....................  123304-10-9...........  EPA 544...............  0.009 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-RR.....................  111755-37-4...........  EPA 544...............  0.006 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
microcystin-YR.....................  101064-48-6...........  EPA 544...............  0.02 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
nodularin..........................  118399-22-7...........  EPA 544...............  0.005 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 76920]]

 
                                             List 1: Assessment Monitoring Additional Chemical Contaminants
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Metals
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
germanium..........................  7440-56-4.............  EPA 200.8,............  0.3 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
                                                             ASTM D5673-10, SM 3125
manganese..........................  7439-96-5.............  EPA 200.8,............  0.4 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
                                                             ASTM D5673-10, SM 3125
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Pesticides and a Pesticide Manufacturing Byproduct
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alpha-hexachloro- cyclohexane......  319-84-6..............  EPA 525.3.............  0.01 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
chlorpyrifos.......................  2921-88-2.............  EPA 525.3.............  0.03 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
dimethipin.........................  55290-64-7............  EPA 525.3.............  0.2 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
ethoprop...........................  13194-48-4............  EPA 525.3.............  0.03 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
oxyfluorfen........................  42874-03-3............  EPA 525.3.............  0.05 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
profenofos.........................  41198-08-7............  EPA 525.3.............  0.3 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
tebuconazole.......................  107534-96-3...........  EPA 525.3.............  0.2 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
total permethrin (cis- & trans-)...  52645-53-1............  EPA 525.3.............  0.04 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
 
tribufos...........................  78-48-8...............  EPA 525.3.............  0.07 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Brominated Haloacetic Acid (HAA) Groups \d\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HAA5...............................  N/A...................  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557..  N/A..................  Stage 2 DBPR and/or    3/1/2018-11/30/2020
                                                                                                             DSMRT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HAA6Br.............................  N/A...................  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557..  N/A..................  Stage 2 DBPR and/or    3/1/2018-11/30/2020
                                                                                                             DSMRT.
HAA9...............................  N/A...................  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557..  N/A..................  Stage 2 DBPR and/or    3/1/2018-11/30/2020
                                                                                                             DSMRT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Alcohols
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-butanol..........................  71-36-3...............  EPA 541...............  2.0 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
2-methoxyethanol...................  109-86-4..............  EPA 541...............  0.4 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
2-propen-1-ol......................  107-18-6..............  EPA 541...............  0.5 [micro]g/L.......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Other Semivolatile Chemicals
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
butylated hydroxanisole............  25013-16-5............  EPA 530...............  0.03 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
o-toluidine........................  95-53-4...............  EPA 530...............  0.007 [micro]g/L.....  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
quinoline..........................  91-22-5...............  EPA 530...............  0.02 [micro]g/L......  EPTDS................  3/1/2018-11/30/2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                List 2: Screening Survey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved...........................  Reserved..............  Reserved..............  Reserved.............  Reserved.............  Reserved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               List 3: Pre-Screen Testing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved...........................  Reserved..............  Reserved..............  Reserved.............  Reserved.............  Reserved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column headings are:
1--Contaminant: The name of the contaminant to be analyzed.
2--CAS (Chemical Abstract Service) Registry Number or Identification Number: A unique number identifying the chemical contaminants.
3--Analytical Methods: Method numbers identifying the methods that must be used to test the contaminants.
4--Minimum Reporting Level (MRL): The value and unit of measure at or above which the concentration of the contaminant must be measured using the
  approved analytical methods. If EPA determines, after the first six months of monitoring that the specified MRLs result in excessive resampling, EPA
  will establish alternate MRLs and will notify affected PWSs and laboratories of the new MRLs. N/A is defined as non-applicable.
5--Sampling Location: The locations within a PWS at which samples must be collected.
6--Period During Which Monitoring to be Completed: The time period during which the sampling and testing will occur for the indicated contaminant.
\a\ The analytical procedures shall be performed in accordance with the documents associated with each method, see paragraph (c) of this section.
\b\ The MRL is the minimum concentration of each analyte that must be reported to EPA.

[[Page 76921]]

 
\c\ Sampling must occur at entry points to the distribution system (EPTDSs), after treatment is applied, that represent each non-emergency water source
  in routine use over the 12-month period of monitoring. Systems that purchase water with multiple connections from the same wholesaler may select one
  representative connection from that wholesaler. This EPTDS sampling location must be representative of the highest annual volume connections. If the
  connection selected as the representative EPTDS is not available for sampling, an alternate highest volume representative connection must be sampled.
  See 40 CFR 141.35(c)(3) for an explanation of the requirements related to the use of representative ground water EPTDSs. Sampling for brominated HAA
  groups must be conducted at the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproduct Rule (DBPR) sampling locations (40 CFR 141.622). If these locations
  are not defined, the PWS is required to collect samples at locations that best represent the distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT). DSMRT
  is defined as an active point (i.e., a location that currently provides water to customers) in the distribution system where the water has been in the
  system the longest relative to the EPTDS. Sampling must occur at source water (SR) intake locations defined by EPA under the UCMR as untreated water
  entering the water treatment plant (i.e., a location prior to any treatment). Systems subject to the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
  (LT2) should use their source water sampling site(s) from 40 CFR 141.703. Systems subject to the Stage 1 DBPR should use their TOC source water
  sampling site(s) from 40 CFR 141.132. TOC source water sampling site(s) were set under Stage 1 DBPR and remain unchanged under Stage 2 DBPR. If a
  system has two different sampling locations for LT2 and Stage 1 DBPR, the system should select the sample point the best represents the definition of
  source water sample location(s) for UCMR. For each EPTDS there should be one source water sample point associated with that EPTDS. It is possible that
  different EPTDSs share the same source water. PWSs that purchase 100 percent of their water; ``consecutive systems'' are not required to collect
  source water samples.
\d\ TOC and bromide must be collected at the same time as HAA samples. These indicator samples must be collected at a single source water intake (as
  defined in footnote c, above) using methods already approved for compliance monitoring. TOC methods include: SM 5310 B, SM 5310 C, SM 5310 D (21st
  edition), or SM 5310 B-00, SM 5310 C-00, SM 5310 D-00 (SM Online), EPA Method 415.3 (Rev. 1.1 or 1.2). Bromide methods include: EPA Methods 300.0
  (Rev. 2.1), 300.1 (Rev. 1.0), 317.0 (Rev. 2.0), 326.0 (Rev. 1.0) or ASTM D 6581-12. The MRLs for the individual HAAs are discussed in paragraph
  (a)(5)(v) of this section.
\e\ Temperature and pH must be measured at the same time as cyanotoxin samples at the source water intake as described in footnote c, above. pH methods
  include: EPA Method 150.1 and 150.2, ASTM D1293-12, SM 4500-H+ B (21st edition) or SM 4500-H+ B-00 (SM Online). Temperature methods include: SM 2550
  (21st edition), or SM 2550-10 (SM Online).

    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) Frequency. You must collect the samples within the time frame 
and according to the frequency specified by contaminant type and water 
source type for each sampling location, as specified in Table 2, in 
this paragraph. For the second or subsequent round of sampling, if a 
sample location is non-operational for more than one month before and 
one month after the scheduled sampling month (i.e., it is not possible 
for you to sample within the window specified in Table 2, in this 
paragraph), you must notify EPA as specified in Sec.  141.35(c)(5) to 
reschedule your sampling.

                       Table 2--Monitoring Frequency by Contaminant and Water Source Types
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Contaminant type                Water source type          Time frame \1\           Frequency \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List 1 Cyanotoxins Chemicals......  Surface water or Ground     March-November.......  You must monitor twice a
                                     water under the direct                             month for four
                                     influence of surface                               consecutive months
                                     water (GWUDI).                                     (total of eight sampling
                                                                                        events). Sample events
                                                                                        must occur two week
                                                                                        apart.
List 1 Contaminants--Additional     Surface water or GWUDI....  March-November.......  You must monitor four
 Chemicals.                                                                             times during your 12-
                                                                                        month monitoring period.
                                                                                        Sample events must occur
                                                                                        two months apart.
                                                                                        (Example: If your first
                                                                                        sampling event is in
                                                                                        March, the second
                                                                                        monitoring must occur
                                                                                        during May, the third
                                                                                        during July, and the
                                                                                        fourth during
                                                                                        September).
                                    Ground water..............  March-November.......  You must monitor two
                                                                                        times during your 12-
                                                                                        month monitoring period.
                                                                                        Sample events must occur
                                                                                        six months apart.
                                                                                        (Example: If your first
                                                                                        monitoring is in March,
                                                                                        the second monitoring
                                                                                        must occur during
                                                                                        September. If your first
                                                                                        monitoring is in
                                                                                        November, the second
                                                                                        monitoring must occur in
                                                                                        May).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No sampling will take place during the months of December, January or February, except for resampling
  purposes.
\2\ Systems must assign a sample event code for each contaminant listed in Table 1. Sample event codes must be
  assigned by the PWS for each sample event. For more information on sample event codes see Sec.   141.35(e)
  Table 1.

    (C) Location. You must collect samples for each List 1 Assessment 
Monitoring contaminant, and, if applicable, for each List 2 Screening 
Survey, or List 3 Pre-Screen Testing contaminant, as specified in Table 
1, in paragraph (a)(3) of this section. Samples must be collected at 
each sample point that is specified in column 5 and footnote c of Table 
1, in paragraph (a)(3) of this section. PWSs conducting List 1 
monitoring for the brominated HAA groups must collect TOC and bromide 
samples as specified in footnote d of Table 1, in paragraph (a)(3) of 
this section. PWSs conducting List 1 monitoring for cyanotoxins must 
measure temperature and pH as specified in footnote e of Table 1, in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section. If you are a ground water system with 
multiple EPTDSs, and you request and receive approval from EPA or the 
State for sampling at representative EPTDS(s), as specified in Sec.  
141.35(c)(3), you must collect your samples from the approved 
representative sampling location(s).
* * * * *
    (ii) Small systems. If you serve 10,000 or fewer people and are 
notified that you are part of the State Monitoring Plan for Assessment 
Monitoring, Screening Survey or Pre-Screen monitoring, you must comply 
with the requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)(A) through (H) 
of this section. If EPA or the State informs you that they will be 
collecting your UCMR samples,

[[Page 76922]]

you must assist them in identifying the appropriate sampling locations 
and in collecting the samples.
* * * * *
    (iii) Phased sample analysis for microcystins. You must collect the 
three required samples (one at the source water intake and two at the 
EPTDS) for each sampling event, but not all samples may need to be 
analyzed. PWSs that purchase 100 percent of their water; ``consecutive 
systems'' only sample at their EPTDS. If the ELISA result from the 
source water intake is less than 0.3 [micro]g/L, report that result and 
do not analyze the additional EPTDS samples for that sample event. If 
the ELISA result from the source water intake is greater than or equal 
to 0.3 [micro]g/L, report that value and analyze the EPTDS ELISA 
sample. If the EPTDS ELISA result is less than 0.3 [micro]g/L, report 
that result and do not analyze the additional EPTDS samples for that 
sample event. If the EPTDS ELISA result is greater than or equal to 0.3 
[micro]g/L, report the value and analyze the other microcystin samples 
collected at the EPTDS using EPA Method 544.
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (v) Method defined quality control. You must ensure that your 
laboratory analyzes Laboratory Fortified Blanks and conducts Laboratory 
Performance Checks, as appropriate to the method's requirements, for 
those methods listed in Table 1, column 3, in paragraph (a)(3) of this 
section. Each method specifies acceptance criteria for these QC checks. 
The following HAA results must be reported using EPA's electronic data 
reporting system for quality control purposes.

                                                                 Table 4--HAA QC Results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  2--CAS  Registry    3--Analytical methods        4--Minimum
         1--Contaminant                  No.                   \a\            reporting level \b\   5--HAA6Br group     6--HAA9 group     7--HAA5 group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Brominated Haloacetic Acid (HAA) Groups
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bromochloroacetic acid (BCAA)..  5589-96-8.........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.3 [micro]g/L.....  HAA6Br...........  HAA9............
Bromodichloroacetic acid         71133-14-7........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.5 [micro]g/L.....
 (BDCAA).
Chlorodibromoacetic acid         5278-95-5.........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.3 [micro]g/L.....
 (CDBAA).
Tribromoacetic acid (TBAA).....  75-96-7...........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  2.0 [micro]g/L.....
Monobromoacetic acid (MBAA)....  79-08-3...........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.3 [micro]g/L.....  .................  ................  HAA5.
Dibromoacetic acid (DBAA)......  631-64-1..........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.3 [micro]g/L.....
Dichloroacetic acid (DCAA).....  79-43-6...........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.2 [micro]g/L.....
Monochloroacetic acid (MCAA)...  79-11-8...........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  2.0 [micro]g/L.....
Trichloroacetic acid (TCAA)....  76-03-9...........  EPA 552.3 or EPA 557...  0.5 [micro]g/L.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column headings are:
1--Contaminant: The name of the contaminant to be analyzed.
2--CAS (Chemical Abstract Service) Registry Number or Identification Number: A unique number identifying the chemical contaminants.
3--Analytical Methods: Method numbers identifying the methods that must be used to test the contaminants.
4--Minimum Reporting Level (MRL): The value and unit of measure at or above which the concentration of the contaminant must be measured using the
  approved analytical methods. If EPA determines, after the first six months of monitoring that the specified MRLs result in excessive resampling, EPA
  will establish alternate MRLs and will notify affected PWSs and laboratories of the new MRLs.
5-7--HAA groups identified in paragraph (a)(3) of this section to be monitored as UCMR contaminants.
\a\ The analytical procedures shall be performed in accordance with the documents associated with each method, see paragraph (c) of this section, and
  must meet all quality control requirements outlined paragraph (a)(5) of this section.
\b\ The MRL is the minimum concentration of each analyte that must be reported to EPA.

    (vi) * * * You must require your laboratory to submit these data 
electronically to the State and EPA using EPA's electronic data 
reporting system, accessible at http://www2.epa.gov/dwucmr, within 120 
days from the sample collection date. * * *
* * * * *
    (c) Incorporation by reference. These standards are incorporated by 
reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the 
Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved 
material is available for inspection either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, and from 
the sources as follows. The Public Reading Room (EPA West, Room 3334, 
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC) is open from 8:30 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 
telephone number for this Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and 
the telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426. The 
material is also available for inspection at the National Archives and 
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of 
this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030 or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/about.html.
    (1) The following methods are from the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004.
    (i) EPA Method 150.1 ``pH Electrometric, in Methods for Chemical 
Analysis of Water and Wastes,'' 1983, EPA/600/4-79/020. Available on 
the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov.
    (ii) EPA Method 150.2 ``pH, Continuous Monitoring (Electrometric), 
in Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,'' 1983, EPA/600/
4-79/020. Available on the Internet at http://www.nemi.gov.
    (iii) EPA Method 200.8 ``Determination of Trace Elements in Waters 
and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma--Mass Spectrometry,'' Revision 
5.4, 1994. Available on the Internet at https://www.nemi.gov.
    (iv) EPA Method 300.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion 
Chromatography Samples,'' Revision 2.1, 1993. Available on the Internet 
at http://www.nemi.gov.
    (v) EPA Method 300.1 ``Determination of Inorganic Anions in 
Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography,'' Revision 1.0, 1997. Available 
on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (vi) EPA Method 317.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
with the Addition of a Postcolumn Reagent for Trace Bromate Analysis,'' 
Revision 2.0, 2001, EPA 815-B-01-001. Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/

[[Page 76923]]

approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (vii) EPA Method 326.0 ``Determination of Inorganic Oxyhalide 
Disinfection By-Products in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography 
Incorporating the Addition of a Suppressor Acidified Postcolumn Reagent 
for Trace Bromate Analysis,'' Revision 1.0, 2002, EPA 815-R-03-007. 
Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (viii) EPA Method 415.3 ``Determination of Total Organic Carbon and 
Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and Drinking Water,'' 
Revision 1.1, 2005, EPA/600/R-05/055. Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (ix) EPA Method 415.3 ``Determination of Total Organic Carbon and 
Specific UV Absorbance at 254 nm in Source Water and Drinking Water,'' 
Revision 1.2, 2009, EPA/600/R-09/122. Available on the Internet at 
http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (x) EPA Method 525.3 ``Determination of Semivolatile Organic 
Chemicals in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Capillary 
Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),'' Version 1.0, 
February 2012, EPA/600/R-12/010. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (xi) EPA Method 530 ``Determination of Select Semivolatile Organic 
Chemicals in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Gas 
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),'' Version 1.0, January 2015, 
EPA/600/R-14/442. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (xii) EPA Method 541 ``Determination of 1-Butanol, 1,4-Dioxane, 2-
Methoxyethanol and 2-Propen-1-ol in Drinking Water by Solid Phase 
Extraction and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry,'' November 2015, 
EPA 815-R-15-011. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (xiii) EPA Method 544 ``Determination of Microcystins and Nodularin 
in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/
Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS),'' Version 1.0, February 2015, EPA 
600-R-14/474. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/water-research/epa-drinking-water-research-methods.
    (xiv) EPA Method 545 ``Determination of Cylindrospermopsin and 
Anatoxin-a in Drinking Water by Liquid Chromatography Electrospray 
Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS),'' April 2015, EPA 
815-R-15-009. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (xv) EPA Method 552.3 ``Determination of Haloacetic Acids and 
Dalapon in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Microextraction, 
Derivatization, and Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture 
Detection,'' Revision 1.0, July 2003, EPA 815-B-03-002. Available on 
the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (xvi) EPA Method 557 ``Determination of Haloacetic Acids, Bromate, 
and Dalapon in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography Electrospray 
Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (IC-ESI-MS/MS),'' Version 1.0, 
September 2009, EPA 815-B-09-012. Available on the Internet at http://www2.epa.gov/dwanalyticalmethods/approved-drinking-water-analytical-methods.
    (2) The following methods are from ``ASTM International,'' 100 Barr 
Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
    (i) ASTM D1293-12 ``Standard Test Methods for pH of Water.'' 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D1293.htm.
    (ii) ASTM D5673-10 ``Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by 
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry,'' approved August 1, 
2010. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D5673.htm.
    (iii) ASTM D6581-12 ``Standard Test Methods for Bromate, Bromide, 
Chlorate, and Chlorite in Drinking Water by Suppressed Ion 
Chromatography.'' Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6581.htm.
    (3) The following methods are from ``Standard Methods for the 
Examination of Water & Wastewater,'' 21st edition (2005), American 
Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710.
    (i) SM 2550. ``Temperature.''
    (ii) SM 3125 ``Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass 
Spectrometry.''
    (iii) SM 4500-H+ B ``pH Value in Water by Potentiometry Using a 
Standard Hydrogen Electrode.''
    (iv) SM 5310B ``The Determination of Total Organic Carbon by High-
Temperature Combustion Method.''
    (v) SM 5310C ``Total Organic Carbon by Persulfate-UV or Heated-
Persulfate Oxidation Method.''
    (vi) SM 5310D ``Total Organic Carbon by Wet-Oxidation Method.''
    (4) The following methods are from ``Standard Methods Online.'' 
Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org.
    (i) SM 2550-10 ``Temperature.''
    (ii) SM 3125-09 ``Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass 
Spectrometry (Editorial revisions, 2011).''
    (iii) SM 4500-H+ B-00 ``pH Value in Water by Potentiometry Using a 
Standard Hydrogen Electrode.''
    (iv) SM 5310B-00 ``The Determination of Total Organic Carbon by 
High-Temperature Combustion Method.''
    (v) SM 5310C-00 ``Total Organic Carbon by Persulfate-UV or Heated-
Persulfate Oxidation Method.''
    (vi) SM 5310D-00 ``Total Organic Carbon by Wet-Oxidation Method.''
    (5) The following methodology is from Ohio EPA, Columbus, OH.
    (i) ELISA SOP. ``Ohio EPA Total (Extracellular and Intracellular) 
Microcystins--ADDA by ELISA Analytical Methodology,'' Version 2.0, 
January 2015. Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.ohio.gov/Portals/28/documents/habs/HAB_Analytical_Methodology.pdf.
    (ii) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2015-30824 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```