Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/03/03/2011-4641/revisions-to-the-unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-regulation-ucmr-3-for-public-water-systems
Timestamp: 2016-06-26 11:46:49
Document Index: 533004340

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', 'art 51', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141', '§ 141']

-11737 (25 pages)
Document Number: 2011-4641
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/2011-4641 Related Topics
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OW-2009-0090. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. This Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.
David J. Munch, Technical Support Center, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive (MS 140), Cincinnati, OH 45268; telephone (513) 569-7843; or e-mail at munch.dave@epa.gov; or Brenda D. Parris, Technical Support Center, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive (MS 140), Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; telephone (513) 569-7961; or e-mail at parris.brenda@epa.gov. For general information, contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Callers within the United States may reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791. The Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., Eastern time. The Safe Drinking Water Hotline may also be found on the Internet at: http://water.epa.gov/aboutow/ogwdw/hotline/.
aNAICS = North American Industry Classification System.
States, local and Tribal governments that analyze water samples on behalf of public water systems required to conduct such analysis; States, local and Tribal governments that directly operate community, transient and non-transient non-community water systems required to monitor
Private operators of community and non-transient non-community water systems required to monitor.
This table is not exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware may potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the definition of PWS in § 141.2 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and applicability criteria in § 141.40(a)(1) and (2) of today's proposed action. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the persons listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
µg/LMicrogram per liter
ASTMAmerican Society for Testing Materials
CCLContaminant Candidate List
DSMRTDistribution system maximum residence time
EPTDSEntry point to the distribution system
HCFC-22Chlorodifluoromethane
IC/MSIon Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
LCMRLLowest concentration minimum reporting level
LC/MS/MSLiquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
LFSMLaboratory fortified sample matrix
LFSMDLaboratory fortified sample matrix duplicate
MRLMinimum reporting level NAICSNorth American Industry Classification System
NCODNational Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database
PAPartnership Agreement
PFHxSPerfluorohexane sulfonic acid
PFOSPerfluorooctane sulfonic acid
SMStandard Methods
SRFState Revolving Fund
SDWIS/FedFederal Safe Drinking Water Information System
UCMRUnregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
II. Statutory Authority and Background Back to Top
Exhibit 1—Proposed Contaminant Lists Back to Top
EPA published the first list for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation cycle (i.e., UCMR 1) in the Federal Register on September 17, 1999 (64 FR 50556), and the second list (i.e., UCMR 2) on January 4, 2007 (72 FR 367). The monitoring lists that were applicable under UCMR 1 and 2 are available at: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/.
The 1996 amendments to SDWA instituted the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and UCMR programs to provide information EPA needs to determine which drinking water contaminants have the greatest potential to present a meaningful opportunity to reduce health risk through a national primary drinking water regulation (NPDWR). The CCL is the primary mechanism for the identification of contaminants that may require regulation while UCMR provides EPA with the data necessary to determine if a contaminant occurs at a frequency and concentration that would be a public health concern. The CCL and UCMR are coordinated parts of EPA's risk management process, and they support each other. The UCMR sampling program is limited by statute to 30 contaminants at one time, and was designed in consideration of the technical difficulty and expense of analyzing up to 30 contaminants, as well as their potential to occur in treated drinking water at levels of public health concern. The data collected through the UCMR program are being stored in the NCOD to: facilitate analysis and review of contaminant occurrence; guide the conduct of the CCL process; and support the Administrator's determination whether to regulate a contaminant in the interest of protecting public health, as required under SDWA section 1412 (b)(1). Results of the UCMR 1 and 2 monitoring can be viewed by the public at EPA's UCMR Web site: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/data.cfm.
III. Requirements of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Program Back to Top
EPA developed, and is proposing in today's action, a slightly revised design for UCMR 3 based on experience with UCMR 1 and UCMR 2. EPA reviewed various aspects of the UCMR 1 and 2 programs and identified several critical changes that would improve implementation. 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 include direct implementation of the rule by EPA, the design of Assessment Monitoring, and EPA funding for the small system testing. In addition to requesting comment on the proposed list of contaminants, EPA also requests comment on: Monitoring based on retail population; revised data elements; and other changes between UCMR 2 and UCMR 3 that are outlined in Exhibit 2. Updates to Web addresses, applicability dates, corrections of minor typographical errors, and other minor clerical edits are reflected in rule language, but do not appear in Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2—Notable Changes Being Proposed for UCMR 3 Back to Top
141.35(a) and 141.40(a)
Population-based applicability and related applicability date
Base applicability on retail population. Under UCMR 1 and 2, systems that purchased all of their water were not required to monitor. These systems would now be subject to UCMR monitoring requirements. The new SDWIS/Fed applicability date (i.e., the date used to determine which systems are subject to monitoring) is also specified
141.35(c)(3)(ii)
Demonstrating representative ground water sampling locations
Clarifies that when identifying a representative well, the well must be one of the higher annual volume producing and consistently active wells. Should this location go off-line, an alternative location must be sampled
141.35(c)(6)(ii) and 141.40(a)(5)(vi)
Reduces time for labs to electronically report results (from 120 to 60 days); and for systems to review, approve, and report data (from 60 to 30 days)
141.35(c)(6) and 141.35(d)(2)
Requires small and large systems to report all data elements in Table 1 with each sample. Previously, only a subset of the data elements were to be reported with each sample
141.35(e)
Revises Table 1 of § 141.35 to:
• Clarify and update the definition of Data Element 6—Disinfectant Type
III.F. and V.J.
141.40(a)(1)
Applicability to transient systems
Removes exemption for transient systems, which would now be subject to monitoring for List 3 contaminants if notified by EPA or State
141.40(a)(2)(ii)(C) and 141.40(a)(3)
Pre-Screen Testing viruses and indicators
Systems participating in List 3 monitoring would be required to allow EPA to monitor for enterovirus and norovirus and collect specified pathogen indicators
III.B. and III.F.
141.40(a)(3)
Analytes to be monitored and related specifications
Revises Table 1 of this section to include: New list of 28 priority contaminants, with 6 EPA-developed and 4 consensus organization developed analytical methods, as well as new monitoring dates of January 2013 through December 2015
141.40(a)(4)(i)(B)
Sampling requirements—frequency
Specifies that schedules must be adjusted based on sample point availability. Clarifies that sampling points within a system may have different schedules
Also, revises Table 2 of this section to include monitoring requirements for microbiological contaminants for ground water systems at a frequency of two times during a consecutive 12-month period
141.40(a)(4)(i)(C)
Requires systems conducting Assessment Monitoring to collect metal and chlorate samples at distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT) sampling locations. If these locations are not defined, requires PWS to collect samples at locations that best represents the maximum residence time in the distribution system
141.40(a)(5)(iii)
Minimum Reporting Level (MRL) definition
Revises the definition of the MRL
The proposed contaminant list for UCMR 3 was further pared down as follows: (1) Contaminants with no currently available methods, or methods that would not be ready in time for UCMR 3 monitoring were eliminated; and, (2) those contaminants included in UCMR 1 or UCMR 2 monitoring were also eliminated from inclusion. This narrowed list of fewer than 35 analytes was further considered by an EPA and State working group, and prioritized using health effects data and other critical endpoints, to arrive at a final proposed list of 30 analytes listed in Exhibit 3. Further information on this prioritization process, and on the health effects and occurrence data EPA used to select the chemical analytes proposed for UCMR 3 are contained in “Possible Contaminants for Inclusion on UCMR 3—Information Compendium” (USEPA, 2010d).
EPA has not included hexavalent chromium (chromium-6) in the proposed list of chemicals for UCMR 3 monitoring; however, EPA is aware of potential concerns about chromium-6 occurrence in public water supplies. EPA thus requests comment on whether the Agency should include chromium-6 as one of the 30 contaminants for UCMR 3 Assessment Monitoring. EPA has recently issued voluntary guidance to water systems on monitoring for chromium-6, including recommendations regarding the use of a modified version of EPA Method 218.6 for the analysis of samples and a recommended reporting level of 0.06 ug/L (see http://water.epa.gov/drink/info/chromium/guidance.cfm). If EPA were to include chromium-6 in UCMR 3, the Agency would incorporate it into Assessment Monitoring. Under this approach, EPA would make chromium-6 monitoring mandatory for all large water systems and a subset of small systems; see also Section III.F.2 for further discussion of the Assessment Monitoring approach. EPA requests comments on what contaminant(s) should be removed from the list of 30 UCMR 3 contaminants if chromium-6 were added, as well as comments regarding the recommended and alternative analytical method(s) and the appropriate reporting level. EPA also requests comments on whether total chromium should also be measured concurrent with chromium-6. Side-by-side measurements may provide valuable information on relative occurrence and the utility of total chromium monitoring as a surrogate for chromium-6.
Exhibit 3—30 Proposed UCMR 3 Analytes Back to Top
9. ASTM D6581-08 (ASTM, 2008) 10. EPA Method 537 (LC/MS/MS) (USEPA, 2009b)
7 Hormones using EPA Method 539 (LC/MS/MS)1:
estriol (16-α-hydroxy-17-β-estradiol)
9 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) using EPA Method 524.3 (GC/MS)2:
Synthetic Organic Compound using EPA Method 522 (GC/MS)3:
4 Metals using EPA Method 200.8 (IC/MS)4or alternate SM5or ASTM Methods6:
Oxyhalide Anion using EPA Method 300.1 (IC/Conductivity)7or alternate SM8or ASTM Methods9:
6 Perfluorinated Chemicals using EPA Method 537 (LC/MS/MS)10:
2 Viruses (see Section III.B.7 for methods discussion):11
The LCMRL is estimated using sophisticated statistical procedures that have been incorporated into an LCMRL calculator tool that is available on EPA's Web site (http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm). The statistical tool estimates a probability distribution for spike recovery as a function of spiking concentration. This requires regression modeling that estimates expected value and expected variance for repeated measurements as functions of spiking concentration. Often this variance is an increasing function of spiking level. In this case, ordinary least squares regression is not appropriate to estimate the expected value function. Weighted least squares is used with weights proportional to the reciprocal of the expected variance, multiplied by a weight (Tukey's biweight) that gives robustness against outliers. The variance model is estimated using a Generalized Linear Model. To estimate these regressions, an experimental design with replicate spiking at multiple concentrations is required. If the LCMRL estimate is below the lowest non-blank spiking concentration or above the highest spiking concentration, another set of blanks must be spiked so that the LCMRL is bracketed by the lowest and highest spike concentrations when the LCMRL is re-estimated. The spiked concentrations must be contained within the instrument calibration curve that is routinely used for each analyte. The combined procedure provides a robust estimator of the LCMRL and a sophisticated and useful measure of method capability.
In UCMR 2, the MRL was established by EPA by adding the mean of the LCMRL determined according to the procedure detailed in “Statistical Protocol for the Determination of The Single-Laboratory Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level (LCMRL) and Validation of the Minimum Reporting Level (MRL)” (USEPA, 2004), (http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/methods/pdfs/methods/methods_lcmrl.pdf) by the primary and secondary laboratories conducting the development and validation of the analytical method to three times the difference of the LCMRLs. If LCMRL data from three or more laboratories were available, the MRL was established by EPA by adding three times the standard deviation of the LCMRLs to the mean of the LCMRLs.
The proposed UCMR 3 laboratory approval program is the same as that employed in previous UCMR cycles. It is designed to assess and confirm the capability of laboratories to perform analyses using the methods listed in § 141.40(a)(3), Table 1, of today's proposed rule. The UCMR 3 laboratory approval process is designed to assess whether laboratories meet the required equipment, laboratory performance, and data reporting criteria described in today's action. This evaluation program is voluntary in that it only applies to laboratories intending to analyze UCMR 3 samples. However, EPA would require systems to use UCMR 3 approved laboratories when conducting monitoring for those analytes listed in Table 1 of § 141.40(a)(3) of this proposed rule. A list of laboratories approved for UCMR 3 would be posted to EPA's UCMR Web site: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/ucmr3/labs.cfm. Laboratories are encouraged to apply for UCMR 3 approvals as early as possible, as schedules for large PWS sampling would be completed soon after the final rule is promulgated. The steps for the laboratory approval process are listed in the following paragraphs, a through f.
A PT sample is a synthetic sample containing a concentration of an analyte that is known to EPA, but unknown to the laboratory being tested. To complete the initial laboratory approval process, a laboratory would be expected to meet specific acceptance criteria for the analysis of a UCMR 3 PT sample(s) for each method for which the laboratory is seeking approval. EPA intends to offer up to four opportunities for a laboratory to successfully analyze the UCMR 3 PT samples. Up to three of these studies would be conducted prior to the publication of the final rule, but at least one study would be conducted after publication of the final rule. This would allow laboratories to complete their portion of the laboratory approval process prior to publication of the final rule, and therefore, receive their approval, immediately following the publication of the final rule, or to wait until the final rule is published before completing the required laboratory approval analyses. A laboratory only needs to pass one of the PT studies for each analytical method for which they are requesting approval. Laboratories applying for UCMR 3 approval, and laboratories conducting UCMR 3 analyses, may be subject to on-site laboratory audits. No PT studies would be conducted after the start of monitoring; however, laboratory audits would be ongoing throughout the entire monitoring period of 2013-2015. Initial laboratory approval would be contingent upon successful completion of a PT study. Continued laboratory approval is contingent upon successful completion of audits.
Note that systems that purchase water with multiple connections from the same wholesaler would be permitted to propose one representative connection from that wholesaler. PWSs would choose a sampling location from among the higher annual volume EPTDS connections. If the connection selected as the representative EPTDS was not available for sampling, an alternate representative connection would need to be sampled.
Demonstrating Representative Ground Water Sampling Locations: As established under UCMR 2, large systems that use ground water sources and have multiple EPTDSs can, with prior approval, conduct monitoring at representative entry point(s) rather than at each EPTDS. To monitor at representative EPTDSs, large systems must meet the reporting criteria specified in § 141.35(c)(3)(ii), and receive approval from EPA or the State. Today's proposed changes to the rule language clarify that when identifying a representative well, the well must be one of the higher annual volume producing and consistently active wells. In addition, should this location go off-line, an alternative location must be sampled.
As proposed, Assessment Monitoring for List 1 contaminants would be conducted from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2015 by all large systems (those systems serving more than 10,000 people), and by a nationally representative sample of 800 small systems (those serving 10,000 people or fewer). Other than these new monitoring dates, there are no other changes to the schedule and frequency of Assessment Monitoring between UCMR 2 and UCMR 3. Small systems would be selected using the same type of stratified, random selection process as used in previous UCMRs. Samples would be collected from the entry point to the distribution systems (EPTDSs). Large ground water systems with multiple EPTDSs would be permitted to sample at representative sampling locations for each ground water source if those sites have been approved by EPA or the State. In addition to EPTDS monitoring, the four metals—cobalt, molybdenum, vanadium, and strontium—as well as chlorate, would be sampled at one distribution system sampling point per treatment plant (i.e., at the distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT)). If the system's treatment plant/water source is subject to sampling requirements under § 141.132(b)(1) (the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule), samples for the metals and chlorate must be collected at the DSMRT sampling location(s) identified for that rule. If a treatment plant/water source is not subject to the sampling required in 40 CFR 141.132(b)(1), then the distribution system samples must be collected at a location that, in the judgment of the PWS, represents the maximum residence time in the distribution system.
As under previous UCMR cycles, samples at ground water locations would be collected twice during a designated consecutive 12-month period. Samples at locations that are fed in whole or part by a surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water (GWUDI) source would be collected quarterly during a designated consecutive 12-month period. Large system schedules (year and months of monitoring) would initially be determined by EPA in conjunction with the States (as described in section III.G. of today's action) and these systems would have an opportunity to modify this schedule. In today's proposed action, EPA has incorporated clarifying revisions in 141.40(a)(4)(i)(B) to specify that large system monitoring schedules must be adjusted based on sample point availability. If it is not possible for a system to meet its specified sampling schedule (if, for instance, a particular sampling point is inactive during the scheduled sampling timeframe), the system must notify EPA to reschedule their sampling. As under previous UCMR cycles, the Agency would continue to schedule and coordinate small system monitoring, working closely with partnering States. State monitoring plans would provide a venue for States to review and revise the initial sampling schedules that EPA proposes (see discussion of State monitoring plans in section III.G. of today's action: “What is the States' Role in the UCMR Program?”). The 28 proposed List 1 contaminants to be monitored under Assessment Monitoring are listed in Exhibit 3, in section III.B of today's action.
Exhibit 5—Systems To Participate in UCMR 3 Monitoring Back to Top
Pre-screen testing for two List 3 microbials1
1Sampling for List 3 contaminants to be conducted at 800 undisinfected wells, located in karst or fractured bedrock, in systems serving 1,000 or fewer customers. Monitoring also includes sampling for pathogen indicators: Total coliforms, E. coli, bacteriophage, Enterococci and aerobic spores. EPA would pay for all sampling and analysis costs associated with virus and pathogen indicator monitoring at these small systems.
2Total for small systems is additive because these systems would only be selected for one component of UCMR 3 sampling. Number is approximate.
3Large system counts are approximate.
800 randomly selected systems
800 selected undisinfected ground water wells from systems serving 1,000 or fewer
IV. Cost of This Proposed Action Back to Top
In today's action, EPA proposes a new set of contaminants for monitoring in the third five-year UCMR monitoring cycle. In addition, UCMR 3 incorporates modifications to improve the rule design. UCMR 3 Assessment Monitoring (for List 1 contaminants) would be conducted from January 2013 through December 2015 by 800 systems serving 10,000 or fewer people, and by all systems serving more than 10,000 people. Eight hundred small systems would be randomly selected for List 1 monitoring. The Pre-Screen Testing for List 3 contaminants would also be conducted from January 2013 through December 2015 in 800 undisinfected ground water wells from systems serving 1,000 or fewer persons. It is assumed for this cost estimation that one-third of systems would monitor during each of the three monitoring years.
Labor costs pertain to systems, States, and EPA. They include activities such as reading the regulation, notifying systems selected to participate, sample collection, data review, reporting, andrecordkeeping. Non-labor costs would be incurred primarily by EPA and by large PWSs. They include the cost of shipping samples to laboratories for testing and the cost of the actual laboratory analyses.
Small Systems (25-10,000), including labor only, non-labor costs paid for by EPA
$0.049 m
Large Systems (10,001-100,000), including labor and non-labor costs
Very Large Systems (100,001 and greater), including labor and non-labor costs
States, including labor costs related to implementation coordination
EPA, including labor for implementation, non-labor for small system testing
Average Annual National Total
The information to be collected under today's proposed rule fulfills the statutory requirements of section 1445(a)(2) of SDWA, as amended in 1996. The data to be collected would describe the source of the water, location, and test results for samples taken from PWSs. The concentrations of any identified UCMR contaminants would be evaluated regarding health effects and would be considered for future regulation accordingly. Reporting is mandatory. The data are not subject to confidentiality protection.
To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, EPA has established a public docket for this rule, which includes this ICR, under Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0090. Submit any comments related to the ICR to EPA and OMB. See
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to submit comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after March 3, 2011, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by April 4, 2011. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.
Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. To ensure that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA will assume all costs for analyses of the samples and for shipping the samples from these systems to the laboratories contracted by EPA to analyze UCMR 3 samples. EPA has set aside $2.0 million each year from the 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 hours associated with collecting a sample and preparing it for shipping.
Exhibit 6—Number of Publicly- and Privately-Owned Small Systems Subject to UCMR 3 Back to Top
Subtotal GW
Subtotal SW
Total of Small Water Systems
Exhibit 7—EPA and Systems Costs for Implementation of UCMR 3 at Small Systems Back to Top
1Total number of systems is 1,600. No small system conducts more than one type of monitoring study.
$3,943,827
$11,831,481
$4,025,533
$12,076,599
System Monitoring Activity Timeline:
1/3 PWSs Sample
System costs are attributed to the labor required for reading about their requirements, monitoring, reporting, and record keeping. The estimated average annual burden across the five-year UCMR 3 implementation period of 2012-2016 is estimated to be 1.3 hours at $31 per small system. Average annual cost, in all cases, is less than 0.4% of system revenues. As required by the SDWA, the Agency specifically structured the rule to avoid significantly affecting small entities by assuming all costs for laboratory analyses, shipping, and quality control for small entities. As a result, EPA incurs the entirety of the non-labor costs associated with UCMR 3 small system monitoring, or 98% of total small system testing costs. Exhibits 8 and 9 present the estimated economic impacts in the form of a revenue test for publicly- and privately-owned systems.
Exhibit 8—UCMR 3 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Publicly-Owned Systems (2012-2016) Back to Top
Revenue test1
1The 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 3 Relative Cost Analysis for Small Privately-Owned Systems (2012-2016) Back to Top
1The “Revenue Test” was used to evaluate the economic impact of an information collection on small private entities (e.g., privately-owned systems); costs are presented as a percentage of median annual revenue in each size category.
VI. Public Involvement in Regulation Development Back to Top
ASTM D5673-10. 2010. Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D5673.htm.
ASTM D6581-08. 2008. 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.
SM 3125. 1997. Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass Spectrometry. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org/store/ProductView.cfm?ProductID=211.
SM 4110D. 2000. Determination of Anions by Ion Chromatography, Part D, IC determination of oxyhalides and bromide. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org/store/ProductView.cfm?ProductID=31.
USEPA. 1994. 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. 1996. Information Collection Rule Microbial Laboratory Manual. Office of Research and Development. April 1996. EPA/600/R-95/178. Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/microbes/online.html#icr.
USEPA. 1997. Method 300.1—Determination of Inorganic Anions in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography. Revision 1.0. Available on the Internet at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
USEPA. 2008. Method 522—Determination of 1,4-Dioxane in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) with Selected Ion Monitoring (SIM). EPA/600/R-08/101. Version 1.0, September 2008. Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
USEPA. 2009a. Method 524.3—Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. EPA/815/B-09/009. Version 1.0, June 2009. Available on the Internet at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
USEPA. 2009b. Method 537—Determination of Selected Perfluorinated Alkyl Acids in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). EPA/600/R-08/092. Version 1.1, September 2009. Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
USEPA. 2010c. Method 539—Determination of Hormones in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Liquid Chromatography Electrospray Ionization Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS). Available on the Internet at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
USEPA. 2010d. Possible Contaminants for Inclusion on UCMR 3—InformationCompendium. EPA 815-B-10-002.
Subpart C—Monitoring and Analytical Requirements Back to Top
SM4(18th, 19th ed.)
SM4(20th ed.)
SM Online22
6300.0 19300.1
8B-1011
Colorimetric Phosphomolybdate;
5I-1601-85
Automated-segmented flow;
5I-2601-90
Automated Discrete
5I-2598-85
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994, 1996, 1999, or 2003, Vols. 11.01 and 11.02, ASTM International; any year containing the cited version of the method may be used. The previous versions of D1688-95A, D1688-95C (copper), D3559-95D (lead), D1293-95 (pH), D1125-91A (conductivity) and D859-94 (silica) are also approved. These previous versions D1688-90A, C; D3559-90D, D1293-84, D1125-91A and D859-88, respectively are located in the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994, Vol. 11.01. Copies may be obtained from ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428.
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th edition (1992), 19th edition (1995) or 20th edition (1998). American Public Health Association, 800 I Street, NW., Washington, DC 20001-3710. The cited methods published in any of these three editions may be used, except that the versions of 3111 B, 3111 D, 3113 B and 3114 B in the 20th edition may not be used.
Method I-2601-90, Methods for Analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of Inorganic and Organic Constituents in Water and Fluvial Sediment, Open File Report 93-125, 1993; For Methods I-1030-85; I-1601-85; I-1700-85; I-2598-85; I-2700-85; and I-3300-85. See Techniques of Water Resources Investigation of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-1, 3rd edition, 1989; Available from Information Services, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
“Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples,” EPA/600/R-93/100, August 1993. Available at NTIS, PB94-120821.
The procedure shall be done in accordance with the Technical Bulletin 601 “Standard Method of Test for Nitrate in Drinking Water,” July 1994, PN 221890-001, Analytical Technology, Inc. Copies may be obtained from ATI Orion, 529 Main Street, Boston, MA 02129.
Method B-1011. “Waters Test Method for Determination of Nitrite/Nitrate in Water Using Single Column Ion Chromatography,” August, 1987. Copies may be obtained from Waters Corporation, Technical Services Division, 34 Maple Street, Milford, MA 01757, Telephone: 508/482-2963, Fax: 508/482-4056.
Because MDLs reported in EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.9 were determined using a 2x preconcentration step during sample digestion, MDLs determined when samples are analyzed by direct analysis (i.e., no sample digestion) will be higher. For direct analysis of cadmium and arsenic by Method 200.7, and arsenic by Method 3120 B, sample preconcentration using pneumatic nebulization may be required to achieve lower detection limits. Preconcentration may also be required for direct analysis of antimony, lead, and thallium by Method 200.9; antimony and lead by Method 3113 B; and lead by Method D3559-90D, unless multiple in-furnace depositions are made.
“Methods for the Determination of Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Drinking Water,” Vol. 1, EPA 815-R-00-014, August 2000. Available at NTIS, PB2000-106981.
Standard Methods Online are available at http://www.standardmethods.org. The year in which each method was approved by the Standard Methods Committee is designated by the last two digits in the method number. The methods listed are the only online versions that may be used.
(b) Reporting by all systems. You must meet the reporting requirements of this paragraph if you meet the applicability criteria in § 141.40(a)(1) and (2).
(1) * * * Information that must be submitted using EPA's electronic data reporting system must be submitted through: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/ucmr3/reporting.cfm.* * *
(2) * * * If you have received a letter from EPA concerning your required monitoring and your system does not meet the applicability criteria for UCMR established in § 141.40(a)(1) or (2), or if a change occurs at your system that may affect your requirements under UCMR as defined in § 141.40(a)(3) through (5), you must fax, mail, or e-mail a letter to EPA, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * *
(3) * * * (ii) * * * The proposed representative well must be one of the higher annual volume producing and more consistently active wells in the representative array. If that representative well is not in use at the scheduled sampling time, an alternative representative well must be sampled. * * *
(ii) Reporting schedule. You must ensure that your laboratory posts the data to EPA's electronic data reporting system within 60 days from the sample collection date (sample collection must occur as specified in § 141.40(a)(4)). You have 30 days from when the laboratory posts the data in EPA's electronic data reporting system to review, approve, and submit the data to the State and EPA, at the Web address specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If you do not electronically approve and submit the laboratory data to EPA within 30 days of the laboratory's posting to EPA's electronic reporting system, the data will be considered approved by you and available for State and EPA review.
Table 1—Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Reporting Requirements Back to Top
4. (a) Sampling Point Identification Code, (b) Sampling Point Zip Code, (c) Optional Zip Code Extension, and (d) Zip Codes Served
(a) An identification code established by the 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 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.
6. Disinfectant Type
The disinfectant in use at the time of UCMR monitoring. To be reported by systems for each sampling point, with possible values including:
Subpart E—Special Regulations, Including Monitoring Regulations and Prohibition on Lead Use Back to Top
§ 141.40 Monitoring requirements for unregulated contaminants.
(a) General applicability. This section specifies the monitoring and quality control requirements that must be followed if you own or operate a public water system (PWS) that is subject to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR), as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section. In addition, this section specifies the UCMR requirements for State and Tribal participation. For the purposes of this section, PWS “population served,” “State,” ” PWS Official,” “PWS Technical Contact,” and “finished water” apply as defined in § 141.35(a). The determination of whether a PWS is required to monitor under this rule is based on the type of system (e.g., community water system, non-transient non-community water system, etc.), and its retail population, as indicated by SDWIS/Fed on December 31, 2010.
(i) Large systems. If you own or operate a retail PWS (other than a transient non-community system) that serves more than 10,000 people, you must monitor according to the specifications in this paragraph (a)(2)(i). If you believe that your applicability status is different than EPA has specified in the notification letter that you received, or if you are subject to UCMR requirements and you have not been notified by either EPA or your State, you must report to EPA, as specified in § 141.35(b)(2) or (c)(4).
Table 1—UCMR Contaminant List Back to Top
5—Sampling locationc
EPA 539d
0.0004 μg/L
1/1/2013-12/31/2015.
0.0009 μg/L
0.0008 μg/L
0.002 μg/L
0.0003 μg/L
EPA 524.3e
0.08 μg/L
0.06 μg/L
EPA 522f
0.07 μg/L
EPA 200.8 ASTM
D5673-10
SM 3125g
1. μg/L
EPA 300.1 ASTM D
SM 4110Dh
EPA 537i
0.02 μg/L
The analytical procedures shall be performed in accordance with the documents associated with each method (per the following footnotes). The incorporation by reference of the following documents listed in footnotes d-i was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Information on how to obtain these documents can be provided by the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791. Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., EPA West, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: (202) 566-2426; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/Federal-register/cfr/index.html. The version of the EPA methods which you must follow for this Regulation are listed in footnotes d through i as follows:
The minimum reporting level (MRL) is the minimum concentration of each analyte that must be reported to EPA.
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 propose one representative connection from that wholesaler. This representative EPTDS sampling location must be one of the higher annual volume connections. If the connection selected as the representative EPTDS is not available for sampling, an alternate representative connection must be sampled. See 40 CFR 141.35(c)(3) for an explanation of the requirements related to use of representative ground water EPTDSs. Sampling for metals and chlorate at disinfection byproduct distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT) sampling locations as defined in 40 CFR 141.132(b)(1)(i). If a treatment plant/water source is not subject to the sampling required in 40 CFR 141.132(b)(1), then the distribution system samples for metals must be collected at a location that the system determines represents the maximum residence time in the distribution system.
EPA Method 539 “Determination of Hormones in Drinking Water Using Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” is available at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
EPA Method 524.3 “Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry,” Version 1.0, June 2009 is available at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
EPA Method 522 “Determination of 1,4-Dioxane in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) with Selective Ion Monitoring (SIM),” Version 1.0, September 2008 is available at http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
EPA Method 200.8 “Determination of Trace Elements in Waters and Wastes by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry,” Version 5.4, 1994 is available at http://www.NEMI.gov.
ASTM D5673-10. Standard Test Method for Elements in Water by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D5673.htm.
SM 3125. Metals by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass Spectrometry (1997). Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org/store/ProductView.cfm?ProductID=211.
EPA Method 300.1 “Determination of Inorganic Anions in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography,” Revision 1.0, 1997 is available at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analyticalmethods_ogwdw.cfm.
ASTM D6581-08. 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.
SM 4110D. Determination of Anions by Ion Chromatography, Part D, Ion Chromatography Determination of Oxyhalides and Bromide. Available for purchase on the Internet at http://www.standardmethods.org/store/ProductView.cfm?ProductID=31.
EPA Method 537 “Determination of Selected Perfluorinated Alkyl Acids in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” Version 1.1, September 2009 is available at http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
(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 § 141.35(c)(5) to reschedule your sampling.
Table 2—Monitoring Frequency by Contaminant and Water Source Types Back to Top
You must monitor for 4 consecutive quarters. Sample events must occur 3 months apart.
(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. 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 § 141.35(c)(3), you must collect your samples from the approved representative sampling location(s). Systems conducting Assessment Monitoring must also sample for metals and chlorate at the disinfection byproduct distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT) sampling location(s) if they are subject to sampling requirements in § 141.132(b)(1). If a treatment plant/water source is not subject to the sampling required in 40 CFR 141.132(b)(1), then the distribution system samples must be collected at a location that the system determines represents the maximum residence time in the distribution system.
(G) Sampling forms. You must completely fill out each of the sampling forms and bottles sent to you by the UCMR Sampling Coordinator, including data elements listed in § 141.35(e) for each sample, as specified in § 141.35(d)(2). You must sign and date the sampling forms.
(iv) Laboratory fortified sample matrix and laboratory fortified sample matrix duplicate. You must ensure that your laboratory prepares and analyzes the Laboratory Fortified Sample Matrix (LFSM) sample for accuracy and Laboratory Fortified Sample Matrix Duplicate (LFSMD) samples for precision to determine method accuracy and precision for all contaminants in Table 1, in paragraph (a)(3) of this section. LFSM/LFSMD samples must be prepared using a sample collected and analyzed in accordance with UCMR requirements and analyzed at a frequency of 5% (or 1 LFSM/LFSMD set per every 20 samples) or with each sample batch, whichever is more frequent. In addition, the LFSM/LFSMD fortification concentrations must be alternated between a low-level fortification and mid-level fortification approximately 50% of the time. (For example: a set of 40 samples will require preparation and analysis of 2 LFSM/LFSMD paired samples. The first LFSM/LFSMD paired sample set must be fortified at either the low-level or mid-level, and the second LFSM/LFSMD paired sample set must be fortified with the other standard, either the low-level or mid-level, whichever was not used for the initial LFSM/LFSMD paired sample set.) The low-level LFSM/LFSMD fortification concentration must be within ±50% of the MRL for each contaminant (e.g., for an MRL of 1 μg/L the acceptable fortification levels must be between 0.5 μg/L and 1.5 μg/L). The mid-level LFSM/LFSMD fortification concentration must be within ±20% of the mid-level calibration standard for each contaminant, and should represent, where possible and where the laboratory has data from previously analyzed samples, an approximate average concentration observed in previous analyses of that analyte. There are no UCMR contaminant recovery acceptance criteria specified for LFSM/LFSMD analyses. All LFSM/LFSMD data are to be reported.
(vi) Reporting. 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://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/ucmr3/reporting.cfm), within 60 days from the sample collection date. You then have 30 days from when the laboratory posts the data to review, approve and submit the data to the State and EPA, via EPA's electronic data reporting system. If you do not electronically approve and submit the laboratory data to EPA within 30 days of the laboratories posting to EPA's electronic reporting system, the data will be considered approved and available for State and EPA review.
Subpart B—Primary Enforcement Responsibility Back to Top
a. In paragraph (j) introductory text by removing “§ 141.40”.
(1) If a State chooses to issue waivers from the monitoring requirements in §§ 141.23 and 141.24, the State shall describe the procedures and criteria which it will use to review waiver applications and issue wavier determinations. * * *