|
 |
|
National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Analytical Methods for Chemical and Microbiological Contaminants
and
Revisions to Laboratory Certification Requirement
Related Material
Federal Register Document
[Federal Register: December 1, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 230)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67449-67467]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01de99-19]
[[Page 67449]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part V
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Parts 141 and 143
National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations: Analytical
Methods for Chemical and Microbiological Contaminants and Revisions to
Laboratory Certification Requirements; Final Rule
[[Page 67450]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 141 and 143
[WH-FRL-6481-7]
RIN 2040-AD04
National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Analytical Methods for Chemical and Microbiological Contaminants and
Revisions to Laboratory Certification Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule contains revisions to drinking water
regulations that were proposed for public comment in separate documents
dated July 31, 1998, September 3, 1998, and January 14, 1999. In this
rule, EPA is approving the use of updated versions of 25 American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 54 Standard Methods for
Examination of Water and Wastewater (Standard Methods or SM) and 13
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analytical methods for compliance
determinations of chemical contaminants in drinking water. At the same
time, the Agency is withdrawing approval of the previous versions of
the 13 EPA Methods. Previous versions of the SM and ASTM methods will
continue to be approved. EPA is also approving use of a new medium and
two new methods for simultaneous determination of total coliforms and
E. coli., a new method for determination of lead, six new methods for
determination of magnesium, and two new methods for determination of
acid herbicides. The Agency is also making several technical
corrections or clarifications to the regulations, amending the
regulation to provide for changes in the composition of Performance
Evaluation (PE) samples, requiring a successful PE sample analysis each
year for chemical analyses, and requiring method specific laboratory
certification criteria for reporting compliance data. This rule also
adds two ASTM and two SM methods to those recommended for secondary
monitoring of sulfate and chloride.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective on January 3, 2000. The
incorporation by reference of the publications listed in today's rule
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 3,
2000. For Judicial Review purposes, this final rule is promulgated as
of 1 p.m. (Eastern time) on December 15, 1999, as provided in 40 CFR
23.7.
ADDRESSES: The record for this rulemaking has been established under
three separate docket numbers: W-97-04 for the September 3, 1998 (63 FR
47115) rule; W-97-05 for the July 31, 1998 (63 FR 41134) rule; and W-
98-27 for the January 14, 1999 (64 FR 2538) rule. Supporting documents
including references and methods cited in this document, public
comments received on the proposal and EPA's responses, are available
for review at the US Environmental Protection Agency, Water Docket,
East Tower Basement, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. For
access to the docket materials, call 202-260-3027 on Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays, between 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m.
Eastern Time for an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The EPA 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 Federal
holidays, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
For technical information on microbiology methods contact Paul S.
Berger, Ph.D., (202-260-3039). For technical information regarding
chemistry methods, contact Jeanne Campbell (202-260-7770). Both
individuals are in the Standards and Risk Management Division, Office
of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC-4607), US Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. For a list
of Regional Contacts see Supplementary Information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Potentially Regulated Entities
Public water systems are the regulated entities required to conduct
analyses to measure for contaminants in water samples. However, EPA
Regions, as well as States, local, and tribal governments with primacy
to administer the regulatory program for public water systems under the
Safe Drinking Water Act, sometimes conduct analyses to measure for
contaminants in water samples. If EPA has established a maximum
contaminant level (``MCL'') for a given drinking water contaminant, the
Agency also ``approves'' standardized testing procedures (i.e.,
promulgated through rulemaking) for analysis of the contaminant. Once
EPA standardizes such test procedures, analysis using those procedures
(or approved alternate test procedures) is required. Public water
systems required to test water samples must use one of the approved
standardized test procedures. Categories and entities that may
ultimately be regulated include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially
Category regulated entities SIC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local, and Tribal States, local and tribal 9511
Governments. governments that analyze
water samples on behalf of
public water systems
required to conduct such
analysis; States, local, and
tribal governments that
themselves operate public
water systems required to
conduct analytic monitoring.
Industry......................... Industrial operators of 4941
public water systems.
Municipalities................... Municipal operators of public 9511
water systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could 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 applicability language at 40 CFR 141.2 (definition of public water
system). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult one of the persons listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Regional Contacts
EPA Regional Offices
I JFK Federal Bldg., One Congress Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA 02203,
Phone: 617-918-1611, Tony DePalma
II 290 Broadway, 24th Floor, New York, NY 10007, Phone: 212-647-3880,
Walter Andrews
III 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107, Phone: 215-814-5757,
Victoria Binetti
IV 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30365, Phone: 404-562-9329,
Stalling Howell
V 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: 312-886-6206,
Charlene Denys
VI 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202, Phone: 214-665-7150,
Larry Wright
VII 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101, Phone: 913-551-7682,
Robert Morby
VIII One Denver Place, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202,
Phone: 303-312-6812, Jack Rychecky
IX 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Phone: 415-744-1858,
Corine Li
[[Page 67451]]
X 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Phone: 206-553-1893, Larry
Worley
Information on Internet Access
This Federal Register document has been placed on the Internet at
the following location: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. Information about
analytical methods approved for compliance monitoring can be found at
the following location: http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/methods/methods.html.
Availability and Sources for Methods
Copies of final EPA Methods are available for a nominal cost
through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), US
Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
NTIS also may be reached at 800-553-6847. Copies of EPA Methods 515.3
and 549.2 may be obtained from USEPA, National Exposure Research
Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268. Written requests for copies of EPA Methods 515.3
and 549.2 may be faxed to NERL-Cincinnati at 513-569-7757 or sent via
E-mail to: Dwmethods.help@epa.gov. All other methods must be obtained
from the publisher. Publishers (with addresses) for all approved
methods are cited at 40 CFR Part 141 and in the References section of
today's rule.
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Regulatory Background and History
III. Summary of Final Rule
IV. Response to Comments
V. Changes Between the Proposed Rules and the Final Rule
VI. Performance-based Measurement System
VII. Regulation Assessment Requirements
VIII. References
I. Statutory Authority
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, requires
EPA to promulgate national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs)
which specify maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or treatment techniques
for drinking water contaminants (SDWA section 1412 (42 U.S.C. 300g-1)).
NPDWRs apply to public water systems pursuant to SDWA section 1401 (42
U.S.C. 300f(1)(A)). According to SDWA section 1401(1)(D), NPDWRs
include ``criteria and procedures to assure a supply of drinking water
which dependably complies with such maximum contaminant levels;
including quality control and testing procedures. * * *'' (42 U.S.C.
300f(1)(D)). In addition, SDWA section 1445(a) authorizes the
Administrator to establish regulations for monitoring to assist in
determining whether persons are acting in compliance with the
requirements of the SDWA (42 U.S.C. 300j-4). EPA's promulgation of
analytical methods is authorized under these sections of the SDWA as
well as the general rulemaking authority in SDWA section 1450(a), (42
U.S.C. 300j-9(a)).
II. Regulatory Background and History
EPA has promulgated analytical methods for all currently regulated
drinking water contaminants for which MCLs or monitoring requirements
have been promulgated. In most cases, the Agency has promulgated
regulations specifying (i.e., approving) the use of more than one
standardized analytical method for a particular contaminant. Systems
may use any one of them for determining compliance with an MCL or
monitoring requirement. After any regulation is published, EPA may
amend the regulations to approve additional methods or modifications to
existing approved methods, or withdraw approved methods that become
obsolete.
On July 31, 1998, and January 14, 1999, EPA proposed to amend the
regulations to approve the use of several new methods and modifications
to existing methods that EPA believes are as good as or better than the
current methods and procedures. The January 14 notice also proposed six
analytical methods for magnesium, which would compensate for an
omission in the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts (DBP)
Rule (63 FR 69390, December 16, 1998). The DBP Rule allows certain
surface water systems that are unable to achieve the specified level of
total organic carbon removal instead to meet one of several alternative
performance criteria, including the removal of 10 mg/L magnesium
hardness from source water. The DBP Rule, however, does not include any
analytical methods for magnesium.
In addition to these two proposed rules, EPA proposed a rule on
September 3, 1998, which was a companion to a direct final rule
published on the same day (63 FR 47098). In the September 3, 1998 rule,
EPA proposed approving the use of updated versions of previously
approved analytical methods, the withdrawal of older versions of
certain EPA methods, minor technical corrections or clarifications, and
amendments to the regulations. The direct final rule, in the absence of
adverse public comment, would have been final on January 4, 1999.
Because adverse comments were received, EPA withdrew the entire
September 1998 rule on December 31, 1998 (63 FR 72200) and deferred
final action in order to respond to those comments.
III. Summary of Final Rule
A. This Rule Amends the Regulations at 40 CFR Part 141 To
1. Allow use of newer versions of 25 methods published by the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). The new versions are
published in the 1996 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vols. 11.01 and
11.02.
2. Allow use of newer versions of 54 methods published by the
Standard Methods Committee. The new versions are published in Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 19th edition,
1995.
3. Allow use of 13 of the 14 compliance monitoring methods
published by EPA in the document, Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking Water--Supplement III, EPA/600/R-95/131,
August 1995. These 13 methods replace the previous versions of these
methods. The compliance method published in Supplement III that is not
approved in today's rule is EPA Method 515.1, Rev. 4.1; the previous
version, Rev. 4.0, continues to be the approved version.
4. Approve a new method for the determination of lead under the
Lead and Copper Rule, Palintest Method 1001.
5. Approve six new methods for the determination of magnesium, EPA
Method 200.7, ASTM D-511-93 versions A and B, and SM 3500-Mg versions
B, C and E under the DBP Rule.
6. Approve two additional methods for the determination acid
herbicides, EPA Method 515.3 and ASTM D5317-93.
7. Replace EPA Method 549.1 for determination of Diquat with EPA
Method 549.2.
8. Approve use of a new membrane filter medium, MI (4-
Methylumbelliferyl-Beta-D-galactopyranoside--Indoxyl-Beta-D-
glucuronide) Agar, for the simultaneous determination of total
coliforms and E. coli. in drinking water under the Total Coliform Rule
(TCR) and source water under the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR).
9. Approve two new methods for determination of total coliforms,
E*Colite® Test and m-ColiBlue24® Test in source
water under the SWTR.
10. Require that microbiological samples collected for the
determination of coliforms or fecal coliforms in source water under the
SWTR or for determination of heterotrophic bacteria
[[Page 67452]]
in distribution system samples be shipped and held below 10 deg.C.
11. Reduce the minimum incubation time for reading the Colisure
Test, for determination of total coliforms, from 28 hours to 24 hours
in drinking water under the TCR.
12. Require that a PE sample for chemical contaminants be
successfully analyzed at least once each year using each method used to
report compliance monitoring results. Additional methods used for
confirmation testing, however, would not require PE proficiency
testing.
13. Clarify that the acceptance limits for successfully measuring
chemical analytes in a PE sample apply only if that analyte has been
added to the PE sample.
14. Increase the maximum holding time from 48 hours to 14 days for
chlorinated, unacidified drinking water samples collected for
determination of nitrate.
15. Promote safe handling of acids by clarifying that acidification
of samples for determinations of metals can be conducted in the
laboratory rather than in the field and allowing use of dilute (1:1)
solutions of acid to preserve samples collected for the determination
of metals or nitrate (including total nitrate).
16. Provide an option for field/laboratory determinations of
alkalinity, calcium, conductivity, orthophosphate and silica in
drinking water samples by any person acceptable to the State to conduct
these determinations. Previously a laboratory had to be certified to
conduct these determinations.
B. This Rule Amends the Regulations at 40 CFR Part 143 To
1. Add methods for the determination of chloride to the table of
methods recommended for the optional monitoring of secondary drinking
water contaminants. The new recommended methods for chloride are ASTM D
512-89B and SM 4500-Cl-B.
2. Add methods for the determination of sulfate to the table of
methods recommended for the optional monitoring of secondary drinking
water contaminants. The new recommended methods for sulfate are ASTM D
516-90 and SM 4500-SO42- E.
IV. Response to Comments
EPA received 15 comments on the July 31, 1998 (63 FR 41134)
proposal, 13 comments on the September 3, 1998 (63 FR 47115) rule, and
21 comments on the January 14, 1999 proposal (64 FR 2538). Commenters
represented analytical laboratories, water utilities, instrument
manufacturers, State and local governments, trade associations,
scientists, and private citizens. A summary of major public comments on
the proposed rules and the Agency's response is presented in this
section. The Agency's complete response to all comments on these rules
is available in the public docket for this rule.
Except as noted in Part V of this preamble, the provisions in
today's rule are the same as those proposed in the July 31, 1998, the
September 3, 1998 and the January 14, 1999, Federal Register notices.
A. Response to Significant Comments Received on the July 31, 1998 (63
FR 41134) Notice
1. Using the Same Method To Analyze Compliance Monitoring Samples and
Performance Evaluation Samples
Several commenters objected to the July 1998 proposal that would
require laboratories to use the same method to report the results of
analyses of compliance monitoring samples and the annual PE sample that
is required to maintain certification for drinking water. No commenter
stated that it was unsound scientifically to require testing laboratory
proficiency with a PE sample using the same method used for routine
compliance monitoring. Commenters criticized the requirement, because
it was too expensive or did not conform with the National Environmental
Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) standard for PE sample
analysis.
The commenters did not quantify what would be too expensive nor
provide any cost estimates of the degree or extent that costs would
increase for drinking water compliance monitoring under the proposed
requirement. All States currently require the proposed practice. In
addition, Chapter Three of the EPA Manual for the Certification of
Laboratories Analyzing Drinking Water Fourth Edition (EPA 1997)
recommends that, ``If a laboratory wishes to be certified for a
contaminant by more than one method, it should analyze the PE samples
by each method for which it wishes to be certified.'' In this context
``to be certified'' means to be permitted to report compliance
monitoring data. Two factors mitigate the cost of analyzing PE samples-
by-method. First, a PE sample analysis is required only for each method
used to report compliance data. Second, if a laboratory analyzes
samples for an analyte and confirms the result by analysis with a
second method, the laboratory is required to pass a PE only with the
method used to report the compliance data. For labs that elect to
report compliance results using more than one method per analyte, the
incremental cost of an extra PE sample analysis is small, manageable
and reasonable, and justified by the need to ensure that a laboratory
is qualified to report data with each method.
The Agency has worked with NELAC to maximize compatibility between
NELAC standards and the EPA laboratory certification requirements. The
NELAC standards state that a State or federal regulation would
supersede a NELAC standard when a conflict exists. EPA has the ultimate
responsibility to ensure the quality and integrity of compliance
monitoring data reported under the SDWA and other statutes. NELAC
standards can be an alternative means to implement regulatory
requirements for drinking water laboratory certification, but they are
not a substitute for drinking water regulations. EPA strongly
encourages States to adopt NELAC standards, but adoption is voluntary.
Three commenters supported the proposed requirement, but were
concerned that the proposed change may be misinterpreted and require
one to pass the PE sample for all analytes even if one were only
measuring a subset of the analytes in a compliance sample (e.g., using
EPA 552.1 to determine dalapon, but not the haloacetic acids). EPA does
not believe the requirement will be subject to misinterpretation. If
one uses EPA 552.1 to report only dalapon data, the PE sample results
need only include dalapon. EPA intends to provide further guidance on
this requirement in the laboratory certification manual when it is
revised, and provide other assistance as specific questions arise.
2. Withdrawal of EPA Method 549.1 for Diquat
Four commenters stated they have not had any regular precipitation
problems using EPA Method 549.1. Some of these commenters believe that
withdrawal of EPA Method 549.1 is unnecessary and a hardship because it
would require use of the new EPA Method 549.2. One of the commenters
noted to the contrary that elimination of the pH adjustment simplifies
the method and should not have a negative effect.
EPA agrees that not all matrices exhibit the precipitation problem
at the pH adjustment step, which may be why commenters did not report
significant precipitation problems with EPA Method 549.1. However, the
Agency has received complaints that precipitation occurs in hard water
matrices. EPA has verified this problem in simulated hard water
matrices containing high
[[Page 67453]]
concentrations of magnesium. After carefully reviewing all of the
procedural steps of EPA Method 549.1, EPA experimentally retested the
pH adjustment step. The test demonstrated that the pH adjustment to pH
10.5 did not improve extraction efficiency as had been reported in
literature. Increasing pH to 10.5 actually had a negative effect on
recovery because of the degradation of Diquat at strongly alkaline pH.
Therefore, the pH adjustment step was removed and the method was
reissued and proposed as EPA Method 549.2. The pH retest step and other
data are in the administrative record of the July 31, 1998 (63 FR
41134) rule.
Use of EPA Method 549.2 does not require re-certification or
learning the use of a new method. EPA Method 549.2 is EPA Method 549.1
without the pH adjustment step. Requiring a step (pH adjustment) to be
omitted from the current method does not impose a hardship on
analytical laboratories or the regulated community. As no positive
effect is associated with the pH adjustment to 10.5, and there is the
possibility of a negative effect, the Agency is withdrawing EPA Method
549.1.
3. MI-Agar Medium for Coliform Determinations
In the July 31, 1998 rule, EPA proposed to approve the use of MI
Agar for use with the Total Coliform Rule and Surface Water Treatment
Rule. The Agency had proposed that the results from MI Agar can be read
following incubation of media for 16-24 hours. Two commenters suggested
that the MI Agar procedure should be approved as a 24 hour procedure
since results in the comparison study were read at 24 hours. EPA data
demonstrates that blue E. coli and fluorescent total coliform colonies
appear in as few as 9 hours, which would be detected by the laboratory
in 16-24 hours, depending upon the time of day the sample was filtered.
However, because the appearance time for the blue E. coli colonies
exceeded the standard 8-hour working day and because EPA planned to
compare the MI Agar procedure with one using M-Endo medium, a 24-hour
method, EPA used the 24-hour incubation time for the studies. Thus, the
Agency is approving the method as a 24-hour test (although the test may
be recorded as positive if this result shows up earlier than 24 hours).
The test is approved for detecting total coliforms and E. coli under
the Total Coliform Rule and for enumerating total coliforms under the
Surface Water Treatment Rule.
B. Responses to Significant Comments Received on the September 3, 1998
(63 FR 47115) Notice
1. Quality Control Improvements for EPA Methods
Four commenters on the September 1998 rule noted that, although
many Supplement III methods contain tightened analyte recovery control
limits of ± 30%, the data presented in some of these methods
do not support the change. Commenters provided data or other
information to support their argument for the following analytes: 2,4-
DB, Aciflurofen, DCPA, Dinoseb, pentachlorophenol and Picloram in EPA
Method 515.1, Rev. 4.1; hexachlorocyclopentadiene (HCP) in EPA Method
508.1, Rev. 2.0; and DDT in EPA Method 508, Rev.3.1. The commenters
recommended either (1) retaining the current limits of ± 3
standard deviations or method limits, whichever are narrower for these
three methods or (2) setting the recovery control limits on an analyte-
by-analyte basis.
EPA revised the quality control requirements to set a limit on the
range of acceptable recoveries of analytes. Previously the allowed
variability had no limit because it was based on relative standard
deviation (RSD) of previous recoveries and could increase to
unacceptable limits if the RSD continued to increase during routine use
of the method. The proposed revised criteria would allow the recoveries
to vary by as much as three times the RSD provided this value does not
exceed a fixed numerical limit. The fixed (usually ± 30%)
limit is specified in the initial demonstration of capability section
of each EPA method. After reviewing public comment, EPA agrees that the
fixed criteria may be too restrictive for some analytes. Specifically,
because the recovery limits of ± 30% for some of the
regulated acid herbicides in EPA Method 515.1, Rev. 4.1 are not fully
supported by the available data, the Agency will not approve this
revision of EPA Method 515.1. The current revision, 4.0, will remain
approved with the current recovery control limits of ± 3
standard deviations. EPA may evaluate the available data to determine
if a better recovery control strategy can be developed for a future
proposal. Because of this change, EPA will not impose the
± 30% criterion on the ASTM version of EPA Method 515.1,
D5137-93, that is approved in today's rule.
The Agency is keeping the ± 30% recovery criterion for
other Supplement III methods, including EPA Methods 508 and 508.1,
because the data published in these methods supports the tighter
control limits. The control limits of DDT from reagent water listed in
Table 2 of EPA Method 508 range from 82% to 142%, i.e. 112%
± 30%. The mean recoveries observed for the two synthetic
waters (Table 2) and another reagent water (Table 3) are 98%, 84% and
87%, all of which fall within the allowed 82-142% recovery control
limits. Although EPA agrees that data published for HCP in EPA Method
508.1, Rev. 2.0 does not support the ± 30% limits for HCP,
the failure is due to the extremely low spiking levels of HCP used,
.i.e., four to six times the method MDL of 0.004 µg/L. In
Section 9.3 of most Supplement III methods the specified minimum
spiking level is ten times the MDL, which for HCP would be 0.04
µg/L, or at some midpoint of the calibration curve between the
MDL and the MCL, which for HCP would be 25 µg/L. Data in the
Supplement III version of EPA Method 525.2 was obtained with HCP spiked
at higher concentrations and supports the ± 30% recovery
control limits. EPA Method 525.2 data supports the HCP control limits
in EPA Method 508.1 because the procedure for the recovery of HCP from
a drinking water sample is identical in both methods. The main
difference between the methods is the detection system, which would not
affect recovery of HCP from drinking water in any way.
2. Nitrate and Nitrite Determinations
Nitrate 48-Hour Holding Time: Two commenters believe the 48-hour
limit specified in the September 1998 rule for unacidified samples is
not justified when the drinking water has been disinfected. The
commenters provided data and cited a reference [Williams 1979] to
demonstrate the stability of nitrate in chlorinated drinking water
samples that have not been acidified. One commenter recommended a
holding time of 14 to 28 days. The proposed 48 hour limit was based on
the recommended preservation conditions in the approved methods
published by EPA, ASTM and Standard Methods. Data submitted by the
commenters and in an EPA study [EPA 1987] support a longer holding
time. The JAWWA report showed no difference between the two types
(acidified and unacidified) of samples over a period of 14 days; the
EPA report recommended a holding time of 16 days. EPA accepts the
commenters' data and is increasing the holding time to 14 days at
4 deg. C for chlorinated, unacidified samples but is keeping the
current requirement of 48 hours for unacidified, unchlorinated drinking
water samples.
[[Page 67454]]
Nitrite Determinations in Some Disinfected Drinking Water Samples:
The September 1998 notice included a footnote 2 in the preservation
table at Sec. 141.23(k)(2) which explained that analysis of samples
disinfected with a strong oxidant (such as free chlorine, chlorine
dioxide or ozone) can only provide a total nitrate (nitrate plus
nitrite) result because all nitrite will be oxidized to nitrate. One
commenter suggested that EPA drop the new footnote because it was
incorrect. The commenter provided data to show that nitrite can occur
in supplies disinfected with chlorine if a sufficiently high level of
ammonia is present. EPA proposed the footnote to remove a burden from
PWSs that conduct unnecessary measurements of nitrite that has been
oxidized to nitrate in a chlorinated water sample. These measurements
are a burden when samples must be shipped, because the maximum holding
time for nitrite samples is 48 hours. Although chlorine and other
strong oxidant disinfectants will usually oxidize nitrite to nitrate in
a water sample, EPA agrees that this may not occur in all chlorinated
water supplies. Thus, the footnote has not been added to the
preservation table. EPA may use other means to reduce the burden of
nitrite analysis at a PWS when use of a strong oxidant disinfectant
clearly makes a nitrite determination unnecessary.
3. Approval of 20th Edition of Standard Methods
Several commenters applauded EPA's decision to approve 19th edition
of Standards Methods but urged EPA to consider approval of 20th edition
as it will be published before this final rule takes effect. The timing
of promulgation of this rule and publication of the 20th edition did
not allow sufficient time for review of the 20th edition by the Agency.
The Agency has begun this review and once a review is complete intends
to propose to incorporate the latest edition of Standard Methods and
other voluntary consensus standards, seek comments and finalize these
changes.
4. EPA's Decision Against Withdrawal of Older Editions of Consensus
Methods
Three commenters expressed concern that EPA has chosen to cite not
only the most recent edition of Standard Methods but also older
editions which are no longer available from the publisher. The Agency
believes that the differences between the methods in earlier and newer
editions are not significant to warrant the removal of older editions
or impose any possible additional economic burden (especially on small
laboratories) to require the purchase of new editions.
C. Response to Significant Comments Received on the January 14, 1999
(64 FR 2538) Notice
1. False-Positive Rates for m-ColiBlue24® Test and
E*Colite® Test
Several commenters contended that the false-positive rates for the
E*Colite® Test and m-ColiBlue24® Test were too
high and consequently opposed approval of these tests without an
additional analytical procedure to ensure that those positives were
actually coliforms. According to data submitted by the manufacturers
that developed the two proposed tests, the false positive rates were:
16.0% for total coliforms and 7.2% for E. coli (E*Colite
Test®), and 26.8% for total coliforms and 2.5% for E. coli
(m-ColiBlue24® Test).
As part of its process for evaluating new methods for regulated
drinking water contaminants, EPA recommends that applicants follow the
testing protocols developed by EPA for use under the Alternative Test
Procedure (ATP) and provide EPA with the resulting data. The two
existing protocols for total coliforms/E. coli direct the applicant to
provide the false-positive rate, false-negative rate, comparison data
with an EPA-specified reference method, and other information. The
current protocols, however, do not set an upper limit for the false-
positive and false-negative rates. Because the two applicants met all
the conditions of the protocol, and the protocols do not set an upper
limit for the false-positive rate, EPA next decided whether the false-
positive results were sufficiently great so as to require a
verification step.
The Agency decided that the rates are not so high to require a
verification step. First, the definition of ``total coliforms'' is not
tightly defined. The definition is not strictly based upon taxonomy,
but rather on the basis of gas production from the fermentation of
lactose. EPA has approved some coliform tests (e.g., Colilert test)
that are based not upon this process, but rather on some other means of
determining whether the organism uses lactose. Therefore, the different
methods may not be testing for exactly the same set of organisms, and
this situation clouds the meaning of the term ``false-positive.''
Second, the Agency believes that public health would not be jeopardized
with the higher false-positive rates because any false-positive result
would err on the side of safety. Third, the Agency notes that a single
total coliform-positive sample does not result in an MCL violation.
Thus the adverse consequence of a ``false-positive'' for the system is
mitigated. Finally, water systems have a choice among several methods
currently approved for coliform. The user should take the false-
positive rate (and, more importantly, the false-negative rate) into
account in choosing which analytical methods to use for compliance
sampling. Therefore, the Agency is not requiring a verification step
for these two methods although systems/laboratories may elect to verify
a total coliform-positive test at their discretion. The Agency notes
that the Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing
Drinking Water (4th ed., EPA 815-B-97-001, March 1997), at paragraph
5.1.8, encourages laboratories to perform parallel testing between a
newly approved test and another EPA-approved procedure for enumerating
total coliforms for at least several months and/or over several seasons
to assess the effectiveness of the new test for the wide variety of
water types submitted for analysis.
To emphasize the point that systems and laboratories should
carefully choose which coliform method to use, the Agency has added a
footnote to the table on approved methods for total coliforms in
141.21(f) that states:
EPA strongly recommends that laboratories evaluate the false-
positive and negative rates for the method(s) they use for
monitoring total coliforms. EPA also encourages laboratories to
establish false-positive and false-negative rates within their own
laboratory and sample matrix (drinking water or source water) with
the intent that if the method they choose has an unacceptable false-
positive or negative rate, another method can be used. The Agency
suggests that laboratories perform these studies on a minimum of 5%
of all total coliform-positive samples, except for those methods
where verification/confirmation is already required, e.g., the M-
Endo and LES Endo Membrane Filter Tests, Standard Total Coliform
Fermentation Technique, and Presence-Absence Coliform Test. Methods
for establishing false-positive and negative rates may be based on
lactose fermentation, the rapid test for ß-galactosidase and
cytochrome oxidase, multi-test identification systems, or equivalent
confirmation tests. False-positive and false-negative information is
often available in published studies and/or from the
manufacturer(s).
In addition to this footnote, to assist systems and laboratories in
choosing a method, EPA is planning two future actions. First, EPA
intends to prepare and widely distribute a list of the Agency-approved
coliform methods, along with published false-positive and false-
negative rates for each. Second, EPA intends to re-evaluate whether the
alternate test procedure protocol for
[[Page 67455]]
coliforms should include specific limits for the false-positive and
false-negative rates, whether to specify more precisely how these rates
are to be determined, and whether to revise the comparison study to
correct for the false-positive rates.
As a result of these measures, the Agency might undertake
rulemaking that would require laboratories to use another test to
verify the results from one or more of the coliform methods that the
Agency has previously approved for drinking water analyses or are being
approved in today's rule. Alternatively, the Agency may issue guidance
rather than regulations on this issue. EPA is approving the three
proposed coliform methods in today's rule rather than delay approval
until the conclusion of this re-evaluation, because (1) The issue is
not whether the test should be approved, but rather whether a
verification step is needed, (2) Any future verification requirement
may cover not only the three proposed coliform methods, but also
previously EPA-approved methods, and (3) The Agency may issue guidance
to the States, laboratories, and water systems on this issue rather
than regulations. In the interim, EPA is recommending that each
laboratory establish false-negative and false-positive rates for the
water matrices to be tested, if it uses a method(s) for which EPA does
not currently require a confirmation/verification step.
2. m-ColiBlue24® Test and E*Colite® Test:
Presence-Absence vs. Density Measurements
Commenters requested clarification whether the m-
ColiBlue24® Test and E*Colite® Test were being
proposed as presence-absence type tests or density tests. EPA proposed,
and is approving, these two tests only as presence-absence type tests,
i.e., to determine the presence or absence of total coliforms and E.
coli in a 100-mL water sample under the Total Coliform Rule (TCR). The
two methods have not been approved for use under the SWTR by unfiltered
systems to enumerate densities of total coliforms in the source water.
3. m-ColiBlue24® Test: Incubation Time
Commenters requested clarification of the incubation time for m-
ColiBlue24®. EPA is approving this method and the Colisure
test as 24-hour tests.
4. E*Colite® Test: Accidental Release of Bactericide
E*Colite® Test has a bactericide compartment that is
separated by a seal from the reaction compartment. Two commenters were
concerned that an accidental release of the bactericide could result in
either sample loss or undetected false-negatives. According to a letter
to EPA, dated April 13, 1999, from the manufacturer, Charm Sciences has
quality assurance criteria for the integrity of the seal between the
reaction compartment and the bactericide compartment. The Agency has
included the letter in the docket for today's rule. Charm Sciences
tests the seal between the bactericide and the culture in raw material
acceptance specifications. Test bags must have a failure rate of <0.2%
after 72 hours incubation at 37 deg. C. In addition, the manufacturer
adds a red dye to the bactericide so that a faulty seal between the
compartments is quickly identified by the user as a flawed test.
Finally, Charm Sciences, in an improvement, dispenses the bactericide
in a protective foil pouch contained inside the bactericide
compartment. This additional pouch offers a failure rate <0.2%.
According to Charm Sciences, the probability of a simultaneous
compartment seal failure and a pouch failure would be P<0.00004. As a
result, the Agency believes an accidental release of bactericide is
improbable.
5. Magnesium: Inductively Coupled Plasma--Mass Spectrometry (EPA Method
200.8)
The January 14 notice proposed six analytical methods for
magnesium. EPA is approving all six methods. One commenter recommended
that EPA approve the use of EPA Method 200.8, Inductively Coupled
Plasma--Mass Spectrometry, in addition to the other six methods for
analysis of magnesium. The Agency, however, does not have the data to
support the use of EPA Method 200.8 for magnesium, and thus is not
approving this method.
6. Lead: Anodic Stripping Voltammetry Method (Method 3130 B in Standard
Methods)
The January 14 notice proposed a new alternate test procedure for
lead, Method 1001, Lead in Drinking Water Differential Pulse Anodic
Stripping Voltammetry (DPASV), developed by Palintest LTD. Two
commenters recommended that EPA approve the Anodic Stripping
Voltammetry Method for lead (Method 3130 B) that appears in Standard
Methods. The commenters did not provide their rationale, but apparently
believe that approval is warranted based upon the fact that it is a
consensus method equivalent to the proposed Palintest Procedure.
EPA reviewed Method 3130 in Standard Methods to determine whether
the method could be approved on the basis that it was equivalent to the
proposed Palintest Procedure (Method 1001). While the Agency notes that
both procedures employ the same measurement technique, i.e.,
Differential Pulse Anodic Stripping Voltammetry, it does not believe
that this fact, by itself, is sufficient to claim that the methods are
equivalent.
Based upon the description provided in Standard Methods, the Agency
does not believe there is sufficient data to show that the methods are
equivalent. Method 3130 (Sections 1a and 1c) mentions sample digestion,
and references Section 3030. While Section 3030 presents several acid
digestion procedures, there is no supporting data employing the cited
procedure(s) to show the efficacy of Method 3130 in conjunction with
the measurement phase. In addition, in the section on ``procedure''
(Section 4), there is no mention of a specific value for the detection
limit, nor linear dynamic range data, for either the hanging mercury
drop electrode or the thin mercury film electrode, in the context of
the operating parameters listed in the table, ``Instrumental
conditions.''
Also, the section on ``quality control'' (Section 6) only states
that the guidelines in Section 3020 should be followed. The guidelines
in 3020, Quality Control, state that one should refer to individual
method(s) for method specific quality control requirements. Thus,
Method 3130 neither presents nor provides an acceptable cite for method
quality assurance. Although Section 1020 B, Quality Control, discusses
and/or describes the necessary elements of QC, it does not present the
necessary data to demonstrate equivalency.
For the reasons indicated above, EPA is not approving Method 3130
in this rule. However, the Agency may decide to approve this method as
a consensus method under a subsequent edition of Standard Methods, once
the concerns indicated above are resolved.
V. Changes Between the Proposed Rules and the Final Rule
Except as noted below, the actions in today's final rule are the
same as the proposed actions.
A. Changes to the July 31, 1998 Proposed Rule
MI Agar Medium for Coliform Determinations
The Agency proposed that results from MI Agar can be read following
16-24 hour incubation. In today's final rule the Agency has approved MI
Agar as a 24 hour test.
[[Page 67456]]
B. Changes to September 3, 1998 Proposed Rule
1. Acid Herbicide Methods: EPA 515.1 (Rev. 4.1) and ASTM D 5317-93
EPA will not withdraw EPA Method 515.1 (Rev. 4.0) as proposed in
the September rule and replace it with EPA Method 515.1 (Rev. 4.1) for
the determination of acid herbicides the data in Rev. 4.1 does not
support the upper limit of ± 30% for the recovery of some
method analytes. Because of this change, EPA will not require that the
± 30% criterion be applied to determinations of acid
herbicides using ASTM D 5317-93. EPA Method 515.1 Rev. 4.1 is published
in Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water--Supplement III (Supplement III), EPA/600/R-95/131, August 1995.
EPA Method 515.1 Rev. 4.0 is published in Methods for the Determination
of Organic Compounds in Drinking Water, EPA/600/4-88/039, December
1988, Revised, July 1991. The other 13 compliance methods in Supplement
III are approved in today's rule and replace the previously approved
versions of these methods. EPA is withdrawing approval of the previous
versions of the 13 EPA methods effective on June 1, 2001.
2. Nitrate and Nitrite Determinations
EPA is changing two of the amendments that were proposed at
141.23(k)(2) for determinations of nitrate or nitrite. The proposed
amendments would have eliminated the requirement to determine nitrite
in some drinking waters that are disinfected and require unacidified,
chlorinated samples to be analyzed within 48 hours of collection. Under
certain conditions nitrite is not completely oxidized to nitrate in
disinfected water supplies, EPA will not eliminate the requirement to
determine nitrite in disinfected water supplies. Therefore, EPA is
increasing the proposed holding time for unacidified samples of
chlorinated drinking water from 48 hours to 14 days.
3. Acidification of Samples
The footnotes to the table of preservation requirements at
Sec. 141.23(k)(2) are revised to allow use of dilute rather than
concentrated acids and to clarify that current regulations do not
require that samples for determination of metals be acidified in the
field at the time of collection. This information was previously
omitted from the table, because most approved methods specify use of
dilute acid or that metals (not nitrate) samples may be analyzed 16
hours after they have been acidified at the laboratory.
4. Methods for Monitoring Unregulated Contaminants
The methods for unregulated monitoring at 40 CFR 141.40 will not be
updated, because other regulatory actions (the Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule, UCMR) will supersede the currently specified methods.
These changes were published as a final rule on September 17, 1999 (64
FR 50556).
C. Changes to January 14, 1999 Proposed Rule
There were no changes to the actions or methods proposed in this
rule.
VI. Performance-Based Measurement System
EPA plans to implement in the future a performance-based
measurement system (PBMS) that would allow the option of using either
performance criteria or reference methods in its drinking water
regulatory programs. The Agency is currently determining the specific
steps necessary to implement PBMS in its programs and preparing an
implementation plan. Final decisions have not yet been made concerning
the implementation of PBMS in water programs. However, EPA is currently
evaluating what relevant performance characteristics should be
specified for monitoring methods used in the water programs under a
PBMS approach to ensure adequate data quality. EPA would then specify
performance requirements in its regulations to ensure that any method
used for determination of a regulated analyte is at least equivalent to
the performance achieved by other currently approved methods.
Once EPA has made its final determinations regarding implementation
of PBMS in programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA would
incorporate specific provisions of PBMS into its regulations, which may
include specification of the performance characteristics for
measurement of regulated contaminants in the drinking water program
regulations.
VII. Regulation Assessment Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 USC 601 et.
seq.
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
The RFA provides default definitions for each type of small entity.
It also authorizes an agency to use alternative definitions for each
category of small entity, ``which are appropriate to the activities of
the agency'' after proposing the alternative definition(s) in the
Federal Register and taking comment. 5 U.S.C. 601 (3)-(5). In addition
to the above, to establish an alternative small business definition,
agencies must consult with SBA's Chief Counsel for Advocacy.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, EPA considered small entities to be those public water
systems serving 10,000 or fewer customers. Public water systems
includes both publicly and privately owned water systems. In accordance
with the RFA requirements, EPA proposed using this alternative
definition for governmental jurisdictions, small businesses and small
not-for-profit enterprises in the Federal Register (63 FR 7620-7621
(February 13, 1998)), requested public comment, consulted with the
Small
[[Page 67457]]
Business Administration (SBA) on the alternative definition as it
relates to small businesses, and finalized the alternative definition
in the final Consumer Confidence Report regulation on, 63 FR 44524-
44525 (August 19, 1998). As stated in that Final Rule, the alternative
definition would be applied to all future drinking water regulations.
After considering the economic impact of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Although
this final 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. Today's rule approves
new and revised versions of currently approved EPA Methods, ASTM
Methods and Standard Methods for compliance with drinking water
standards and monitoring requirements. Previous versions of these ASTM
and Standard Methods will not be withdrawn. Public water systems and
laboratories performing analyses on behalf of these systems may
continue to use them after the promulgation of today's rule. Previous
versions of 13 EPA Methods, however, will be withdrawn after 18 months.
The delayed effective date for withdrawal should provide ample time for
the changeover. The incremental change in cost associated with the use
of the new versions of EPA methods will be very minor because the new
versions contain only technical enhancements and editorial
improvements. This rule also provides public water systems additional
options for detecting total coliforms and E. coli in drinking water
under the Total Coliform Rule and source water under the Surface Water
Treatment Rule, for measuring magnesium under the DBP Rule, and for
measuring lead under the Lead and Copper rule.
This rule also made minor technical corrections, amendments, or
clarifications to the regulations and laboratory certification
requirements. Laboratories conducting analysis for contaminants in
drinking water are required to be certified for proficiency in the
analytical method they actually use for drinking water compliance
monitoring. Thus, in the case of laboratories that choose to be
certified for an analyte using more than one approved method, the
regulation will require such laboratories to analyze a PE sample for
each method for which certification is requested. Currently most
laboratories elect to be certified for only one method and there is no
reason to believe this situation will change. Even if some small
laboratories elect to seek certification for more than one method for
some analytes, EPA has concluded that less than 24 small laboratories
(1% of the total) will elect to do so. The consequent economic impact
on small government laboratories would only be the annual cost of an
additional PE analysis for the additional method of their choosing
which could run as much as $100 or as little as $10 per laboratory. The
cost per laboratory depends on the complexity of the additional method
for which the laboratory chooses to be certified.
The requirement to hold samples at 10 deg.C during transit/storage
under the Surface Water Treatment Rule is not expected to cause any
significant increase in monitoring cost for small water systems. The
requirement will affect only a selected number of small systems. The
requirement to hold total and fecal coliform samples at 10 deg.C
during transit/storage will affect only systems which use surface water
and do not filter. Distribution system samples collected for the
analysis of heterotrophic bacteria [measured as heterotrophic plate
count (HPC)] are also required to be held at 10 deg.C during transit/
storage. However, the analysis of heterotrophic bacteria is an optional
substitute for maintaining a detectable disinfection residual. The
requirement to hold samples below 10 deg.C can be easily met by
shipping samples in reusable ice packs. EPA estimates a one time cost
of less than $5 per sample for the ice packs; over a period of time
this represents only a slight increase in sample shipping cost under
current requirements.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
The rule approves use of additional analytical methods by systems
conducting analysis for contaminants in drinking water and thus
provides operational flexibility to the system. Any mandate to use a
standardized testing procedure for a particular contaminant was
established by EPA in an earlier rulemaking. Today's rule merely allows
additional standardized procedures. Although, the rule withdraws
earlier outdated versions of some methods, EPA anticipates no increase
in expenditure or burden on the testing laboratories because newer
methods are easier and more efficient to use. Thus, no increase in
expenditure or burden on the laboratories' client public water systems
is expected.
The rule also approves six methods for magnesium for use under the
Stage 1 DBP Rule. Currently there are no EPA approved methods for
magnesium, though earlier rulemaking established the need for
standardized testing (in order to avoid other requirements). The
methods will allow certain systems using softening that are unable to
meet the specified level of total organic carbon removal to analyze for
magnesium as one of several alternative performance criteria. EPA
estimates that the cost of a magnesium analysis should not exceed $20
per sample; systems analyzing magnesium under the DBP Rule will be
required to collect 24
[[Page 67458]]
samples per year, which will cost no more than $20 x 24 = $480 per
year. EPA believes that less than 1% of the 1,395 surface water systems
covered by the DBP Rule will choose to monitor for magnesium as one of
several criteria. As noted earlier, however, today's rule did not
establish a new requirement for standardized testing of magnesium. That
requirement was established in earlier rulemaking (though EPA neglected
to specify acceptable standardized procedures at that time).
Today's rule affects laboratory testing requirements in ways other
than approval of additional standardized test procedures. Some of these
changes impose Federal mandates, but the effect of the new mandate will
be well below $100 millions dollars in any one year. Today's rule
authorizes changes to the composition of Performance Evaluation (PE)
samples, requires yearly analysis of PE samples, establishes a
requirement that laboratories be certified based on the proficiency
with the method they actually use, and establishes a temperature
requirement for certain samples prior to testing. The cost of PE
program should decrease because the testing laboratories have to
analyze for fewer analytes. The authorized changes to PE sample
composition may actually decrease the burden associated with existing
mandates.
Requiring PE sample analysis once a year will not adversely affect
the systems because all States that conduct laboratory certification
programs currently require yearly PE sample analysis. Today's
rulemaking merely formalizes this national consistency among the
States.
The amendment requiring that laboratories be certified based on the
proficiency on the method they actually use to report the compliance
data will impose a minor requirement for laboratories that choose to be
certified for an analyte by more than one method. Previously,
laboratories could satisfy PE testing requirement using any approved
method regardless of the method actually used. Today's action merely
codifies the common sense intention that laboratories establish
proficiency with the methods they actually use. Though the requirement
to establish proficiency now mandates use of the method actually used
for compliance testing, EPA believes the potential incremental cost of
an extra PE sample analysis is small, manageable and reasonable, and
justified by the need to ensure that a laboratory is qualified to
report data with each method. Currently most laboratories elect to be
certified by the one method that they routinely use. There is no reason
to believe laboratories will be compelled to incur the cost of an
additional PE sample in the future.
The requirement to hold source water samples below 10 deg.C during
transit/storage under the Surface Water Treatment Rule will affect only
a small fraction (1-9%) of the water utilities. The effect on
monitoring cost will be very minor, and attributable to a slight
increase in sample shipping cost. Therefore, the mandate associated
with the sample holding temperature should be insignificant.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The requirements will not be significant according to the
information presented in the previous discussion of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. The requirements will not be unique because large and
small governments would be affected the same way. Thus today's rule is
not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq., EPA must submit an information collection request
covering information collection requirements in a rule to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This rule does not
contain any information collection requirements, and therefore is not
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
E. Science Advisory Board and National Drinking Water Advisory Council,
and Secretary of Health and Human Services
In accordance with Section 1412 (d) and (e) of the SDWA, the Agency
submitted all three rules in the proposal phase to the Science Advisory
Board, the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, and the Secretary
of Health and Human Services for their review. They had no comments.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law
No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use
voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do
so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA is approving new
versions of ASTM and Standard Methods for many regulated drinking water
contaminants. ASTM and SM are both voluntary consensus standard bodies
responsible for promoting adoption of uniform and efficient methods for
analysis. In addition, EPA conducted a search to identify applicable
consensus standards that would be acceptable for compliance
determinations under the SDWA for the measurement of Diquat, six acid
herbicides, magnesium, and lead and is approving consensus methods
whenever possible. EPA identified two methods (ASTM D 5317-93 and SM
6640 B) for the acid herbicides. EPA is approving ASTM Method D 5317-93
for acid herbicides but decided not to use SM 6640 B in this
rulemaking. The use of this voluntary consensus standard would have
been impractical with applicable law because of significant
shortcomings in the sample preparation and quality control sections of
the method instructions. The Stage 1 DBP disinfection by-products final
rule allows systems to demonstrate compliance with a total organic
carbon removal requirement by demonstrating the removal of magnesium
from the water supply. In today's rule, EPA has approved five voluntary
consensus standards, SM 3500-Mg versions B, C, and E; ASTM D 511-93
versions A and B, for determination of magnesium. These methods have
the sensitivity and precision necessary to determine magnesium removal
at the levels specified in the Stage 1 DBP rule.
EPA identified no voluntary consensus standards for Diquat, and
none were brought to the Agency's attention in comments. Therefore, EPA
has decided to use EPA Method 549.2. A commenter recommended that EPA
include thallium as an approved analyte in SM 3113 B. While SM 3113 B
lists thallium in the potential analytical scope, the method does not
contain accuracy and precision statistical data for determinations of
thallium. The Agency does not have and the commenter did not provide
the sensitivity, accuracy and precision statistical data the Agency
would need to approve this technique for compliance determinations of
thallium. Therefore, EPA decided not to include thallium in this
rulemaking. A commenter recommended that the
[[Page 67459]]
Agency approve a voluntary consensus standard (SM 3130 B) for lead,
because the commenter believes it is equivalent to the Palintest Method
1001 that is approved in today's rule. EPA reviewed SM 3130 B and
concluded that is it not equivalent to the technique used in Method
1001, and the performance data in the method are not complete enough
for the Agency to determine whether SM 3130 B would produce results
equivalent to Method 1001 or to other methods approved for
determinations of lead.
G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined
to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2)
Concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to
believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the
regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children,
and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency. This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not an ``economically significant'' rule as defined under
E.O. 12866.
H. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA
to provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a federalism
summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include a description of
the extent of EPA's prior consultation with State and local officials,
a summary of the nature of their concerns and the agency's position
supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the
extent to which the concerns of State and local officials have been
met. Also, when EPA transmits a draft final rule with federalism
implications to OMB for review pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA
must include a certification from the agency's Federalism Official
stating that EPA has met the requirements of Executive Order 13132 in a
meaningful and timely manner.
Today's final rule 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
Today's rule approves new and revised versions of currently approved
EPA Methods, ASTM Methods and Standard Methods for measurement of
compliance with drinking water standards. This rule also provides
public water systems, many of which are owned or operated by political
subdivisions of States, with additional options for detection of total
coliforms and E. coli in drinking water under the Total Coliform Rule
and source water under the Surface Water Treatment Rule, as well as for
measurement of magnesium under the DBP Rule, and for measurement of
lead under the Lead and Copper rule. Though public water systems may be
owned or operated by political subdivisions of States, the additional
measurement flexibility afforded by today's rule will in no way affect
the allocation of responsibilities among various levels of government.
This rule also made minor technical corrections, amendments, or
clarifications to the regulations and laboratory certification
requirements. Laboratories conducting analysis for contaminants in
drinking water are required to be certified for proficiency in the
analytical method they actually use for drinking water compliance
monitoring. Thus, in the case of laboratories that choose to be
certified for an analyte using more than one approved method, the
regulation will require such laboratories to analyze a PE sample for
each method for which certification is requested. Today's rule also
requires that source water samples be held at 10 deg.C during transit/
storage under the Surface Water Treatment Rule. For government
laboratories that will be affected by this rule, the affect will not
have federalism implications because the rule will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs, nor will it affect existing
relationships between the national government and the States, nor will
it affect the distribution of powers and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of
the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
I. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. EPA's promulgation of
analytical methods is authorized under section 1401(1)(D) and 1445(a)
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. This rule approves new and updated
analytical methods for drinking water compliance monitoring and makes
method related corrections and amendments in the regulations. The
[[Page 67460]]
choice of new and updated analytical methods will actually save
compliance cost as newer methods are more efficient and easier to use.
Methods related corrections and amendments may cause a small increase
in compliance cost but the increase will be very minor as discussed in
the preamble. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of
Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective January 3, 2000.
VIII. References
APHA 1992. Eighteenth edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992, American Public Health
Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20005.
APHA 1995. Nineteenth edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1995, American Public Health
Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20005.
ASTM 1994. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994, Vol. 11.01 and
11.02, American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor
Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428.
ASTM 1996. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1996, Vol. 11.01 and
11.02, American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor
Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428.
AWWA 1996. ``Standard Methods--A Closer Look'', Posavec, Steve, in
Opflow, Vol. 22, No. 2, February 1996, American Water Works
Association, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235.
Brenner 1993. Brenner, K.P., et al., ``New medium for the
simultaneous detection of total coliform and Escherichia coli in
water'', Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:3534-3544.
Brenner 1996a. Brenner, K.P., et al., ``Comparison of the
recoveries of Escherichia coli and total coliform from drinking water
by the MI Agar method'', Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62:203-208.
Brenner 1996b. Brenner, K.P., et al., ``Interlaboratory evaluation
of MI Agar and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--approved
membrane filter method for the recovery of total coliform and
Escherichia coli from drinking water'', J. Microbiol. Methods 27:111-
119.
EPA 1987. ``Development of Preservation Techniques and
Establishment of Maximum Holding Times: Inorganic Constituents of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and Safe Drinking Water
Act'', EPA/600/S4-86/043, March 1987.
EPA 1990a. ``Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water--Supplement I'', July 1990, NTIS PB91-146027.
EPA 1991. ``Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water'', December 1988, revised July 1991, NTIS PB91-231480.
EPA 1992. ``Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water--Supplement II,'' August 1992, NTIS PB92-207703.
EPA 1993. ``Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances
in Environmental Samples'', August 1993, NTIS PB94-120821.
EPA 1994. ``Methods for the Determination of Metals in
Environmental Samples--Supplement I'', May 1994, NTIS PB95-125472.
EPA 1994b. Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methods, EPA/600/R-94/
173, October 1994, NTIS PB95-104766.
EPA 1995. ``Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water--Supplement III,'' EPA/600/R-95/131, August 1995, NTIS
PB95-261616.
EPA 1996. EPA Methods 515.3, ``Determination of Chlorinated Acids
in Drinking Water by Liquid-liquid Extraction, Derivatization And Gas
Chromatography With Electron Capture Detection,'' Revision 1.0, EPA/
815/B-99/001, July 1996. Available from U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati, 26
West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268.
EPA 1997a. EPA Methods 549.2 ``Determination of Diquat And Paraquat
in Drinking Water by Liquid-solid Extraction And High Performance
Liquid Chromatography With Ultraviolet Detection'', Revision 1.0, EPA/
815/B-99/002, June 1997. Available from U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati, 26
West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268.
EPA 1997b. Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing
Drinking Water, Fourth Edition, Office of Water Resource Center (RC-
4100), 401 M. Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460, EPA/81/B-97/001, March
1997.
NY 1996. Suffolk County Water Authority 1996. Data Package
pertaining to EPA Method 508.1 and the use of a NP detector. Suffolk
County Water Authority Laboratory, 260 Motor Parkway, P.O. Box 18043,
Hauppauge, New York 11788-8843.
Palintest 1999. Method 1001: Lead in Drinking Water by Differential
Pulse Anodic Stripping Voltammetry, August 1999. Palintest, LTD, 21
Kenton Lands Road, P.O. Box 18395, Erlanger, KY 41018.
USGS 1989. Methods I-3720-85, I-3300-85, I-1030-85, I-1601-85, I-
2598-85, I-1700-85 and I-2700-85 in Techniques of Water Resources
Investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-1, 3rd
ed., 1989, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Information Services, Box
25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
USGS 1993. Method I-2601-90 in Methods of Analysis by the U.S.
Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory--Determination of
Inorganic and Organic Constituents in Water and Fluvial Sediments, Open
File Report 93-125, 1993, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Information
Services, Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
Williams 1979. Williams, T. J, et al., ``An Evaluation of the Need
for Preserving Potable Water Samples for Nitrate Testing'', JAWWA,
March 1979, pp. 157-160.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 141
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Incorporation by reference,
Indian-lands, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water supply.
40 CFR Part 143
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Incorporation by reference,
Indian-lands, Water supply.
Dated: November 22, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of
Code of Federal Regulations, are amended as follows:
[[Page 67461]]
PART 141--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-1, 300g-2 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-
5, 300g-6, 300j-4, 300j-9, and 300j-11.
2. Section 141.21 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (f)(3);
b. Revising the next to last sentence of paragraph (f)(5);
c. Revising the second sentence of paragraph (f)(6)(i);
d. Revising the second sentence of paragraph (f)(6)(ii);
e. Adding paragraphs (f)(6)(v), (f)(6)(vi) and (f)(6)(vii); and
f. Revising the second sentence of paragraph (f)(8).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 141.21 Coliform sampling.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) Public water systems must conduct total coliform analyses in
accordance with one of the analytical methods in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organism Methodology \12\ Citation \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Coliforms \2\...... Total Coliform 9221A, B
Fermentation Technique
3,4,5.
Total Coliform.......... 9222
Membrane Filter......... A, B, C
Technique \6\...........
Presence-Absence........ 9221
(P-A) Coliform Test 5,7.
ONPG-MUG Test \8\....... 9223
Colisure Test \9\
E*Colite® Test
\10\
m-ColiBlue24®
Test \11\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed
below. The incorporation by reference of the following documents
listed in footnotes 1, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11 was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
Part 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the sources
listed below. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be
obtained from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791.
Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at
the Office of Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite
700, Washington, D.C. 20408.
\1\ Methods 9221 A, B; 9222 A, B, C; 9221 D and 9223 are contained in
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th
edition (1992) and 19th edition (1995) American Public Health
Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20005; either
edition may be used.
\2\ The time from sample collection to initiation of analysis may not
exceed 30 hours. Systems are encouraged but not required to hold
samples below 10 deg.C during transit.
\3\ Lactose broth, as commercially available, may be used in lieu of
lauryl tryptose broth, if the system conducts at least 25 parallel
tests between this medium and lauryl tryptose broth using the water
normally tested, and this comparison demonstrates that the false-
positive rate and false-negative rate for total coliform, using
lactose broth, is less than 10 percent.
\4\ If inverted tubes are used to detect gas production, the media
should cover these tubes at least one-half to two-thirds after the
sample is added.
\5\ No requirement exists to run the completed phase on 10 percent of
all total coliform-positive confirmed tubes.
\6\ MI agar also may be used. Preparation and use of MI agar is set
forth in the article, ``New medium for the simultaneous detection of
total coliform and Escherichia coli in water'' by Brenner, K.P., et
al., 1993, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:3534-3544. Also available from
the Office of Water Resource Center (RC-4100), 401 M. Street SW,
Washington, D.C. 20460, EPA/600/J-99/225.
\7\ Six-times formulation strength may be used if the medium is filter-
sterilized rather than autoclaved.
\8\ The ONPG-MUG Test is also known as the Autoanalysis Colilert System.
\9\ A description of the Colisure Test, Feb 28, 1994, may be obtained
from IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., One IDEXX Drive, Westbrook, Maine
04092. The Colisure Test may be read after an incubation time of 24
hours.
\10\ A description of the E*Colite® Test, ``Presence/Absence
for Coliforms and E. Coli in Water,'' Dec 21, 1997, is available from
Charm Sciences, Inc., 36 Franklin Street, Malden, MA 02148-4120.
\11\ A description of the m-ColiBlue24® Test, Aug 17, 1999, is
available from the Hach Company, 100 Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA 50010.
\12\ EPA strongly recommends that laboratories evaluate the false-
positive and negative rates for the method(s) they use for monitoring
total coliforms. EPA also encourages laboratories to establish false-
positive and false-negative rates within their own laboratory and
sample matrix (drinking water or source water) with the intent that if
the method they choose has an unacceptable false-positive or negative
rate, another method can be used. The Agency suggests that
laboratories perform these studies on a minimum of 5% of all total
coliform-positive samples, except for those methods where verification/
confirmation is already required, e.g., the M-Endo and LES Endo
Membrane Filter Tests, Standard Total Coliform Fermentation Technique,
and Presence-Absence Coliform Test. Methods for establishing false-
positive and negative-rates may be based on lactose fermentation, the
rapid test for ß-galactosidase and cytochrome oxidase, multi-
test identification systems, or equivalent confirmation tests. False-
positive and false-negative information is often available in
published studies and/or from the manufacturer(s).
* * * * *
(5) * * * The preparation of EC medium is described in Method 9221E
(paragraph 1a) in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 18th edition, 1992 and in the 19th edition, 1995; either
edition may be used. * * *
(6) * * *
(i) * * * EC medium is described in Method 9221 E as referenced in
paragraph (f)(5) of this section. * * *
(ii) * * * Nutrient Agar is described in Method 9221 B (paragraph
3) in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
18th edition, 1992 and in the 19th edition, 1995; either edition may be
used. * * *
* * * * *
(v) The membrane filter method with MI agar, a description of which
is cited in footnote 6 to the table in paragraph (f)(3) of this
section.
(vi) E*Colite® Test, a description of which is cited in
footnote 10 to the table at paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
(vii) m-ColiBlue24® Test, a description of which is
cited in footnote 11 to the table in paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(8) * * * Copies of the analytical methods cited in Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (18th and 19th
editions) may be obtained from the American Public Health Association
et al.; 1015 Fifteenth Street NW., Washington, DC 20005. * * *
* * * * *
3. Section 141.23 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4)(iii);
b. Revising the table and footnotes in paragraph (k)(1);
c. Revising paragrah (k)(2) including the table;
d. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(i); and
e. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(ii) introductory text.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.23 Inorganic chemical sampling and analytical requirements.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) If duplicates of the original sample taken from each sampling
point used in the composite sample are available, the system may use
these instead of resampling. The duplicates must be analyzed and the
results reported to the State within 14 days after completing analysis
of the composite sample, provided the holding time of the sample is not
exceeded.
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant and methodology
\13\ EPA ASTM \3\ SM \4\ Other
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alkalinity:
Titrimetric............... ........... D1067-92B 2320 B I-1030-85 \5\
Electrometric titration... ........... ..................... ..................... .....................
Antimony:
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8
Hydride-Atomic Absorption. ........... D-3697-92 ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... ..................... 3113 B .....................
Arsenic\14\:
[[Page 67462]]
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... D-2972-93C 3113 B .....................
Hydride Atomic Absorption. ........... D-2972-93B 3114 B .....................
Asbestos:
Transmission Electron \9\ 100.1 ..................... ..................... .....................
Microscopy.
Transmission Electron \10\ 100.2 ..................... ..................... .....................
Microscopy.
Barium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; Direct. ........... ..................... 3111 D .....................
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... ..................... 3113 B .....................
Beryllium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... D3645-93B 3113 B .....................
Cadmium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... ..................... .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... ..................... 3113 B .....................
Calcium:
EDTA titrimetric.......... ........... D511-93A 3500-Ca D
Atomic absorption; direct ........... D511-93B 3111 B .....................
aspiration.
Inductively-coupled plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
Chromium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... ..................... 3113 B .....................
Copper:
Atomic absorption; furnace ........... D1688-95C 3113 B .....................
Atomic absorption; direct ........... D1688-95A 3111 B .....................
aspiration.
ICP....................... \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
ICP--Mass spectrometry.... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
platform.
Conductivity Conductance...... ........... D1125-95A 2510 B .....................
Cyanide:
Manual Distillation ........... D2036-91A 4500-CN- C
followed by.
Spectrophotometric, ........... D2036-91B 4500-CN- G
Amenable.
Spectrophotometric....
Manual............ ........... D2036-91A 4500-CN- E I-3300-85 \5\
Semi-automated.... \6\ 335.4
Selective Electrode....... ........... ..................... 4500-CN- F
Fluoride:
Ion Chromatography........ \6\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B
Manual Distill.; Color. ........... ..................... 4500-F- B, D
SPADNS.
Manual Electrode.......... ........... D1179-93B 4500-F- C
Automated Electrode....... ........... ..................... ..................... 380-75WE \11\
Automated Alizarin........ ........... ..................... 4500-F- E 129-71W \11\
Lead:
Atomic absorption; furnace ........... D3559-95D 3113 B
ICP-Mass spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8
Atomic absorption; \2\ 200.9
platform.
Differential Pulse Anodic ........... ..................... ..................... Method 1001 \15\
Stripping Voltammetry.
Magnesium:
Atomic Absorption......... ........... D 511-93 B 3111 B
ICP....................... \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B
Complexation Titrimetric ........... D 511-93 A 3500-Mg E
Methods.
Mercury:
Manual, Cold Vapor........ \2\ 245.1 D3223-91 3112 B
Automated, Cold Vapor..... \1\ 245.2
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8
Nickel:
Inductively Coupled Plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Direct. ........... ..................... 3111 B
Atomic Absorption; Furnace ........... ..................... 3113 B
Nitrate:
Ion Chromatography........ \6\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B B-1011 \8\
Automated Cadmium \6\ 353.2 D3867-90A 4500-NO3- F
Reduction.
[[Page 67463]]
Ion Selective Electrode... ........... ..................... 4500-NO3- D 601 \7\
Manual Cadmium Reduction.. ........... D3867-90B 4500-NO3- E
Nitrite:
Ion Chromatography........ \6\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B B-1011 \8\
Automated Cadmium \6\ 353.2 D3867-90A 4500-NO3- F
Reduction.
Manual Cadmium Reduction.. ........... D3867-90B 4500-NO3- E
Spectrophotometric........ ........... ..................... 4500-NO2- B
Orthophosphate: \12\
Colorimetric, automated, \6\ 365.1 ..................... 4500-P F
ascorbic acid.
Colorimetric, ascorbic ........... D515-88A 4500-P E
acid, single reagent.
Colorimetric, ........... ..................... ..................... I-1602-85 \5\
phosphomolybdate;.
automated-segmented ........... ..................... ..................... I-2601-90 \5\
flow;.
automated discrete.... ........... ..................... ..................... I-2598-85 \5\
Ion Chromatography........ \6\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B
pH: Electrometric............. \1\ 150.1 D1293-95 4500-H+ B
\1\ 150.2 ..................... ..................... .....................
Selenium:
Hydride-Atomic Absorption. ........... D3859-93A 3114 B .....................
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
Atomic Absorption; Furance ........... D3859-93B 3113 B .....................
Silica:
Colorimetric, molybdate ........... ..................... ..................... I-1700-85 \5\
blue;.
automated-segmented ........... ..................... ..................... I-2700-85 \5\
flow.
Colorimetric.............. ........... D859-95 ..................... .....................
Molybdosilicate........... ........... ..................... 4500-Si D .....................
Heteropoly blue............... ........... ..................... 4500-Si E .....................
Automated method for ........... ..................... 4500-Si F .....................
molybdate-reactive silica. .....................
Inductively-coupled plasma \3\ 200.7 ..................... 3120 B .....................
Sodium:
Inductively-coupled plasma \2\ 200.7 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; direct ........... ..................... 3111 B .....................
aspiration.
Temperature: Thermometric ........... ..................... 2550 .....................
Thallium:
ICP-Mass Spectrometry..... \2\ 200.8 ..................... ..................... .....................
Atomic Absorption; \2\ 200.9 ..................... ..................... .....................
Platform.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of
the following documents listed in footnotes 1-11 and 15 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the sources
listed below. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline at 800-426-4791. Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of Federal Register, 800 North Capitol
Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.
\1\ ``Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes'', EPA/600/4-79/020, March 1983. Available at NTIS, PB84-
128677.
\2\ ``Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples--Supplement I'', EPA/600/R-94/111, May
1994. Available at NTIS, PB95-125472.
\3\ Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994 and 1996, Vols. 11.01 and 11.02, American Society for Testing and
Materials. 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, Vols. 11.01.
Copies may be obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.
\4\ 18th and 19th editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992 and 1995,
respectively, American Public Health Association; either edition may be used. Copies may be obtained from the
American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20005.
\5\ 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 Sediments, 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 ed., 1989; Available from
Information Services, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
\6\ ``Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples'', EPA/600/R-93/100, August
1993. Available at NTIS, PB94-120821.
\7\ 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.
\8\ 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.
\9\ Method 100.1, ``Analytical Method For Determination of Asbestos Fibers in Water'', EPA/600/4-83/043, EPA,
September 1983. Available at NTIS, PB83-260471.
\10\ 10 Method 100.2, ``Determination of Asbestos Structure Over 10-µm In Length In Drinking Water'',
EPA/600/R-94/134, June 1994. Available at NTIS, PB94-201902.
\11\ Industrial Method No. 129-71W, ``Fluoride in Water and Wastewater'', December 1972, and Method No. 380-
75WE, ``Fluoride in Water and Wastewater'', February 1976, Technicon Industrial Systems. Copies may be
obtained from Bran & Luebbe, 1025 Busch Parkway, Buffalo Grove, IL 60089.
\12\ Unfiltered, no digestion or hydrolysis.
\13\ 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.
[[Page 67464]]
\14\ If ultrasonic nebulization is used in the determination of arsenic by Methods 200.7, 200.8, or SM 3120 B,
the arsenic must be in the pentavalent state to provide uniform signal response. For methods 200.7 and 3120 B,
both samples and standards must be diluted in the same mixed acid matrix concentration of nitric and
hydrochloric acid with the addition of 100 µL of 30% hydrogen peroxide per 100ml of solution. For
direct analysis of arsenic with method 200.8 using ultrasonic nebulization, samples and standards must contain
one mg/L of sodium hypochlorite.
\15\ The description for Method Number 1001 for lead is available from Palintest, LTD, 21 Kenton Lands Road,
P.O. Box 18395, Erlanger, KY 41018. Or from the Hach Company, P.O. Box 389, Loveland, CO 8053.
(2) Sample collection for antimony, asbestos, barium, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, cyanide, fluoride, mercury, nickel, nitrate,
nitrite, selenium, and thallium under this section shall be conducted
using the sample preservation, container, and maximum holding time
procedures specified in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant Preservative Container Time \3\
------------------------------------\1\-------------\2\-----------------
Antimony.................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Asbestos.................... 4 deg.C........ P or G...... 48 hours 4
Barium...................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Beryllium................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Cadmium..................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Chromium.................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Cyanide..................... 4 deg.C, NaOH.. P or G...... 14 days
Fluoride.................... None........... P or G...... 1 month
Mercury..................... HNO3........... P or G...... 28 days
Nickel...................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Nitrate..................... 4 deg.C........ P or G...... 48 hours 5
Nitrate-Nitrite 6........... H2SO4.......... P or G...... 28 days
Nitrite..................... 4 deg.C........ P or G...... 48 hours
Selenium.................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
Thallium.................... HNO3........... P or G...... 6 months
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ When indicated, samples must be acidified at the time of collection
to pH < 2 with concentrated acid or adjusted with sodium hydroxide to
pH > 12. When chilling is indicated the sample must be shipped and
stored at 4 deg.C or less.
\2\ P=plastic, hard or soft; G=glass, hard or soft.
\3\ In all cases samples should be analyzed as soon after collection as
possible. Follow additional (if any) information on preservation,
containers or holding times that is specified in method.
\4\ Instructions for containers, preservation procedures and holding
times as specified in Method 100.2 must be adhered to for all
compliance analyses including those conducted with Method 100.1.
\5\ If the sample is chlorinated, the holding time for an unacidified
sample kept at 4 deg.C is extended to 14 days.
\6\ Nitrate-Nitrite refers to a measurement of total nitrate.
(3) * * *
(i) Analyze Performance Evaluation (PE) samples provided by EPA,
the State or by a third party (with the approval of the State or EPA)
at least once a year.
(ii) For each contaminant that has been included in the PE sample
and for each method for which the laboratory desires certification
achieve quantitative results on the analyses that are within the
following acceptance limits:
* * * * *
4. Section 141.24 is amended by:
a. Revising the section heading
b. Revising paragraph (e);
c. Revising paragraphs (f)(14)(ii);
d. Revising paragraphs (f)(17)(i)(A), (f)(17)(i)(B), (f)(17)(ii)
introductory text; and paragraph (f)(17)(ii)(A);
e. Revising paragraph (h)(10)(ii);
f. Revising paragraph (h)(13) introductory text, (h)(13)(i); and
g. Revising paragraph (h)(19)(i)(A)and (h)(19)(i)(B) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 141.24 Organic chemicals, sampling and analytical requirements.
* * * * *
(e) Analyses for the contaminants in this section shall be
conducted using the following EPA methods or their equivalent as
approved by EPA.
(1) The following documents are incorporated by reference. This
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies
may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. Method 508A and
515.1 are in Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water, EPA/600/4-88-039, December 1988, Revised, July 1991.
Methods 547, 550 and 550.1 are in Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking Water--Supplement I, EPA/600-4-90-020,
July 1990. Methods 548.1, 549.1, 552.1 and 555 are in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking Water--Supplement II,
EPA/600/R-92-129, August 1992. Methods 502.2, 504.1, 505, 506, 507,
508, 508.1, 515.2, 524.2 525.2, 531.1, 551.1 and 552.2 are in Methods
for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking Water--
Supplement III, EPA/600/R-95-131, August 1995. Method 1613 is titled
``Tetra-through Octa-Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans by Isotope-Dilution
HRGC/HRMS'', EPA/821-B-94-005, October 1994. These documents are
available from the National Technical Information Service, NTIS PB91-
231480, PB91-146027, PB92-207703, PB95-261616 and PB95-104774, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia
22161. The toll-free number is 800-553-6847. Method 6651 shall be
followed in accordance with Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 18th edition, 1992 and 19th edition, 1995,
American Public Health Association (APHA); either edition may be used.
Method 6610 shall be followed in accordance with the Supplement to the
18th edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 1994 or with the 19th edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1995, APHA; either publication may
be used. The APHA documents are available from APHA, 1015 Fifteenth
Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20005. Other required analytical test
procedures germane to the conduct of these analyses are contained in
Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methods, EPA/600/R-94-173, October
1994, NTIS PB95-104766. EPA Methods 515.3 and 549.2 are available from
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research
Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268. ASTM Method D 5317-93 is available in the Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, 1996, Vol. 11.02, American Society for Testing
and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428, or
in any edition published after 1993.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant Method \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benzene................................... 502.2, 524.2
Carbon tetrachloride 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
Chlorobenzene 502.2, 524.2
1,2-Dichlorobenzene....................... 502.2, 524.2
1,4-Dichlorobenzene....................... 502.2, 524.2
1,2-Dichloroethane........................ 502.2, 524.2
cis-Dichloroethylene...................... 502.2, 524.2
trans-Dichloroethylene.................... 502.2, 524.2
Dichloromethane........................... 502.2, 524.2
1,2-Dichloropropane....................... 502.2, 524.2
Ethylbenzene.............................. 502.2, 524.2
Styrene................................... 502.2, 524.2
Tetrachloroethylene....................... 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane..................... 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
Trichloroethylene......................... 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
Toluene................................... 502.2, 524.2
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene.................... 502.2, 524.2
1,1-Dichloroethylene...................... 502.2, 524.2
1,1,2-Trichloroethane..................... 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
Vinyl chloride............................ 502.2, 524.2
Xylenes (total)........................... 502.2, 524.2
2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin)..................... 1613
2,4-D4 (as acid, salts and esters)........ 515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3,
D5317-93
2,4,5-TP \4\ (Silvex)..................... 515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3,
D5317-93
Alachlor \2\.............................. 507, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Atrazine \2\.............................. 507, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Benzo(a)pyrene............................ 525.2, 550, 550.1
Carbofuran................................ 531.1, 6610
Chlordane................................. 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505
Dalapon................................... 552.1, 515.1, 552.2, 515.3
Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate................... 506, 525.2
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate................. 506, 525.2
Dibromochloropropane (DBCP)............... 504.1, 551.1
Dinoseb \4\............................... 515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3
Diquat.................................... 549.2
Endothall................................. 548.1
Endrin.................................... 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Ethylene dibromide (EDB).................. 504.1, 551.1
Glyphosate................................ 547, 6651
[[Page 67465]]
Heptachlor................................ 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Heptachlor Epoxide........................ 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Hexachlorobenzene......................... 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene................. 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Lindane................................... 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Methoxychlor.............................. 508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Oxamyl.................................... 531.1, 6610
PCBs \3\ (as decachlorobiphenyl).......... 508A
(as Aroclors)......................... 508.1, 508, 525.2, 505
Pentachlorophenol......................... 515.2, 525.2, 555, 515.1,
515.3, D5317-93
Picloram \4\.............................. 515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3,
D5317-93
Simazine \2\.............................. 507, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
Toxaphene................................. 508, 508.1, 525.2, 505
Total Trihalomethanes..................... 502.2, 524.2, 551.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For previously approved EPA methods which remain available for
compliance monitoring until June 1, 2001, see paragraph (e)(2) of this
section.
\2\ Substitution of the detector specified in Method 505, 507, 508 or
508.1 for the purpose of achieving lower detection limits is allowed
as follows. Either an electron capture or nitrogen phosphorous
detector may be used provided all regulatory requirements and quality
control criteria are met.
\3\ PCBs are qualitatively identified as Aroclors and measured for
compliance purposes as decachlorobiphenyl. Users of Method 505 may
have more difficulty in achieving the required detection limits than
users of Methods 508.1, 525.2 or 508.
\4\ Accurate determination of the chlorinated esters requires hydrolysis
of the sample as described in EPA Methods 515.1, 515.2, 515.3 and 555,
and ASTM Method D 5317-93.
(2) The following EPA methods will remain available for compliance
monitoring until June 1, 2001. The following documents are incorporated
by reference. This incorporation by reference was approved by the
Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and
1 CFR Part 51. Copies may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington,
DC. EPA methods 502.2 Rev. 2.0, 505 Rev. 2.0, 507 Rev. 2.0, 508 Rev.
3.0, 531.1 Rev. 3.0 are in ``Methods for the Determination of Organic
Compounds in Drinking Water'', December 1988, revised July 1991;
methods 506 and 551 are in ``Methods for the Determination of Organic
Compounds in Drinking Water--Supplement I'', July 1990; methods 515.2
Rev. 1.0 and 524.2 Rev. 4.0 are in ``Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking Water--Supplement II,'' August 1992; and
methods 504.1 Rev. 1.0, 508.1 Rev. 1.0, 525.2 Rev.1.0 are available
from US EPA NERL, Cincinnati, OH 45268
(f) * * *
(14) * * *
(ii) If duplicates of the original sample taken from each sampling
point used in the composite sample are available, the system may use
these instead of resampling. The duplicates must be analyzed and the
results reported to the State within 14 days after completing analysis
of the composite sample, provided the holding time of the sample is not
exceeded.
* * * * *
(17) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation (PE) samples provided by EPA,
the State, or by a third party (with the approval of the State or EPA)
at least once a year by each method for which the laboratory desires
certification.
(B) Achieve the quantitative acceptance limits under paragraphs
(f)(17)(i)(C) and (D) of this section for at least 80 percent of the
regulated organic contaminants included in the PE sample.
* * * * *
(ii) To receive certification to conduct analyses for vinyl
chloride, the laboratory must:
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation (PE) samples provided by EPA,
the State, or by a third party (with the approval of the State or EPA)
at least once a year by each method for which the laboratory desires
certification.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(10) * * *
(ii) If duplicates of the original sample taken from each sampling
point used in the composite sample are available, the system may use
these instead of resampling. The duplicates must be analyzed and the
results reported to the State within 14 days after completion of the
composite analysis or before the holding time for the initial sample is
exceeded whichever is sooner.
* * * * *
(13) Analysis for PCBs shall be conducted as follows using the
methods in paragraph (e) of this section:
(i) Each system which monitors for PCBs shall analyze each sample
using either Method 508.1, 525.2, 508 or 505. Users of Method 505 may
have more difficulty in achieving the required Aroclor detection limits
than users of Methods 508.1, 525.2 or 508.
* * * * *
(19) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation (PE) samples provided by EPA,
the State, or by a third party (with the approval of the State or EPA)
at least once a year by each method for which the laboratory desires
certification.
(B) For each contaminant that has been included in the PE sample
achieve quantitative results on the analyses that are within the
following acceptance limits:
* * * * *
5. Section 141.28 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 141.28 Certified laboratories.
(a) For the purpose of determining compliance with Secs. 141.21
through 141.27, 141.30, 141.40, 141.74 and 141.89, samples may be
considered only if they have been analyzed by a laboratory certified by
the State except that measurements for alkalinity, calcium,
conductivity, disinfectant residual, orthophosphate, pH, silica,
temperature and turbidity may be performed by any person acceptable to
the State.
* * * * *
6. Section 141.74 is amended by revising the first five sentences
in paragraph (a) introductory text, the table and footnotes in
paragraph (a)(1), and the first and second sentences in paragraph
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 141.74 Analytical and monitoring requirements.
(a) Analytical requirements. Only the analytical method(s)
specified in this paragraph, or otherwise approved by EPA, may be used
to demonstrate compliance with Secs. 141.71, 141.72 and 141.73.
Measurements for pH, turbidity, temperature and residual disinfectant
concentrations must be conducted by a person approved by the State.
Measurement for total coliforms, fecal coliforms and HPC must be
conducted by a laboratory certified by the State or EPA to do such
analysis. Until laboratory certification criteria are developed for the
analysis of fecal coliforms and HPC, any laboratory certified for total
coliforms analysis by the State or EPA is deemed certified for fecal
coliforms and HPC analysis. The following procedures shall be conducted
in accordance with the publications listed in the following section. *
* *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organism Methodology Citation \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Coliform \2\................ Total Coliform Fermentation Technique 3,4,5... 9221 A, B, C
Total Coliform Membrane Filter Technique \6\.. 9222 A, B, C
[[Page 67466]]
ONPG-MUG Test \7\............................. 9223
Fecal Coliforms \2\............... Fecal Coliform Procedure \8\.................. 9221 E
Fecal Coliform Filter Procedure............... 9222 D
Heterotrophic bacteria \2\........ Pour Plate Method............................. 9215 B
Turbidity......................... Nephelometric Method.......................... 2130 B
Nephelometric Method.......................... 180.1 \9\
Great Lakes Instruments....................... Method 2 \10\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of
the following documents listed in footnotes 1, 6, 7, 9 and 10 was approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from
the sources listed below. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791. Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20408.
\1\ Except where noted, all methods refer to Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th
edition, 1992 and 19th edition, 1995, American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW,
Washington, D.C. 20005; either edition may be used.
\2\ The time from sample collection to initiation of analysis may not exceed 8 hours. Systems must hold samples
below 10 deg.C during transit.
\3\ Lactose broth, as commercially available, may be used in lieu of lauryl tryptose broth, if the system
conducts at least 25 parallel tests between this medium and lauryl tryptose broth using the water normally
tested, and this comparison demonstrates that the false-positive rate and false-negative rate for total
coliform, using lactose broth, is less than 10 percent.
\4\ Media should cover inverted tubes at least one-half to two-thirds after the sample is added.
\5\ No requirement exists to run the completed phase on 10 percent of all total coliform-positive confirmed
tubes.
\6\ MI agar also may be used. Preparation and use of MI agar is set forth in the article, ``New medium for the
simultaneous detection of total coliform and Escherichia coli in water'' by Brenner, K.P., et al., 1993, Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 59:3534-3544. Also available from the Office of Water Resource Center (RC-4100), 401 M
Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460, EPA 600/J-99/225.
\7\ The ONPG-MUG Test is also known as the Autoanalysis Colilert System.
\8\ A-1 Broth may be held up to three months in a tightly closed screw cap tube at 4 deg.C.
\9\ ``Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples'', EPA/600/R-93/100, August
1993. Available at NTIS, PB94-121811.
\10\ GLI Method 2, ``Turbidity'', November 2, 1992, Great Lakes Instruments, Inc., 8855 North 55th Street,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53223.
(2) Public water systems must measure residual disinfectant
concentrations with one of the analytical methods in the following
table. The methods are contained in both the 18th and 19th editions of
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992 and
1995; either edition may be used. * * *
* * * * *
7. Section 141.89 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1)
introductory text, (a)(1)(i) to read as follows and by removing the
semicolon at the end of paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) and adding a period in
it's place.
Sec. 141.89 Analytical methods.
(a) * * *
(1) Analyses for alkalinity, calcium, conductivity, orthophosphate,
pH, silica, and temperature may be performed by any person acceptable
to the State. Analyses under this section for lead and copper shall
only be conducted by laboratories that have been certified by EPA or
the State. To obtain certification to conduct analyses for lead and
copper, laboratories must:
(i) Analyze Performance Evaluation samples, which include lead and
copper, provided by or acceptable to EPA or the State at least once a
year by each method for which the laboratory desires certification; and
* * * * *
PART 143--NATIONAL SECONDARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 143 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.
2. Section 143.4 is amended by revising the table and footnotes in
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 143.4 Monitoring.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant EPA ASTM \3\ SM \4\ Other
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aluminum............................. \2\ 200.7 ............................. 3120 B .........................
\2\ 200.8 ............................. 3113 B .........................
\2\ 200.9 ............................. 3111 D .........................
Chloride............................. \1\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B
........... ............................. 4500-Cl- D .........................
........... D512-89B 4500-Cl- B .........................
Color................................ ........... ............................. 2120 B .........................
Foaming Agents....................... ........... ............................. 5540 C .........................
Iron................................. \2\ 200.7 ............................. 3120 B .........................
\2\ 200.9 ............................. 3111 B .........................
........... ............................. 3113 B .........................
Manganese............................ \2\ 200.7 ............................. 3120 B .........................
\2\ 200.8 ............................. 3111 B .........................
\2\ 200.9 ............................. 3113 B .........................
Odor................................. ........... ............................. 2150 B .........................
Silver............................... \2\ 200.7 ............................. 3120 B \5\ I-3720-85
\2\ 200.8 ............................. 3111 B .........................
\2\ 200.9 ............................. 3113 B .........................
Sulfate.............................. \1\ 300.0 D4327-91 4110 B .........................
\1\ 375.2 ............................. 4500-SO42- F .........................
........... ............................. 4500-SO42- C, D .........................
........... D516-90 4500-SO42- E .........................
[[Page 67467]]
TDS.................................. ........... ............................. 2540 C .........................
Zinc................................. \2\ 200.7 ............................. 3120 B .........................
\2\ 200.8 ............................. 3111 B .........................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of the following documents was approved by
the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the sources
listed below. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791. Documents may be
inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20408.
\1\ ``Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples'', EPA/600/R-93-100, August 1993. Available at NTIS, PB94-120821.
\2\ ``Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples--Supplement I'', EPA/600/R-94-111, May 1994. Available at NTIS, PB 95-125472.
\3\ Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994 and 1996, Vols. 11.01 and 11.02, American Society for Testing and Materials. Copies may be obtained from the
American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428.
\4\ 18th and 19th editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992 and 1995, American Public Health Association; either
edition may be used. Copies may be obtained from the American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20005.
\5\ Method I-3720-85, Techniques of Water Resources Investigation of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-1, 3rd ed., 1989; Available from
Information Services, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
[FR Doc. 99-30901 Filed 11-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
|
