Thursday
February 10, 1994
I i 1
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 141
Monitoring Requirements for Public
Drinking Water Supplies; Proposed Rule
-------
6332
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 141
[WH-FRU-4818-8]
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Monitoring Requirements
for Public Drinking Water Supplies:
Cryptosporidlum, Glardia, Viruses,
Disinfection Byproducts, Water
Treatment Plant Data and Other
Information Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to require
public water systems which serve
10,000 people or greater to generate and
provide the Agency with specific
monitoring data and other information
characterizing their water systems.
Systems which use surface water, or
ground water under the influence of
surface water, and serve between
10,000-100.000 people would be
required to (a) monitor their source
xvater at the intake of each plant for two
disease-causing protozoa, Giardia and
Cryptosporidium; fecal coliforms or
Escherichia coli; and total coliforms;
and (b) provide specific engineering
data as it pertains to removal of disease-
causing microorganisms. Systems which
use surface water, or ground water
under the influence of surface water,
and serve more than 100,000 people
would be required to monitor their
source water at the intake of each plant
for the microorganisms indicated above,
plus viruses, and, when pathogen levels
exceed one pathogen/liter in the source
water, finished water for these
microorganisms; monitor for certain
disinfection byproducts (DBFs) as well
as other water quality indicators; and
provide specific engineering data as
they pertain to removal of disease
causing organisms and control of DBFs.
All ground water systems that serve
more than 100,000 people would be
required to monitor for certain DBF,
other water quality indicators, and to
provide specific physical and
engineering data. Systems which use
surface water and serve more than
100,000 people and systems which use
ground water and serve more than
50,000 people would be required to
conduct bench or pilot scale studies to
evaluate treatment performance for the
removal of precursors to DBFs unless
they have met certain source water or
treated water quality criteria. This
information will be used to consider
possible changes to the current Surface
Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) and to
develop drinking water regulations for
disinfectants and DBFs. If the SWTR is
amended, information collected under
this monitoring rule would assist
utilities in complying with such
amendments.
DATES: Comments should be postmarked
or delivered by hand on or before March
14,1994. Comments received after this
date may not be considered because of
time constraints.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
ESWTR/DBPR Monitoring Docket Clerk,
Water Docket (MC-4101); U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; 401
M Street, SW; Washington, DC 20460.
Please submit any references cited in
your comments. EPA would appreciate
an original and three copies of your
comments and enclosures (including
references). Commenters who want EPA
to acknowledge receipt of their
comments should include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope. No
facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted
because EPA cannot ensure that they
will be submitted to the Water Docket.
The proposed rule with supporting
documents and all comments received
are available for review at the Water
Docket at the address above. For access
to Docket materials, call (202) 260-3027
between 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. for an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Safe Drinking Water Hotline, Telephone
(800) 426-4791. The Safe Drinking
Water Hotline is open Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays,
from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
For technical inquiries, contact Stig
Regli or Paul S. Berger, Ph.D., Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water
(WH-550D), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.,
Washington DC 20460, telephone (202)
260-7379 (Regli) or (202) 260-3039
(Berger).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Regulatory Background
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Requirements (ESWTR)
1. Need for Enhanced SWTR
2. Monitoring and reporting requirements
and rationale
3. Reasons for monitoring listed pathogens
and indicators
4. Rationale for frequency of microbial
monitoring
5. Rationale for reporting physical data and
engineering information
6. Analytical methods
7. Laboratory approval
8. Quality assurance
B. Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2)
1. Need for additional data
2. Monitoring and reporting requirements
and rationale
3. Treatment process information
collection
4. Database development :
5. Analytical methods '.
6. Quality assurance i
7. Bench/pilot scale testing
C. Dates '
D. Reporting Requirements
E. List of Systems Required to Submit Data
IV. State Implementation
V. Cost of Rule
VI. Other Statutory Requirements *
A. Executive Order 12866;
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Science Advisory Board, National
Drinking Water Advisory Council, and
Secretary of Health and Human Services
VII. Request for Public Comments
VIII. References j
I. Statutory Authority
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA
or the Act), as amended in 1986,
requires EPA to promulgate National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs) which specify maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs) or treatment
techniques for drinking water
contaminants (42 U.S.C. 300g-l).
NPDWRs apply to public water systems
(42 U.S.C. 300f(l)(A). Section 1412(b)(3)
of the Act requires EPA to publish
regulations for at least 25 contaminants
at three year intervals. Section
1412(b)(9) of the Act requires EPA to
review existing national primary
drinking water regulations at least once
every 3 years. '
According to section 1445(a)(l) of the
Act, every public water system "shall
establish and maintain such records,
make such reports, conduct such
monitoring, and provide such
information as the Administrator may
reasonably require by regulation to
assist him in establishing regulations,
[or] * * * in evaluating the health risks
of unregulated contaminants". This
section authorizes EPA to require
systems to monitor and provide the
Agency with these data as well as other
data characterizing the system,
including source and treated water
quality. •
In addition, section 1401(l)(d) of the
Act defines NPDWRs to 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
* * * ". This section authorizes EPA to
require systems and laboratories to use
Agency-approved methods and quality
assurance criteria for collecting and
analyzing water samples.,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6333
II. Regulatory Background
Two regulations attempt to control
disease-causing microorganisms
(pathogens) in public water supplies—
the Total Coliform Rule (54 FR 27544;
June 29,1989) and the Surface Water
Treatment Requirements (SWTR) (54 FR
27486; June 29,1989). A third
regulation, the Groundwater
Disinfection Rule, which is currently
under development, will add further
protection for systems using ground
water. The Agency is considering
revising the SWTR in conjunction with
the development of other new
regulations.
Another rule EPA is currently
developing will address chemical
byproducts that form when disinfectants
used for microbial control in drinking
water react with various organic
chemicals in the source water. Some of
these disinfection byproducts are toxic
or are probable human carcinogens. As
such, they were included on the 1991
Drinking Water Priority List (56 FR
1470; January 14,1991) as candidates
for future regulations. They are among
the candidate contaminants for which
EPA must meet a Court-ordered
deadline that is currently being
negotiated.
To develop the Disinfectant/
Disinfection Byproducts (D/DBP) Rule,
EPA instituted a formal regulation
negotiation process in 1992 (57 FR
53866; Nov 13,1992) including
representatives from water utilities,
State and local agencies, environmental
groups, consumer groups, and EPA. The
Negotiating Committee agreed to
propose three rules: a) an information
collection rule (ICR), which is proposed
herein, b) an "interim" enhanced
surface water treatment rule (ESWTR),
to be proposed within the next few
months, and c) D/DBP regulations, to be
proposed concurrently with the'interim
ESWTR.
During the development of the D/DBP
Rule, a number of members of the
Negotiating Committee did not believe
that there were adequate data available
to address some of the DBFs on EPA's
priority list (56 FR 1473; January 14,
1991). They believed that insufficient
data were available on many aspects of
DBFs necessary to make appropriate
regulatory decisions including health
effects and health effect related issues,
occurrence of and exposure to
contaminants, and the capabilities of
treatment technologies. Also of concern
were the limited data on microbial
contaminants for making regulatory
decisions.
The Negotiating Committee's
development of the three proposed rules
mentioned above was based on the
premise of (1) taking prudent immediate
steps by proposing a two staged D/DBP
rule and an interim ESWTR, and (2)
developing additional data through
monitoring and research for future
regulatory decisions that would support
refinements to the proposed interim
ESWTR and the Stage 2 D/DBP rule. For
example, decisions on the direction of
an ESWTR will be limited without more
data on the occurrence of
microorganisms, the effectiveness of
current and advanced treatment
schemes, potential consumer exposure,
dose response relationships for certain
pathogens, pathogen strain differences,
and cyst/oocyst viability measures.
Likewise, important decisions on the
Stage 2 D/DBP rule would benefit from
additional data on occurrence of DBFs,
effects of current and advanced
treatment approaches on DBF formation,
potential consumer exposures, acute
short-term health effects, chronic health
effects, and the use of surrogates as tools
for denning adequacy of treatment for
specific contaminants and reduced
monitoring.
The ICR was developed to obtain both
microbial and DBF occurrence,
exposure, and treatment data for input
to the ESWTR and Stage 2, as outlined
below, and would require the
expenditure of an estimated $130
million over three and a half years by
a segment of public water suppliers. The
commitment by the public water supply
community to support the collection of
additional data was linked to EPA's
commitment to provide (1) adequate
quality control procedures for collecting
and managing the information obtained
under the ICR and (2) additional
funding, especially on health effects, for
properly interpreting the data collected
under the ICR. As evidence of this
linkage, non-EPA members of the
Negotiating Committee sought to assist
the Agency in obtaining funding for the
health effects and other research equally
critical to the future decisions. On May
20,1993, these committee members sent
letters to the Administration and
members of Congress requesting support
for a federal commitment of $4 million
per year for five years to support the
needed research. The letters noted that
the American Water Works Association
Research Foundation had, independent
of the negotiations, presented a public-
private partnership research plan under
which they committed to provide up to
$2 million per year for the research
under a one for two match.
On a related effort, non-EPA
Negotiating Committee members
requested on July 14,1993, in a letter to
EPA's Administrator, consideration of
reallocation of Agency research funds to
support the research needs described
above. The July 14,1993 letter also
spoke of the need for the Agency to
commit funds necessary to adequately
collect, manage, and analyze data
collected under the ICR. A number of
Negotiating Committee members
believed that, without additional federal
research and data management funding,
the ICR data generated by systems
would not be particularly useful in
developing the ESWTR or Stage 2 D/
DB.P Rule.
The Negotiating Committee agreed
that more data, especially monitoring
data, should be collected under the ICR
to assess possible shortcomings of the
SWTR and develop appropriate
remedies, if needed, to prevent
increased risk from microbial disease
when systems began complying with the
new D/DBP Rule. It was also agreed that
EPA would propose an interim ESWTR
for systems serving greater than 10,000
people that included a wide range of
regulatory alternatives. Data gathered
under the ICR would form the basis for
developing the most appropriate criteria
among the options presented in the
proposed interim ESWTR, and
eventually for a long-term ESWTR that
would include possible refinements to
the interim ESWTR and be applicable to
all system sizes. Both of these ESWTR
rules would become effective
concurrently with the requirements of
the Stage 1 D/DBP rule for the
respective different system sizes.
The Negotiating Committee also
agreed that additional data on the
occurrence of disinfectants, DBFs,
potential surrogates for DBFs, source
water and within-treatment conditions
affecting the formation of DBFs, and
bench-pilot scale information on the
treatability for removal of DBF
precursors would be useful for
developing Stage 2 D/DBP regulatory
criteria beyond those currently being
considered for proposal in Stage 1. To
this end, today's proposed ICR rule,
which would require this additional
information, was accepted as necessary
and reasonable by the Negotiating
Committee.
UK. Diiicussion of Proposed Rule
A, Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Requirements
1. Need for Enhanced SWTR
The SWTR, which became effective
on December 31,1990, requires all
systems using surface water, or ground
water 'under the direct influence of
surface water, to disinfect. It also
requires all such systems to filter their
water 'unless they can demonstrate that
-------
6334
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
they have an effective watershed
protection program and can meet other
EPA-specified requirements. The SWTR
also specifies that systems using surface
water must treat water to remove/
inactivate at least 99.9% (3 logsio) of the
Giardia lamblia cysts (a protozoan) and
at least 99.99% (4 logsio) of the viruses.
The SWTR does not require a system to
monitor its source water or drinking
water for these pathogens.
During the development of the SWTR,
the United States experienced its first
large recognized waterborne disease
outbreak of cryptosporidiosis, caused by
the protozoan, Cryptosporidium (Hayes
et al., 1989). Other outbreaks caused by
this pathogen have since been reported
both in the United States and other
countries. Because of the lack of data
before 1989 on Cryptosporidium oocyst
occurrence and susceptibility to
treatment, EPA decided to regulate this
pathogen in a future rulemaking, rather
than to delay publication of the SWTR
until these data were available. EPA and
others are now performing research to
understand the health risks posed by
Cryptosporidium. Although some
occurrence and treatment data are now
available, EPA believes that much more
is needed before EPA can promulgate a
suitable regulation for Cryptosporidium.
EPA is planning to propose an MCLG
and treatment technique requirement for
Cryptosporidium in the ESWTR, and
use the data from this rule to determine
the need for, and specifics of, that
regulation.
Another shortcoming of the SWTR is
that a 3-log removal/inactivation of
Giardia and a 4-log removal/inactivation
of enteric viruses may be inadequate
when a system is supplied by a poor
quality source water. In developing the
SWTR, EPA assumed on the basis of
data available at that time, that this level
of treatment was adequate for most
systems. The Agency published
associated guidance recommending
greater treatment for systems supplied
by poor quality source waters (EPA,
1991).
Subsequent data on Giardia densities
in source water and drinking water
(LeChevallier et al., 1991a,b), however,
bring into question the assumption that
the treatment specified in the SWTR
was adequate for most systems. These
new data suggest that Giardia cyst
concentrations in the source waters of
many systems may be too great for the
spedfie&minimum level of treatment to
adequately control waterborne giardiasis
(to be discussed hi the preamble of the
forthcoming proposed interim ESWTR).
As a result of this uncertainty, EPA
needs much more data on the
concentration of Giardia cysts and
viruses for various qualities of source
waters, with variation over time and
seasonal influences, to determine the
need for additional treatment to provide
adequate Giardia and virus control, hi
addition, EPA needs more field data.on
the effectiveness of different types of
water treatment for controlling these
pathogens.
If these new data indicate that EPA's
original assumption was correct, i.e.,
that only a small percentage of systems
have source water Giardia and virus
concentrations that are too great for
adequate control under the SWTR, then
guidance (EPA, 1991) may suffice and
no revision of the SWTR would be
needed. In contrast, if a high percentage
of systems have elevated concentrations
of Giardia, then EPA believes that the
SWTR may need to be revised to require
additional treatment for such systems.
If the data indicate that a revision of
the SWTR is needed, then one
regulatory option would be to tailor
required treatment levels to Giardia
concentrations in the source water. For
example, the Agency might require a
system to achieve at least a 99.9 percent
(3-log) reduction if the source water(s)
contained less than 1 cyst/100 liters, a
99.99 percent (4-log) reduction if the
source water(s) contained 1 to 9 cysts/
100 liters, a 99.999 percent (5-log)
reduction if the source water(s)
contained 10 to 99 cysts/100 liters, and
a 99.9999 percent (6-log) reduction if
the source water(s) contained more than
99 cysts/100 liters. These suggested
level of treatment requirements are
consistent with existing EPA Guidance
(USEPA 1991). Based on the dose
response curve developed by Rose et al
(1991) these levels of treatment have
been predicted to ensure a risk of less
than 1 infection per 10,000 people per
year. The concept of utilities providing
higher levels of treatment to meet a
desired acceptable risk level will be one
of the options discussed in the preamble
of the forthcoming proposed ESWTR.
The data collected under today's
monitoring rule, if promulgated, could
be used as the basis for the treatment
level prescribed.
If EPA decides to revise the SWTR
according to the above or similar
approach, then the monitoring data
would assist the Agency in determining
the most appropriate manner for
calculating source water pathogen
densities. For example, options include
the arithmetic means, geometric means,
highest value, or a 90th percentile value
(e.g., for ten data points, the system
would select the second highest, or for
18 data points, the system would select
the third highest). These options will be
discussed in greater detail in the
forthcoming proposed interim ESWTR.
These proposed revisions would be
modified or withdrawn based on
monitoring data collected under the
present rule.
In summary, today's proposed rule, if
promulgated, would provide the Agency
with much needed field data to
determine the need for amending the,
SWTR to control microorganisms in an
appropriate manner. Data collected
under this proposed rule could also
form the basis by which systems could
establish levels of treatment, perhaps
beyond those minimally required under
the SWTR, that are appropriate for
controlling microbial risk while
complying with new D/DBP regulations.
EPA understands that the water
industry may voluntarily provide
additional useful data for these
purposes. The data collected under
today's proposed rule, if promulgated,
would also support the long-term
ESWTR rule.
2. Monitoring and Reporting
Requirements and Rationale
The rule would require systems using
surface water that serve a population
greater than 100,000 (about 233 systems
nationally) to monitor their influent to
each plant for Giardia cysts,
Cryptosporidium oocysts, "total.
culturable viruses" (hereafter referred to
as "viruses", unless otherwise
indicated), fecal coliforms or
Escherichia coli, and total coliforms.
Monitoring would be monthly for 18
months. If a plant has several sources of
water, the system must sample the
blended water from all sources or, if this
is not possible, sample the source with
the expected highest pathogen
concentration. If, during the first twelve
months of monitoring, any pathogen
were to exceed a density of one/liter, or
if the detection limit for any pathogen
exceeds one/liter, the system would be
required to monitor their finished water
for the entire set of pathogens and
indicators at the same frequency as
source water sampling for the remaining
months.
Under this rule, systems would not be
required to continue monitoring for
viruses if: (1) viruses are not detected in
the source water at the intake (for each
plant) during the first twelve months of
monitoring, or (2) the system has tested
the source water at the intake (for each
plant) for either total coliforms or fecal
coliforms at least five times per week
between [insert first day of month, 4
months prior to the promulgation date
of this rule] and [insert first day of
month, 2 months after the promulgation
date of this rule], and the density of
total coliforms or fecal coliforms is less
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6335
than 100 colonies/100 ml or 20
colonies/100 ml, respectively, for at
least 90% of the samples.
For surface water systems that serve
between 10,000 and 100,000 people, the
rule would require source water
monitoring at the intake of each plant,
for the organisms listed above, except
that they would not have to monitor for
viruses. Monitoring for this category of
systems would be every two months for
12 months. The rule would require all
systems serving more than 10,000
people to provide the above monitoring
data and other, system-specific
information to EPA. The rule would not
apply to systems that purchase all of
their water from other systems.
The rationale for requiring this
information is to provide EPA with
much needed data on the concentrations
and variations with time of viral and
protozoan pathogens in various types of
source waters. It would also help EPA
evaluate whether current assumptions
on water treatment removal efficiencies
for pathogenic protozoa and viruses are
appropriate. Together, these data and
the data on source water concentrations
would provide EPA and the system a
better understanding of pathogen
concentrations following treatment,
which would allow for a more accurate
assessment of the pathogen levels and
the associated health risk to which the
public may be exposed. These data,
along with possible additional data on
dose-response patterns, pathogen strain
differences, and cyst/oocyst viability
measures, would allow EPA to
determine the circumstances under
which the SWTR is not adequate and to
revise this rule accordingly to overcome
any shortcomings.
The data would also help EPA
characterize occurrence relationships
among Giardia cysts, Cryptosporidium
oocysts, and viruses. For example, these
data would help the Agency evaluate
the merits of using Giardia as the
primary target to define treatment
requirements, as it did in the SWTR. In
addition, the data may help EPA
identify and prevent treatment changes
that systems might inappropriately
consider to meet the forthcoming D/DBP
rule.
The source water data collected under
this rule might also be used for
determining appropriate levels of
treatment for particular systems serving
more than 10,000 people, if minimum
treatment requirements were specified
as a function of source water quality
conditions under the interim ESWTR.
EPA would not require systems
serving between 10,000 and 100,000
people to monitor treated water because
the Agency believes that sufficient data
for microorganisms would be provided
by the larger systems, which are
generally better able to fund the
collection of the needed data. EPA
would also not require these sized
systems to monitor viruses in source
waters because the Agency believes that
the larger systems would provide
sufficient data to establish any
relationship between the viruses and the
two protozoan pathogens being
monitored, regarding source water
densities and treatment effectiveness.
The Agency, in the absence of data
suggesting otherwise, would continue to
use Giardia, possibly including
Cryptosporidium, as the primary target
organism(s) for regulation, given their
greater disinfection resistance compared
to most other organisms, and
consequently less data would be needed
for the viruses.
The data from these larger systems
would also be useful for estimating
pathogen concentrations in many source
waters serving systems with fewer than
10,000 people, which EPA believes
typically do not have the financial
resources or technical expertise to
collect and process the samples as part
of the above monitoring requirements.
The Agency would use the large system
data to define the relationship between
the pathogen concentrations in the
source water and the concentrations of
potential/existing microbial indicators
of water quality. If such a relationship
were found, then small systems could
use one or more of these easily-
measured indicators to estimate
pathogen concentrations in their source
waters.
In addition, small systems that use the
same source water and are in the same
vicinity as a large system may be able
to use the same pathogen concentrations
measured by the large system as a basis
for determining the minimum level of
treatment required. Finally, EPA may be
able to use these data to develop
national occurrence patterns that would
allow the Agency to establish more
appropriate treatment criteria for small
systems. By characterizing source water
quality using any one or a combination
of these three approaches, a small
system could evaluate the effectiveness
of treatment in place for pathogen
control and determine the need for
additional treatment steps.
The Agency requests suggestions for
assessing pathogen exposure in small
systems in addition to the three
approaches.provided above. Following
the full compilation of data under the
ICR and other research developments,
EPA is considering proposing a long-
term ESWTR that would include criteria
by which systems serving less than
10,000 people could determine
appropriate levels of treatment for
different source water qualities.
.As stated above, under this proposed
ICR, systems using surface water and
seirving more than 100,000 people
would be required to monitor their
finished water for the entire set of
pathogens and indicators if any
pathogen density in the source water
were to exceed one/liter. Since pathogen
occurrence in a particular source water
can vary by several orders of magnitude,
a pathogen density of slightly greater
than one/liter during one month might
be followed by considerably greater
densities in subsequent months.
Requiring a system to monitor its raw
and filtered water concurrently in the
months following a source water
pathogen concentration of greater than
one/liter would be more likely to result
in pathogen detection in the filtered
water compared to a situation'where
source water pathogen densities are less
than one/liter. EPA believes that, at
Giardia occurrence levels above one/
liter or virus occurrence levels above
10/liter, a 3-log Giardia reduction or 4-
log virus reduction, depending upon the
efficacy of treatment, should still be
countable in the treated water. At a
density less than one/liter in source
water, the sample volume needed to
detect pathogens in treated waters
would be unreasonably high and
technically difficult to achieve.
To avoid virus monitoring that is
likely to be uninformative because of
exceptionally good source water quality,
EPA would allow two circumstances
under which a system that serves more
than 100,000 people could forgo all or
part of the virus monitoring
requirement, hi one case, a system that
does not detect any viruses during the
first twelve months of monitoring would
not be required to monitor viruses
during the last six months of
monitoring. In the other case, if a system
has monitored for total conforms or
fecal coliforms in the source water for
at least five days/week every week for
six months before the effective date of
this rule, and 90 percent of all samples
are no greater than 100 total coliform/
100 ml or 20 fecal coliforms/100 ml, the
system may forgo the virus monitoring
requirement, per approval by EPA upon
submission of this data. EPA believes
that systems that do not detect viruses
during a full year of monitoring, or
where the densities of total coliforms or
fiscal coliforms do not exceed the values
specified in the SWTR above which a
system is required to filter, could
assume that treatment that removes/
inactivates Giardia satisfactorily would
also reduce viruses to a safe level.
-------
6336 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 /Proposed Rules
One issue raised during rule
development is whether a system could
submit previously collected monitoring
data in lieu of part or all of the data
required by this rulemaking. EPA
believes such data would be useful only
if (l) the laboratory used the same
analytical methods approved under this
rulemaking, (2) the Agency has some
assurance that the laboratory used
adequate quality assurance procedures
hi analyzing the samples, [3) the system
Srovides all data, rather than selected
ata, and that these data include
seasonal information, and (4) the
laboratory analyzed the full set of
pathogens and bacterial indicators
required by this rule so that microbial
interrelationships can be evaluated. The
Agency solicits comment on whether to
allow systems to submit previously
collected data in lieu of the
requirements of this rulemaking and, if
so, the appropriateness of the criteria
outlined above regarding the
admissibility of such data.
Another issue is whether EPA should
require systems to submit some
percentage of their processed
microbiological samples to the Agency
or some'other repository for archiving.
Such a repository would allow EPA,
States, systems, and research centers to
study the samples in the future for any
newly identified pathogens or any
additional relationships. Also, a
repository could allow for very efficient
research since particular samples of
interest could be selected from the same
sites based on previous ICR monitoring
results. The previous data could, in part,
be validated using new analytical
methods that become available in the
future. An examination of archived data
may allow EPA to require monitoring of
an easily measured indicator rather than
pathogens in any future rulemaking.
If the Agency determines that
archiving is appropriate, based on
public comments received, EPA would
facilitate its implementation by making
any requirement as simple as possible
for systems and laboratories. For this
purpose, EPA intends to serve as the
repository for all archived samples
under this rule. For Giardia/
Cryptosporidium samples, systems/
laboratories would collect a total
volume of at least 140L and 1400L for
raw and treated waters, respectively,
and send approximately one-fourth of
the sample concentrate (V* of the pellet),
i.e., about 5 ml of sediment in 5 ml of
formalin, to EPA for archiving under
refrigeration. For viruses, systems/
laboratories would collect a total
volume of at least 200L and 1400L for
raw and treated waters, respectively,
and ship a 100-ml filter eluant (pH
neutralized) on dry ice to EPA for each
sample.
EPA solicits comment on the
feasibility and utility of archiving
samples.
EPA also requests comment on the
option for requiring systems to collect
particle size count data within the
treatment plant in lieu of, or in addition
to, finished water monitoring for
Giardia and Cryptosporidium. The
intent of the finished water monitoring
is to provide data on removal
efficiencies throughout the treatment
process, and applicability of pathogen
removal credits for various treatment
processes. However, because suspended
solids in some source waters may clog
the filters and thus limit the sample
volume collected, systems may only be
able to determine an upper limit for
pathogen concentration, i.e., less than
the detection limit, rather than an actual
concentration. This problem would
preclude a system from calculating
pathogen reduction efficiencies by
treatment. Additionally, the analytical
method currently specified does not
clearly differentiate between live or
dead cysts/oocysts of Giardia and
Cryptosporidium. Potential public
misunderstandings of cysts/oocysts
detected in plant effluent is another
reason to allow particle count data.
Removal efficiencies indicated by
particle count data may approximate
removal efficiencies of Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts. Particle size
counting may be used as a tool for
evaluating removal efficiencies of
physical removal processes. Ongoing
research may provide enough
information to establish a quantitative
relationship between reductions by
treatment of particle counts of specific
size and reductions of Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts. Due to
recovery problems of Giardia and
Cryptosporidium by the methodology
and the inability to quantitate removal
efficiencies in many waters, the use of
particle counts in the same or smaller
size range as Giardia and
Cryptosporidium may be a better
method for the evaluation of removal
efficiencies by treatment.
The intent of the option for allowing
particle size measurements in lieu of
finished water monitoring for Giardia
and Cryptosporidium is to obtain data
on the use of particle count data as a
surrogate for Giardia and
Cryptosporidium removal. Under this
option particle counts would be taken
on the plant influent, settled water,
filter effluent, and plant effluent. The
particle count data would be taken on
the same day as the plant influent data
for Giardia and Cryptosporidium.
The particle count data would be
recorded on a form similar to that
shown in Appendix A of this preamble.
The data would be recorded as particle
size counts for each treatment step
between the plant influent and effluent.
By requiring particle size counts in
increments of "greater than" values for
some specified volume of flow, removal
efficiency for a specified particle size
range (e.g., 5-10 urn), could be
calculated for a particular treatment
process. This would be done by
subtracting the count in the higher size
range (e.g., >10 um) from the count in
the lower size range (e.g.,;>5 um) for the
effluent of one treatment process (or the
raw water) and comparing this value,
"a", to a similarly calculated value, "b",
for a subsequent treatment process (i.e.,
["a" - "b"]/"a" x 100). Removal
efficiencies calculated based upon
particle size counts in the ranges of 2-
5 um and 5-10 um, as indicated in
Appendix A of this preamble, may be
conservative indicators for estimating
the removal efficiency of Giardia or
Cryptosporidium which are generally in
the respective size ranges:of 3-7
microns and 8-12 microns, respectively.
EPA solicits comment on the
following issues pertaining to
monitoring of particle size counts:
Under what circumstances, if any,
should monitoring of particle size
counts be allowed in lieu:of monitoring
finished water for Giardid and
Cryptosporidium? What particle size
ranges and Sample volumes should be
monitored? What analytical method(s),
including instrumentation, should be
used for such monitoring? What criteria
should be specified to ensure that
particle size data collected from
different systems could be appropriately
compared? What criteria should be
specified to ensure that the particle size
measurements would be most
representative of removal of Giardia and
Cryptosporidium? Should methods in
addition to, or in lieu of, particle size
counting, such as Microscopic
Paniculate Analysis (MPA), be included
as a condition for avoiding finished
water monitoring of Giardia and .
Cryptosporidiumf
3. Reasons for Monitoring Listed
Pathogens and Indicators
EPA would require monitoring of
Giardia concentrations because this
pathogen causes more reported
waterborne disease outbreaks than any
other single known pathogen and is
more resistant to environmental stresses
and disinfection than almost all other
known waterborne pathogens. The
Agency would require monitoring of
Cryptosporidium because this pathogen
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6337
has caused major waterborne disease
outbreaks in the United States, England,
and elsewhere, and is even more
resistant to disinfection than is Giardia.
Cryptosporidium may also not be as
readily removed by filtration as Giardia,
given its smaller size.
A; number of enteric viruses have
caused waterborne disease and they
may be responsible for many, if not
most, of the outbreaks where a causative
agent was not specifically identified
(about half of all reported outbreaks).
EPA believes, however, that it would be
prohibitively expensive to monitor for
all of them, using current technology.
Moreover, adequate analytical
methodology is not yet available for
routine analysis for many of them. For
this reason, the Agency would require
systems to monitor total culturable
viruses (as determined by BGM (Buffalo
Green Monkey) tissue cultures), a group
of enteric viruses that are commonly
found in fecally polluted waters and
which EPA believes are at least
somewhat representative of other
pathogenic enteric viruses. Total
culturable viruses contain some strains
that are capable of causing waterborne
disease/have been widely studied for
many years, and analytical methods are
far better denned for them than is the
case for many specific enteric viruses.
,. EPA believes that monitoring for total
culturable viruses is useful both because
this group of viruses contains pathogens
and is a potential indicator for other
viral pathogens.
Some individuals believe that systems
which satisfactorily control for Giardia
cysts will adequately control for
pathogenic viruses, since viruses
generally are much less resistant to
disinfection than are Giardia cysts, and
thus virus monitoring is not warranted
under this rulemaking. They point out
that, based on the Guidance Manual to
the Surface Water Treatment
Requirements (EPA, 1991), the
disinfection CT values (disinfection
concentration in mg/1 x disinfection
contact time in minutes) for achieving
the SWTR compliance level inactivation
of viruses, which is based on hepatitis
A inactivation data, is about one to two
orders of magnitude below that for
achieving the SWTR compliance level of
inactivation of Giardia.
EPA, however, does not believe that
sufficient data are yet available to
conclude that the Giardia density in
source waters is an adequate gauge to
define the necessary treatment for
viruses in all types of source waters.
The Agency is not aware of data on
relative densities between Giardia and
viruses in source water. If the virus
concentration in some source waters
greatly exceeds that of Giardia, and
some pathogenic viruses are
significantly more resistant to
disinfection than is hepatitis A, an
adequate treatment for Giardia may not
result in adequate control of viruses.
Moreover, the Agency notes that viruses
have often been detected in fully treated
waters (i.e., coagulation, sedimentation,
filtration, and disinfection) (Gerba and
Rose, 1990; Payment et al., 1985; Hurst,
1991), and it is not aware of any data
demonstrating that viruses in raw water
or treated water are usually or always
accompanied by Giardia cysts. The
Agency also notes that the CT values for
viruses in the Guidance Manual to the
SWTR (EPA, 1991) were based upon
laboratory studies on free (i.e., non-
aggregated) viruses; in environmental
waters, viruses are usually aggregated or
associated with cell debris, some of
which may not be removed entirely by
filtration processes. Such cell-associated
aggregates are considerably more
resistant to disinfection than free
viruses (Williams, 1985; Sobsey et al.,
1991). Moreover, some pathogenic
enteric viruses may be substantially
more resistant to disinfection than
others (Keswick et al., 1985).
Because of these uncertainties, it may
not be appropriate to assume that by
controlling Giardia densities, systems
will adequately control viral pathogens.
EPA needs monitoring data from many
systems nationwide to determine the
level of treatment needed to control
viruses. Specifically, the Agency needs
to determine the extent to which
Giardia are present in source waters
when viruses are present. The Agency
also needs to determine what minimum
level of disinfection inactivation is
necessary for surface water supplies to
ensure adequate virus control,
regardless of Giardia densities. These
data will allow the Agency to determine
whether a system that consistently
provides an overall Giardia reduction of
3-logs (of which at least 0.5-log is due
to disinfection alone) or any greater
reduction levl^l for Giardia, will also
consistently provide an adequate
control for viruses, especially hi cases
where virus densities in source waters
are much higher than those for Giardia.
Information collected under this rule
would provide part of these data. The
Agency believes that these data, along
with a more intensive voluntary
monitoring effort among a small number
of systems, should clarify this situation
sufficiently to allow it to develop
suitable revisions to the SWTR.
With regard to bacterial pathogens,
EPA believes that pathogenic protozoa
and many waterborne viruses are more
resistant to environmental stress and
disinfection than most enteric bacteria
that cause waterborne disease. Thus a
system that protects the public from
pathogenic protozoa and viruses will
concurrently protect them from most
pathogenic bacteria (except possibly for
those bacteria that can proliferate within
the distribution system or which have
special protective factors). For this
reason, EPA would not require these
systems to monitor pathogenic bacteria
in the source water or in treated water.
While EPA would not require systems
to monitor pathogenic bacteria, the
Agency would require them to monitor
potential bacterial indicators for
waterborne pathogens in source water
and treated water. Under this rule, EPA
is proposing to require systems to
monitor for total coliforms and either
fecal coliforms or E. coli. Total coliforms
and fecal coliforms have been used
widely for decades to assess source
water quality, testing for these two
groups of bacteria is very simple and
inexpensive, and systems are familiar
with these tests. Total coliforms are
usually much more numerous in water
than fecal coliforms, and therefore
enumeration in source waters and
treated water is more sensitive than
with fecal coliforms. However, fecal
coliforms are a better indicator of fresh
fecal contamination than are total
coliforms. Because the bacterium E. coli
is more closely related to fresh fecal
pollution and to gastrointestinal illness
among bathers than are fecal coliforms,
EPA would allow a system to analyze
fair E. coli in lieu of fecal coliforms.
EPA solicits comment on the
requirement to monitor the specific
pathogens and bacterial indicators
mentioned above. The Agency
specifically seeks comment on whether
to require systems to monitor both fecal
coliforms and E. coli, rather than one or
the other. In addition, the Agency may
include a requirement to monitor for
two other potential indicators—
Clostridium perfringens {C. perfringens)
ari.d coliphage which are discussed
below.
Clostridium perfringens. C.
perfringens is a bacterium that is
common in the intestinal tract of warm-
blooded animals. This organism forms
am endospore in the environment that is
extremely resistant to environmental
stresses and disinfection. Of the more
than 60 species of Clostridium, C.
perfringens is the one most consistently
associated with human fecal wastes
(Cabelli, 1977). It is consistently present
in human feces at a relatively high
density (Bisson and Cabelli, 1980) and
appears to be excreted in.greater
numbers than are fecal pathogens
(NATO, 1984). There is controversy over
-------
6338
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
whether other important animal hosts
exist, since C. perfringens spores are
widely found in terrestrial and aquatic
environments (Cabelli, 1977). The
survivability of C. perfringens spores in
water and their resistance to treatment
compared to the pathogens is much
greater than other indicators (Bonde,
1977), except possibly for Giardia and
Cryptosporidium. Analysis is relatively
easy and inexpensive. The European
Community has a supplementary
standard for the endospores of sulfite-
reducing Clostridium for drinking
waters.
Recently, Payment and Franco (1993)
published a paper that showed that C.
perfringens may be a suitable indicator
for viral and protozoan pathogens in
both raw water and filtered water. In
this study, the investigators collected
large-volume samples from three water
treatment plants and analyzed them for
Giardia cysts, Cryptosporidium oocysts,
cultivable human enteric viruses,
Clostridium, and somatic and male-
specific coliphage. They found that
Clostridium densities were significantly
correlated with the densities of viruses,
cysts, and oocysts in river water and
with viruses and oocysts (but not
Giardia cysts) in filtered water.
For the above reasons, EPA is
considering a requirement that systems
monitor their source and filtered water
for C. perfringens at the same frequency
as is being proposed for the other
organisms. C. perfringens may be
appropriate as a low cost monitoring
indicator for estimating pathogen
densities in the source water and/or for
defining treatment effectiveness. If
feasible, such an indicator could greatly
reduce monitoring costs for determining
appropriate levels of treatment to
address microbial concerns. This would
be of special benefit for smaller systems
under the long-term ESWTR. EPA
solicits comment on this issue.
Coliphage. The Agency also seeks
comment on the utility of coliphage as
an indicator of pathogen presence.
Coliphages, which are viruses that infect
the bacterium E. coli, are far simpler to
analyze than other viruses and are, like
E. coli, generally associated with fecal
contamination. They have often been
discussed as a possible indicator of
treatment effectiveness for enteric
viruses. Coliphages are commonly
categorized into two groups: the somatic
phage and the male-specific (or F-
spocific) phage. The somatic phage gain
entry into E. coli cells via the cell wall,
while the male-specific phage gain entry
only through the sex-pili of those E. coli
cells that have them (referred to as male
cells).
Because Coliphages are so much
simpler to analyze than human viruses,
EPA wants to determine whether
systems can use coliphages to indicate
the presence of the human viruses in
source waters and filtered water. Data
on relative densities in natural waters
are sparse. Somatic phages are common
in the feces of humans and other
animals but, unlike human viruses,
some of them apparently can multiply
in natural water, probably in species
other than E. coli. Male-specific phages
are not common in humans and other
animals, but are common in sewage,
suggesting they can multiply in the
sewerage system (IAWPRC, 1991). Data
on the relative resistance and removal of
coliphages and human viruses during
the water treatment process is also
scarce, and the data which exist are
inconsistent, especially for the somatic
phages (IAWPRC, 1991). Some of the
male-specific phages (e.g., MS2),
however, appear to be more resistant to
chemical disinfection than most
waterborne pathogens (Sobsey, 1989).
One recent study suggests that
coliphages are suitable as an indicator
for viruses, at least in filtered water. In
the Payment and Franco (1993) study
indicated above, the densities of somatic
coliphages (E. coli CN13 host) were
statistically correlated with human
enteric viruses and Cryptosporidium
oocysts (but not Giardia cysts) in
filtered water, and not in river water.
Male-specific coliphages (Salmonella
typhimurium WG49 host) were
correlated with human enteric viruses
in filtered water, but not in river water.
The male-specific coliphages were also
correlated with Giardia cysts, but not
Cryptosporidium oocysts, in river water.
In another study, Havelaar et al.
(1993) compared the concentrations of
culturable viruses (BGM cell line) with
those of thermotolerant coliforms, fecal
streptococci, and male-specific RNA
phages (Salmonella typhimurium WG49
host) for a variety of water types. The
investigators found that the male-
specific phages were significantly
correlated (significant at P <1%) with
culturable virus concentrations in river
water, coagulated river water, and lake
water, but not for raw and biologically
treated sewage. They conclude that
male-specific phages may be a suitable
indicator for enteric viruses in fresh
waters.
If data suggest that one or both groups
of coliphages are adequate as an
indicator of pathogen presence for
source waters and/or treatment
effectiveness, EPA may, in the long-term
ESWTR, require systems, especially
those serving populations fewer than
10,000, to monitor these organisms as
one basis for determining what level of
treatment is needed to safeguard the
drinking water. The Agency solicits
comment on this issue. '
4. Rationale for Frequency of Microbial
Monitoring
The rule would require systems
serving more than 100,000 people to
monitor monthly for a consecutive
period of 18 months, and for systems
serving between 10,000-100,000 people
to monitor every two months for a
consecutive 12 month period, between
[insert month beginning three months
following promulgation date] and March
1997. Moreover, unlike larger systems, •
systems serving between 10,000— '
100,000 people would not be required to
monitor treated water.
The extended interval of time within:
which the monitoring can occur is to
allow adequate lab capacity to be
developed and approved by EPA. EPA
encourages that monitoring begin as
soon as die system identifies an EPA
approved lab for conducting the
analysis. Criteria that EPA will use to
approve laboratories for conducting ICR
analysis are discussed later. Any D/DBP
monitoring required under this rule
should not commence until the
microbial monitoring can begin to allow
EPA to characterize how treatment
concurrently affects microbial and DBF
occurrence. ' ,
The microbial monitoring under this
rule would provide EPA with over -
15,000 data points for each monitored
organism in source water'(about 8,000
data points for viruses) and probably up
to 4,000 data points for each monitored
organism in treated water. EPA believes
that this amount of data, complemented
with additional research, will be
sufficient for allowing the Agency to
accurately assess the pathogen exposure
and decipher the relationships in source
water densities among pathogens and
between pathogens and their potential
indicators. Importantly, the data
provided by this monitoring schedule
would allow the Agency to establish a
database on pathogen and indicator
densities and their variations with time,
including seasonal variations, and thus
allow the Agency to revise the SWTR,
if appropriate, in a reasonable manner.
Under this rule, all monitoring for
microbiological related parameters
would end no later than March 31,
1997, with a substantial portion of this
monitoring completed much sooner.
EPA expects monitoring completed
during this period will allow the
Agency to a) develop the most suitable
revisions to the SWTR, if required, and
promulgate such a rule by December
1996, and b) for individual systems,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6339
provide sufficient data to establish an
appropriate level of treatment by June
1998, the effective date of the interim
ESWTR that was agreed to by the
Negotiating Committee (should such a
rule become necessary). The schedule
for such rule development is further
described iri section III.C of this
preamble.
5. Rationale for Reporting Physical Data
and Engineering Information
In addition to requiring systems to
monitor for specific microorganisms, the
rule would also require each system to
provide certain information to EPA
about the nature of the source water and
treatment processes. Systems serving
greater than 100,000 or more people
would be required to submit the data
indicated in Table III.6 (see section
III.B.3) using data entry software
developed by EPA. This.information, in
conjunction with the microbial
occurrence data indicated in Appendix
A of the rule and DBF occurrence data
indicated in Tables HI.1-III.5 (see
section HI.B.2), would be used by EPA
to analyze relationships between source
water quality, treatment characteristics,
and finished water quality as it pertains
to both pathogens and DBPs. EPA would
use the information collected in Table
III.6 and from other research to predict
the ability of systems to comply with
different ESWTR regulatory options, i.e.,
achieve different levels of pathogen
removal and inactivation, either within
existing design and operation capacity,
or with system upgrades.
The information cited above would
assist EPA in evaluating the monitoring
data and treatment removal efficiencies,
thus clarifying pathogen exposure levels
in finished water entering the
distribution system under real world
conditions. This would allow EPA to
develop more refined regulations or
guidance to limit pathogen exposure.
The information would also help
systems comply with the forthcoming
D/DBP Rule without undermining
pathogen control.
With regard to treatment processes,
EPA would require information on the
type of disinfectant used and its dosage,
contact time, and pH; and the type of
filter process used and the media size,
depth, and hydraulic loading rate. This
information, along with information on
pathogen densities in the source water
and treated water (including particle
size count data if this monitoring option
is adopted), would help the Agency
determine the validity of existing
treatment efficiency assumptions and
models for pathogens.
EPA would also require systems that
do not detect Giardia, Cryptosporidium,
or viruses in a sample to report the
sample volume used and.the organism
detection limit. This information would
allow EPA to determine the maximum
theoretical pathogen density in that '
sample.
EPA solicits comment on the need to
report the listed physical data and
engineering information, and whether
additional reporting requirements are
warranted.
Systems serving between 10,000 and
100,000 people would not have the
extensive DBP occurrence data or
finished water microbial data required
of large systems and, therefore, would
only be required to submit part of the
information in Appendix A of the rule
(i.e., raw water occurrence information
for Giardia, Cryptosporidium, total
coliforms, and fecal coliforms or E.coli)
and treatment data as it pertains to
microbial concerns (Appendix B of the
rule). The purpose of the treatment
plant information is to enable EPA to
predict the national impact on systems
in this size category for meeting
different ESWTR regulatory options.
The Negotiating Committee agreed
that all systems of the pertinent size
categories be required to submit
physical and engineering data even
though this might provide more data
than was needed to develop national
cost estimates. Nevertheless, the
Negotiating Committee believed the
requirement to be appropriate because
of the large number of systems with
diverse characteristics and of the
difficulties in otherwise equitably
funding the collection of a smaller but
still large and representative data set.
EPA solicits comment on whether
alternative more efficient means for
obtaining treatment plant information
are available for systems serving
between 10,000 and 100,000 people. For
example, is it appropriate to only
require the treatment plant data from a
random subset of systems in this size
category (e.g., from 200 systems), and to
extrapolate such data to all the other
systems in this size category? Would it
be appropriate to assume that systems in
the size category 10,000 to 100,000
have, in general, the same design and
operating conditions as those hi the size
category 100,000 and above, and
therefore could avoid submitting the
required treatment plant information?
6. Analytical Methods
General. EPA must approve all
analytical methods used in this rule. In
the present mlemaking, the Agency
would require all systems to use the
same methods for the analysis of
Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and viruses
to facilitate comparisons among the
systems.
Total coliforms, fecal coliforms, and
E. coli. Analytical methods for
monitoring total coliforms and fecal
colifornis in source water are already
approved by the SWTR under
§ 141.74(a), and would be used for
monitoring under the present
rulemaking. For monitoring E. coli in
source waters, EPA would approve the
following methods, all of which have
been approved for detecting E: coli in
drinking water under the Total Coliform
Rule (§ 141.21(f))i
(1) EC medium supplemented with 50
ug/ml of 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-D-
glucuronide (MUG), as specified in
§ 141.21(f)(6)(i). In this method, each
total coliform-positive broth culture
from the Multiple Tube Fermentation
(MTF) Technique (§ 141.74(a)(2)) or
each total coliform-positive colony from
the Membrane Filter Technique
(§ 141.74(a)(2)) is transferred to 10 ml of
EC + MUG. After incubation, the
inoculated medium is examined with an
ultraviolet light. If fluorescence is
observed, the medium contains E. coli.
(2) Nutrient agar supplemented with
100 ug/ml of MUG, as specified in
§ 141.21(f)(6)(ii), with the additional
requirement that E. coli colonies be
counted.
(3) Minimal Medium ONPG-MUG
Test, often referred to as the Colilert
Test, as specified in § 141.74(a)(2), with
the additional requirement that total
coliform-positive tubes be examined
with an ultraviolet light. If fluorescence
is observed, the medium contains E.
coli.
Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and total
culturable viruses. In August 1993, EPA
sponsored a workshop of invited experts
in Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and virus
analysis and quality assurance
procedures to help the Agency develop
standardized methods for these
organisms for use with the ICR.
Workshop participants included
representatives from academia; water
industry; commercial laboratories; and
federal, State and local governments. As
the basis for the discussion, the
workshop used the Giardia/
Cryptosporidium method published by
ASTM (1992) and the method to be
published shortly in the 18th edition
Supplement to Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. Two virus methods in the
lath edition of Standard Methods
(Method 9510C for virus collection and
elution; Method 9510G for virus assay)
(APHA, 1992) were used. The methods
in ASTM (1992) and Standard Methods
were used as the basis for this
discussion because these texts are
-------
6340 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
highly respected and widely used
references that have heen peer-reviewed
throughout the scientific community.
The workshop generally recommended
use of the methods above, but, because
these methods allow many sub-options,
decided to refine and standardize them
to achieve more precise comparisons
among systems under the ICR (USEPA,
1993a).
The method for Giardia/
Cryptosporidium, as revised, is in
Appendix C of the proposed rule. This
method includes sample collection,
purification, and microscopic assay, and
allows the density of Giardia and
Cryptosporidium to be determined
simultaneously on the same sample.
The microscopic assay includes the use
of epifluoresconce along with
differential-interference- (or Hoffman
Modulation) contrast optics to identify
morphological characteristics.
One issue with regard to the Giardia/
Cryptosporidium method concerns how
to express the results. The total number
of cysts and oocysts are counted, based
on immunofluorescence, size, shape,
and presence of internal structures.
Then the total number of cysts with
internal structures is tallied. The issue
is what terminology to use for these two
steps. One procedure is to categorize the
first step as a "presumptive" test and
the second step as the "confirmed" test.
The terminology "confirmed" could be
used if at least two internal structures
are identified as being Giardia/
Cryptosporidium cysts/oocysts. The
second procedure is to categorize the
first step as the "total number of cysts
and/or oocysts per 100L" (which would
be equivalent to "presumptive") and the
second step as the "total number of
cysts and/or oocysts with internal
structures." The terminology "with
internal structures" could be used if at
least one internal structure is identified
as being Giardia/Cryptosporidium cysts/
oocysts.
The rationale for considering the two
steps as presumptive and confirmed is:
(1) Some algal and yeast cells recovered
with this procedure cross-react with the
Srotozoan monoclonal antibodies used,
!) many algae and other particles
autofluoresce and thereby confuse the
analyst, and (3) depending upon the
criteria that will be used for defining
level of treatment requirements in the
interim ESVVTR, use of the terminology
"confirmed" may reduce the number of
false positives and thereby not lead to
excessive levels of treatment to achieve
the desired health risk goal. However,
the use of these terms is somewhat
inaccurate in that it diminishes the
importance of the total count (i.e., the
presumptive test). The confirmed test
only reflects those particles where
internal structures can be specifically
observed, which may represent only a
small fraction of the cysts/oocysts on
the slide.
EPA requests comment on which
terminology is most suitable for
referring to the two steps.
Other methods for the assay of
Giardia and Cryptosporidium are
currently being developed. One of these
assays (the electrotation assay) is based
on the observation that particles in a
rotating electric field also rotate if the
frequency is right. In addition to this
assay, other potential assays for the
protozoa include polymerase chain
reaction and flow cytometry. The
Agency requests comment about the
most appropriate means for
incorporating new and easier analytical
methods for Giardia and
Cryptosporidium into the ICR.
The method for viruses, as revised, is
in Appendix D of the proposed rule.
This method relies on a most probable
number technique using BGM tissue
culture monolayers, with cytopathic
effect (CPE) as the sole enumeration
endpoint. Attendees at the workshop
considered plaque-forming units (PFU)
as an endpoint, but rejected it. Although
the PFU endpoint can be determined
without the use of a microscope, unlike
the CPE endpoint, it may not be as
sensitive as CPE, i.e., use of CPE should
result in greater virus densities. The
workshop members determined that
sensitivity was more important than
precision in quantitation for comparing
virus and protozoan data to determine
the appropriateness of using Giardia
and possibly Cryptosporidium as the
primary target organism(s) for defining
adequacy of treatment.
Clostndium perfringens. If EPA
decides to require systems to monitor
Clostridium perfringens, as was
discussed in Section EGAS above, the
Agency would also specify a method for
this bacterium. The Agency believes
that the most appropriate method is a
membrane filter procedure using M-CP
medium (Bisson and Cabelli, 1979),
possibly as modified by Armon and
Payment (1988). The Agency solicits
comment on whether this method is
most suitable for monitoring
Clostridium perfringens. The Agency
notes that this organism must be grown
under strict anaerobic conditions (i.e.,
without oxygen).
Coliphage. If EPA decides to require
the monitoring of somatic coliphages
and/or male-specific coliphage, as was
discussed in Section MAS, the Agency
believes that the most appropriate
method is a simple agar overlay
procedure. For somatic phage testing,
the Agency believes that the most
suitable host is E. coli C. The Agency
solicits comment on whether this
procedure and host are most suitable for
monitoring the somatic coliphage. The
Agency also seeks comment, with data,
on what bacterial host is most suitable
for monitoring male-specific coliphages.
The method for sample collection,
sample processing, and assay for
somatic and male-specific coliphage is
presented in Appendix D|of the
proposed rule.
EPA requests comment on the
appropriateness of the above methods.
7. Laboratory Approval
General. EPA is developing a program
for approving laboratories to analyze the
pathogens that would be monitored
under this rule. This program would
ensure that these laboratories are
competent to perform the analyses.
Analytical skill is especially important
for the difficult and sophisticated
processing and analyses specified for
the total culturable viruses and Giardia
and Cryptosporidium. Another
prominent reason for approving
laboratories is to ensure that laboratory
procedures are as standardized as
possible for uniform data comparison
among systems.
Currently, EPA has a laboratory
certification program for drinking water
analyses. All laboratories that analyze
drinking water samples to determine
compliance with MCLs must be certified
by EPA or the State, as specified by 40
CFR 142.10(b)(4) and 141.28. Under this
program, EPA certifies the principal
State laboratory and, with certain
exceptions (see 40 CFR 142.10), each
State certifies all drinking water
laboratories within the State.
Laboratories certified to perform
analysis for coliforms under the Total
Coliform Rule would be approved to
analyze for total coliforms, fecal
coliforms, and E. coli urider the ICR
without further action. The current
program does not address pathogens.
Rather than broaden the present
laboratory certification program to
include Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and
the viruses, EPA believes that it would
be more appropriate to develop a
separate program and to differentiate the
two programs by using the term
laboratory "approval" instead of
"certification" to. refer to laboratories
performing pathogen analyses required
by the ICR. The rationale for this
approach is that (1) EPA expects that
only a small number of laboratories will
be qualified to perform analyses for the
protozoa and viruses because of the
complexity of the methods, (2) few
States and EPA Regions are currently
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6341
able to certify laboratories for the
pathogens of interest, and (3) the short
time constraints for implementing this
rule and the short-term nature of die
sampling (up to 18 mondis) do not
provide time for a full certification
program.
Nevertheless, EPA is proposing to use
several major elements of the current
certification program in its program to
"approve" laboratories for pathogen
analysis, including performance
evaluation (PE) samples, training, and
on-site evaluations. If an interim or
long-term ESWTR were to require some
systems to monitor die same pathogens
as tiiose specified by the ICR, tiien the
laboratory approval criteria would
probably be incorporated into the
drinking water laboratory certification
program.
Performance evaluation samples.
Under the laboratory approval program
proposed herein, a laboratory would
need to analyze satisfactorily a set of PE
samples to become approved and
subsequent sets of PE samples (e.g., 6,
12,18 mondis) to maintain approval.
Workshop participants recommended
that a set of PE samples for Giardia/
Cryptosporidium consist of (1) a mixture
of Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium
oocysts, (2) a mixture of Giardia cysts
and Cryptosporidium oocysts plus algal
cells, and (3) algal cells only (negative
control). According to workshop
recommendations, a set of PE samples
for viruses should include virus samples
of varying titers (concentrations) that
die laboratory would process as if diey
were filter eluates. Currently, EPA is
developing a PE sample program
intended to satisfy these
recommendations.
Training, hi addition to PE samples, at
least one principal analyst in each
laboratory would need to complete an
EPA-specified training course or meet
die requirements of equivalent training,
.as defined by the Agency. Aldiough
EPA has not yet defined "equivalent
training", die Agency is considering an
approach involving a training video or
an apprenticeship widi an expert. EPA
is developing two training courses—one
in Giardia/Cryptosporidium analysis,
and the other in environmental virus
analysis. Each of these courses would
also include training in sample
collection.
On-site evaluation. EPA is also
proposing to require a laboratory to pass
an on-site evaluation before receiving
approval. The EPA Regional
Administrator would be die ultimate
approval audiority. The Agency would
develop criteria for determining
whedier an individual has die necessary
expertise to conduct die intended tests.
The Agency has drafted a laboratory
approval manual diat lists die specific
criteria diat an on-site evaluator would
examine. These criteria are based on
workshop recommendations. This
manual, which is available in die Water
Docket, includes a number of
certification criteria from Chapters ffl
and V of EPA's laboratory certification
manual (USEPA, 1990). For example, as
part of die on-site evaluation, die
certification officer would ensure diat
die laboratory has prepared and is using
a written laboratory Quality Assurance
Plan. This plan is described in EPA's
laboratory certification manual (Chapter
HI). Some draft criteria pertaining to die
qualifications of laboratory personnel
are indicated below.
For Giardia and Cryptosporidium
analysis:
• Technician: This person performs
at the bench level and is actively
involved in collecting samples,
extracting filters, and/or processing die
filter eluent for Giardia/
Cryptosporidium analysis. The
technician must have two years of
college (full time) in life sciences or a
related field.
• Analyst: This person must have
two years of college (full time) in die life
sciences or a related field and have at
least diree mondis experience in
examining indirect fluorescent antibody
stains under die microscope.
• Principal Analyst/Supervisor: This
person is a qualified, experienced
microbiologist widi a minimum of a
B.A./B.S. degree in microbiology or a
closely related field. The principal
analyst must have completed die ICR
protozoan training course (mentioned
above) or have equivalent experience, as
approved by EPA.
For virus analysis:
• Technician: This person extracts
die filter and processes die sample, but
does not perform tissue culture work.
The technician must have at least diree
mondis experience in filter extraction of
virus samples and sample processing.
• Analyst: This person performs at
die bench level and is involved in all
aspects of die analysis, including
sample collection, filter extraction,
sample processing, and assay. The
analyst must have two years of college
(full time) in the life sciences or at least
six mondis of bench experience in cell
culturing and animal virus analyses.
• Principal Analyst/Supervisor: This
person is a qualified, experienced
microbiologist who oversees die entire
analysis. The individual must have a
B.A./B.S. degree in die life sciences
widi diree years experience in cell
culture and animal virus analyses. This
individual must have completed die ICR
environmental virology training course
or have equivalent experience, as
approved by EPA.
Because of die tight time constraints
arid die limited number of national
experts capable of participating in on-
sitte evaluations, EPA proposes to give
highest priority in evaluating tiiose
laboratories (e.g., commercial, academic,
utility, State) that (1) have been
analyzing Giardia and Cryptosporidium
or virus samples for at least one year, (2)
have nationally recognized experts in
protozoan or virus analyses, or (3) have
die technical capability, capacity, and
willingness to analyze at least four
samples/mondi under die ICR
requirements for Giardia and
Cryptosporidium or viruses.
Laboratory capacity. If, following die
beginning effective date of this rule, a
system cannot locate an approved
laboratory to analyze its water samples
for die indicated pathogens, die system
would be required to notify EPA in
writing (see Section III.C). EPA will
inform die system which laboratories
are available for performing the
requisite analysis, or when new
approved laboratories become available
to do such analysis.
EPA solicits comment on die
approach above for approving
laboratories and, more broadly, on the
most appropriate means for ensuring
diat laboratories performing the
pathogen analyses are competent.
Laboratories wishing to become
approved for doing these analyses
should contact ICR Laboratory
Coordinator, USEPA, Office of Ground
Water and Drinking Water, Technical
Support Division, 26 West Martin
Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio
45268, for an application form to initiate
the approval process.
8. Quality Assurance
Sample collection. For the collection
of samples for pathogens, die laboratory
would document that each sample
collector, eitiier from the laboratory or
the system, is properly trained. Witiiout
such documentation, the laboratory
would not proceed widi analyzing the
system's samples. EPA encourages
approved laboratories to provide
adequate training, if needed, not only to
laboratory sample collectors, but to
individuals at client water systems who
collect tiieir own samples for pathogens.
Other criteria for sampling are included
in die draft laboratory approval manual
mentioned in Section 7, above.
-Data reporting. EPA proposes to
require a laboratory to submit data
results to both die Agency and die client
system for die pathogens. The water
system would also be required to submit
-------
6342
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
the same data results to the Agency. By
receiving and comparing both data
submissions, EPA can reduce reporting
errors. EPA would require that systems
report data in a computer-readable form;
in addition, systems serving at least
100,000 people would be required to
report data in an EPA-specified
electronic format (see Section in.B6 for
more discussion). EPA encourages
systems serving 10-100,000 people to
also submit data using the electronic
format.
EPA also proposes to require a
laboratory, when the laboratory submits
pathogen data to the Agency, to include
its results on the most recent set of PE
samples for that pathogen. This quality
assurance criterion would allow EPA to
assess the quality of that data, especially
if the data appear to be atypical or
equivocal.
B. Stage 2 Disinfection By-Products Rule
1. Need for Additional Data
When drinking water is disinfected,
the organic material and bromide that
are naturally present in the water react
with the disinfectant to form hundreds
of DBFs. Only a small subset of these
chemicals have been identified due to
the complexities of measuring them.
Many of them are not stable, so they
decompose during the sampling or
analytical process. Others are polar and
so are not easily extracted from the
water for further analysis.
Most of the DBFs that can be
measured In drinking water (i.e., there
are analytical techniques available to
detect them) are byproducts from the
use of chlorine. However, there is
limited occurrence information on even
these DBFs, so the extent of exposure
cannot be estimated. Only a subset of
them have been studied to determine
whether exposure to them presents a
risk to health.
Several DBFs were included on the
1991 Drinking Water Priority last (56 FR
1470; January 14,1991), as candidates
for future regulations. During
development of the proposed Stage 1D/
DBF Rule, the Negotiating Committee
did not believe there were adequate data
available to address most of the DBFs on
the Priority List, so MCLs were
recommended for a subset of the
Priority List DBFs (trihalomethanes
[THMs], haloacetic acids [HAAs],
chlorite and bromate). The Stage 1 D/
DBF Rule would address the "other"
DBFs in two ways: 1) EPA would
assume that control of other Priority List
DBFs would occur if systems could
meet the MCLs for THMs and HAAs;
and 2) EPA would require some surface
water systems using conventional
treatment to implement optimized
coagulation to remove as much organic
material as possible before disinfection,
thereby minimizing the formation of all
DBFs. Total organic carbon (TOG) was
designated as the surrogate for the
organic precursor material removed
during optimized coagulation.
Many members of the Negotiating
Committee expressed concern on the
adequacy of data to support the use of
surrogate limits such as TOG for
inclusion in the Stage 1 regulatory
criteria. The lack of field data led the
Negotiating Committee to base its
decisions on the Stage 1D/DBP Rule
using a water treatment plant model to
predict DBF concentrations resulting
from various changes in treatment
practices.
•The THM and HAA compliance
monitoring requirements being
considered for proposal in the Stage 1
D/DBP Rule were modeled after the
requirements of the current Total
Trihalomethane (TTHM) Rule (44 FR
68624, November 1979). Some members
of the Negotiating Committee were
concerned that quarterly monitoring for
THMs and HAAs would not accurately
reflect consumer exposure to DBFs. An
under-prediction of consumer exposure
would be especially serious if research
indicated there were short-term adverse
health effects from exposure to DBFs.
Field data were not available to assess
the spatial and seasonal variability of
DBF concentrations within distribution
systems. Data were also lacking
concerning the usefulness of surrogates,
such as total organic halide (TOX), as
tools for reducing compliance
monitoring costs.
As a result of the above uncertainties,
the Negotiating Committee strongly
recommended that additional
information be collected and analyzed
to assist in the development of a Stage
2 D/DBP Rule. Field data are needed to:
(1) Characterize source water parameters
that influence DBF formation, (2)
determine the concentrations of DBFs in
drinking water, (3) refine models for
predicting DBF formation based on
treatment and water quality parameters,
and (4) establish cost-effective
monitoring requirements that are
protective of the public health. Today's
proposed rule would provide EPA with
the data necessary to accomplish the
above tasks.
2. Monitoring and Reporting
Requirements and Rationale
The rule would require ;all community
and nontransient, noncorrimunity
systems serving at least 100,000 persons
to: (1) Perform the monitoring
summarized in Table III.1-.2 and (2)
report treatment plant operational data
specified in Table m.6. Treatment
plants that use alternate disinfectants
(chloramines, ozone, or chlorine
dioxide) or hypochlorite solutions
would also be required to perform
monitoring for DBFs that are of
particular concern for the disinfectant
being used. Community and
nontransient, noncommupity systems
that use groundwater not under the
direct influence of surface water and
serve between 50,000 and 99,999
persons would be required to conduct
monthly monitoring for total organic
carbon (TOG) in water entering the
distribution system. ;
TABLE 111.1.—SAMPLING POINTS FOR ALL SYSTEMS
Sampling point
Analyses i
Frequency
Treatment plant influent
Treatment plant Influent (optional for waters with high oxidant
demand due to the presence of inorganics).
Treatment plant influent
After air stripping
Before and after filtration
At oach point of disinfection 2
At end of each process In which chlorine Is applied
After filtration (if chlorine is applied prior to filtration)
pH, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, calcium and total hard-
ness, TOG, UV2S4, bromide, and ammonia. !
Optional oxidant demand test
TOX ••
Ammonia '••
pH, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, calcium and total hard-
ness, TOG, and UV2S4.
pH, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, calcium and total hard-
ness, TOO, and UV2S4.
Disinfectant residual3
THMs. HAAs(6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, and TOX ...
Monthly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6343
TABLE 111.1.—SAMPLING POINTS FOR ALL SYSTEMS—Continued
Sampling point
Entry point to distribution system
Entry point to distribution system
4 THM Compliance Monitoring Points in Distribution System (1
sample point will be chosen to correspond to the SDS sam-
ple, * 1 will be chosen at a maximum detention time, and the
remaining 2 will be representative of the distribution system).
Analyses;1
pH alkalinity turbidity temperature calcium and total hard-
ness, TOC, UV2s4, and disinfectant residual a.
THMs HAAs(6) HANs CP HK CH TOX and SDS4
THMs, HAAs (6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, TOX, pH, Temperature,
Alkalinity, Total Hardness and Disinfectant Residuals.
Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly.
1 TOC is total organic carbon. UV2s4 is absorbance of ultraviolet light at 254 nanometers. THMs are chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform. HAAs(6) is mono-, dK and trichloroacetic acid; mono- and di- bromoacetic acid; and bromochloroacetic
acid. HANs are dichloro-, trichloro-, bromochloro-, and dibromo- acetonitrile. CP, is chloropicrin. HK is 1,1-dichloropropanone and 1.1,1-
trichloropropanone. CH is chloral hydrate. TOX is total organic halide. SDS is the simulated distribution system test.
2 For utilities using ozone or chlorine dioxide, Tables III.4 and III.5, respectively, show additional monitoring requirements at this sampling point.
3 Free chlorine residual will be measured in systems using free chlorine as the residual disinfectant; total chlorine residual will be measured in
systems using chloramines as the residual disinfectant.
o The SDS (simulated distribution system test) sample will be stored in such a manner that it can be compared to the results from one of the
distribution system sampling points. This distribution system sampling point will be selected using the following criteria: 1) No additional disinfect-
ant added between the treatment plant and this point, 2) Approximate detention time of water is available, and 3) No blending with water from
other sources. The SDS sample will be analyzed for THMs, HAAs(6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, TOX, pH and disinfectant residual.
5 Five THM samples.
Monitoring of source water quality.
EPA would require all community and
nontransient noncommunity water
systems serving at least 100,000 persons
to conduct monthly monitoring of the
raw water entering each treatment plant
for pH, alkalinity, turbidity,
temperature, calcium and total
hardness, total organic carbon (TOC),
ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm
(UV2S4), bromide ion, and ammonia. If
the raw water were to contain a
sufficiently high concentration of
inorganic chemicals (i.e., hydrogen
sulfide, iron, manganese) to cause a high
oxidant demand, then the system would
be encouraged to monitor for this
inorganic oxidant demand at the same
frequency. Systems would collect
samples from the plant influent after
water from multiple sources is blended.
The sampling point would be before the
first treatment step to characterize the
chemical quality of the water being
treated. A system that uses ground water
not under the direct influence of surface
water and with multiple wells in the
same aquifer would only be required to
collect raw water samples from
representative wells in the two aquifers
serving the largest portion of the
system's population.
The above parameters were selected
because they influence the quantity and
chemical character of the DBFs formed
when the disinfectant is added to the
water. High oxidant demand water
should be characterized because the
availability of the disinfectant for
reaction with organic material to form
DBFs will depend on the amount of
disinfectant that is consumed by
inorganic chemicals. EPA solicits
comments on the definition of high
oxidant demand water and the type(s) of
measurements necessary to characterize
it-
Monthly sampling at the treatment
plant influent would provide an
estimate of the variability in raw water
quality. EPA would use data from this
portion of the rule to characterize source
water parameters that influence DBF
formation.
Monitoring within the treatment
plant. EPA would require systems
serving at least 100,000 people to
monitor for most of the same parameters
at several points within the treatment
plant. These requirements are
summarized in Table HI.l. Samples
from representative points before and
after the filters collected on a monthly
basis would be measured for pH,
alkalinity, turbidity, temperature,
calcium and total hardness, TOC, and
UV254. These measurements would
provide data on changes in water
quality between the plant influent and
the last filtration step. Of particular
importance are data on how the organic
precursor material (as represented by
TOC and UV254) is removed prior to and
through filtration.
Monthly monitoring of the same
parameters (pH, alkalinity, turbidity,
temperature, calcium and total
hardness, TOC, and UV2S4) would be
required at each point of disinfection.
These data are critical, because most
data now available for comparing these
variables with DBF concentrations are
based on source water data. Most
utilities do some treatment of the water
prior to the addition of disinfectant, so
source water measurements do not
accurately reflect the quality of the
water when the disinfectant is added.
These data would provide a more
accurate determination of how these
parameters influence DBP formation.
Disinfectant residuals would be
measured monthly at the end of each
treatment process in which chlorine is
applied. Free and total chlorine residual
would be reported if free chlorine is
used as the disinfectant; total chlorine
residual would be reported if ammonia
is added in combination with chlorine
or when sufficient ammonia is present
in the source water that breakpoint
chlorination is not achieved. These data
combined with information on the
applied disinfectant dosages and contact
times (from the plant operational data
discussed in the next section) would
give a more accurate picture on DBF
formation, because the chlorine or
chloramine demand of the water can be
estimated. Part of this demand is
reflected in the formation of DBFs.
If a water plant practices air stripping
to remove volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from the raw water prior to the
addition of a disinfectant and the raw
water contains ammonia, then a
monthly sample collected immediately
following the air stripper and analyzed
for ammonia would be required. Air
stripping might change the
concentration of ammonia, and an
accurate concentration of ammonia is
necessary to determine DBP formation.
EPA would also require systems
serving at least 100,000 people to
analyze samples from the entry point to
the distribution system monthly. The
monitoring would consist of pH, -
alkalinity, turbidity, temperature,
calcium and total hardness, TOC, UV2s4,
and disinfectant residual.
Systems are already monitoring for
many of the parameters listed above,
eiither to comply with other drinking
water regulations or for operational
considerations. Therefore, the
additional costs of providing monthly
-------
6344 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
data would not be excessive for these
parameters.
The monthly data from the treatment
plants would provide EPA with the
necessary information to conduct two
analyses essential for the development
of the Stage 2 D/DBP Rule: (1) The
variability in source water quality and
treatment operation and its impacts on
the parameters that influence the
formation of DBFs, and (2) when the
data are combined with the DBF data
described below, EPA will have a better
understanding of how water quality and
treatment practices influence DBF
formation. This understanding would
allow EPA to refine models for
predicting DBF formation based on
treatment and water quality parameters
and thus to further clarify the
interrelationships between disinfectant
concentrations and DBFs under field
conditions.
EPA would require community and
nontransient, noncommunity water
systems that use only ground water not
under the direct influence of surface
water and serve between 50,000 and
99,999 people to analyze TOG samples
monthly from the entry points to the
distribution system.
Additional monitoring for
chlorination by-products. EPA would
require monitoring for specific
chlorination by-products quarterly to
fulfill three objectives: (1) To relate
water quality and treatment practices to
DBF formation, (2) to determine the
concentration of DBFs in drinking
water, and (3) to establish cost effective
monitoring requirements that are
protective of public health. The Agency
would require analysis for the following
chlorination by-products: chloroform,
bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, bromoform,
monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic
acid, trichloroacetic acid,
monobromoacetic acid, dibromoacetic
acid, bromochloroacetic acid,
trichloroacetonitrile,
dichloroacetonitrile,
bromochloroacetonitrile,
dibromoacetonitrile, 1,1-
dlchloropropanone, 1,1,1-
trichloropropanone, chloropicrin, and
chloral hydrate. Each time a DBF
sample is collected, the system would
also oe required to measure and report
pH, temperature, alkalinity, and
disinfectant residual. Free chlorine
residual would be measured in systems
using free chlorine as the disinfectant.
Total chlorine residual would be
measured at sampling points after the
addition of ammonia, because the
residual disinfectant would be
chloramines.
To relate DBF formation to water
quality and treatment practices, EPA
would require systems to monitor the
above DBFs at the following locations:
(1) At a representative point
immediately after the last filtration step
(if chlorine is applied prior to the
niters), (2) at the entry point to the
distribution system, and (3) at a TTHM
compliance monitoring sampling point
in the distribution system which can be
related to a simulated distribution
system (SDS) sample. This distribution
system sampling point would be
selected using the following criteria: (I)
No additional disinfectant is added to
the water between entry to the
distribution system and the sampling
point, (2) the approximate detention
time of the water is available, and (3)
there is no blending with water from
other treatment plants. A sample would
also be collected at the entry point to
the distribution system and incubated at
a time and temperature corresponding
to the distribution system sample. This
SDS sample would be analyzed for the
same DBFs as the distribution system
sample and it would provide a measure
of DBF formation under controlled
conditions. Data from SDS samples
would also be evaluated as a cost-
effective alternative to distribution
system compliance monitoring.
The concentration of chlorination by-
products would be determined by
requiring the utilities to conduct
quarterly monitoring at four points in
the distribution system using the same
criteria for sampling point selection as
specified in the THM Rule. One sample
would be taken from a point
representing a maximum detention time
in the system. The sample point with
the highest THM concentrations would
meet this criterion. The second sample
would correspond to the SDS sampling
point described above. The remaining
two points would be representative of
the distribution system. All four
sampling points would be routine
sampling points for TTHM compliance
monitoring. This regimen minimizes the
sampling costs, since additional
sampling points are not required. It also
provides a link between the
measurements made for this rule and
the historical TTHM compliance
monitoring data for each system.
Systems that have two or more
treatment plants serving the same
distribution system would only be
required to collect four DBF samples in
the distribution system.
Six quarters of DBF monitoring would
provide EPA with information
concerning the spatial and seasonal
variability of DBFs within distribution
systems. In an effort to evaluate lower
cost monitoring options, EPA would
also require systems to monitor total
organic halide (TOX) concentrations at
the same sampling points and at the
same time DBF concentrations are
measured. Total organic halide (TOX) is
an indicator of the total quantity of
dissolved halogenated organic material
present in water. Essentially all of the
TOX present in chlorinated drinking
water in the United States is the result
of reactions between chlorine and the
organic material and bromide ion
present in the source water. The
eighteen chlorination by-products listed
above typically account for less than
50% of the TOX that is measured in
chlorinated drinking water. Since TOX
also includes the halogenated by-
products not routinely measured, it
might be a better surrogate of
chlorination by-product concentrations
than are TTHMs and THAAs. The TOX
analysis of treatment plant influent
would also be required quarterly,
because the source water could contain
background concentrations of
halogenated organic compounds as a
result of chemical contamination or
upstream discharges of chlorinated
water. The DBF, TOX, and surrogate
precursor (i.e., TOG and UV^s-J data will
be evaluated to determine the most cost-
effective monitoring requirements that
are protective of public health.
All the samples for the above-named
parameters would be collected as close
together in time as feasible (during the
same working day if possible). Samples
would be collected during normal plant
operating conditions, when there were
no obvious changes in source water
quality due to storm events, chemical
spills, etc. The quarterly sampling for
DBFs would be conducted at the same
time as the sampling from the treatment
plant(s). The quarterly samples would
be collected at a time when the source
water quality and plant operations had
been stable for several days, so that the
distribution system sample can be
related to the SDS sample that is
collected at the same time.
Additional monitoring required for
systems using chloramines. EPA would
require systems serving at least 100,000
people and using chloramines to
analyze for one additional DBF,
cyanogen chloride. This by-product is
formed when chlorine reacts with
organic material in the presence of the
ammonium ion (Ohya and Kanno,
1985). There are little data available to
assess the occurrence of this compound
and the factors influencing its formation
are poorly understood. Therefore, these
data are necessary to determine how the
distribution of by-products would
change if utilities switched from free
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6345
chlorine to chloramines as the residual
disinfectant to meet the MCLs for TTHM
andTHAA.
Monitoring for cyanogen chloride
would be required quarterly, as
summarized in Table III. 2. Only one
sample would be required from the
distribution system, because of the
analytical complexities of measuring the
compound. By sampling at the entry
point to the distribution system and at
a point of maximum detention time,
EPA would be able to assess the
concentration range at which this
compound occurs. Cyanogen chloride is
very reactive, and would be expected
both to decompose and be produced
within the distribution system.
TABLE IH.2.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING CHLORAMINES
Sampling point
Entry point to distribution system
One THM compliance monitoring sample point representing a
maximum detention time in distribution system.
Analyses
Cyanogen chloride . .
Cyanogen chloride i
Frequency
Quarterly
Quarterly
Additional monitoring required of
systems using hypochlorite solutions.
EPA would require systems serving at
least 100,000 people and using
hypochlorite solutions for chlorination
to perform the additional monitoring
presented in Table m.3. The monitoring
would include quarterly measurements
for chlorate in the treatment plant
influent, hypochlorite feedstock
solution, and water at the entry point to
the distribution system. Chlorate is a
decomposition product found in
hypochlorite feedstock (Lister, 1956;
Bolyard, et al., 1992; and Gordon et al.,
1993). Its concentration in the drinking
water would not be expected to change
in the distribution system unless
additional hypochlorite solution was
added, because it is not a DBP from
chlorine reactions under drinking water
conditions. Quarterly monitoring of the
hypochlorite stock solution to assess the
factors that influence chlorate formation
(pH, storage temperature, and
hypochlorite ion concentration) would
also be required. These data would
allow EPA to assess the significance of
chlorate ion resulting from the use of
hypochlorite solutions. EPA anticipates
chlorate would be regulated as part of
the Stage 2 DBP Rule.
TABLE III. 3.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTIONS
Sampling point
Treatment plant influent
Hypochlorite stock solution
Entry point to distribution system
Analyses
Chlorate
pH temperature free residual chlorine and chlorate
Chlorate
Frequency
Quarterly
Quarterly.
Additional monitoring required of
systems using ozone. EPA would require
systems serving at least 100,000 people
and using ozone in their treatment
process to perform the additional
monitoring listed in Table ffi.4. The
ozone contactor influent would be
monitored monthly for parameters that
influence formation of by-products: pH,
alkalinity, turbidity, temperature,
calcium and total hardness, TOC, UV2S4,
bromide, and ammonia. The ozone
residual would be measured in the
contactor effluent and immediately
prior to filtration. These data would be
combined with the operational data and
the DBP data to better understand and
piredict DBP formation.
TABLE 111.4.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING OZONE
Sampling point
Ozone contactor influent
Ozone contactor influent
Ozone contactor effluent
Ozone contactor effluent
Before filtration
Entry point to distribution system
Entry point to distribution system
Analyses
pH, alkalinity, turbidity temperature calcium and total hard-
ness, TOC, UVzs*, bromide, and ammonia.
Aldehydes^ and AOC/BDOC 2
Ozone residual
Aldehydes1 and AOC/BDOC2
Ozone residual .
Bromate
Aldehydes 1 and AOC/BDOC 2
Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly
Quarterly.
1 The aldehydes to be included in this analysis are: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, butanal, propanal, pentanal, glyoxal, and methyl glyoxal.
Measurement of other aldehydes is optional.
2 Submission of data for assimilable organic carbon (AOC) or biodegradeable organic carbon (BDOC) is optional.
Water systems using ozone would
also be required to monitor for specific
DBPs that are known to be formed as the
result of oxidation reactions. The
contactor influent, contactor effluent
and water from the entry point to the
distribution system would be monitored
on a quarterly basis for aldehydes.
Utilities Would also be encouraged to
voluntarily measure assimilable organic
carbon (AOC) or biodegradeable
dissolved organic carbon (BDOC) at the
same sampling points and at the same
frequency and voluntarily submit the
data. The concentration of bromate
would be monitored on a monthly basis
at the entry point to the distribution
system. The concentration of bromate is
not expected to increase in the water
after it leaves the treatment plant.
'Additional monitoring required of
systems using chlorine dioxide. EPA
would require systems serving 100,000
people and using chlorine dioxide in
their treatment process to conduct the
additional monitoring listed in Table
IIK.5. Parameters that influence the
formation of by-products would be
measured on a monthly basis at
sampling point(s) prior to each
-------
6346
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
application of chlorine dioxide. The total hardness, TOG, UV2s4, and
analyses xvould include: pH, alkalinity, bromide.
turbidity, temperature, calcium and
TABLE 111.5—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING CHLORINE DIOXIDE
Sampling point
Analyses
Frequency
Treatment plant Influent
Before each chlorine dioxide application
Before first chlorine dioxide application
Before application of ferrous salts, sulfur reducing agents, or
GAC.
Before downstream chtorine/chloramine application
Entry point to distribution system
Entry point to distribution system
3 distribution system sampling points (1 near first customer, 1
in middle of distribution system, and 1 at a maximum deten-
tion time in the system).
Chlorate '.
pH, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, calcium and total hard-
ness, TOG, UV2S4, and bromide. '
Aldehydes 1 and AOC/BDOC2 -
pH, chlorine dioxide residual, chlorite, chlorate
Aldehydes^ and AOC/BDOC2 »
Chlorite, chlorate, chlorine dioxide residual, bromate
Aldehydesi and AOC/BDOC* ••
chlorite, chlorate, chlorine dioxide residual, pH, and tempera-
ture. :
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
ifhe aldehydes to be included in this analysis are: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, butanal, propanal, pentanal, glyoxal, and methyl glyoxal.
Measurement of other aldehydes is optional.
a Submission of data for AOC or BDOC is optional.
The by-products of particular concern
from the use of chlorine dioxide are
chlorite and chlorate. Since the
application of ferrous salts or sulfur
reducing agents changes the
concentrations of these by-products,
utilities would be required to monitor
for chlorite and chlorate prior to and
following each of these treatment
processes. Monitoring would also be
required before and after granular
activated carbon (GAC) filtration. These
data would provide a better
understanding of the formation and
control of these two by-products and
would allow the development of
predictive models for use in
development of the Stage 2 D/DBP Rule.
Very little data are available
concerning the chlorite and chlorate
concentrations generally present in
drinking water as a result of chlorine
dioxide use. Therefore, utilities would
be required to monitor for these by-
products at the entry point to the
distribution system and at three sites
within the distribution system. The
concentrations of chlorite and chlorate
are expected to change as the water is
distributed through the system, so
distribution system samples are needed
to assess the magnitude of the changes.
One sample would be collected near the
first customer; another sample would be
collected at a point representing the
maximum detention time in the
distribution system and the last sample
would be collected at a point
representative of the average consumer.
These water systems would also be
required to monitor the chlorine dioxide
residual concentrations, pH and
temperature at the above sampling
points. Of particular concern is the
possible re-formation of chlorine
dioxide in the distribution system as a
result of reactions between chlorite and
chlorine. Since chlorine dioxide and its
by-products may pose acute health
risks, monitoring for them would be
required on a monthly basis. The
proposed Stage 1 D/DBP Rule may
require daily monitoring for chlorine
dioxide at the point of entry into the
distribution system and monthly
monitoring for chlorite at three points in
the distribution system.
Because low levels of chlorate have
been reported in source water (Bolyard,
et al., 1993; and Gordon, et al., 1993),
EPA would also require systems using
chlorine dioxide to monitor the
treatment plant influent monthly for
chlorate. This monitoring would
provide data to assess the relative
amounts of chlorate from source water
versus the amount produced as the
result of chlorine dioxide use.
EPA would also require systems using
chlorine dioxide to perform quarterly
monitoring for several oxidation by-
products, because there is a small
amount of data indicating their presence
as the result of chlorine dioxide use.
Quarterly monitoring for aldehydes
would be required: (1) Before the first
chlorine dioxide application in order to
determine background levels from the
source waters; (2) before application of
the secondary disinfectant to determine
what was produced by chlorine dioxide;
and (3) at the entry point to the
distribution system to evaluate the total
level delivered to the consumers based
upon all the treatment processes and
disinfectants. EPA would also
encourage systems to voluntarily
measure AOC or BDOC at the same
sampling points and at the same
frequency and voluntarily submit the
data. The Agency would require systems
to report the bromate concentration
present in the sample analyzed for
chlorite and chlorate from the entry
point to the distribution system, because
there are limited data indicating that
bromate may be formed as a result of
sunlight catalyzed reactions between
chlorine dioxide and bromide ion
present in the source water (Zika et al.,
1985). This would be an additional
sample, because the measurement of
low levels of bromate (<10 ug/L) in the
presence of much higher levels of
chlorite (100-1000 ug/L) would require
special treatment of the sample.
3. Treatment Process Information
Collection
Background/justification. EPA
proposes collecting treatment process
information as part of this rule to
characterize the various forms of
treatment currently being used by
treatment plants serving more than
100,000 persons. The treatment process
information will be used to evaluate
options available to large water utilities
to monitor and reduce DBF formation.
The Water Treatment Plant (WTP)
Model (Harrington, et al., 1992) was
used to predict THM and HAA levels in
the development of the Stage 1 D/DBP
Rule. The model is available from the
Safe Drinking Water Act Hotline (1-
800-426-4791). It uses raw water
quality and treatment process data to
predict THM and HAA formation. The
WTP model is calibrated, on fewer than
100 bench-, pilot-, and full-scale
studies. This rule would provide a
sufficiently large database to upgrade
the model to include additional
processes, predict other DBFs, and
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6347
better calibrate the model based on
hundreds of plant experiences.
The process data would be coupled
with the water quality data described in
Tables III.l through in. 5 to assess how
treatment impacts precursor removal;
how treatment affects the formation of
THMs, HAAs and other DBFs; and how
parameters like TOX and SDS compare
to distribution system compliance
parameters. Relationships between the
process data and water quality data
collected under this rule would be
evaluated to help define Stage 2
requirements of the D/DBP Rule and to
better evaluate and refine prediction
models that will be used for the Stage
2 D/DBP Rule development.
Specific Process Information. The
treatment plant information and unit
processes listed in Table III. 6 and the
water quality data described in previous
sections will provide the information
necessary to develop predictions
between raw water quality, treatment
conditions, precursor removal, and DBF
formation. EPA selected the parameters
listed to characterize the unit process
for use in developing the predictions
and Stage 2 D/DBP Rule development.
For example, coagulation parameters are
needed for evaluation of efficiencies to
better define the impact of enhanced
coagulation for precursor (TOG) control.
The depth of the filter is needed to
evaluate the feasibility of adding GAG to
the filter for precursor removal. The
complete process train details are
needed to evaluate the feasibility and
costs of treatment changes being
considered for DBF control. The list
does not include every possible water
treatment process parameter, but does
include the parameters that would be
used to characterize the treatment
practices for the purpose of this
monitoring rule.
TABLE 111.6.—TREATMENT PUNT INFORMATION
Utility information:
Utility Name
Mailing Address
Contact Person & Phone Number
Public Water Supply Identification Number FRDS (PWSID)
Population Served
Plant information:
Name of plant
Design flow (MGD)
Annual minimum water temperature (C)
Annual maximum water temperature (C)
Hours of operation (hours per day)
Source water information:
Name of source
Type of source (One of the following)
1 River
2 Stream
3 Reservoir
4 Lake
5 Ground water under the direct influence of surface water
6 Ground water
7 Spring
8 Purchased from Utility Name, FRDS PWSID
9 Other
Surface water as defined by SWTR (TRUE/FALSE)
Monthly Average Flow of this Source (MGD)
Upstream sources of microbiological contamination
Wastewater plant discharge in watershed (yes/no)
Distance from intake (miles)
Monthly average flow of plant discharge (MGD)
Point source feedlots in watershed (yes/no)
Distance of nearest feedlot discharge to intake (miles)
Non-point sources in watershed
Grazing of animals (yes/no)
Nearest distance of grazing to intake (miles)
Plant influent (ICR influent sampling point):
Monthly average flow (MGD)
Monthly peak hourly flow (MGD)
Flow at time of sampling (MGD)
Plant effluent (ICR effluent sampling point):
Monthly average flow (MGD)
Monthly peak hourly flow (MGD)
Flow at time of sampling (MGD)
Sludge treatment:
Monthly average solids production (Ib/day)
Installed design sludge handling capacity (Ib/day)
General process parameters:
The following data will be required for all unit processes:
Number of identical parallel units installed
Number of identical parallel units in service at time of sampling
The following parameters will be required for all unit processes except chemical feeders:
Design Flow per unit (MGD)
Liquid volume per unit (gallons)
Tracer study flow (MGD)
-------
6348
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 111.6.—TREATMENT PLANT INFORMATION—Continued
T50 (minutes)
T10 (minutes) i
Presedimentation basin:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fp)
Chemical feeder: «
Type of feeder (one of the following)
1 Liquid :
2 Gas
3 Dry
Capacity of each unit (Ib/day)
Purpose (one or more of the following)
1 Coagulation
2 Coagulation aid
3 Corrosion control
4 Dechlorination
5 Disinfection !
6 Filter aid
7 Fluoridatton
8 Oxidation
9 pH adjustment ;
10 Sequestration
11 Softening
12 Stabilization ;
13 Taste and odor control
14 Other
Chemical feeder chemicals (one of the following): ;
Alum
Anhydrous ammonia
Ammonium hydroxide
Ammonium sulfate
Calcium hydroxide
Calcium hypochlorite
Calcium oxide
Carbon dioxide
Chlorine dioxide—acid chlorite
Chlorine dioxide—chlorine/chlorite
Chlorine gas
Ferric chloride
Ferric sulfate
Ferrous sulfate
Ozone
Polyaluminum chloride
Sodium carbonate
Sodium chloride
Sodium fluoride
Sodium hydroxide
Sodium hypochlorite ',
Sodium hexametapnosphate
Sodium silicate
SuKuric acid
Zinc orthophosphate
Other
°f The above list is intended to be a comprehensive list of chemicals used at water treatment plants. If the name of a chemical does not ap-
* pear in the list then "Other Chemical" information will be requested. ;
2. Formulas and feed rate units will be included in data reporting software.
Monthly average feed rate based on inventory (mg/L) Feed rate at time of sampling (mg/L) ;
Other chemical:
N°na'additlon to Chemical Feeder information the following will be required for any chemical not included in the Chemical Feeder list of chemi-
cals.
Trade name of chemical
Formula
Manufacturer . '.
Rapid mix:
Type of mixer (one of the following)
1 Mechanical
2 Hydraulic jump ;
3 Static
4 Other
If mechanical: horsepower of motor
If hydraulic: head loss (ft)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6349
TABLE 111.6.—TREATMENT PUNT INFORMATION—Continued
If static: head loss (ft)
Flocculation basin:
Type of mixer (one of the following)
1 Mechanical
2 Hydraulic
3 Other
If mechanical: Mixing power (HP)
If hydraulic: head loss (ft)
Sedimentation basin:
Loading at Design Flow (gpm/fP)
Depth (ft)
Filtration:
Loading at Design Flow (gpm/fP)
Media Type (one or more of the following)
1 Anthracite
2 GAG
3 Garnet
4 Sand
5 Other
Depth of top media (in)
If more than 1 media: Depth of second media (in)
If more than 2 media: Depth of third media (in)
If more than 3 media: Depth of fourth media (in)
If GAC media: Carbon replacement frequency (months):
Water depth to top of media (ft)
Depth from top of media to bottom of backwash trough (ft)
Backwash Frequency (hours)
Backwash volume (gallons)
Contact basin (Stable liquid level):
Baffling Type (one of the following as defined in SWTFt guidance manual)
1 Unbaffled (mixed tank)
2 Poor (inlet/outlet only)
3 Average (Inlet/Outlet and intermediate)
4 Superior (Serpentine)
5 Perfect (Plug flow)
Clearwell (Variable liquid level):
Baffling Type (one of the following as defined in SWTR guidance manual)
1 Unbaffled (mixed tank)
2 Poor (inlet/outlet only)
3 Average (Inlet/Outlet and intermediate)
4 Superior (Serpentine)
5 Perfect (Plug flow)
Minimum liquid volume (gallons)
Liquid volume at time of tracer study (gallons)
Ozone contact basin:
Basin Type
1 Over/Under (Diffused O3)
2 Mixed (Turbine O3)
Number of Stages
CT (min mg/L)
EPA requests comments on the design and operating parameters to be reported for ozone contact basins.
Tube settler:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fp)
Tube angle from horizontal (degrees)
Upflow clarifier:
Design horse power of turbine mixer (HP)
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fP)
Special Equipment (none, one, or more of the following)
1 Lamella plates
2 Tubes
Plate settler:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ft?)
DE filter
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fP)
Precoat (Ib/ft3)
Bodyfeed (mg/L)
Run length (hours)
Granular activated carbon:
Empty bed contact time at design flow (minutes)
. Design regeneration frequency (days)
Actual regeneration frequency (days)
Membranes:
Type (one of the following)
-------
6350
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 111.6.—TREATMENT PLANT INFORMATION—Continued
1 Reverse osmosis
2 Nanofiltration
3 Ultrafiltration
4 Microfiltration
5 Electrodialysis
6 Other
Name of Other type
Membrane type (one of the following)
1 Cellulose acetate and derivatives
2 Polyamides
3 Thin-film composite
4 Other
Name of other membrane type
Molecular weight cutoff (gm/mole)
Configuration (one of the following)
1 Spiral wound
2 Hollow fiber
3 Tube
4 Plate and frame
5 Other
Name of other configuration
Design flux (gpd/fP)
Design pressure (psi)
Purpose of membrane unit (one or more of the following)
1 Softening
2 Desalination
3 Organic removal
4 Other
5 Contaminant removal—name of contaminant
Percent recovery (%)
Operating pressure (psi)
Air stripping:
Packing height (ft)
Design liquid loading (gpm/fP)
Design air to water ratio
Type of packing (Name)
Nominal size of packing (inch)
Operating air flow (SCFM)
Adsorption clarifien
Surface loading at design flow (gprn/ft2)
Dissolved air flotation:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fP)
Slow sand filtration:
Surface loading at design flow (gpd/fP)
ton exchange:
Purpose (one or more of the following)
1 Softening
2 Contaminant removal
Contaminant name
Media type (Name)
Design exchange capacity (equ/ft3)
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fP)
Bed depth (ft)
Regenerant Name (one of the following)
1 Sodium Chloride (NaCI)
2 Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4)
3 Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)
4 Other
If othen Name and formula
Operating regeneration frequency (hr)
Regenerant concentration (%)
Regenerant Used (Ib/day)
Other treatment:
Name
Purpose
Design Parameters
EPA will be working with the
industry to develop the software to
collect this process information as
described in the following section.
Utilities would use the data collection
software to input the process data once
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6351
at the beginning of the monitoring
period with monthly updates of the
operating data and any treatment
modifications.
EPA requests comments on the
completeness of Table m.6 to describe
treatment plant configurations and the
specific design parameters for the unit
processes that would be relevant to
Stage 2 D/DBP rule development and
future model development for
predicting DBFs. Is all the requested
information essential? Are more
efficient mechanisms available than
those proposed herein for obtaining the
desired information? Will the treatment
plant information requested be adequate
for developing models by which to
predict the ability of utilities to achieve
various potential regulatory criteria
under Stage 2 (e.g., DBP and TOX
occurrence levels in the distribution
system)? Will the treatment plant
information required for systems serving
100,000 or more .people be adequate for
developing predictive models of DBP
formation for systems serving less than
100,000 people? What additional
information, if any, would be important
to obtain to predict the formation of
DBFs in systems serving less than
10,000 people? If additional information
is needed, what mechanisms should be
used for obtaining it? For example,
would any survey techniques of
representative systems be useful for
obtaining this information?
Data collection software design. Since
the collection of DBF occurrence data
and source water quality data must be
combined with information about the
treatment processes, EPA proposes
using data collection software as a
mechanism for obtaining the monitoring
data and treatment plant process
information necessary for developing
the Stage 2 D/DBP Rule. The software
would capture information about source
water quality, treatment plant design,
unit processes, chemical dosages, and
the monitoring results listed in Tables
m.l-m.6. EPA would provide technical
assistance for use of the data collection
software.
To capture both water quality data
and process information from each
plant, the data collection software and
database would be designed to handle
various treatment configurations
including split flow, process parameters
relevant to each configuration, and
water quality monitoring data described
in earlier sections.
EPA would provide each utility a
diskette containing the data collection
software. The software would generate
screen driven data entry forms that are
customized for the water utility
depending on the treatment process
configuration entered by the utility. The
water quality parameters listed in
Tables ffl.l through ni.5 and the results
of the microbiological monitoring would
also be entered by the utility. The water
utility would only enter monitoring
results pertinent to its system. Table
ffl.6 lists the unit process choices that
would be used to develop the process
train for a given water treatment plant.
The computer program would be
designed to prompt the user for the
process parameters based on the process
choices selected. For example, a plant
using only chlorine for disinfection
would not see prompts for chlorine
dioxide residual, bromate, or chlorite on
its data entry screen.
The software will determine such
details as where sampling points should
generally be located and which water
quality parameters should be measured.
The user would have the option of
printing a series of data forms to be used
locations, requesting laboratory
analysis, and gathering design and
operation parameters. The software will
be designed in data segments and will
save data to a monthly data file on a
hard drive or diskette. The utility will
send data to EPA as described in the
following section.
assure the quality of information
provided.
The output from the data collection
software would be monthly data files in
ASCII format. Data files on diskette
would be mailed to EPA and transferred
to the master data base. Data files
transferred via modem would be sent
using telecommunication software
supplied by the utility. EPA requests
comment on the use of diskettes,
modem or other means for data
reporting.
Design of the database, its input/
output mechanisms, and its output
formats would be considered before
start-up of the monitoring effort. The
output would target the requirements
being considered for the Stage 2 D/DBP
Rule and the Enhanced SWTR.
Examples of the many questions the
output would address are: (1) What is
the national distribution of bromide,
TOG, etc., i.e., the factors that affect DBP
formation? (2) What is the distribution
of HAAs, chloral hydrate, etc. in
distribution system waters? (3) What
treatment processes and operating
conditions are associated with
minimum DBP levels? (4) What levels of
bromate form in ozonation plants under
different conditions?
4. Database Development
The proposed procedure would entail
each PWS collecting the data on a
computer diskette provided by EPA
using the data collection software,
sending the data via modem or by
diskette to a database coordinator,
having the data reviewed for correctness
by an engineer or scientist familiar with
water treatment, loading the data into a
master database, having the data
analyzed periodically throughout the
monitoring period, generating interim
reports, and having the database in final
usable form for Stage 2 D/DBP Rule
development shortly after the
conclusion of the sixth quarter
monitoring period. Any interested party
would have access to the data at various
points in time during the collection
period. EPA would provide technical
assistance throughout the data
collection and reporting process.
EPA proposes that a personal
computer with an MS-DOS operating
system be used for data entry. EPA
would provide the ICR data collection
software to the utilities for data
collection. The utilities would provide
the personal computer. The software
will have many built in features to guide
the user through the process train
configuration and data input. In
addition, EPA intends to make technical
assistance available, if needed, to help
Testing data collection and transfer.
Before monitoring begins, EPA would
need to beta test the ICR data collection
software for transferring data from the
utility to a master database to identify
unforeseen problems with the data
collection procedure. Therefore, the
Agency's schedule for beta testing must
have enough lead time to modify the
process, if needed, before monitoring
begins. EPA intends to conduct the data
collection software beta testing with the
cooperation of a small number of
utilities with diverse characteristics.
The master database and its data
manipulation and output procedures
would also be beta tested to identify
unforeseen problems with the data
handling procedures after the data are
reported to EPA.
Frequency of reporting. EPA would
require systems to submit data to the
Agency two months after monitoring
begins and thereafter monthly. Periodic
reporting would allow EPA to review
the data aiad resolve problems
associated, with data collection and
submission, and also to quicken the
pace of regulatory development of the
interim and long-term ESWTRs.
Data availability. EPA would make
raw (unanalyzed) data available to
interested organizations and individuals
periodically throughout the monitoring
period via electronic transfer. EPA
proposes that the data be made available
after the first two quarters' raw data
-------
have been verified, and for every 6
months of data thereafter following the
verification of that data until the
conclusion of the monitoring period.
This access would be a "read only"
mode.
EPA would make analyzed data
available in summary form. The
analyzed data would be grouped by
source water type, utility size, type of
treatment, distribution of DBFs,
distribution of TOG, treatment
effectiveness, etc. These data would be
used in developing the interim and
long-term ESWTR and the Stage 2 D/
DBF rule.
5. Analytical Methods
Approved methods. Analytical
methods that are currently approved for
monitoring purposes under other
drinking water regulations would be
approved for use under this rule. These
include the parameters: (1) pH; (2)
alkalinity; (3) turbidity; (4) temperature;
(5) calcium hardness; [6) free residual
chlorine; (7) total residual chlorine; (8)
chlorine dioxide residual; (9) ozone
residual; (10) chloroform; (11)
bromodichloromethane; (12)
dibromochloromethane; and (13)
bromoform.
Analytical methods for several of the
above named parameters have also been
updated in the 18th edition of Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater. These include:
(1) pH; (2) alkalinity; (3) turbidity; (4)
temperature; (5) calcium hardness; (6)
free residual chlorine; (7) total residual
chlorine; (8) chlorine dioxide residual;
and (9) ozone residual. The updated
versions of these methods would also be
approved for compliance monitoring
under this rule.
In addition to the methods currently
approved for monitoring purposes
under other drinking water regulations
and their most recent versions,
approved methods for the remainder of
the parameters that must be measured
for this rule are listed in Table ffl.7. The
methods are published and contain
descriptions of the methodology and
information on the precision and
accuracy of the methods.
EPA is proposing one new method
(EPA Method 551) for trihalomethane
(chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and
bromoform) monitoring under this rule.
EPA is also soliciting comment on
whether use of this method should also
be approved for compliance with the
monitoring requirements under the
Trihalomethane rule [44 FR 68264,
November 29,1979].
Monitoring for the six haloacetic acids
(HAAs) would be done using EPA
Method 552.1 or an expanded version of
Method 6233 B which is published in
the 18th edition of Standard Methods.
Bromochloroacetic acid is not listed as
an analyte in the published version of
Method 6233 B, because an analytical
standard was not commercially
available when the method was first
developed. The feasibility of including
it in Method 6233 B has been
demonstrated (Earth and Fair, 1992),
and it will be added to the method
during the next revision.
Method 6233 B is undergoing revision
for the 19th edition of Standard
Methods, so EPA proposes that a draft
version be made available to
laboratories performing HAA analyses
for this monitoring rule.
EPA would require laboratories to use
EPA Method 551 for measuring
trichloroacetonitrile,
dichloroacetonitrile,
bromochloroacetonitrile,
dibromoacetonitrile, 1,1-
dichloropropanone, 1,1,1-
trichloropropanone, and chloropicrin.
The use of pentane instead of methyl-
tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), the solvent
described in the method, would be
permissible when analyzing for these
analytesandfortheTHMs. ^
Chloral hydrate (CH) would also be
measured using EPA Method 551, but
its concentration would be determined
by analyzing a separate sample from the
one collected for the other 551 analytes.
CH requires a different dechlorinating
agent than the other DBFs included in
the method. The THMs can also be
measured in the chloral hydrate sample.
MTBE must be used as the extracting
solvent when measuring CH. '
EPA Method 551 specifies that the pH
of the sample be adjusted to between 4.5
and 5.0 when the sample is collected, to
prevent base-catalyzed hydrolysis of
several of the analytes. Sample stability
has been demonstrated for 14 days
when this technique is used in the
laboratory. However, field application of
this preservation technique (i.e.,
titration) has not been tested and may
not be practical. EPA proposes that the
samples be collected without adjusting
the pH and that the laboratories be
required to extract the samples within
24-48 hours of sample collection. This
requirement would result in a negative
bias in the data for several of the
analytes, with the bias increasing as the
pH of the samples increases. EPA
solicits comments on this approach or
suggestions on alternative approaches.
Chlorate, chlorite, bromide, and
bromate would be measured using EPA
Method 300.0. Laboratories would be
permitted to use alternate eluents (e.g.,
borate eluent) or sample cleanup or
concentration techniques in order to
lower the detection limit for bromate, as
long as the quality assurance criteria
specified in the method are met.
EPA is aware that the above method
may not be sensitive enough to provide
quantitative data for bromate at
concentrations <10 |ig/L. Some
laboratories may be able to detect
bromate in samples at concentrations as
low as 5 jig/L, but the data will riot be
1OW as O (Ag"-') uui uio uaia vn»i iiw«. uu
precise enough to be used for making
decisions on how treatment practices
and source water characteristics
influence bromate formation. Since the
Stage 1D/DBP Rule may propose a
maximum contaminant level goal
(MCLG) of zero for bromate, it is
important to extend the quantitation for
bromate to as low a concentration as
possible during this information
collection process.
One of EPA's laboratories has the
capability to measure bromate at
concentrations of <1 ng/L using a
selective anion concentration technique
prior to ion chromatography analysis
(Hautman, D.P.,.Nov. 1992). EPA does
not think this new technique could be
readily transferredito laboratories doing
routine analyses, because the required
instrumentation is not commercially
available and the technique is complex
and time consuming. Therefore, in order
to obtain low level bromate
measurements, EPA is proposing that
utilities be required to collect duplicate
samples and to send one sample from
each duplicate set to EPA. EPA could
then obtain more sensitive quantitation
to better characterize bromate formation
as a function of water quality treatment
characteristics. EPA would use the data
generated by utilities to evaluate the
ability of laboratories to accurately and
precisely measure bromate near the
anticipated MCL bf 10 ug/1 in the Stage
1 D/DBP rule that was agreed to by the
Negotiating Committee. EPA would be
responsible for obtaining the required
analyses using the new technique. EPA
solicits comments on this approach for
obtaining low level bromate
measurements. ;
Cyanogen chloride (CNC1)
concentrations would be monitored
using a modified version of EPA Method
524.2. This compound is not listed in
the method, but feasibility has been
demonstrated (Flesch and Fair, 1988).
Cyanogen chloride is unstable, so
laboratories would be required to
perform the analysis within 24-48 hours
of sample collection. Samples for CNC1
analysis must be dechlorinated using
ascorbic acid.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6353
EPA is aware of one other technique
for measuring CNC1. A headspace
analytical technique using gas
chromatography with electron capture
detection was recently described in the
literature (Xie and Reckhow, 1993). It
can also be used to measure cyanogen
bromide which may be preferentially
formed when the source water contains
bromide ion. EPA solicits comments on
whether this technique should be used
to generate data for this monitoring rule.
Use of the technique would be
contingent upon preparation of a
written protocol for performing the
analysis including specific quality
control requirements. The protocol
would be published in the ICR DBF
Analytical Methods Guidance Manual.
A method for the analysis of
aldehydes in source water and drinking
water is being written for the 19th
edition of Standard Methods. The
methodology involves the use of O-
(2,3,4,5,6-pentafluorobenzyl)-
hydroxylamine (PFBHA) as a
derivatizing agent. PFBHA reacts with
low molecular weight carbonyl
compounds, including aldehydes, in
aqueous solutions to form the
corresponding oximes. These
derivatives are extractable with organic
solvents and can be measured using gas
chromatography with either electron
capture (BCD) or selective ion
monitoring-mass spectrometry (SIM-
MS) detection (Glaze et al., 1989;
Cancilla et al., 1992). EPA proposes that
the draft version of the method be used
by laboratories performing aldehyde
analyses for this monitoring rule.
Analyses for aldehydes are usually
begun immediately or within 24 to 48
hours after sample collection, because a
preservation technique has not been
demonstrated. EPA proposes that all
aldehyde analyses for this rule be
initiated within 48 hours of sample
collection. EPA solicits comments on
alternative approaches.
Total organic halide (TOX) would be
monitored using Standard Method 5320
B. All samples for this monitoring rule
would be dechlorinated and acidified at
the time of collection.
Total organic carbon (TOG) would be
monitored using Standard Method 5310
C (persulfate-ultraviolet oxidation) or
5310 D (wet-oxidation). The samples
must not be filtered prior to analysis.
Turbid samples would be diluted using
organic free water in order to remove
interferences from high concentrations
of particulate matter.-
EPA is aware of recent advances in
the measurement of TOG using high
temperature catalytic oxidation (Benner
and Hedges, 1993; Kaplan, 1992). The
instrumentation is commercially
available and is being used in some
drinking water laboratories. Published
data suggest the new technique may be
slightly more effective than the
proposed methods in oxidizing
refractory organic material. If this is
true, then results produced using the
new technique would indicate higher
TOG levels than would be measured
using the proposed methods, when
samples contained refractory organic
material. The methodology has not been
evaluated by EPA and it is not
published in a reference text such as
Standard Methods or an EPA Methods
Manual. EPA solicits comments on
whether (or under what conditions) the
use of this new oxidation technique
should be permitted for monitoring
under this rule.
No written method exists for
measuring ultraviolet absorbance at 254
nm (UV254). EPA proposes that a
protocol be developed by a workgroup
composed of persons familiar with
techniques currently being used to
study precursor removal. The protocol
would be distributed to all laboratories
that generate UV254 data for this rule
and its use would be required. The
protocol would also be published in the
ICR DBP Analytical Methods Guidance
Manual. The protocol will specify
sample nitration and pH adjustment
procedures.
Simulated distribution system (SDS)
samples would be incubated at the same
temperature and pH as the distribution
system for a reaction time comparable to
the estimated detention time of the
distribution system sampling point
selected for comparison purposes. The
general protocol is described in the 18th
edition of Standard Methods under
Method 5710 E. Exact details of how the
SDS samples would be handled will be
specified in the ICR DBP Analytical
Methods Guidance Manual. Since the
temperature and incubation time of the
SDS samples will be utility specific,
EPA will recommend that the utility
incubate the sample for the specified
time period. The pH and disinfectant
residual would be measured at the end
of the incubation period. The sample
would t:hen be poured into sample
bottles containing the appropriate
dechloi mating agents and preservatives
and seat to the laboratory for analysis.
This procedure would alleviate concern
over laboratory logistics in dealing with
many SDS samples requiring different
incubation temperatures and times. The
SDS sample would be analyzed for
chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, bromoform,
monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic
acid, trichloroacetic acid,
monohvomoacetic acid, dibromoacetic
acid, bromochloroacetic acid, chloral
hydrate, trichloroacetonitrile,
dichloroacetonitrile,
bromochloroacetonitrile,
dibromoacetonitrile, 1,1-
dichloropropanone, 1,1,1-
trichloropropanone, chloropicrin, total
organic halide, pH, and disinfectant
residual.
TABLE 111.7—ANALYTICAL METHODS APPROVED FOR MONITORING RULE
pH
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Temperature
Calcium hardness
Free residual chlorine ....
Total residual chlorine ....
Chlorine dioxide residual
Ozone residual . ..
40 CFR reference 1
141 74(a)(7) 141 89{a)
141 .89(a)
141.22(a) 141 74(a)(4)
141 74(a)(6) 141 89(a)
141.89(3)
141.74(a)(5)
141.74(a)(5)
141.74(a)(5) :
141.74(sW5)
Methodology
EPA method
1 flfl 1 3
200.74
Standard method 2
4«!nfl— H +
2320 B
01 on R
2550 B
3111 B, 3120 B, 3500-
CaD
4500— Cl D 4500-CI F
4500-CI G, 4500-CI H
4500-CI D 4500-CI F
4500-CI F, 4500-CI
G, 4500-CI I
4500— on- n ^mnru-
CIO 2 D, 4500-CIO2 E
AKf\f\_ O D
-------
6354
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 111.7—ANALYTICAL METHODS APPROVED FOR MONITORING RULE—Continued
Analyte
Bromodichloromethane ..
Dibromochloromethane ..
Chloral Hydrate
Bfomochlorosce to nitrite .
1 ,1 ,1-Trich!oropropanone
Tola! Organic Halide
(TOX).
UV absorbance at 254
nm (method described
in preamble— protocol
will be developed).
Simulated Distribution
System Test (SDS).
OxWant Demand/Re-
quirement (optional).
AOC/BDOC (optional) ....
Methodology
40 CFR reference 1
141 SubptC, App. C
141 SubptC, App. C
141 Subpt C, App. 3
141 Subpt C, App. C
EPA method
502.25,524.25.6,5517.8
502.25,524.25.6, 5517.8
502.25,524.25.6,5517.8
502.25,524.25.6,5517.8,
552.1 e
552.1 e
552.1 e
552.1 6
552.1 e
552.1 6
55U
551 7.8
551 7.8
551 7.8
551 7.8
551 7.8
551 7.8
551 7.8
300.010
300.010
300.010
300.010
524.26
Standard method a
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 BS
draft method submitted
to 19th Edition
5320 B
531 OC, 5310 D
5710 E
2340 B, 2340 C
4500-NH3D,4500-NH3
F
2350 B, 2350 C, 2350 D
9217B/
1 Currently approved methodology for drinking water compliance monitoring is listed in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations in the sec-
of Water and Wastewater, 18th ed., American Public Health Association, American Water Works As-
SC3"aMetriodstof Cheimical AnalysisVwater and Wastes," EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH EPA-600/4-79-
Defcfr'mination of Metals in Environmental Samples. Available from National Technical Information Service (NTIS), U.S. De-
Drinking Water," EPA/600/4-88/039, PB91-231 480, National Technical
in Drinking Water-Supplement ..." EPA/600/R-92/129, PB92-207703,
SEPA? ''iJfettvods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking Water— Supplement I," EPA/600/4-90-020, PB91-146027,
a Pentane may be used as the extraction solvent for this analyte, if the quality control criteria of the method are met. ..... .. m ..
s This analyte is not currently included in the method. However, Barth and Fair (1992) present data demonstrating it can be added to the meth-
od. The method is being revised for the 19th edition of Standard Methods and it will include this analyte. _„,_.„„„„
louSEPA, "Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples," EPA/600/R/93/100-, August 1993.
Laboratory approval. EPA recognizes
that the usefulness of the data generated
as the result of this rule depends on the
ability of laboratories to reliably analyze
the disinfectants, disinfection by-
products and other parameters. EPA has
a laboratory certification program for
drinking water analyses. All laboratories
that analyze drinking water samples to
determine compliance with drinking
water regulations must be certified by
EPA or the State, as specified by 40 CFR
142.10(b)(4) and 141.28. Under this
program, EPA certifies the principal
State Laboratory and, with certain
exceptions (see 40 CFR 142:10), each
State certifies drinking water
laboratories within the State.
Laboratories currently certified to
perform analyses using EPA Methods
501.1, 501.2, 502.2 or 524.2 for TTHMs
or volatile organic compound (VOC)
would be approved to analyze for
chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform
using the same analytical method under
the ICR without further action. In
addition, all persons or laboratories
already approved by EPA or the State
for analyzing alkalinity, pH,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6355
temperature, turbidity, disinfectant
residual, and calcium hardness analyses
would be approved to perform these
measurements under the ICR without
further action. Parties approved by a
State for calcium hardness analyses
using Standard Methods 3500-Ca D
would also be approved for total
hardness measurements using Standard
Method 2340 C under this rule. Parties
approved by a State for calcium
hardness analyses using Standard
Methods 3111 B or 3120 B would also
be approved for total hardness
measurements using Standard Methods
2340 B under this rule. Parties approved
by a State for pH measurements using
Standard Methods 4500-H+ would also
be approved for ammonia measurements
using Standard Method 4500-NH3 F
under this rule.
For other parameters to be monitored
under this rule, EPA proposes to
develop a separate laboratory evaluation
process apart from the drinking water
laboratory certification program. A new
process is being proposed for several
reasons: 1) few States and EPA Regions
are currently able to certify laboratories
for the new analytes of interest in this
rule and it is unlikely that they could
develop the capacity in the time frame
to implement this rule; 2) the short-term
nature of the monitoring period may not
warrant a full certification program,
since monitoring would not be required
for many of the analytes after the 18
month monitoring period; and 3) large
numbers of laboratories are not needed
to perform the DBP-related monitoring,
because the monitoring requirements
only affect approximately 300 systems.
Under the new process, EPA would
require laboratories to meet specific
criteria (described below) before
approving them to perform monitoring
of the new analytes covered in the DBP
portion of the ICR. Laboratories would
be approved on a method-by-method
basis.
Laboratory approval criteria would
consist of the following elements:
(1) The laboratory would be required
to contact ICR Laboratory Coordinator,
USEPA, Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water, Technical Support
Division, 26 West Martin Luther King
Drive Cincinnati, Ohio, 45268, for an
application form to initiate the approval
process. The form would request
information on the laboratory personnel,
facilities, analytical methods/protocols
in use for ICR analyses, current State
certification status, and laboratory
capacity to process DBP/ICR samples.
The laboratory could submit a copy of
the most recent application form it had
filed with the State and the most recent
copy of the State's on-site visit report,
in lieu of completing portions of the
EPA form. The laboratory could also
provide EPA with copies of its PE data
for ICR analytes in the three most recent
PE studies. The PE data must have been
generated using the methods for which
file laboratory is seeking approval.
(2) EPA would require the laboratory
to use the analytical methods or
protocols specified in this rule and
contained in the ICR DBP Analytical
Methods Guidance Manual. A
laboratory that desires to use EPA
Method 551 for trihalomethane analyses
under this rule would have to apply for
approval under this process, even
though it may be certified for THM
compliance monitoring using a different
method.
(3) EPA would require the laboratory
to have a Quality Assurance (QA)
Manual specific to this rule. Guidance
for preparing this manual will be
provided in the ICR DBP Analytical
Methods Guidance Manual. (Examples
of the types of information that should
be included in the QA Manual are: (1)
Laboratory organization; (2) sampling
handling procedures; (3) analytical
method references and quality control;
and (4) data handling and reporting
procedures. The QA manual would also
include or reference the standard
operating procedure (SOP) for each
analytical method/protocol in use for
ICR analyses.) The QA manual must be
available for review, if requested.
(4) EPA would require the laboratory
to conduct an initial demonstration of
capability (IDC) and method detection
limit (MDL) determinations for each
analysis for which it requests approval
for this monitoring rule, and submit
these data to the Agency. EPA would
require laboratories to determine the
MDL according to the procedure
outlined in 40 CFR part 136 Appendix
B, with additional guidance being given
in the ICR DBP Analytical Methods
Guidance Manual. The manual will also
outline minimum requirements for
performing the IDC determinations.
Minimum performance criteria for each
method IDC and MDL would also be
specified in the ICR DBP Analytical
Methods Guidance Manual based on
what is feasible to achieve and what is
necessary to obtain the data quality
objectives of this rule. (EPA is proposing
that the minimum performance criteria
for IDCs and MDLs be based on IDC and
MDL data obtained from a minimum of
three laboratories that are experienced
in conducting each specific analysis.)
(5) If the laboratory does not have a
history of successfully analyzing PE
samples for the ICR analytes using the
methods specified in this rule, then EPA
would require the laboratory to
satisfactorily analyze two PE samples, if
available, for each of the methods it uses
to generate data for this monitoring rule.
Historical performance in PE studies
could be applied toward meeting this
requirement if the laboratory had
satisfactory performance on at least two
of three PE samples analyzed by the
method in question and the last PE
sample was satisfactorily analyzed. EPA
proposes that satisfactory performance
on PE samples be defined as achieving
within ±40% of the study mean
concentration for this rule. EPA
considers this criteria as reasonable
relative to what laboratories should be
able to achieve in order to meet the
objectives of the rule.
PE samples are currently available for
THMs, six HAAs, chloral hydrate,
bromate, chlorite, and chlorate. EPA
plans to conduct special PE studies for
the ICR. which will also include
trichloi'oacetonitrile,
dichloroacetonitrile,
bromochloroacetonitrile,
dibromoacetonitrile, 1,1-
dichloropropanone, and 1,1,1-
trichloropropanone, bromide, TOC,
TOX arid UV254PE samples. A PE
sample for chloropicrin will not be
required because laboratory
performance using EPA Method 551 can
be assessed using the data from the
other method analytes.)
EPA is considering using a third party
(independent organization) to review
the application form, IDC, MDL, and PE
study data and conduct an on-site
inspection, if necessary. Based upon the
third party's assessment of the
laboratory, EPA would approve
laboratories. EPA solicits comment on
this process or other options such as
laboratories paying for the review by a
third party.
Implementation of the laboratory
approval process would begin upon
promulgation of the ICR and it would
extend until the end of the first quarter
period of monitoring, following the
beginning effective date of this rule, but
possibly later, if EPA determines that
insufficient laboratories through that
date had been approved. No additional
laboratories would be evaluated after
this period unless there was not
adequate laboratory capacity to handle
the monitoring required by the DBP ICR.
If additional capacity was required, then
new laboratories would be evaluated
until the necessary capacity was
reached.
EPA proposes that a list of
"approved" laboratories be made
available to all the utilities required to
monitor for DBFs, their precursors and
surrogates. The list would be distributed
directly to the utilities, as well as to
-------
6356 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
each EPA Regional Office and State
Primacy Agency. The list would also be
available for public distribution from
EPA.
EPA would monitor the performance
of "approved" laboratories throughout
the ICR monitoring period by requiring
the laboratories to: (1) periodically
(either quarterly or semiannually,
depending on feasibility) analyze PE
samples; and (2) report specific quality
control (QC) data with the analytical
results from the monitoring samples.
Maintaining laboratory "approval"
throughout the ICR monitoring period
would be contingent upon successfully
meeting the acceptance criteria for the
PE samples and the quality control data.
The required QC data and performance
criteria would be included in the ICR
DBF Analytical Methods Guidance
Manual. (An overview is presented in
Section 6 of this preamble under
Analytical Data.) Laboratories that do
not pass a PE sample would receive
another PE sample before the next
regularly scheduled EPA PE study, to
demonstrate successful completion of
corrective action. EPA, either directly or
by third party, would provide technical
assistance to laboratories that had
initially been "approved" and then
develop problems, if the operation of
such laboratories is necessary to
maintain the lab capacity to fulfill the
requirements of this rule.
Laboratory capacity. EPA recognizes
that obtaining the necessary laboratory
capacity to complete the DBF
monitoring required by this rule may be
difficult. For this reason, as for pathogen
monitoring, EPA is proposing a period
within which monitoring could be
initiated and completed. Systems would
be required to conduct microbial and
DBF monitoring simultaneously,
beginning as soon as EPA approved
laboratories could be identified for
conducting both analysis. However,
TOG monitoring would not be delayed
because these data are required to assess
which systems would need to do bench
or pilot scale testing of precursor
removal technologies. Therefore, all
TOG monitoring must begin by [insert
date 3 months following the
promulgation of this rule]. EPA also
proposes to delay or omit the
monitoring of certain analytes, if their
inclusion would cause undue delay hi
the start of monitoring for the remainder
of the analytes. Monitoring would not
be omitted for the following parameters:
(1) Trihalomethanes; (2) haloacetic
acids; (3) bromate; (4) chlorite; (5)
chlorate; (6) total organic halide; (7)
total organic carbon; and (8) bromide.
EPA requests comments on this issue.
EPA is concerned about the feasibility
of developing laboratory capacity for
measuring cyanogen chloride (CNCL)
and aldehydes. In addition, EPA is
concerned about its ability to evaluate
laboratories that may develop
capabilities for measuring these
analytes, because PE samples will not be
available. These issues are described
below.
EPA has several concerns about the
measurement of CNCL The first issue is
one of safety. Analytical standards must
be prepared from pure CNC1, because
pure CNC1 is the only commercially
available material. The worker who
prepares the stock liquid CNC1
standards must be experienced in the
preparation of liquid standards from
gases. Due to the toxicity of the
compound, special precautions must be
taken to ensure the safety of the worker.
Few laboratories that specialize in
analyses of drinking water are equipped
to prepare CNC1 standards from pure
gas.
One solution to the safety issue would
be for EPA to provide liquid CNC1
standards to laboratories that perform
this analysis for the ICR. EPA is not
certain that development of liquid CNC1
standards is feasible within the time
frame of this rule. In addition, EPA is
concerned about the ability to evaluate
the performance of laboratories that
conduct this analysis.
EPA does not have the resources to
develop performance evaluation (PE)
samples for CNC1 or aldehydes in time
to meet the requirements of this
regulation. An alternative approach to
compare laboratory performance would
be to conduct round robin
interlaboratory studies using whole
volume samples. Due to issues
concerning the stability of CNC1 and
aldehydes and limited data on the
intralaboratory performance of the
methods, the results from round robin
interlaboratory studies would be very
difficult to interpret.
One of EPA's laboratories has the
capability to measure CNC1 in water
using EPA Method 524.2 and to measure
aldehydes using the PFBHA
methodology. Utilities could be required
to send all samples for CNC1 and
aldehyde analyses to EPA. Having one
laboratory perform all these analyses for
the ICR would eliminate the data
variability that results from multiple
laboratory analyses, thus producing
more precise data. Greater precision
would make it easier to determine how
treatment practices and source water
characteristics influence CNC1 and
aldehyde formation. EPA solicits
comment on this approach for obtaining
CNC1 and aldehyde measurements.
6. Quality Assurance
The integrity of the DBF monitoring
database is contingent upon accurate
and precise analytical data from the
samples, accurate plant process
information from each utility, and
correct input of the data into the
database. EPA proposes that each utility
prepare a Quality Assurance Project
Plan (QAPP) specific for the ICR
monitoring. The QAPP would cover the
entire project starting with the
objectives of the project, through the
sampling strategy and procedures,
laboratory procedures and analytical
methods and finally, the data handling
and reporting processes. Guidance for
preparing it would be provided in an
ICR Guidance Manual.
Sampling. The sampling for this rule
would primarily be done by the system.
Each system has its own sampling
regime and protocol W the currently
regulated contaminants. Sampling for
the unregulated DBFs is more complex,
and will require greater coordination
with the analytical laboratory. As a
result, EPA intends to develop a
sampling guidance manual to describe
the proper sampling techniques for use
in complying with this rule. The manual
would describe: (1) Sample containers;
(2) sampling techniques; (3) required
preservatives and dechlorinating agents;
(4) sample shipping conditions; and (5)
sample holding times and conditions.
Samplers would be required to follow
the specifications outlined in the
manual. EPA solicits comments
concerning alternative mechanisms for
ensuring consistency in the sampling
aspects of the study.
Analytical data. The analytical data
for this rule may be generated by many
laboratories. As a result, the data will
have variable characteristics such as: (1)
Detection level; (2) precision; and (3)
bias. As a first step to ensuring data
comparability, EPA would require
laboratories to use the specific
analytical methods or protocols outlined
in the ICR and described in the ICR DBF
Analytical Methods Guidance Manual.
An additional technique that may be
employed to assist in data comparability
is to require all laboratories to obtain
their primary standards (i.e., standards
which laboratories use to calibrate their
instruments) from the same source. EPA
is evaluating the cost of providing
primary standards for the major ICR
analytes to laboratories "approved" for
performing analyses for the ICR.
In addition, EPA proposes that
minimum quality control acceptance
criteria be established for all data that
are entered into the DBF database. A
workgroup will establish acceptance
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6357
criteria for each parameter being
measured based on the data quality
objectives necessary for successfully
completing the monitoring study
objectives. These criteria will be
included in the ICR DBF Analytical
Methods Guidance Manual. The
performance of the method as it is
routinely used in laboratories currently
doing the same analysis will be used as
a,guide for determining feasibility in
meeting the data quality objectives.
Laboratories will be required to: (1)
Demonstrate the absence of
interferences from background
contamination by analyzing method
and/or shipping blanks, depending
upon the method at a specified
frequency; (2) achieve quantitative
recovery of surrogate standards that are
spiked into samples for some analytical
methods; (3) achieve quantitative
recovery of the internal standard when
its use is specified in the method/
protocol; (4) perform a specified
minimum number of duplicate analyses
and analyses of fortified samples (or
reagent water, depending upon the
analysis) with each batch of samples
processed through the analytical
procedure; (5) achieve a specified level
of precision and accuracy for each batch
of samples. Where appropriate,
calibration will require a specified
number of procedural standards, as well
as periodic verification of quantitation
at the minimum reporting level. The ICR
Analytical Methods Guidance Manual
will contain specific criteria for: (1) The
quality control (QC) procedures that
must be followed with each analytical
method or protocol; (2) the minimum
reporting level for each method/protocol
and a method for demonstrating it (The
minimum reporting level, which is the
level at which laboratories will be able
to accurately and precisely measure the
analyte, will be higher than the method
detection limit [MDL]); and (3) data
quality acceptance criteria for each
method/protocol. The QC procedures
and acceptance criteria may be more
stringent than the specifications in the
current versions of the methods based
on ICR data quality objectives.
Concentrations below the minimum
reporting level specified for each
method/protocol will be reported as
"zero" in the database. EPA requests
comments on the use of zero in the
database to indicate concentrations
below the reporting level, or whether
data should be reported as low as the
MDL level.
EPA would require laboratories to
include the above mentioned QC data
with the analytical results for the
samples in the reports they send to the
systems. The Agency would provide
systems guidance on how to evaluate
the QC data. Monitoring data that meet
the minimum QC acceptance criteria (as
specified in the ICR DBF Analytical
Methods Manual) would be. reported to
EPA along with a subset of the
associated QC data. The utility would
send the QC information and
identification of the laboratories to EPA
using the same mechanism as it uses to
report plant process and monitoring
data. In some cases, the QC data for a
batch of samples will be shared by two
or more utilities (e.g., analyses of
laboratory fortified blanks). EPA would
require both the laboratory and utility to
report to EPA the extraction and
analysis dates for each batch of samples.
The QC data would be entered into
the DBP database along with the
analytical data. Computer algorithms
will be used to determine if the data
meet the specified QC criteria and the
data will be classified as acceptable or
marginally acceptable. Systems would
not submit to EPA data that do not meet
the minimum QC criteria. Instead, the
utility will notify EPA of the reason for
losing the sample (i.e, breakage, sample
holding time exceeded, laboratory QC
out of control, etc.). When the laboratory
fails to consistently meet performance
criteria, EPA would assist the system in
finding an alternate laboratory for future
monitoring. EPA would also provide
technical assistance, upon request,
either directly or through a contractor,
to laboratories who develop technical
difficulties in measuring critical ICR
analytes, to maintain the necessary
laboratory capacity and capability to
complete the ICR monitoring. EPA
requests comments on the QA/QC
criteria for data entry into the database.
Treatment plant process data. To
maintain quality and integrity of data
input, EPA would undertake some level
of review of system data. The Agency
would screen the data for proper use of
the input software, proper electronic
transfer of data, submission of all
required data and plant operating
information, reasonableness and
completeness of the data, consistency
with previous reports, etc. EPA requests
comment on how the data review
should be conducted.
7. Bench/Pilot Scale Testing
During the negotiation of the D/DBP
rule, the Negotiating Committee agreed
to require surface water systems serving
greater than 100,000 people and ground
water systems serving greater than
50,000 people to conduct bench or pilot
studies on DBP precursor removal,
using either GAG or membrane
filtration, unless these systems met
certain water quality conditions or
already had such full scale treatment in
place. The purpose of this requirement
was twofold: (a) To obtain more
information on the cost effectiveness of
GAG and membrane technology for
removing DBP precursors and reducing
DBP levels, and (b) to accelerate the
time that systems would need to install
such full scale technology if they were
required to do so under the Stage 2 D/
DBP rule. The proposed rule would
require each system to complete the
study, including a report describing the
results and conclusion of the study, by
September 1997.
The Negotiating Committee also
considered whether these objectives
could be met without all systems
conducting the studies, and if so, how
resources that would otherwise be
devoted to bench/pilot scale testing
could be used to fill other possible data
gaps. EPA is exploring alternatives to
the proposed regulations if it is
determined that not all systems need to
undertake the studies in order to fulfill
the objectives of these requirements.
One possibility is for the final rule to
provide that some systems that would
otherwise conduct the studies could
instead pool their resources (in an
amount equivalent to the cost of such
studies) to contribute to funding key
research identified during the
negotiated rule-making process. EPA is
exploring an arrangement with a third
party organization to use those pooled
resources to undertake such efforts.
Such a project would be conducted
under the guidance of an advisory group
representing the participants in the
negotiated rule-making. EPA solicits
comments on the approach and which
criteria could be used in the final rule
for determining which systems could
participate in this alternative. EPA also
solicits comments on other means for
accomplishing the objective of
maximizing data collection resources..
The Negotiating Committee agreed
that systems using surface water would
not have to conduct the bench pilot
scale studies if they met either of the
following conditions: (1) System uses
chlorine as the primary and residual
disinfectant and had an annual average
of less than 40 ug/1 for total
trihalomethanes and less than 30 ug/1
for total haloacetic acids (HAAS), or (2)
the TOC level in the raw water before
disinfection is less than 4.0 mg/1, based
on an average of monthly measurements
for one year beginning [insert 3 months
following the promulgation date of this
rule]. Systems using ground water
would ihot have to conduct a study if the
TOC in the finished water is less than
2.0 mg/1, based on an average of
-------
6358
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
monthly measurements for one year
beginning [insert 3 months following
thepromulgation date of this rule].
EPA is proposing that the treatment
studies be designed to yield
representative performance data and
allow the development of treatment cost
estimates for different levels of organic
disinfection byproduct control. The
treatment study would be conducted
with the effluent from treatment
processes already in place that remove
disinfection byproduct precursors and
TOG. Depending upon the type of
treatment study that is made, the study
would be conducted in accordance with
the following criteria.
Bench scale testing. Bench-scale
testing would be defined as continuous
flow tests: (1) Rapid small scale column
test (RSSCT) for GAG (Crittenden et al.
1991; Sontheimer et al. 1988; Summers
et al. 1992; Cummings et al., 1992); and
(2) reactors with a configuration that
yield representative flux loss assessment
for membranes. Both the RSSCT and
membrane system test can be adversely
affected by the presence of particles.
Therefore, both tests would be preceded
by particle removal processes, such as
microfiltration.
GAG bench-scale testing would
include the following information on
each RSSCT: Pretreatment conditions,
GAG type, GAG particle diameter,
height and dry weight (mass) of GAG in
the RSSCT column, RSSCT column
inner diameter, volumetric flow rate,
and operation time at which each
sample is taken. EPA would require the
testing of at least two empty bed contact
times (EBCTs) using the RSSCT. The
Agency would require these RSSCT
EBCTs'to be designed to represent a full-
scale EBCT of 10 min and a full-scale
EBCT of 20 min. Additional EBCTs
could be tested. The RSSCT testing
would include the water quality
parameters and sampling frequency
listed in Table m.8. The RSSCT would
be run until the effluent TOG
concentration is 75% of the average
influent TOG concentration or a RSSCT
operation time that represents the
equivalent of one year of full-scale
operation, whicheyer is shortest. The
average influent TOG would be defined
as the running average of the influent
TOG at the time of effluent sampling.
RSSCTs would be conducted quarterly
over one year to obtain the seasonal
variation. Thus a total of four RSSCTs
at each EBCT is required. If, after
completion of the first quarter RSSCTs,
the system finds that the effluent TOG
reaches 75% of the average influent
TOG within 20 full-scale equivalent
days on the EBCT=10 min test and
within 30 full-scale equivalent days on
the EBCT=20 min test, then the last
three quarterly tests would be
conducted using membrane bench-scale
testing with only one membrane, as
described in Section 141.142 (b)(l)(B).
(Crittenden et al. 1991; Sontheimer et al.
1988; Summers et al. 1992; Cummings
et al. 1992)
TABLE m.8.—SAMPLING OF GAC BENCH-SCALE SYSTEMS
Sampling point
Analyses
Sample frequency
GAC Influent
GAC influent
GAC effluent EBCT-10
min (scaled).
GAC effluent @ EBCT-20
min (scaled).
Alkalinity, total & calcium hardness, ammonia and bro-
mide.
pH, turbidity, temperature, TOG and UV^. SDS' for
THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH, temperature, TOO and UVrm. SDSi for THMs,
HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH, temperature, TOC and UVzs-t. SDS' for THMs,
HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
Two samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
the RSSCT run.
Three samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
the RSSCT run.
A minimum of 12 samples. One after one hour, and
thereafter at 5% to 8% increments of the average in-
fluent TOC.
A minimum of 12 samples. One after one hour, and
thereafter at 5% to 8% increments of the average in-
fluent TOC.
1 SDS conditions are defined in Section 141.142 (b)(4).
(B) EPA would require the membrane
bench-scale testing to include the
following information: pretreatment
conditions, membrane type, membrane
area, configuration, inlet pressure and
volumetric flow rate, outlet (reject)
pressure and volumetric flow rate,
permeate pressure and volumetric flow
rate, recovery, and operation time at
which each sample is taken. A
minimum of two different membrane
types with nominal molecular weight
cutoffs of less than 1000 would be
investigated. The membrane test system
would need to be designed and operated
to yield a representative flux loss
assessment. The system would conduct
membrane tests quarterly over one year
to obtain the seasonal variation. Thus,
the system would run a total of four
membrane tests with each membrane.
The membrane bench-scale testing
would include the,water quality
parameters and sampling frequency, as
listed in Table III.9.
TABLE III. 9.—SAMPLING OF BENCH-SCALE MEMBRANE SYSTEMS
Sampling point
Analyses
Sample frequency 2
Membrane Influent.
Membrane influent.
Membrane permeate for
each membrane tested.
Alkalinity, total dissolved solids, total & calcium hard-
ness and bromide.
pH, turbidity, temperature, HPC, TOC and UV2S4. SDS'
for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, turbidity, tempera-
ture, total & calcium hardness, bromide, HPC, TOC
and UV2J4. SDS> for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine
demand.
Two samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
the membrane run. If a continuous flow (non-batch)
influent is used then samples are taken at the same
time as the membrane effluent samples.
Three samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
the membrane run. If a continuous flow (non-batch)
influent is used then samples are taken at the same
time as the membrane effluent samples.
A minimum of 8 samples evenly spaced over the mem-
brane run.
i SDS conditions are defined in Section 141.142(b)(4).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6359
2 More frequent monitoring of flow rate and pressure would be required to accurately assess flux loss.
Pilot-scale testing. Under the
proposal, EPA defines pilot-scale testing
as continuous flow tests: (1) Using GAG
of particle size representative of that
used in full-scale practice, a pilot GAG
column with a minimum inner diameter
of 2.0 inches, and hydraulic loading rate
(volumetric flow rate/column cross-
sectional area) representative of that
used in full-scale practice, and (2) using
membrane modules with a minimum of
a 4.0 inch diameter for spiral wound
membranes or equivalent membrane
area if other configurations are used.
GAG pilot-scale testing would include
the following information on the pilot
plant: Pretreatment conditions, GAG
type, GAG particle diameter, height and
dry weight (mass) of GAG in the pilot
column, pilot column inner diameter,
volumetric flow rate, and operation time
at which each sample is taken. If pilot
scale testing were conducted, at least
two EBCTs would be required to be
tested, EBCT=10 min and EBCT=20
min, using the pilot-scale plant.
Additional EBCTs could be tested. The
pilot testing would include the water
quality parameters listed in Table ffl.10.
The pilot tests would be run until the
effluent TOC concentration is 75% of
the average influent TOC concentration,
with a,maximum run length of one year.
The average influent TOC would be
defined as the running average of the
influent TOC at the time of sampling.
The pilot-scale testing should be
sufficiently long to determine the
seasonal variation.
TABLE 111.10.—Sampling of GAG Pilot-scale Systems
Sampling point
Analyses
Sample frequency
GAG influent
GAG effluent
min.
EBCT=10
GAG effluent @ EBCT=20
min.
pH, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, total & calcium
hardness, ammonia, bromide, TOC and UV254. SDSi
for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH, turbidity, temperature, ammonia,2 TOG and UV254.
SDS' for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH, turbidity, temperature, ammonia,2 TOC and UV254-
SDS' for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.,
A minimum of 15 samples taken at the same time as
the samples for GAG effluent at EBCT=20 min.
A minimum of 15 samples. One after one day, and
thereafter at 3% to 7% increments of the average in-
fluent TOC.
A minimum of 15 samples. One after one day, and
thereafter at 3% to 7% increments of the average in-
fluent TOC.
i SDS conditions are defined in Section 141.142 (b.4). !
2 If present in the influent.
Note: More frequent effluent monitoring may be necessary in order to predict the 3% to 7% increments of average influent TOC.
If membrane pilot-scale testing were
conducted it would include the ,
following information on the pilot plant:
pretreatment conditions, membrane
type, configuration, staging, inlet
pressure and volumetric flow rate,
outlet (reject) pressure and volumetric
flow rate, permeate pressure and
volumetric flow rate, recovery,
operation time at which each sample is
taken, recovery, cross flow velocity,
recycle flow rate, backwashing and
cleaning conditions, and
characterization and ultimate disposal
of the reject stream. The membrane test
system would be designed to yield a
representative flux loss assessment. The
pilot-scale testing shall be sufficient in
length, and conducted throughout the
year in order to capture the seasonal
variation, with a maximum run length
of one year. The pilot testing would
include the water quality parameters as
listed in Table ul.ll.
TABLE 111.11.—Sampling of Pilot-scale Membrane Systems
Sampling point
Analyses
Sample frequency 3
Membrane influent.
Membrane permeate
pH, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, turbidity, tempera-
ture, total & calcium hardness, ammonia, bromide,
HPC, TOC and UV254. SDS' for THMs, HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine demand.
pH, alkalinity, total dissolved solids, turbidity tempera-
ture, total & calcium hardness, ammonia?, bromide,
HPC, TOC and UV^. SDSi for THMs, HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine demand.
A minimum of 15 samples to be taken at the same time
as the membrane effluent samples.
A minimum of 1!5 samples evenly spaced over the
membrane run.
i SDS conditions are defined in Section 141.142(b)(4).
2 If present in the influent.
3 More frequent monitoring of flow rate and pressure will be required to accurately assess flux loss.
Pretreatment analysis. EPA would
require that influent water to either
bench- or pilot-scale tests be taken at a
point before the addition of any oxidant
or disinfectant that forms chlorinated
disinfection byproducts. If the oxidant
or disinfectant addition precedes any
full-scale treatment process that
removes disinfection byproduct
precursors, then bench- or pilot-scale
treatment processes that simulate this
full-scale treatment process would be
required prior to the GAG or membrane
process.
Simulated distribution system
analysis. EPA would require the use of
simulated distribution system (SDS)
conditions with chlorine before the
measurement of THMs, HAA6, TOX and
chlorine demand. These conditions
would be based on the site-specific SDS
sample, as defined in Section 141.141(c)
(Table 1) with regard to holding time,
temperature, and chlorine residual. If
chlorine is not used as the final
disinfectant in practice, then a chlorine
dose should be set to yield a free
-------
6360 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
chlorine residual of 0.2 mg/1 after a
holding time equal to the longest period
of time the water is expected to remain
in the distribution system or seven days,
whichever is shortest. The holding time
prior to analysis of THMs, HAA6, TOX
and chlorine demand would be required
to remain as that of the SDS sample as
defined in § 141.141(c) (Table 1).
Systems with multiple source waters.
For systems with multiple source
waters, bench-or pilot scale testing
would be required for each treatment
plant that serves a population greater
than 100,000 (surface water supplies) or
50,000 (ground water supplies) and uses
a significantly different source water.
EPA would provide guidance for
making such determinations.
EPA would require a groundwater
system with multiple wells from the
same aquifer to monitor TOG from one
sampling point to determine if a bench
or pilot scale study is required. A
ground water system with multiple
wells from different aquifers must
sample TOG from at least two wells
from each of the aquifers with the
highest TOG concentrations, as
determined from at least one sample.
from each aquifer.
Reporting. Under this rule, EPA
would require all systems conducting
bench or pilot scale studies to report to
the Agency the additional information
in Table 6 of § 141.141, as appropriate,
for source water and treatment
processes that precede the bench/pilot
systems. This information is to be
reported for full-scale pretreatment
processes and for pilot- or bench-scale
pretreatment processes where
appropriate.
Selection of bench versus pilot scale
and membrane versus GAC studies.
Bench-scale GAC studies (RSSCTs) are
less expensive than pilot studies and
produce information based on the
ability of GAC to adsorb TOG. Pilot-
scale studies of GAC produce
information more representative of TOG
removal at full-scale.
Removal of TOG by GAC in full-scale
water treatment plants is a function of
two processes that occur
simultaneously: adsorption on the
surface of GAC and biological
degradation. Pilot scale studies are the
most economical way to demonstrate
both processes on a continuous flow
basis.
By their nature, RSSCT studies are of
short duration and designed to measure
adsorption of organic compounds.
Biological activity is discouraged
through various means and if biological
degradation does occur, the RSSCT
results are invalid.
Pilot-scale GAC studies produce a
time-averaged result of the influent
TOG, whereas RSSCT studies are run on
batches of water (50-100 gallons)
collected at discrete time periods. Pilot-
scale GAC effluent data will reflect large
spikes of influent TOC concentrations
which can degrade the process
performance. The RSSCT procedure
cannot duplicate this process, and can
only reflect higher than normal influent
TOG concentrations if the batch sample
collects the TOC spike.
Bench-scale membrane studies would
only generate limitejd data on DBF
removal, primarily TOG removal.
Moreover, what data is generated would
be constrained by limited membrane
flux information that is critical for
generating membrane cost data.
Consequently, EPA recommends that
membrane performance and cost data
for DBF control be generated by pilot-
scale studies rather than bench studies.
Most large systems may choose GAC
for DBF removal studies, rather than
membrane technology, due to the
economies of scale associated with full-
scale GAC treatment. However, systems
with very poor source waters may more
easily achieve low TOC levels in the
treated water with membrane
technology. A goal of this portion of the
ICR is to obtain data from a number of
pilot-scale studies for both membrane
and GAC technologies as input to Stage
2 rule development. Without EPA
specifically requiring that these pilot-
scale studies be conducted, it remains
unclear whether an adequate number of
such studies will be done. A major issue
is how to equitably encourage utilities
to produce these studies.
Table 111.12 is a summary of the type
and number of pilot studies expected to
be needed for Stage 2 Rule development
as discussed by the Negotiating
Committee during the rule negotiation
process.
TABLE 111.12.—Number of Pilot Studies Needed for Stage 2 Organized by TOC Category
Pilot study type
GAC
Membrane
TOC concentrations, mg/L
>4to8
10
2
>8to
12
10
2
•12 to
16
10
2
•16
xxxxxxxxxx
2
EPA does not recommend GAC
studies at very high TOC
concentrations, due to the rapid
breakthrough of TOC at empty bed
contact times (EBCTs) of 10 and 20
minutes. The Agency believes that to
ensure that the categories in Table in.12
are properly covered, the Agency would
need to tell individual systems which
concentration category to use. The water
system representatives on the
Negotiating Committee agreed to
conduct a survey of systems serving
more than 100,000 people, in
conjunction with EPA, to identify which
systems have a pilot plant suitable for
running GAC studies in the post-filter
adsorber mode or intend to build one in
the near future. These systems will also
be asked if they are willing to conduct
pilot-scale membrane studies.
EPA would also request systems to
provide limited water quality data to
enable EPA to assess a TOC
concentration range and, if possible, a
TOC "type" to the water to be tested. If
the nature of the TOC cannot be
classified, EPA would select waters
from different sections of the country to
cover the matrix in Table 111.12.
Based on the results of the survey,
EPA may request systems with pilot
plants to perform GAC or membrane
pilot studies instead of an RSSCT.
Systems with pilot plants in place
should be able to perform GAC pilot
studies at a fraction of the cost of having
to build one from scratch. The cost
should not be much greater than
running an RSSCT.
EPA developed the above described
survey approach with follow up
voluntary pilot plant studies among
candidate utilities to encourage a wide
range of studies for different types of
waters and DBF precursors needed to be
studied. The Negotiating Committee
also discussed the advisability of
requiring Subpart H systems to perform
a pilot-scale study if (1) the systems
have a raw water TOG concentration
greater than 4.0 mg/L and serve more
than 500,000 people, or (2) the systems
have a raw water TOC concentration
-------
——• ^^z
above a specified concentration and
serve more than 100,000 people.
The Negotiating Committee developed
all of the above options because of the
uncertainty of the distribution of TOG
concentrations in the source waters for
large systems and the desire to produce
useful data for developing the Stage 2 D/
DBF Rule. EPA solicits comment on
how to ensure an adequate number of
pilot scale studies for both membranes
and GAG technology. If EPA finds that
an insufficient number of systems are
willing to conduct pilot-scale testing as
a follow-up to the survey, what should
the Agency require to ensure that the
desired number of studies indicated in
Table HI.12 are done? Should EPA select
the sites for GAG and membrane pilot
studies, according to system size, TOG
concentration, or both? Also, how can
the site selection process ensure that
membranes are used in some of the pilot
studies?
6361
C. Dates
EPA is proposing to require systems
serving 100,000 or more people to begin
to monitor microbial (for Subpart H
systems only), chemical, and treatment
process parameters no earlier than
[insert date three months following
promulgation date of this rule] and no
later than October 1995. The exception
to this is for TOG monitoring which
must begin [insert first day of month
three months following promulgation
date]. Once monitoring has begun, these
systems would be required to monitor
for 18 consecutive months and would
have to be finished no later than March
31,1997.
Systems required to monitor both
microbiological (under § 141.140) and
chemical parameters would have to
conduct both types of monitoring
concurrently for 18 consecutive months.
This monitoring regimen would allow
for evaluation of both treatment efficacy
and DBF formation.
Systems serving between 10,000 and
99,999 people would begin to monitor
microbial and treatment process
parameters no earlier [insert month
three months following promulgation
date] and no later than April 1996. Once
monitoring has begun, these systems
would be required to monitor every
other month for 12 consecutive months
and would have to be finished no later
than March 31,1997.
Subpart H systems serving 100,000 or
more people and ground water systems
serving 50,000 or more people would
begin bench- or pilot-scale studies no
later than [insert month 18 months after
promulgation of rule] and be required to
complete the studies by September
1997, unless the system met one of the
criteria to avoid studies.
Prior to the start of monitoring,
systems must arrange to have samples
analyzed by an EPA approved
laboratory. If systems serving greater
than 100,000 people are not able to
arrange to have samples analyzed by
such a laboratory by [insert date six
months after publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register], they are
required to notify EPA. If systems
serving between 10,000 and 100,000
people are not able to arrange to have
samples analyzed by such a laboratory
by [insert date nine months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register], they are required to
notify EPA. EPA will then provide a list
of approved labs or other necessary
guidance.
In summary of what has been stated
previously in parts, the purpose of the
monitoring under this rule is to (a)
determine if an ESWTR is necessary,
and if so, to support the development of
appropriate criteria in both the interim
and long-term ESWTR, (b) assist utilities
in the implementation of the interim
ESWTR if such a rule becomes
necessary, and (c) support the
development of the Stage 2 D/DBP Rule.
The above monitoring schedules,
albeit tight, were agreed to by the
Negotiating Committee as part of the
regulation negotiation process. The
Time line
12/93
3/94
6/94 ..
8/94 ..
10/94
TABLE Ill.is.-Proposed Time Frame of D/DBP, ESWTR, ICR Rule Development
schedules for compiling monitoring data
are tight because the Negotiating
Committee placed a time limit of
December 1996 for promulgating an
interim ESWTR and a Stage 1 D/DBP
Rule. For this schedule to be realized a
large number of utilities will need to
initiate monitoring beginning shortly
after October 1994 so that EPA can
analyze the data and consider them in
promulgating the interim ESWTR. EPA
is making every possible effort to ensure
that enough laboratories can be
approved to generate the necessary data
within the desired time frame. Systems
are encouraged to generate data as
quickly as possible so that their data
will be considered in the interim
ESWTR. Data generated after the time
EPA believes it has sufficient data to
promulgate the interim ESWTR wiU be
used to develop the long-term ESWTR,
and assist utilities in the
implementation of the interim ESWTR
Before promulgating the interim
ESWTR, EPA intends to issue a Notice
of Availability to: (a) Discuss the
pertinent data collected under the ICR
rule, (b]l discuss additional research that
would influence determination of
appropriate regulatory criteria, (c)
discuss criteria EPA considered
appropriate to promulgate in the interim
ESWTR (which would be among the
regulatory options of the proposed
interim ESWTR) and (d) solicit public
comment on the intended criteria to be
promulgated. Following consideration
of public comments received, EPA
would promulgate the interim ESWTR
and the Stage 1 D/DBP rule at the same
time to reduce the possibility that a
system might unduly compromise its
control of pathogens while complying
with the Stage 1 D/DBP rule. Table HL13
indicates the anticipated schedule by
which the various rules would be
proposed, promulgated and become
effective. Even though the December
1993 date has not been met, EPA is
hopeful 1:hat other dates will not slip
commensurately.
Stage 1 D/DBP rule
Propose enhanced coagulation require-
ment for systems with conventional
treatment; MCl_s for TTHMs = 80 ng/l
HAAs = 60 jig/I. MCLs for bromate,
chlorite, limits for disinfectants for all
systems.except TNCWSs.
Close of public comment period
Stage 2 D/DBP rule
Propose information collection require-
ments for systems >100k.
Propose Stage 2. MCLs for TTHMs = 40
ng/l, THAAs = 30 jig/I. BAT as precur-
sor removal with chlorination.
Promulgate ICR
Systems >100,000 begin ICR monitoring
ESWTR
Propose information collection require-
ments for systems >10k.
Propose interim ESWTR for systems
>10k.
Promulgate ICR.
Close of public comment period to pro-
posed ESWTR.
Systems begin ICR monitoring.
-------
6362
•••••
Time line
10/95
W'
***
Federal Register / V ...... " '
TABLE HI.13.-Proposed Time Frame of D/DBP. ESWTR. ICR Rule Deyelopment-Continued^
- . -- • -- 1 „, ___ o rWHQD n,lo I ESWTR
Stage 1 D/DBP rule
11/95
1/96
12/96
3/97
6/97
10/97
12/97
12/98
6/00..
1/02
Stage 2 D/DBP rule
SW systems >100k and GW systems
>50k begin bench/pilot studies unless
source water quality criteria met..
Promulgate Stage 1
Effective. Effective for SW systems sen/-
Uiy yjowio* -^i**i»i «•*..—• •
date for GAG or membrane technology.
Staae 'i' limits effective for surface water
systems <10k, and ground water sys-
tems >1 Ok.
Stage 1 limits effective for GW systems
<10k unless Stage 2 criteria super-
sede.
Systems complete ICR monitoring
Notice of availability for Stage
reproposal.
Complete and submit results of bench/
pilot studies.
Initiate reproposal—begin with 3/94 pro-
posal. .
Close of public comment period
Propose for all CWSs, NTNCWSs ..........
Promulgate Stage 2 for all CWSs,
NTNCWSs.
Effective lower MCLs or other criteria,
extended compliance to 2004 for GAG
or membranes.
Notice of availability on monitoring data
and direction of interim ESWTR.
Close of public comment period to NOA.
Promulgate interim ESWTR systems
>10k.
Systems complete ICR monitoring.
Propose long-term ESWTR for systems
<10k, possible changes for systems
>10k.
Interim ESWTR effective for systems
>10k 1994, 1995, 1996 monitoring
data used for level of treatment deter-
mination.
Promulgate long-term ESWTR.
Long-term ESWTR effective for all sys-
tem sizes.
EPA believes it will need about one
year of microbial monitoring data from
& large number of utilities to determine
candidate regulatory criteria for
discussion in the Notice of Availability
concerning the interim ESWTR. EPA
also believes it will need about one year,
following the issuance of the NOA, to
promulgate the interim ESWTR.
Microbial and DBF monitoring are
required at the same time to facilitate
data management and to allow
comparisons to be made concerning
simultaneous control of both pathogens
and DBFs.
EPA requests comment on the
feasibility of the schedule for the
monitoring requirements proposed
under this ICR. EPA also solicits
comments on alternative microbial
monitoring schemes, that would need
less laboratory capacity and would still
provide the requisite data for
Developing the interim ESWTR, as well
as providing adequate data by which
systems could implement such a rule.
EPA requests comment on a proposed
alternative to require those systems
serving 100,000 or more persons to
initiate all microbial, chemical, and
treatment process monitoring
requirements (not including TOG
monitoring which would begin [insert
date three months following
promulgation date of this rule]) within
the first 3 months of the proposed 30
month monitoring period, and that
those systems serving between 10,000
and 100,000 people complete all
monitoring requirements during the last
12 months of the 30 month monitoring
period. Systems serving between 10,000
and 100,000 people that desire and are
able to initiate monitoring through an
EPA approved laboratory before their
required start date would be given credit
toward meeting the requirements of this
rule. EPA believes that this proposed
alternative monitoring schedule may
facilitate the generation of more
microbial data within a shorter time,
thereby increasing the likelihood of
meeting the schedule for promulgating
the interim ESWTR. This alternative
schedule would also increase
efficiencies of available EPA resources
to manage and track data, and to
provide technical assistance to utilities
as they attempt to comply with this rule.
EPA also requests comments on the
appropriateness of separating the final
ICR rule into two separate rules: one for
data collection to support the
development and implementation of the
interim ESWTR, and another for data
collection to support the development
of the Stage 2 D/DBP and ESWTR rules.
The purpose of such a strategy would be
to promulgate the microbial data
collection requirements sooner than
otherwise might be possible to avoid
undue delay in developing and
promulgating the interim ESWTR, as
well as the Stage 1 D/DBP rule.
D. Reporting Requirements
Under this rule, systems would
provide the monitoring data and other
indicated information directly to EPA.
States, as well as the public, would have
access to all the reported data via a
national electronic data base. The
Agency is using this approach to avoid
increasing the implementation burden
to the States and to obtain and analyze
the data more quickly to meet the
accelerated schedule of future
rulemakings agreed to by the
Negotiating Committee negotiating the
DBF Rule. ;
Under this ICR rule, systems serving
more than 100,000 people would be
required to provide the requisite data
beginning [insert date 6 months
following the promulgation date oi this
rule], and every three months thereafter
until completion of the required
monitoring. Systems serving between
10,000 and 100,000 people would be
required to provide the requisite data
beginning four months after starting
monitoring and every 2 months
thereafter, until completion of the
required monitoring. With this
approach, a substantial amount of the
data should become available in time for
consideration in evaluating different
regulatory options for the interim
ESWTR. The initial data submissions
will allow EPA to screen the data for
problems and begin entering it into a
national data base which would be
accessible by the public. Systems would
-------
need to report the required physical and
engineering information on the initial
submission only, unless this
information changes. To assist EPA in
processing quickly the large amount of
data anticipated, the Agency requests
that systems serving more than 100,000
people submit data either electronically
or on computer diskettes, and that
systems serving between 10,000 and
100,000 people do so if possible.
To assist the systems and facilitate
EPA's effort to screen the data and enter
it into a computer, the Agency has
developed specific forms for data and
information entry as previously
described. These forms include the EPA
address where the system should send
data and the other required information.
EPA requests comment on the
feasibility of the above reporting
schedule. The Agency also requests
comment on alternative approaches that
might be as, or more, efficient than the
one above.
6363
E. List of Systems Required To Submit
Data
Between now and the time of
promulgation EPA will attempt to
determine which systems would
appropriately be required to meet the
different requirements of the ICR.
Appendix B of this preamble includes a
preliminary list of candidate systems in
the three main size categories that
would be required to submit data to
EPA to fulfill the requirements of this
rule. However, systems which
exclusively purchase water from other
systems, and do not further disinfect,
are not required to do any monitoring
and are not intended to be included in
these lists. Some systems are both
wholesalers and retailers and are
included in the lists. The intent of the
ICR is for the requirements to pertain to
systems which treat water for
populations equivalent to more than
100,000 people or between 10,000 and
100,000 people.
The intent of the first list (Appendix
B-l of this preamble) is to provide a
tabulation of all systems using ground
water or surface water and which
produce treated drinking water for
populations equivalent to serving
100,000 or greater. Systems using
ground water in this size category
would be required to monitor for DBFs
and other water quality indicators,
provide specific physical and
engineering data, and conduct bench or
pilot scale studies depending upon their
water quality (see section III.B.7).
Systems using surface water in this size
category would also be required to
submit this data, as well as microbial
occurrence data.
Data in Appendix B-l of this
preamble includes classification of
populations serving retail and wholesale
populations under two different data
bases: The Federal Reporting Data
System (FRDS) and the Water Industry
Data Base (WIDE). Since there may be
errors or incomplete data in either data
base, data from both data bases are
listed. Also included are data on the
average daily production of water in
millions of gallons per day (MGD).
Based on data included in the WIDE,
95% of the time the average daily flow
production associated with a population
of 100,000 or greater is > 9 MGD.
Therefore, systems with average daily
flows (assuming the flows reported are
correct) significantly greater than 9
MGD, although not necessarily listed
with populations above 100,000, are
included on the list should be
considered candidates for regulation.
The intent of the second list
(Appendix B-2 of this preamble),
generated from FRDS, is to provide a
tabulation of all systems using surface
water and which produce treated
drinking water equivalent to serving
populations between 10,000 and
100,000 people. These systems, if
appropriately classified, would only be
required to submit data on microbial
occurrence in the source water and
provide treatment plant data regarding
microbial treatment.
The intent of the third list (Appendix
B-3 of this preamble), generated from
FRDs, is to provide a tabulation of all
systems using ground water and serving
between 50,000 and 100,000 people. A
portion of these systems would be
required to monitor for TOG, and
depending upon the TOG level in their
ground water (see Section in. B.7),
could be required to conduct bench or
pilot scale studies for DBF precursor
removal using GAG or membrane
technology. No other data collection
requirements pertain to these systems
under this rule.
EPA solicits comment on whether the
three lists of systems included in
only,. EPA requests comment on this
approach.
-~-v.v, UOIB
-------
$45 ana 3>/o mimuu. iu» uuai ^ox
facility is estimated to be between
$150,000 per bench-scale test and
The fifth cost element is a
requirement for pilot and bench scale ^iou.uuu poi UOAK-.II-OV..**-
testing. With some exceptions, this $750,000 per pilot test. The low end
requirement applies to all surface water cost estimate assumes that 200 bench
treatment plants in systems serving firaiB studies (at $150,000 per study
more than 100,000 persons that have an
influent TOG concentration greater than
. (I »» _l,^ nnnlioc *n nil OTnilTldWatei
COSt estimate assumoa umt ~«" ««——
scale studies (at $150,000 per study
assumed to be GAG) and 20 pilot scale
(at $750,000 per study) will be
inlluent iui_ concouuuuuu ei0»^ ~-— studies (at $75U,uuu per SLUUJJ wm u*
4 mg/1. It also applies to all groundwater conducted for surface supplies and that
systems serving more than 50,000 33 bench scale studies (at $250,000 per
persons that have a treated effluent TOG
estimate assumes uiai 10^. UDH^U ov^v
studies (at $150,000 per study) and 58
pilot scale studies (at $750,000 per
study) will be conducted for surface
supplies and that 27 bench scale studies
(at $150,000 per study) and 6 pilot scale
studies (at $750,000 per study) will be
conducted for ground water supplies. At
this time EPA cannot predict with any
certainty the numbers of the different
types of studies that will be conducted.
TABLE V-1.-TOTAL COST AND BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION RULE*
Compliance Activities:
Start-Up Activities:
1395 Surface Water Systems > 10K
165 Ground Water Systems > 50k .
Subtotal
233 Surface Water Systems > 100K
165 Ground Water Systems > 50K
Subtotal
Tola)
MfcroWal Monitoring: ,
1 395 Surface Water Systems > 1 0K 1 ,725 plants
DBP Monitoring:
233 Surface Water Systems > 100K
59 Ground Water Systems > 100K ..
Process Data Reporting:
1395 Surface Water Systems > 10K
Pilot Studies
TABLE V-2.—SUMMARY
[Cost and burden estimates for DBP monitoring under the information collection rule]
Analyte
Aldehydes ..
Alkalinity ..........
Ammonia .........
AOC/BDOC .....
Bromate ..... *....
Bromide ...........
Ca. Hardness ..
Chloral Hydrate
Chlorate ...........
Chlorine ...........
Chkxine Diox-
Chlorite ............
Chloropterin .....
Chloropropano-
rves ......... ...••••
CNCI ...............
Tot.
surface
number
of sam-
ples
756
38,886
8,676
756
756
8,676
31,284
12,288
2,358
23,130
1,188
1,512
12,288
12,288
1,182
Tot
ground
number
of sam-
ples
0
54,504
25,058
0
0
23.310
54,504
15,540
3,096
47.652
15,540
Total
number
of sam-
ples
756
93,390
33,734
756
756
31,986
85,788
27,828
5.454
70,782
1,188
1,512
27,828
Unit
cost
per
sample
in dol-
lars
Unit
burden
per
sample
in min-
utes
Surface cost
in dollars
15,540 27,828
852 I 2,034
60
60
$189,000
816,606
216,900
132,300
75,600
347,040
500,544
3,379,200
235,800
462,600
23,760
189,000
804,864
368,640
295,500
ound cost
i dollars
0
1,144,584
626,456
0
0
932,400
872,064
4,273,500
309,600
953,040
0
0
1,017,870
466,200
213,000
Surface
burden
in hours
1,512
3,889
2,169
2,772
252
2,169
7,300
10,240
786
3,855
198
504
11,674
12,288
1.182
Ground
burden
in hours
Total cost in
dollars
0
5,450
6,265
0
0
5,828
12,718
12,950
1,032
7,942
0
0
14,763
15,540
852 I
$189,000
1,961,190
843,356
132,300
75,600
1,279,440
1,372,608
7,652,700
545,400
1,415,640
23,760
189,000
1,822,734
834,840
508,500
Total
burden
in hours
1,512
9,339
8,434
2,772
252
7,997
20,017
23,190
1,818
11,797
198
504
26,437
27,828
2,034
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6365
TABLE V-2.—SUMMARY—Continued
[Cost and burden estimates for DBF monitoring under the information collecUon rule]
Analyte
H2S, Fe, Mn,
etc
HAA
HAN
Ozone
pH
SDS
Temperature ....
THM
TOC
Tot. Hardness .
TOX
Turbidity
UV 254
Total
Tot.
surface
number
of sam-
ples
?
12,288
12,288
324
39,924
2,640
39,330
12,288
32040
38,292
12,288
32,040
32,040
Tot.
ground
number
of sam-
ples
?
15,540
15,540
0
55,536
7,770
55,536
15,540
54504
54,504
15,540
54504
54504
Total
number
of sam-
ples
i
27,828
27,828
324
95460
-10410
94,866
27828
86544
92,796
27828
86544
86,544
Unit
cost
per
sample
in dol-
lars
?
200
150
20
11
957
4
100
55
32
105
11
25
Unit
burden
per
sample
in min-
utes
•?
50
60
30
10
387
4
30
30
10
60
10
15
Surface cost
in dollars
7
2 457 600
1 843200
6480
439 164
2025 160
157,320
1 228 800
1 762 200
1,225,344
1 290 240
352 440
801 000
$22,126,302
Ground cost
in dollars
9
3 1 08 000
2 331 000
o
610896
7 432 005
222,144
1 554 000
2 997 720
1,744,128
1 631 700
599 544
1 362 600
$34,402,451
Surface
burden
in hours
o
1 0 240
12 288
162
6654
17028
2,622
6 144
16020
6,382
'12288
5340
8010
1153,967
Ground
burden
in hours
t
12 950
15540
o
9256
50 117
3,702
7 770
pyoco
9,084
15 540
9 084
1^ fi9fi
257,260
Total cost in
dollars
o
K cRc cnn
4 1 74 ?nn
fi 4RD
1 n100,000
[Cost and Burden Estimates for DBF Monitoring under the Information Collection Rule]
Analyte
No. of Samples/
month/tit site:
pH
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Temperature ...
Ca. Hardness .
Tot. Hardness
TOC
UV 254
Bromide
Ammonia*
Dis. Resid
H2S, Fe, Mn,
etc
Occurrence to
be deter-
mined).
No. of Samples/
quarter/trt. site:
THM
HAA
HAN
Chloropicrin ....
Chloropropan-
ones
Chloral Hy-
drate
TOX
SDS
Sampling requirements for treatment sites
Surface
Systems=233
Treatement sites
W/Filt.
429
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1.1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
W/O Hit.
11
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1.1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
Ground
Systems=59
Treatment sites
W/Filt.
219
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1.1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
W/O Fill.
1076
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1.1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
Surface
Total
number of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
31,284
31,284
31,284
31,284
31,284
31,284
31,284
31,284
7,920
8,514
15,840
?
5,280
5,280
5,280
5.280
5,280
5,280
5,280
2,640
Ground
Total
number of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
23,310
25,058
46,620
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
7.770
Sampling require-
ments for distribution
systems
Number
of sam-
ples per
system
i
i
4
4
4
- ' 4
I
4
i
4
4
4
4
4
1 4
4
Total
number of
samples
for dist.
systems
7,008
7,008
0
7,008
0
7,008
0
0
0
0
7,008
?
7,008
7,008
7,008
7,008
7,008
7,008
7,008
0
Surface
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
38,292
38,292
31,284
38,292
31,284
38,292
31,284
31,284
7,920
8,514
22,848
?
12,288
12,288
12,288
12,288
12,288
12,288
12,288
2.640
Ground
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
54,504
23,310
25,058
46,620
?
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
15,540
7.770
•Number of samples is a weighted average to take into account the number of systems using air stripping for VOC removal.
-------
6366 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE V-4.—ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEMS USING CHLORAMINES SERVING >100,000
[Cost and Burden Estimates for DBF Monitoring under the Information Collection Rule]
Analyte
Number of samples/quarter/site:
CNCI
Sampling requirements for treatment sites
Surface
Systems=66
Sites=125
1
Ground
Systems=6
Sites=142
1
Surface
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
750
Ground
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
852
Sampling require-
ments for distribution
systems
Number
of sam-
ples per
system
1
Total
number of
samples
for dist.
systems
432
Surface
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
1,182
Ground
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
852
TABLE V-5—ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEMS USING HYPOCHLORITE SERVING >100,000
Analyte
Number of samples/quarter/site:
Chlorals
nH
Temperature
Free Cl
Sampling requirements for treatment sites
Surface
Systems=25
Sites=47
3
1
1
1
Ground
Systems=8
Sites=172
3
1
1
1
Surface
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
846
282
282
282
Ground
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
3,096
1,032
1,032
1,032
Sampling require-
ments for distribution
systems
Number
of sam-
ples per
system
0
0
0
0
Total
number of
samples
for dist.
systems
0
0
6
0
Surface
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
846
282
282
282
Ground
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
3,096
1,032
1,032
1,032
TABLE V-6.—ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEMS USING CHLORINE DIOXIDE SERVING > 100,000
[Cost and Burden Estimates for DBF Monitoring under the Information Collection Rule]
Analyte
Number of samples/month/site:
DH
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Temperature
TOO
UV254
Bromide
dO2
Chloride
Bronri3t@ «
Number of samples/quarter/site:
Aktehyctes
AOC/BDOC
Sampling requirements for treatment sites
Surface
systemsais
srtes=33
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
3
3
Ground
systems=0
sites=0
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
3
3
Surface
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
1,188
594
594
594
594
594
594
1,188
1,188
1,188
594
594
594
Ground
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sampling require-
ments for distribution
systems
Number
of sam-
ples per
system
3
3
Total
number of
samples
for dist.
systems
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
324
324
0
0
0
Surface
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
1,188
594
594
594
594
594
594
1,188
1,512
1,512
594
594
594
Ground
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 /Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6367
TABLE V-7.—ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEMS USING OZONE SERVING > 100,000
[Cost and Burden Estimates for DBP Monitoring under the Information Collection Rule]
Analyte
Number of samples/month/site:
pH
Alkalinity
Turbidity :
Temperature
TOG .,
UV 254
Bromide .•„„„.
Ammonia
Ozone
Bromate
Number of samples/quarter/site:
Aldehydes
AOC/BDOC
Sampling requirements for treatment sites
Surface
sites=9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
Ground
sites=0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
3
Surface
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
162
162
162
162
162
162
162
162
342
162
162
162
Ground
total num-
ber of
samples
for treat-
ment
sites
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sampling require-
ments for distribution
systems
Number
of sam-
ples pei-
system
j
Total
number of
samples
for dist.
systems
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Surface
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
162
162
162
162
162
162
162
162
342
162
162
162
Ground
Combined
total num-
ber of
samples
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
VI. Other Statutory Comments
,A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR
51735 (October 4,1993)) the Agency
must determine tie 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 or entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of the 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.
This rule was reviewed by OMB
under Executive Order 12866.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires EPA to explicitly consider the
effect of proposed regulations on small
entities. The Act requires EPA to
consider regulatory alternatives if there
is any economic impact on any number
of small entities. The Small Business
Administration defines a small water
utility as one which serves fewer than
3,300 people.
The proposed rule is consistent with
the objectives of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act because it will not have
any economic impact on any small
entities. The proposed rule would only
apply to systems serving more than
10,000 people; thus, systems serving
fewer than 10,000 people would not be
affected. Therefore, pursuant to section
605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have an
economic impact on a number of small
entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C 3501 et seq. An
Information Collection Request
document has been prepared by EPA
(ICR No. 270.31) and a copy may be
obtained from Sandy Farmer,
Information Policy Branch; EPA; 401 M
St., SW. (PM-223); Washington, DC
20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740.
Public reporting burden for this
collection of information, including
tune for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information is
estimated to total 1.1 million hours over
the three year clearance period. As
shown in Table V.l., there are five
elements contributing to the total
burden estimate. The total burden
associated with start-up activities is
estimated to be 16,064 hours, an average
of 10 hours per system. The total burden
estimated for the microbial monitoring
is 200,205 hours, averaging 295 hours
pei- plant in systems serving more than
100,000 persons, and 55 hours per plant
in systems serving between 10,000 and
100,000 persons. Total burden for DBP
monitoring is 421,000 hours, averaging
370 hours per plant for surface water
systems serving more than 100,000
persons, and 200 hours per plant in
ground water systems serving more than
100,000 persons. The total burden for
data reporting is estimated to be 124,200
hows, an average of 72 hours per plant.
The per plant impact of this
requirement on systems serving between
10,000 iand 100,000 persons will be
significantly less than these estimates
due to less extensive data processing
requirements relating to DBFs in this
system size range. The total burden
estimate for bench and pilot scale
testing is estimated to be approximately
379,000 hours. The labor burden per
facility is estimated to be between 1,000
hours for bench-scale tests and 5,000
hours for pilot tests.
Send comments regarding the burden
estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Chief, Information Policy E ranch, PM-
223, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,
DC 20460; and to the office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503, marked
-------
6368 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." The
final rule will respond to any OMB or
public comments on the information
collection requirements contained in
this proposal.
D. Science Advisory Board, National
Drinking Water Advisory Council, and
Secretary of Health and Human Services
In accordance with section 1412(d)
and (e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act,
the Agency has submitted this proposed
rule to fee Science Advisory Board,
National Drinking Water Advisory
Council, and the Secretary of Health and
Human Services for their review. The
Agency will take their comments into
account in developing the final rule.
VH. Request for Public Comments
To ensure that EPA can read,
understand and therefore properly
respond to comments, the Agency
would prefer for commenters to type or
print comments in ink, and to cite
where possible, the paragraph(s) in this
proposed regulation (e.g., 141.l40(a)) to
which each comment refers.
Commenters should use a separate
paragraph for each issue discussed.
EPA solicited public comments and
requested suggestions on specific issues
earlier in the ICR preamble and
welcomes comments on other specific
issues. For convenience the comment
topics and requested suggestions are
listed below.
• (m.A.2) Collection of data for EPA
evaluation of water treatment
efficiencies
—Assessment of microbial
concentrations in small systems (other
than the three approaches given)
—Whether to allow systems to submit
previously collected data
—Criteria for admissibility of previously
collected data
—Feasibility and utility of archiving
samples to develop data evaluations
• (ffl.A.2) Particle size count data
—Under what circumstances should
particle size count data within
treatment plant be allowed in lieu of
finished water monitoring for Giardia
and Cryptosporidium
—What particle size ranges and sample
volumes should be monitored
—What criteria should be specified to
ensure particle size measurements
collected from different systems could
be appropriately compared and would
be most representative of removal of
Giardia and Cryptosporidium
—Should other monitoring by other
methods, such as Microscopic
Particulate Analysis (MPA) be
included as condition for avoiding
finished water monitoring of Giardia
and Cryptosporidium
• (ffl.A.3) Monitoring pathogens and
indicators
—Requirements for monitoring Giardia
and Cryptosporidium
—Requirements for monitoring total.
culturable viruses
—Requirements for monitoring bacterial
pathogens
—Requirements for monitoring total
coliforms, fecal conforms or E. coli.
—Requirements for monitoring
Clostridium perfringens
—Requirements for monitoring
coliphage
• (m.A.5) Need to Report physical
data and engineering information
—Nature of source water (surface-
ground, combination)
—Treatment processes (type of
disinfectant, dosage, pH, contact time,
type of filter process, media size,
depth hydraulic loading rate)
—Whether additional reporting
requirements are warranted
—Require fewer systems to submit data
in size category 10,000-100,000
• (ffi.A.6) Appropriateness of
analytical methods
—EC medium supplemented with 50
ug/ml of 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-D-
glucuronide (MUG), as specified in
141.21 (f)(6)(i) for total coliforms,
fecal coliforms and E. coli
—Nutrient agSr supplemented with 100
ug/ml of MUG, as specified in
141.21(f)(6)(ii). E. coli colonies to be
counted
—Minimal Medium ONPG-MUG test
(Colilert test), as specified in 141.74
(a)(2) (coliform-positive tubes to be
examined with UV light
—Method for Giardia/Cryptosporidium
as described in Appendix C of the
rule.
—Feasibility of other methods for
analysis of protozoa
—Method for viruses as described in
Appendix D of the rule
—Method for Clostridium perfringens.
—Method for coliphage as described in
Appendix D of the rule
• (HI.B.2) Monitoring of Source
Water Quality
—Definition of high oxidant demand
water
—Types of measurements necessary to
characterize high oxidant demand
water
• (ffl.B.3) Specific Process
Information
—Design to be reported for ozone
contact basins
—Operating parameters to be reported
for ozone contact basins
—Completeness of Table HI.6
(Treatment Plant Information) in
describing treatment plant
configurations and specific design
parameters for the unit processes
relevant to ESWTR and DBF Stage 2
development
—Completeness of Table III.6 in
describing treatment plant
configurations and specific design
parameters relevant to future model
development for predicting DBFs
• (III.B.4) Database development.
—Use of diskettes and/or modem for
data reporting, use of Windows based
software
• (III.B.5) Analytical methods
—Sample collection without adjusting
pH and laboratories required to
extract samples within 24-48 hours of
sample collection ;
—Suggestions on alternative approaches
to collecting sample without adjusting
pH and laboratories extracting sample
within 24-48 hours I
—Alternative approaches to all
aldehyde analyses being initiated
within 48 hours of sample collection
—Proposal to drop or delay monitoring
of certain analytes, if including them
causes undue delay in other
monitoring
—Proposal that any monitoring delay
would not be cancelled or postponed
for: (1) trihalomethanes; (2) haloacetic
acids; (3) bromate; (4) chlorite; (5)
chlorate; (6) total organic halide; (7)
total organic carbon; and (8) bromide
• (m.B.6) Quality Assurance
—Alternative mechanisms (other than
following specifications outlined in
manual to be developed) for ensuring
consistency in sampling
—The use of zero in the database to
indicate concentrations below the
reporting level
—The QA/QC criteria for data entry into
the database as presented in the text
• (III.B.7) Selection of bench versus
pilot scale and membrane versus GAG
studies
—How to ensure an adequate number of
pilot scale studies for both
membranes and GAG technology to
ensure quality results
—What specific requirements could be
made to ensure that the necessary
number of studies (as indicated in
Table 111.12) are done, if an
insufficient number of volunteers are
identified as willing to do pilot scale
testing
—Should selection of sites for GAG and
membrane pilot studies be required
according to system size, TOC
concentration, or both ;
—How the site selection process can
ensure that some of the pilot studies
use membranes
• (III.C) Dates for completing data
i development monitoring requirements
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6369
—Feasibility of schedule for monitoring
requirements
• (HI.E) List of systems required to
submit data
—Whether the list of systems accurately
represents the systems required to
comply with the ICR, should other
systems be included, others deleted
In addition to the specific comments
solicited previously in this preamble,
EPA solicits comments on the following:
Are other mechanisms or procedures
available than those proposed herein by
which the desired information could be
obtained more efficiently? What
mechanisms might be available for
transferring some of the resource
commitments that large utilities have
made during the D/DBP negotiated
rulemaking, to fund other research in
support of the development of the
ESWTR or stage 2 D/DBP rule?
VII. References
APHA. 1992. American Public Health
Association. Standard methods for the
examination of water and wastewater (18th
ed.). Washington, DC.
ASTM. 1992. D-19 Proposal P 229, Proposed
test method for Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts in low-turbidity
water by a fluorescent antibody procedure.
1992 Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
Vol. 11.02 Water (11), pp. 925-935. ASTM,
Philadelphia, PA.
Armon, R., and P. Payment. 1988. A modified
M-CP medium for the enumeration of
Clostridium perfringens from water
samples. Can. J. Microbiol. 34:78-79.
Barth, R.C. and P.S. Fan-. 1992. Comparison
of the microextraction procedure and
Method 552 for the analysis of HAAs and
Chlorophenols. J. Amer. Water Works
Assoc. 84(ll):94-98.
Bisson, J.W., and V.J. Cabelli. 1979.
Membrane filter enumeration method for
Clostridium perfringens. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 37:55-66.
Bisson, J.W., and V.J. Cabelli. 1980.
Clostridium perfringens as a water
pollution indicator. J. Water Poll. Control
Fed. 52:241-248.
Bolyard, M., P.S. Fair, and D.P. Hautman.
1992. Occurrence of chlorate in
hypochlorite solutions used for drinking
water disinfection. Environ. Sci. Technol.
26(8):1663-1665.
Bolyard, M., P.S. Fair, and D.P. Hautman.
1993. Sources of chlorate ion in US
drinking water. J. Amer. Water Works
Assoc. 85(9):81-88.
Bonde, G.J. 1977. Bacterial indication of
water pollution. Pages 273-364. In: M.R.
Droop^and H.W. Jannasch (eds.), Advances
in aquatic microbiology, Vol. 1. Academic
Press, NY.
Brenner, R., and J.I. Hedges. 1993. A test of
the accuracy of freshwater DOC
measurements by high-temperature
catalytic oxidation and UV-promoted
persulfate oxidation. Marine Chem.
41:161-165.
Cabelli, V.J. 1977. Clostridium perfringens as
a water quality indicator. Pages 65-69. In:
A.W. Hoadley and B.J. Dutka (eds.),
Bacterial indicators/health associated with
water/American Society for Testing and
Materials. Philadelphia, PA.
Cancilla, D.A., C.-C. Chou, R. Barthel, and
S.S. Que Hee. 1992. Characterization of the
O-(2,3,4,5,6-pentafluorobenzyl)-
hydroxylaminehydrochloride (PFBOA)
derivatives of some aliphatic mono- and
dialdehydes and quantitative water
analysis of these aldehydes. J. AOAC Int.
75(5):842-854.
Carney, M. 1991. European Drinking Water
Standards. J. Amer. Waterworks Assoc.
83(7):48-55.
Crittenden et al., 1991. Predicting GAG
performance with Rapid Small-Scale
Column Tests. Journ. AWWA, 83(1), 77-87.
Cummings, Summers and Howe, 1992. Proc,
1992 AWWA Water Quality Tech. Conf.,
Toronto, Canada, AWWA, Denver, CO.
EPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
1990. Manual for the certification of
laboratories analyzing drinking water
(third ed.). EPA 570/9-90-008A), USEPA,
Washington, DC. (Insure that Change 1 to
Manual is included).
EPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
1991. Guidance manual for compliance
with the filtration and disinfection
requirements for public water systems
using surface water sources. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Ground Water and Drinking Water,
Washington, DC.
EPA. U.S. 1993a. Summary Report: Protozoa,
virus and coliphage monitoring workshop.
August 10-12,1993.
Flesch, J.J., and P.S. Fair. 1988. The analysis
of cyanogen chloride in drinking water.
Proceedings of Amer. Water Works Assoc.
Water Qual. Technol. Conf. pp. 465-474.
Gerba, C., and J. Rose. 1990. Viruses in
source and drinking water. Chapter 18, pp.
380-396. In: G. McFeters (ed.), Drinking
Water Microbiology. Springer-Verlag New
York, Inc.
Glaze, W.H., M. Koga, and D. Cancilla. 1989.
Ozonation by-products. 2. Improvement of
an aqueous-phase derivatization method
for the detection of formaldehyde and
other carbonyl compounds formed by the
ozonation of drinking water. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 23(7):838-847.
Gordon, G. et al. 1993. Controlling the
formation of chlorate ion in liquid
hypochlorite feedstocks. J. Amer. Water
Works Assoc. 85(9):89-97.
Harrington, G., Z. Chowdhury, D. and D.
Owen. 1992. Developing a computer model
to simulate DBP formation during water
treatment. J. Amer. Water Works Assoc.
84:78-87.
Hautman, D.P. 1992. Analysis of trace
bromate in drinking water using selective
anion concentration and ion
chromatography. Proceedings of Amer.
Water Works Assoc. Water Qual. Technol.
Conf. pp. 993-1007.
Hayes EB, Matte, TD, O'Brien TR, et al. 1989.
Large community outbreak of
cryptosporidiosis due to contamination of
a public water supply. N Engl J Med
320:1372-6.
Havelaar, A., M. van Olphen, and Y. Drost.
1993. F-specific RNA bacteriophages are
adequate model organisms for enteric
viruses in fresh water. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 59:2956-2962.
Hurst, C. 1991. Presence of enteric viruses in
freshwater and their removal by the
conventional drinking water treatment
process. Bull. World Health Org.
IAWPRC. 1991. IAWPRC Study Group on
Health Related Water Microbiology.
Bacteriophages as model viruses in water
quality control. Water Res. 25:529-545.
Kaplan, L.A. 1992. Comparison of high-
temperature and persulfate oxidation
methods for determination of dissolved
organic carbon in freshwaters. Limnol.
Oceanogr. 37(5):1119-1125.
Keswick, B.H. et al. 1985. Inactivation of
Norwalk virus in drinking water by
chlorine. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
50:261-264.
LeChevallier, M., W. Norton, and R. Lee.
1991a. Occurrence of Giardia and
Cryptosporidium spp. in surface water
supplies. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
57:2610-2616.
LeChevallier, M., W. Norton, and R. Lee.
11991b. Giardia and Cryptosporidium spp.
in filtered drinking water supplies. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 57:2617-2621.
Lister, M.W. 1956. Decomposition of sodium
hypochlorite: The uncatalyzed
decomposition. Can. J. Chem. 34:465.
NATO. 1984. North Atlantic Treaty
Organization. Drinking water microbiology.
Committee on the Challenge of Modern
Society, EPA 570/9-84-006, Washington,
DC.
Ohya, T. and S. Kanno. 1985. Formation of
cyanide ion or cyanogen chloride through
the cleavage of aromatic rings by nitrous
acid or chlorine. VIII. On the reaction of
hurnic acid with hypochlorous acid in the
presence of ammonium ion. Chemosphere.
14(11/12):1717-1722.
Payment, P., M. Trudel, and R. Plante. 1985.
Elimination of viruses and indicator
bacteria at each step of treatment during
1 preparation of drinking water at seven
'• water treatment plants. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 1418-1428.
Payment, P. and E. Franco. 1993. Clostridium
perfringens and somatic coliphages as
indicators of the efficiency of drinking
water treatment for viruses and protozoan
cysts. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:2418-
! 2424.
Sobsey, M., T. Fuji, and R. Hall. 1991.
Inactivation of cell-associated and
1 dispersed Hepatitis A virus in water. J.
! Amer. Water Works Assoc. 83:64-67.
Sobssy, M.D. 1989. Inactivation of health-
related microorganisms in water by
disinfection processes. Water Sci. Technol.
21:179-195.
Sontheimer, Crittenden and Summers. 1988.
Activated Carbon for Water Treatment,
distributed by AWWA, Denver, CO.
Summers et al., 1992. Standardized Protocol
for the Evaluation of GAG, AWWA,
Denver, CO.
Williams, F. 1985. Membrane-associated viral
complexes observed in stools and cell
culture. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 50:523-
526.
Xie, Y. and D.A. Reckhow. 1993. A rapid and
simple analytical method for cyanogen
-------
6370 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
chloride and cyanogen bromide in drinking
water. Wat. Res. 27(3):507-511.
Zika, R.G. et al. 1985. Sunlight-induced
photodecomposition of chlorine dioxide.
In: Water Chlorination Chemistry:
Environmental Impact and Health Effects
Vol. 5. Lewis Publ., Chelsea, Mich.
APPENDICES TO THE PREAMBLE
Appendix A—Sample Reporting Sheet for
Particle Size Count Data
Name of Utility • —
Address •
Giardia
Virus
Cryptosporidium
Coliform
Presedimentation process —
Presedimentation effluent particle
size distribution:
>2 urn >5 um >10 um
Microorganism count (optional):
Giardia Cryptospondium
Virus Coliform
Name of Person Completing Form
Phone Number
» •" »•»»•» \-»\jm\ji.i.i.i. _—^^^^^_
Clarification/sedimentation process
Clarification/sedimentation effluent
particle size distribution:
>2 um >5 um >10 um
Microorganism count (optional):
Giardia Cryptospondium
Virus Coliform
Source Water Type (example: river, lake) —
Microorganism count:
Roughing filter process
Roughing filter effluent particle size
distribution:
>2 um >5 um >10 um
Microorganism count (optional):
Giardia Cryptosporidium
Virus Colifonn ;
Filtration process
Filter effluent particle size
distribution:
>2 um >5 um >10 um
Microorganism count (optional):
Giardia Cryptosporidium
Virus Coliform
Clearwell effluent
Clearwell effluent particle size
distribution: ;
>2 um >5 um >10 um
Microorganism count (optional):
Giardia Cryptosporidium
Virus Coliform •
APPENDIX B-1.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE
PWS-ID
WIOB
f.D.
Region
State
City
Utility
FRDS re-
tair pop.
WIDE
Population served
Retail
Wholesale
Total
FRDS
Avg.
day
prod.
(MOD)
WIDE
Avg. day flow (MQD)
Prod.
Puroh.
Total'
EPA Region—1
CT0160011
CTOS40011
CT0890011
CT0930011
CT1350011
CT1S10011
MA4044000
MA1281000
MA2348000
ME0091300
NH1471010
RI1502021 .
RI1 592024 .
90-1620
90-1624
90'1626
90-1627
60-1628
90M629
90*1144
90-1163
90-1166
90-1175
90*1270
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
MA
MA
MA
MA
ME
NH
Rl
Rl
Bridge-
port.
Hartford ..
New Brit-
ain.
New
Haven.
Stamford
Water-
bury.
Boston ...
Brockton
Spring-
field.
Worces-
ter.
Portland .
Man-
chester.
Cum-
berland.
Scituate ..
Bridgeport Hydrau-
lic Co.
The Metropolitan
District.
City of New Britain
Water Dept.
So Central Conn
Reg Water Auth.
Stamford Water
Company.
City of Waterbury
Bur of Water.
MA Water Re-
sources Authority.
Brockton Water
Dept.
Springfield Water
Dept.
City of Worcester ...
Portland Water Dis-
trict.
Manchester Water
Works.
Pawtucket, City Of .
Providence, City Of
367,577
391,250
90,677
380,000
85,000
103,800
#N/A
135,000
240,000
200,000
132,000
104,750
108.000
286,923
382,300
400,000
80,000
397,500
85,500
107,000
0
170,000
165,000
160,000
103,000
10,000
8,000
20,000
34,200
19,500
17,000
2,170,000
250,000
5,000
200
13,000
392,300
408,000
100,000
431,700
105,000
124,000
2,170,000
420,000
170,000
162,000
116,000
66.2
53.1
11.9
62.0
14.6
#N/A
#N/A
10.6
39.5
26.8
22.0
14.0
14.5
64.4
57.6
63.0
11:0
; 58.9
16.0
18.7
323.4
45.6
27.0
24.0
15.5
1.2
0.0
0.0
- 0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
58.8
63.0
11.0
58.9
16.8
18.7
323.4
45.6
27.0
24.0
15.5
EPA Region—2
NJ1605002
NJ2004001
NJ 0418001
NJ0238001
NJ1225001
NJ 0906001
NJ01 19002
NJ0714001
NJ0712001
NJ1345001
90*1280
90-1286
90-1288
90-1290
..............
91*3411
90-1312
90*1314
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
Clifton ....
Elizabeth
Haddon
Heights.
Har-
rington
Park.
Iselin
Jersey
City.
Unwood .
Newark ..
Short
Hills.
Shrews-
bury.
Passalo Valley
Water Comm.
Elizabeth W Dept,
CityO.
NJ-American Water
Co.
United Water Re-
sources.
Middlesex Water
Co.
Dept of Water Jer-
sey Cit.
NJ-American Water
Co.
Newark Water Dept
NJ-American Water
Co.
NJ-American Water
Co.
270,000
112,000
209,402
713,737
207,640
290,618
#N/A
275,221
183,199
302,491
600,000
349,910
722,000
210,000
128,000
198,500
307,334
400,000
0
21,000
200,000
0
0
0
1,000,000
349,910
743,000
, 410,000
128,000
198,500
307,334
iN/A
137
21.5
102.0
25.4
49.7
#N/A
0 1
34.7
30.0
52.0
34.2
102.4
30.0
11.2
21.0
39.0
32.2
0.0
. ' 0.6
4.0
0.0
18.0
0.0
84.2
34.2
,103.0
34.0
11.2
39.0
39.0
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6371
APPENDIX B-1 —CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
NJ1111001
NJ1613001
NJ2004002 ,
NY0000189
NY0000443
NY0000422
NY0002S30
NY0003444
NY0002835
NY0002840
NY0003493
NY0010526
NY0001047
NY0004518
NY0004336
NY0004334
NY0002411
NY0003673
NY0003465
PR0003293
PR0002652
PR0005066
PR0003283
PR0005386
PR0003824
PR0002591
WIDB
I.D.
90*1320
90*1324
90*1340
90*1346
90*1362
90*1366
90*1378
90*1386
90*1387
90*1391
90*1394
90*1395
90*1396
Region
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
;2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
State •
NJ
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
City
Trenton ..
Wanaque
Westfield
Albany ....
Buffalo ...
Buffalo ...
Lake
Suc-
cess.
Larchmo-
nt.
Lynbrook
Merrick ...
New York
Oakdale .
Roch-
ester.
Roch-
ester.
Syracuse
Syracuse
Utica
West
Nyack.
Yonkers .
Aguadilla
Arecibo ..
Caguas ..
Maya-
guez.
Naguabo
Ponce ...
San Juan
Utility
Trenton Water De-
partment.
No Jersey Dist Wtr
Supply Comm.
Elizabethtown
Water Company.
Albany Water Dept
Erie County Water
Auth.
Buffalo City Divi-
sion of Water.
Jamaica Water
Supply Co.
New Rochelle
Water Co.
Long Island Water
Corp.
New York Water
Service Corp.
Dept Environmental
Protection.
Suffolk County
Water Authority.
Monroe County
Water Auth.
City of Rochester
Water Bureau.
Onondaga County
Water Auth.
City of Utica
Spring Valley Water
Co.
City of Yonkers
Water Bureau.
Arecibo Urbano
Caguas Urbano
Rio Blan, Vieq,
Hum, La.
Ponce Urbano
Metropolitano
FRDS re-
tail pop.
225,000
200,902
576,000
101,082
402,180
345,974
130,000
137,640
238,594
170,000
6,552,718
941,000
222,503
231,636
185,000
192,000
120,000
225,000
188,082
129,142
102,796
156,588
123,891
127,428
187,732
1,120,536
WIDB
Population seived
Retail
0
700,000
100,000
391,616
650,000
238,500
6,810,000
349,645
250,000
165,000
135,000
240,000
194,500
Wholesale
800,00)
400,000
5,000
80,00 D
0
0
1,350,000
168,373
50.000
70,000
3,062
5,000
0
Total
800,000
1,100,000
105,000
471,616
650,000
238,500
8,160,000
518,018
300,000
235,000
138,062
245,000
194,500
FRDS
Avg.
oay
prod.
(MGD)
31.2
98.5
131.0
21.1
61.0
100.1
12.2
21.2
26.6
13.4
1,500.0
124.6
60.0
36.8
15.9
501
21.0
27.6
302
10.0
#N/A
7.5
15.0
13.7
24.0
115.7
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
97.9
124.8
19.0
60.7
42.0
29.6
1,582.1
62.0
21.5
16.7
22.2
27.0
32.6
Purch.
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
13.0
33.0
26.2
0.0
0.1
0.0
Total
97.9
125.0
19.0
60.7
68.0
29.6
1,582.1
75.0
54.5
42.9
22.2
27.1
32.6
EPA Region—3
DC0000001
DE0000552
DE0000663
DE0000564
MD0300002
MD01 30002
MD01 50005
PA3390024
PA5650032
PA3480046
PA1150163
PA7210029
. PA1230004
90*1631
90*1633
90*1634
90*1632
90*1173
90*1431
90*1434
90*1435
90*1448
90*1436
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
DC
DE
DE
DE
Mn
MD
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
Washing-
ton.
Newark ..
Wilming-
ton.
Wilming-
ton.
City&
Co-
Laurel
Allentown
Beth-
lehem.
Bryn
Mawr.
Camp Hill
Chester ..
Washington Aque-
duct.
Artesian Water Co
Inc.
City of Wilmington .
Wilmington Subur-
ban Water Corp.
DaH fYltV
Montebello.
Elkridge-Howard
Co. Dpw.
Washington Sub
Sanitation Comm.
Allentown Munic
Water System.
Au Beaver Run.
City of Bethlehem ..
Philadelphia Subur-
ban Water Co.
PA-American Water
Co.
Chester Water Au-
thority.
0
171,800
140,000
93,000
1 359 148
161 000
1,500,000
105,200
130000
110,268
#N/A
74,816
110,000
0
166,000
150,000
100,000
1,400,000
107,000
100,500
850,000
125,100
105,000
1,100,030
;0
200,030
20,030
I
15,000
23,000
' 8,100
870,000
0
50,000
1,100,000
166,000
350,000
120,000
1,415,000
130,000
108,600
1,720,000
125,100
155,000
200.0
11.0
28.0
22.0
120.0
#N/A
120.0
22.2
18.0
25.6
#N/A
10.0
30.7
200.0
11.5
29.0
22.3
169.9
23.9
26.5
82.3
14.5
30.0
0.0
3.4
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
0.2
0.0
200.0
14.8
29.0
23.4
169.9
23.9
26.5
88.3
14.7
30.0
/
-------
6372 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-1.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-IO
PA6250028
PA4110014
PA73600S8
PA1510001
PA5020039
PA5020038
PA5020043
PAS020058
PA23S9008
PA7670100
...........
VA6059501
VA4041845
VA3700500
VA3710100
VA4041035
VA3740600
VA4760100
VA2770650
VA81 53600
WV330201S
WIDB
t.D.
90M437
90-1442
90*1443
90*1456
90M706
90M458
90M460
90M708
90-1468
90M549
90-1554
90-1555
90*1556
91-2190
90-1557
90-1559
..............
90-1594
Region
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
State
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
WV
City
Erie
Johns-
town.
Lancaster
Philadel-
phia.
Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh
Verona ...
Wilkes-
Barre.
York
Chester-
Held.
Mem'field
Midlothia-
n.
Newport
News.
Norfolk ...
Peters-
burg.
Ports-
mouth.
Richmond
Roanoke
Woodbri-
dge.
Charles-
ton.
Utility
City of Erie, Bureau
of Water.
Greater Johnstown
Water Auth.
City of Lancaster ...
Philadelphia Water
Dept.
PA-Amertean Water
Co.
City of Pittsburgh ...
Municipal Auth/
Boro West View.
Wilkinsburg-Penn
Joint Water A.
Pennsylvania Gas
& Water Co.
The York Water
Company.
Chesterfield County
Utils Dept.
Fairfax County
Water Auth.
Swift Creek Water
Plant.
Newport News Wa-
terworks.
Norfolk Dept of Util-
ities.
Appomattox River
Water Auth.
City of Portsmouth .
City of Richmond ...
Roanoke City
Water Depart-
ment.
Occoquan-
Woodbridge-
Dum-Tri.
WV-American
Water Co.
FRDS re-
tail pop.
190,000
65,000
108,000
1,755,000
615,543
, 400,000
200,000
150,000
57,984
139,305
#N/A
150,000
150,000
350,000
295,000
#N/A
120,000
209,000
158,000
102,440
131,913
WIDB
Population served
Retail
230,000
62,000
110,000
T,700,000
500,000
500,000
140,000
425,000
137,200
200,000
578,000
350,000
290,000
0
111,000
217,700
174,074
Wholesale
10,000
67,000
6,400
160,000
250,000
0
25,000
3,000
0
0
275,000
0
405,000
200,000
14,000
210,553
0
Total
240,000
129,000
116,400
1,860,000
750,000
500,000
165,000
428,000
137,200
200,000
• 853,000
350,000
695,000
200,000
125,000
428,253
174,074
FRDS
Avg.
day
prod.
(MGD)
40.0
8.3
16.1
217.8
67.9
74.7
19.1
26.4
1.5
19.2
#N/A
#N/A
37
56.0
35.6
#N/A
16.3
44.7
164
2.9
#N/A
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
42.3
8.5
17.2
351.6
69.0
69.0
20.0
73.8
19.3
9.6
101.9
43.2
73.9
21.2
16.7
59.4
26.6
Purch.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
42.3
8.5
17.2
351.6
71.9
69.0
20.0
73.8
19.3
19.6
103.3
43.2
73.9
21.2
16.7
59.4
26.6
EPA Region—4
AL0000738
ALOOOOS82
AL0001005
AL0001070
AL0001313
FL4500130 .
FL$411132 .
FL6S21405 .
FL3050223.
FL40S0488 .
FL2010948 .
FL4130604 .
FL4060642 .
FL2161327 .
90-1451
90*1463
90*1209
90-1211
90*1635
90*1637
90-1639
90*1022
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
Bir-
ming-
ham.
Huntsville
Mobile ....
Montgom-
ery.
Tusca-
loosa.
Boca
Raton.
Braden-
ton.
Clear-
water.
Cocoa ....
FtLau-
derdale.
Gaines-
ville.
Hialeah ..
Holly-
wood.
Jackson-
ville.
The Water Works &
Sewer Board.
Huntsville Utilities ..
Mobile Water Serv-
ice System.
Water Works/Sani-
tary Sewer Bd.
City of Tuscaloosa .
City of Boca Raton
Manatee County
Public Works.
Pinellas County
Water System.
Cocoa, City Of
Fort Lauderdale,
City Of.
Gainesville
(Murphee Wtp).
Hialeah, City Of
Hollywood, City Of .
City of Jacksonville
528,000
138,000
279,000
195,000
107,655
107,284
187,501
374,078
177,324
235,001
135,000
142,000
142,705
406,635
900,000
167,000
200,000
80,000
109,042
130,000
353,167
415,000
40,000
0
0
46,000
0
120,000
148,408
0
940,000
167,000
200,000
126,000
109,042
250,000
501,575
415,000
105.0
30.0
400
33.5
17.4
40.0
27.3
35.1
57
520
#N/A
0.1
17.0
41.7
110.0
27.0
30.0
20.0
43.8
33.0
35.6
66.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
37.5
0.0
110.0
27.0
30.0
20.0
43.8
33.0
73.1
66.5
EPA Region—4
FL4134357. 90*1024
FL Key West
Florida Keys Aque-
duct Auth.
80,5001 110,000
110,000
6.01
11.5
0.01
11.5
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6373
APPENDIX B-1 .—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
C| liAQAf\Q'>
rLG'ro'rUtfO .
FL6531014 .
Cl ir\l\-\AA7
rLoUOI^WY .
FL41 30871 .
PI fiR1 1^fi1
~L.DO 1 IOU 1 .
Cl A1 11 R1 H
rL/rlOlOlO .
FL3480962 .
FL11 70525.
FL4060162 .
FL6521715 .
FL1 370655 .
FL6290327 .
Cl <5OGfi7Q7
rLoeyu/o/ .
FL4501047 .
GA0950000
GA1210001
GA1 350004
GA2150000
GA0210001
GA0670002
GA0630000
GA0510003
GA0890001
KY0590220
KY0340250
KY0560258
MS0250008
WIDB
I.D.
90*1025
90*1029
90*1663
90*1033
90*1036
90*1037
90*1042
90*1043
90*1045
*""*"""*"
90*1047
90*1050
90*1052
90*1057
90*1054
90*1058
90*1060
90*1061
90*1062
90*1064
90*1122
90*1124
90*1125
90*1230
Region
A
*T
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
State
i|_
FL
n_
FL
=L
PL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
pi
PL
FL
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
KY
KY
KY
MS
Cfty
.ake
Buena
Vista.
Lakeland
Mel-
bourne.
Miami
slew Port
Richey.
North
Miami
Beach.
Orlando ..
Pensa-
cola.
Pompano
Beach.
St. Pe-
ters-
burg.
Tallahas-
see.
Tampa ...
Tfltnnfl
i din pet ...
West
Palm
Beach.
Albany ....
Atlanta ...
Butord ....
Columbus
Macon ....
Marietta ..
Morrow ...
Savannah
Stone
Moun-
tain.
Edge-
wood.
Lexington
Louisville
Jackson
Utility
WchrV-Central
City of Lakeland ....
^lelbourne City of
Miami-Dade Water
& Sewer Auth.
Pasco County
North Miami Beach
Orlando Utilities
Commission.
Escambia County
Utilities Auth.
Broward County ....
City of St. Peters-
burg.
City of Tallahassee
Tampa Water De-
partment.
Hcpud/South
Central.
Palm Beach County
"-
Water, Gas & Light
Commission.
City of Atlanta, Bu-
reau of Wtr.
Gwinnett County ....
Columbus Water
Works.
Macon Water Au-
thority.
Cobb Co Marietta
Water Auth.
Clayton County
Water Auth.
City of Savannah ...
DeKalb County
Public Works.
Kenton County
Water Dist No. 1.
KY-Amertean Water
Co.
Louisville Water
Company.
City of Jackson
Water Works.
FRDS re-
tail pop.
136,500
133,000
149,986
1,705,156
99,548
160,000
356,041
269,545
#N/A
277,655
162,750
471,000
134,741
#N/A
85,000
649,836
296,281
175,000
143,810
425,000
164,081
150,558
553,277
115,500
248,289
718,182
205,895
WIDB
Population served
Retail
116,345
1,000,000
120,000
390,000
220,000
173,888
306,366
152,000
460,000
210,000
90,000
700,000
307,530
185,000
160,000
0
151,100
200,000
550,000
112,000
228,000
695,000
250,000
Wholesale
0
500,000
40,000
5,000
10,000
32,324
20,843
C
C
C
10,000
200,000
100,13(
25(
(
494,50!
28,70!
I
I
63,001
7,001
-37,501
1
Total
116,345
1,500,000
160,000
395,000
KSO.OOO
;>06,212
327,209
152,000
460,000
210,000
100,000
900,000
407,660
185,250
160,000
494,500
179,800
200,000
550,000
175,000
235,000
732,500
250,000
FRDS
Avg.
prod.
(MGD)
#N/A
17.7
9.4
#N/A
#N/A
15.0
#N/A
0.3
#N/A
31.7
25.2
50.0
#N/A
#NA
SNA
#NA
SNA
SNA
#NA
#NA
SNA
SNA
SNA
6.6
27.1
121.2
28.0
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
24.5
292.6
11.0
73.2
31.0
28.0
28.6
23.4
75.7
26.3
19.1
109.3
48.0
32.0
27.0
73.0
16.3
64.5
75.5
17.0
36.9
113.5
35.0
Purch.
0.0
7.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
24.5
300.0
11.0
73.2
31.0
31.0
38.6
23.4
75.7
26.3
19.1
109.3
48.0
32.0
27.0
73.0
16.3
64.5
75.5
24.0
36.9
113.5
35.0
EPA Region—4
Kioni 1 1 ni n
[MUUl 1 lulu
NC01 60010
NC0332010
NC0326010
NC0241010
NC0229025
NC0392010
NC0234010
SC1010001
SC4010001
90*1240
90*1242
90*1244
90*1248
90*1254
90*1256
90*1258
90*1475
90*1476
4
4
4
4
4
4.
4 \
4
4
Nf*
wo
NC
NC.
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
SC
SC
Ashevillo
Charlotte
Durham ..
Fayette-
ville.
Greens-
boro.
Lexington
Raleigh ..
Winston-
Salem.
Charles-
ton.
Columbia
Asheville Wtr Trtmt
Fac.
Charlotte-Mecklen-
burg Utils.
City of Durham
Fayetteville Public
Works Comm.
City of Greensboro
Davidson Water Inc
City of Raleigh
Winston-Salem Util-
ity Comm.
Charleston Comm
of Pub Works.
City of Columbia ....
110,000
400,000
150,000
125,000
207,680
91,003
222,455
205,000
SN/A
SN/A
450,000
155,000
110,000
210,000
99,000
230,000
190,000
350,000
250,000
0
42,000
10,000
0
6,000
50,000
10,000
50,000
0
450,000
197,000
120,000
210,000
105,000
280,000
200,000
400,000
250,000
21.0
61.8
22.0
18.6
36.0
6.5
32.6
32.0
SN/A
#N/A
61.9
22.1
18.4
30.0
6.0
40.0
39.6
50.0
47.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
61.9
22.1
18.4
30.0
6.0
40.0
39.6
50.0
47.0
-------
6374
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-1.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
SC2310001
SC4210001
TN0000107
TN0000366
TN0000450
TN0000494
WIOB
i.D.
90*1477
90*1478
80*1481
90*1486
90*1487
90*1488
Region
4
4
4
4
4
4
State
SC
SC
TN
TN
TN
TN
City
Greenville
Spartanb-
urg.
Chat-
tanoo-
ga.
Knoxville
Memphis
Nashville
Utility
Greenville Water
System.
Spartanburg Water
System.
TN-American Water
Co.
Knoxville Utilities
Board.
Memphis Light,
Gas & Water Div.
City of Nashville ....
FRDS re-
tail pop
#N/A
#N/A
149,467
168,405
703,727
690,000
WIDE
Population served
Retail
300,000
102,000
200,000
225,000
800,000
288,452
Wholesale
6,000
78,000
8,000
1,200
100,000
0
Total
' 306,000
180,000
208,000
226,200
900,000
288,452
FRDS
Avg.
Q3y
prod.
(MGD)
#N/A
#N/A
35.5
31.6
146.3
91.9
WIDE
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
49.0
!
31.0
;
38.9
32.0
137.3
85.9
Purch.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
49.0
31.0
38.9
32.0
137.3
85.9
EPA Region-6
IL1974151 ..
IL0195300 ..
110316000 ..
IU635040 ..
IL0915030 ..
IL1435030..
IL2010300 ..
IU671200 ..
IN5253002 .
IN5282002 .
IN5202020 .
IN5245015 .
IN5249004 .
IN5271014 .
91*3278
90*1082
90*1083
90*1673
90*1091
90*1674
90*1098
90*1101
90*1105
90*1107
90*1108
90*1110
90*1115
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
Addison ..
Cham-
paign.
Chicago
East St.
Louis.
Kankakee
Peoria —
Rockford
Spring-
field.
Blooming-
ton.
Evans ville
Fort
Wayne.
Gary
Indianap-
olis.
South
Bend.
Citizens Utils Co of
Illinois.
Northern Illinois
Water Corp.
City of Chicago,
Dept of Water.
IL-American Water
Co.
Consumers Illinois
Water Co.
IL-American Water
Co.
City of Rockford
Water Dept.
City Water, Light &
Power.
City of Bloomington
Utilities.
Evansville Water
Dept.
Fort Wayne Water
Department.
Gary-Hobart Water
Corp.
Indianapolis Water
Company.
South Bend City
Waterworks.
#N/A
121,200
3,000,000
139,200
55,000
158.564
139,700
126,600
51,870
129,670
180,000
230,000
678,000
108,170
100,000
110,000
3,009,530
350,000
70,000
143,214
132,500
130,000
83,000
210,000
200,000
732,000
120,000
0
1,000
1,533,979
0
50,000
2,240
0
15,000
50,000
16,000
63,000
5,000
4,000
100,000
111,000
4,543,509
350,000
120,000
145,454
132,500
145,000
133,000
226,000
263,000
737,000
124,000
#N/A
15.0
780.0
54.7
10.4
19.4
27.4
21.0
10.0
250
29.2
31.0
95.0
0.0
6.6
18.2
1,043.0
40.8
11.5
19.6
27.5
21.0
\
13.8
32.0
34.8
120.0
24.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
18.2
1,043.0
40.8
12.0
19.6
27.5
21.0
13.8
32.0
34.8
120.0
24.0
EPA Reglon-6
MI0000220.
MI0001BOO .
M 10002790.
MKXM3520.
MKM03760.
MKJ003930.
MKX505850.
MI0006385.
M10006900.
MI0007220 .
MN1270024
MN1620026
OH7700011
OH31 00411
OH1800311
OH2500411
OH5700722
OH0901022
90*1176
90*1182
90*1183
90*1184
90*1193
90*1201
90*1210
90*1397
90*1400
90*1401
90*1403
90*1405
90*1694
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
MN
MN
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
Ann
Arbor.
Detroit ....
Grand
Rapids.
Kala-
mazoo.
Lansing ..
Livonia ...
Saginaw .
Sterling
Heights.
Warren ...
Wyoming
Min-
neapo-
lis.
Saint
Paul.
Akron .....
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton ...
Hamilton
Ann Arbor Utilities
Dept.
Detroit
City of Grand Rap-
ids.
Kalamazoo Public
Utilities.
Lansing Board of
Water & Light.
Livonia
Saginaw Water
Treatment Plant.
Sterling Heights
Warren
Wyoming Utilities
Dept.
Minneapolis Water
Supply.
Saint Paul Water
Utility.
City of Akron
Cincinnati Water
Works.
City of Cleveland ...
City of Columbus ...
City of Dayton,
Dept of Water.
City of Hamilton
. 109,592
1,027,974
197,649
79,722
131,546
100,850
69,512
117,810
144,864
63,891
473,073
385,000
223,019
669,500
567,680
201,840
115,000
50,400
117,000
220,000
120,000
142,000
190,000
63,000
328,500
245000
762,000
1,500,000
715,000
180,000
64,000
1,500
40,000
0
0
0
154,830
54,000
105000
41,000
165,000
82,000
220,000
55,000
118,500
260,000
120,000
142,000
190,000
217,830
382,500
350000
803,000
1,665,000
797,000
400,000
119,000
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
' #N/A
662
53.8
430
127.0
93.4
28.8
46.3
14.7
16.4
47.6
19.0
21.0
30.0
27.2
55.0
460
135.8
300.0
124.0
82.7
15.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
47.6
19.0
21.0
30.0
27.2
55.0
46 0
135.8
300.0
124.0
82.7
15.7
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6375
APPENDIX B-1.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
OH4801411
WI1 130224
WI2410100
WI2520062
WIDB
I.D.
90*1416
90*1585
90*1586
90*1588
Region
5
5
5
5
State
OH
Wl
Wl
Wl
City
Toledo ....
Madison .
Milwau-
kee.
Racine ...
Utility
Toledo Water
Treatment Plant.
Madison Water Util-
ity.
City of Milwaukee
Water Works.
Racine Water Utility
FRDS re-
tail pop.
388,000
191,262
709,537
93,400
WIDB
Population served
Retail
391,000
190,000
661,000
115,000
Wholesale
63,000
5,000
162,000
10,000
Total
454,000
195,000
823,000
125,000
FRDS
Avg.
day
prod.
(MGD)
63.9
#N/A
»N/A
#N/A
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
84.3
32.9
147.7
26.4
Purch.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
84.3
32.9
147.7
26.4
EPA Region—*
AR00004 65
LA1033005
LA105100 1
LA1 05501 7
LA107100 1
LA1071009
LA101703 1
NM35107
01.
OK1011303
OK1020802
OK1020418
TX221000 1
TX1880001
TX220000 1
TX2270001
TX123000 1
TX031000 1
TX1 78000 3
TX057000 4
TX071000 2
TX220001 2
TX057001 0
TX1 01001 3
TX2400001
TX1520002
TX165000 1
TX0680002
TX101029 3
TX0430007
TX015001 8
TX1550008
TX2430001
TX0430044
90*1215
90*1129
90*1135
90*1136
90*1140
90*1423
90*1424
90*1489
90*1491
90*1492
90*1496
90*1499
90*1500
90*1503
90*1508
90*1510
90*1512
90*1514
90*1517
90*1519
90*1526
90*1533
90*1534
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
AR
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
NM
OK
OK
OK
TX
TX
TX ,
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
Little
Rock.
Baton
Rouge.
Harahan .
Lafayette
New Or-
leans.
New Or-
leans.
Shreve-
port.
Albuquer-
que.
Lawton ...
Okla-
homa
City.
Tulsa
Abilene ...
Amarilk) ..
Arlington
Austin
Beau-
mont.
Browns-
ville.
Corpus
Christ!.
Dallas
El Paso ..
Ft. Worth
Garland ..
Houston .
Killeen ....
Laredo ...
Lubbock .
Midland ..
Odessa ..
Pasadena
Piano .....
San Anto-
nio.
Waco
Wichita
Falls.
Wylie
Little Rock Munic
Waterworks.
The Baton Rouge
Water Co.
Jefferson Parish
Water Dept.
Lafayette Utilities ...
New Orleans
Water/Sewer
Board.
New Orleans—
CarroltonWw.
Shreveport Water
System.
Albuquerque Water
System.
City of Oklahoma
City.
City of Tulsa <.
City of Abilene
Water Utils.
Amarilk) Municipal
Water System.
Arlington Water
Utilities.
City of Austin
Beaumont City of—
Water Util Dept.
Brownsville Public
Util Board.
City of Corpus
Christi.
Dallas Water Utili-
ties.
El Paso Water Utili-
ties-Pub Serv B.
Fort Worth Water
Department.
Garland City of
City of Houston
Bell County WCID
#1.
City of Laredo
City of Lubbock
Water Utils.
City of Midland Util-
ities.
City of Odessa
Pasadena City of ...
Piano City of
San Antonio Water
System.
Waco City of
City of Wichita Falls
North Texas Munic
Water Dist.
194,629
340,896
308,362
115,000
56,707
440,229
210,000
417,279
110,880
276,000
160,000
106,400
159,000
266,212
474,715
114,000
98,000
274,476
974,000
620,000
477,000
182,861
*N/A
*N/A
127,544
186,20(5
89,443
100,108
117,000
140,000
925,910
107,450
96,250
582
210,000
350,000
468,509
110,000
550,000
540,000
360,000
108,386
254,100
459,000
91.111
275,000
960,850
450,000
825,313
350
110,000
190,000
100,00
100,000
881,782
92,000
0
128,770
0
0
4,000
0
60,000
24,00(1
12,85(1
14,45(1
75,00(1
11,049
150,000
556,000
200,001)
135,467
170,001)
10,001)
1.615
I)
. |j
23,70!)
30,001
800,003
338,770
350,000
468,509
114,000
{£0,000
(500,000
384,000
121,236
1268,550
{534,000
102,160
425,000
1,516,850
•350,000
960,780
170,350
120,000
191,515
100,000
100,000
905,482
122,000
800,000
#N/A
34.5
36.5
.10.0
8.5
125.0
29.5
110.0
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
18.9
35.5
39.7
1045
18.5
17.7
88.3
306.0
101.5
90.5
36.0
#N/A
#N/A
23.0
35.5
19.5
20.1
14.0
27.4
159.6
21.2
21.3
116.3
54.6
43.0
76.3
16.5
115.0
74.8
90.0
21.7
40.7
100.0
17.4
77.7
337.9
131.6
315.7
20.2
23.0
36.0
19.5
10.8
169.8
22.0
125.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
72
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
54.6
43.0
76.3
16.5
115.0
74.8
92.0
21.7
40.7
100.0
17.4
77.7
345.1
131.6
315.7
20.2
23.0
36.0
19.5
19.4
169.8
22.0
125.0
-------
6376 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-1.— CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE— Continued
PWS-ID
WIDB
I.D.
Region
State
City
Utility
FRDS re-
tail pop.
WIDB
Population served
Retail
Wholesale
Total
FRDS
Avg.
dciy
prod.
(MGD)
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
Purch.
Total
EPA Region— 7
IA5715093 .
IA8222001 .
1A7727031 .
KS2020906
KS2009110
KS201770t
KS2017308
MO1010399
MO1010415
M05010754
MO6010716
MO6010715
NE3110926
NE3105507
90-1068
90-1070
90-1071
90-1116
90*1118
90*1120
90*1121
90*1218
90M220
90*1222
90-1224
90*1228
90-1264
90*1268
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
IA
IA
IA
KS
KS
KS
KS
MO
MO
MO
MO
MO
NE
NE
Cedar
Rapids.
Dav-
enport.
Des
Moines.
Kansas
City.
Mission ..
Topeka...
Wichita ...
Independ-
ence.
Kansas
City.
Spring-
field.
St. Louis
St. Louis
Lincoln ...
Omaha ...
Cedar Rapids
Water Dept.
lA-American Water
Co.
Des Moines Water
Works.
Board of Public
Utilities.
Water Dist No. 1
Johnson Cnty.
City of Topeka
Water Div.
City of Wichita
City of Independ-
ence.
Kansas City Water
Dept.
City Utilities of
Springfield.
St. Louis Cty Water
Co.
City of St. Louis
Lincoln Water Sys-
tem.
Metropolitan Utils
Dist.
110,243
139,850
193,187
149,767
225,300
119,883
308,058
125,000
450,000
149,237
1,000,000
437,500
192,500
450,000
110,000
170,000
208,000
168,000
261,000
130,000
300,000
115,000
460,000
162,422
901,411
450,000
189,600
400,000
0
0
52,000
300
82,000
20,000
50,000
130,510
140,000
0
129,134
60,000
0
50,000
110,000
170,000
260,000
168,300
343,000
150,000
350,000
245,510
600,000
162,422
1,030,545
510,000
189,600
450.000
N/A
N/A
N/A
32.0
22.4
21.0
33.9
10.2
84.9
22.5
121.7
152.0
32.1
75.0
26.0
22.9
40.0
31.9
47.6
24.0
50.0
22.7
t05.0
22.1
170.2
160.0
35.6
96.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.0
22.9
40.0
31.9
47.9
24.0
50.0
22.7
105.0
22.1
170.2
160.0
35.60
96.9
EPA Region— 8
CO0103005
CO0107162
COOI21150
CO0116001
CO0151SOO
S04600294
10-4900512
UT4900392
UT4900390
UT4900391
90*1609
90*1610
90*1611
90*1612
90-1617
90*1480
90*1535
90-1540
90-1541
90-1543
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
so
UT
UT
UT
irr
Aurora ....
Boulder ..
Colorado
Springs.
Denver ...
Pueblo ...
Sioux
Falls.
Layton ....
Salt Lake
City.
Salt Lake
City.
West Jor-
dan.
City of Aurora
City of Boulder
City of Colorado
Springs.
Denver Water Dept
Board of Water
Works of Pueblo.
Sioux Falls Utils—
Water Dept.
Weber Basin Wtr
Conserv Dist.
Metro Wtr Dist Salt
Lake City.
Salt Lake City Pub-
lic Utils.
Salt Lake Co Wtr
Conserv Dist.
225,000
105,000
320,000
1,000,000
100,000
100,814
95,000
700,000
285,258
400,000
230,000
100,600
292,000
704,000
106,000
100,000
0
0
286,740
72,000
0
0
12,000
300,000
0
2,500
200,000
700,000
0
378,000
230,000
100,600
304,000
1,004,000
106,000
102,500
200,000
700,000
286,740
450,000
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
38.7
18.6
65.0
215.1
23.0
17.2
31.4
43.0
89.0
45.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.6
38.7
18.6
65.0
215.1
23.0
17.2
31.4
43.0
89.0
51.8
EPA Region— 9
AZ0407090
A2CM07093
AZ0407095
AZ0407025
AZ0407098
AZW07100
AZ0410112
CA3010001
CA1510Q40
CA1910041
CA3310001
CA0710003
CA3310037
CA2110002
90-1221
90*1227
90-1233
90-1235
90*1237
90-1243
90-1839
90-1255
90*1259
90-1646
90-1261
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
A2
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
Chandler
Glendale
Mesa
Phoenix ..
Scotts-
dale.
Tempo ...
Tucson ...
Anaheim
Bakers-
field.
Bakers-
field.
Clare-
mont.
Coachella
Concord .
Corona ...
Corte
Chandler, Munic
Wtr Dept.
City of Glendale
Mesa, Munic Water
Dept.
City of Phoenix
City of Scottsdale ..
City of Tempe
Tucson Water
City of Anaheim
California Water
Service Co.
Kem County Water
Agency.
Three Valleys Mwd
Coachella Valley
Water Dist. '
Contra Costa Water
District.
City of Corona Util
Svcs Dept.
Mann Municipal
104,004
131,000
220,000
907,930
140,000
145,000
478,641
273,600
#N/A
189,000
535,000
155,655
225,000
100,000
170,000
146,000
985,000
118,000
145,000
555,467
246,000
175,000
200,000
195,000
70,000
168,000
0
200,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
146,000
1,185,000
118,000
145,000
555,467
246,000
175,000
200,000
195,000
70,000
168,000
47
22.0
48.5
193.0
11.8
33.8
55.6
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
27.0
302.7
28.9
36.0
88.2
44.0
40.0
56.0
34.6
21.1
25.0
0.0
0.3
14.3
0.0
0.0
20.0
14.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
27.0
303.0
43.2
36.0
88.2
64.0
54.7
56.0
34.6
21.1
29.0
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6377
APPENDIX B-1 .—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
CA3610018
CA1910039
CA3710006
CA01 10001
CA1010007
CA3010010
CA3010062
CA3010053
CA3710010
CA1910174
CA1910065
CA1910067
CA5010010
CA5010038
CA2710004
CA1910048
CA01 10005
CA3710014
CA3610034
CA3010027
CA3310005
CA1910124
CA01 10010
CA1910126
CA3610094
CA1910134
CA3310031
CA3410021
CA3410020
CA3610039
CA3710020
CA1910155
CA3810001
CA3310009
CA4310027
WIDB
I.D.
90*1265
90*1271
90*1273
90*1281
90*1283
90*1285
90*1287
90*1289
90*1299
90*1305
90*1649
90*1313
90*1317
90*1315
90*1321
90*1652
90*1337
90*1343
90*1347
90*1351
90*1353
90*1359
90*4586
90*1363
90*1832
90*1367
90*1369
90*1381
Region
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
g
9
9
g
9
9
9
g
9
g
g
9
9
9
g
g
9
g
9
g
9
State
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
City
Cucamo-
nga.
El Monte
Escon-
dido.
Fountain
Valley.
Fremont .
Fresno ...
Fullerton .
Garden
Grove.
Hunting-
ton
Beach.
LaMesa ..
LaPuente
Long
Beach.
Los An-
geles.
Los An-
geles.
Modesto .
Modesto .
Monterey
Newhall ..
Oakland .
Ocean-
side.
Ontario ...
Orange ...
Palm
Springs.
Pasadena
Pleasant-
on.
Pomona
Rancho
Cucam-
onga.
Redondo
Beach.
Riverside
Roseville
Sac-
ramen-
to.
Salinas ...
San
Bernar-
dino.
San
Diego.
San
Dimas.
San Fran-
cisco.
San
Jacinto.
San Jose
Utility
Cucamonga County
Water Dist.
San Gabriel Valley
Water Co.
City of Escondido ..
Orange County
Water District.
Alameda County
Water Dist.
City of Fresno
City of Fullerton
City of Garden
Grove.
City of Huntington
Beach.
Helix Water District
Suburban Water
Systems.
Long Beach Water
Department.
Metro Water Dist of
So Calif.
City of Los Angeles
City of Modesto
Modesto Irrigation
District.
CA-American Water
Co.
Castaic Lake Water
Agency.
East Bay Munic
Utility Dist.
Oceanside — City of
Ontario — City of
City of Orange
Water Dept.
Desert Water Agen-
cy.
Pasadena Water &
Power Dept.
Zone 7 Water
Agency.
City of Pomona
Water Dept.
Chino Basin Mwd
Cal. Water Service
Co.-Hermosa/Re-
dondo.
City of Riverside ....
San Juan Subur-
ban, Water Dist.
City of Sacramento
California Water
Service Co.
San Bernardino
City.
City of San Diego ..
So. Cal. Water Co.-
Southwest.
San Francisco
Water Dept.
Eastern Mwd-San
Jacinto.
Santa Clara Valley
Water Dist.
FRDS re-
tail pop.
125,000
146,514
107,000
#N/A
275,000
390,350
' 115,563
131,500
185,000
229,969
51,255
425,000
#N/A
3,400,000
126,333
200,000
114,441
150,000
1,300,000
135,000
135,000
113,700
63,010
154,675
140,000
120,000
300,000
118,200
245,000
#N/A
374,600
#N/A
129,317
1,200,000
178,512
648,000
24,664
750,000
WIDB
Population served
Retail
110,000
i5ot555
65,000
0
255,000
360,765
111,000
134,144
198,000
226,000
200,000
416,000
0
3,427,000
100,000
103,000
1,100,000
110,000
125,000
158,366
119,800
203,000
16,500
347,000
100,000
1,000,000
732,000
0
Wholesale
0
Cl
25,000
1,800,OOD
I
0
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
40,700
0
(I
14,700,000
(1
(i
(1
I
0
0
1)
I)
1)
3,001)
200,001)
1)
1
1)
i
i
I)
1,305,001)
1,400,001)
Total
•110,000
1 55,555
90,000
1,800,000
!!55,000
360,765
111,000
134,144
198,000
266,700
200,000
416.000
14,700,000
3,427,000
100,000
103,000
1,100,000
110,000
125,000
158,366
119,800
206,000
216,500
347,000
100,000
1,000,000
2,037,000
1,400,000
FRDS
Avg.
day
prod.
(MOD)
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
*N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
«N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD)
Prod.
28.9
40.9
30.0
15.0
30.4
89.9
18.7
17.5
26.0
41.0
38.8
24.1
1,665.0
413.8
45.0
15.5
213.0
18.9
6.5
10.1
25.3
52.7
49.0
102.0
12.0
192.4
281.0
82.4
Purch.
0.0
0.1
15.0
0.0
9.8
0.0
12.3
7.5
7.0
5.5
10.3
43.4
0.0
207.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.1
0.0
24.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.3
0.0
0.0
Total
28.9
41.0
45.0
15.0
40.2
89.9
31.0
25.0
33.0
46.5
49.1
67.5
1,665.0
621.1
45.0
15.5
213.0
27.0
6.5
34.7
25.3
52.7
49.0
102.0
12.0
217.7
281.0
82.4
-------
6378
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-1.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND OR SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE
SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING 100,000 OR MORE PEOPLE—Continued
PWS-ID
CA4310011
CA3910001
CA4110008
WIDB
I.D.
90M379
Region
9
9
9
State
CA
CA
CA
City
San Jose
San Jose
San
Mateo.
Utility
San Jose Water
Company.
California Water
Service — Stock-
ton.
California Water
Service.
FRDS re-
tail pop.
755,000
166,100
109,000
WIDB
Population served
Retail
745,000
Wholesale
0
Total
745,000
FRDS
Avg.
day
prod.
(MGD)
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
WIDB
Avg. day flow (MGD) '
Prod.
76.0
|
Purch.
59.0
Total
135.0
EPA Region—9
CA3010038
CA4210010
CAKAIfVUA
CA4910020
CA3910006
CA 4310014
CA5610050
CA3610006
CA 481 0007
H10000331 .
HIQ000335
NV0000289
NV0000090
NV0000190
90*1385
90-1001
90-1066
90*1692
90-1334
90*1338
9
9
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
9
g
9
9
9
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
HI
HI
NV
NV
NV
Santa
Ana
Santa
Bar-
bara.
Paula.
Rosa.
Stockton .
Sunny-
vale.
Oaks.
Upland ..
Vallejo .
Honolulu
Walanae,
Oahu.
Boulder
City.
Las
Vegas.
Sparks ...
City of Santa Ana ..
City of Santa Bar-
bara.
Dist.
Sonoma County
Water Agency.
Stockton East
Water District.
Cfty of Sunnyvale
pal Wtr Dist.
Water Facilities Au-
thority-Jpa.
City of Vallejo
Honolulu Board of
Water Supply.
Walpahu-Ewa-
Waianae.
Southern Nevada
Water System.
Las Vegas Valley
Water Dist.
Westpac Utilities ....
293,742
90,000
165000
400000
225,000
120000
475000
338,660
121 600
645,741
122,166
500,000
500,000
132,000
225,000
80,000
735,860
0
570,400
155,000
0
25,000
0
650,000
0
20,000
225,000
105,000
735,860
650,000
570,400
175,000
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A.
74.3
4.7
125.0
12.7
37.7
26.5
21.7
,
148.0
222.0
34.0
52.0
18.5
0.0
1.0
0.0
139.0
2.2
45.0
21.7
149.0
222.0
173.0
54.2
EPA Region—10
AK0221090
ID4010016
OR4100287
OR4100657
OR41 00731
WA5377050
WA5383100
WA5386800
WA5391200
90*1445
90-1076
90-1426
90-1429
90-1575
90*1576
90*1578
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
AK
ID
OR
OR
OR
WA
WA
WA
WA
Anchor-
age.
Boise
Eugene ..
Portland .
Salem ....
Seattle ...
Spokane
Tacoma ..
Van-
couver.
Anchorage Water &
Wastewater.
Boise Water Cor-
poration.
Eugene Water &
Electric Board.
Portland Bureau of
Waterworks.
Salem Public
Works.
Seattle Water Dept
City of Spokane
Tacoma Water Divi-
sion.
#N/A
144,000
135,000
402,000
116000
572,000
182,000
262,500
103896
180,000
126,000
100,000
390,000
546,000
175,000
213,500
0
0
50,000
330,000
585,000
3,000
5,000
180,000
126,000
150,000
720,000
1,131,000
178,000
218,500
#N/A
23.0
#N/A
#N/A
#N/A
179.4
62.3
76.3
204
24.0
31.3
28.0
120.0
165.0
67:0
80.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
24.0
31.3
28.0
120.0
165.0
67.0
80.5
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE
[By Region, State, Public Water System JD #, Name of Utility, City, and Population] ;
Reg.
1 .....
•j
1
•j
1 ...
1 .....
1 . .
1 .....
1
St
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
PWSID
CT0020021
CT0170011
CT0473011
CT035001 1
CT0570011
CT1 370011
CT0608011
CT0340011
CT0590011
Name
BIRMINGHAM UTILITIES, INC
BRISTOL WATER DEPT
CONNECTICUT WATER CO., WESTERN SYSTEM
CT-AM WATER CO NOROTON DISTRICT ...:...
CT-AM WATER CO, GREENWICH DIST .. .
CT-AMER W.C., MYSTIC VALLEY DIV
CTWC, SHORELINE REG, GUILFORD
DANBURY WATER DEPT
GROTON WATER DEPT
City '
ANSONIA
BRISTOL ....
WAREHOUSE POINT
DARIEN ;...
GREENWICH ....
MYSTIC ;...
GUILFORD ....
DANBURY
GROTON ....
Population
32000
52328
62000
24967
57161
11515
48221
48000
29500
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 15)94 / Proposed Rules
6379
APPENDIX B-^.^CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, 'and Population]
Reg.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 .....'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
, St.
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
CT
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
PWSID
CT0770021
CT080001 1
CT0830011
CT0880011
CT089001 1
CT095001 1
CT1 030011
CT1 030021
CT1 040011
CT11 00011
CT1310011
CT1 350011
CT1 430011
CT1 480011
CT1 520071
CT1 630011
MA4001000
MA1 005000
MA3007000
MA1 008000
MA3009000
MA3010000
MA2015000
MA4016000
MA3023000
MA3026000
MA3030000
MA3031000
MA3040000
MA3046000
MA3048000
MA3049000
MA3050000
MA3057000
MA1061000
MA2064000
MA3067000
MA3071000
MA4072000
MA3079000
MA1 085000
MA3093000
MA4095000
MA4096000
MA2097000
MA31 00000
MA21 03000
MA31 07000
MA1114000
MA31 28000
MA3131000
MA31 33000
MA1 137000
MA3144000
MA31 49000
MA21 53000
MA31 55000
MA1 159000
MA31 60000
MA1161000
MA31 63000
MA31 65000
MA31 68000
MA21 70000
MA31 76000
MA31 78000
MA3181000
MA31 89000
MA31 98000
Name
MANCHESTER WATER DEPT
MERIDEN WATER DEPT
MIDDLETOWN WATER DEPT
NAUGATUCK DIV CONN WATER CO
NEW BRITAIN WATER DEPT
NEW LONDON WATER DEPT
NORWALK FIRST TAXING DISTRICT
NORWALK SECOND TAX DISTRICT WATER
NORWICH WATER DEPT
PLAINVILLE WATER CO
SOUTHINGTON WATER DEPT :
STAMFORD WATER CO
TORRINGTON WATER CO
WALLINGFORD WATER DEPT .
WATERFORD WATER & SEWER AUTH .
WINDHAM WATER WORKS
ABINGTON-ROCKLAND JOINT WATER WORKS j
AGAWAM WATER SUPPLY
AMESBURY WATER DIVISION
AMHERST WATER DIVISION D.P.W
ANDOVER WATER DEPT
ARLINGTON WATER DEPT
ATHOL WATER DIVISION
ATTLEBORO WATER DEPT
BEDFORD WATER DEPT .;
BELMONT WATER DEPT
BEVERLY DEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BILLERICA WATER DEPT
BRAINTREE WATER DEPARTMENT
BROOKLINE WATER DEPT
BURLINGTON WATER DISTRICT
CAMBRIDGE WATER DEPARTMENT ....;
CANTON WATER DIVISION-D.P.W
CHELSEA WATER DEPT
CHICOPEE WATER DEPT
CLINTON WATER DEPT
CONCORD WATER DIV
DANVERS WATER DEPT
DARTMOUTH WATER & SEWER DIV
DRACUT WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT
EAST LONGMEADOW WATER DEPT
EVERETT WATER DEPT
FALL RIVER WATER DEPT
FALMOUTH WATER DEPT ;.. .
FITCHBURG WATER DEPARTMENT
FRAMINGHAM WATER DIVISION
GARDNER WATER DEPARTMENT
GLOUCESTER WATER DEPT
GREENFIELD WATER DEPT
HAVERHILL WATER DIVISION-D.P.W
HINGHAM WATER CO
HOLBROOK WATER DEPT
HOLYOKE WATER WORKS
IPSWICH WATER DIVISION-D.P.W
LAWRENCE WATER DEPT
LEOMINSTER WATER DIV
LEXINGTON WATER & SEWER DIV
LONGMEADOW WATER DEPT
LOWELL WATER DEPT
LUDLOW WATER DEPT
LYNN WATER & SEWER COMMISSION
MALDEN WATER DIVISION :
MARBLEHEAD W&S COMM
MARLBORO PUBLIC WORKS
MEDFORD WATER DEPT ;
MELROSE WATER DEPARTMENT
METHUEN WATER DEPT „.,.... :.
MILTON WATER DEPT ; ';.'. „.
NATICK WATER DEPT
City
MANCHESTER
MERIDEN
MIDD1 ETOWN
NAUGATUCK
NEW BRITAIN
NEW I ONDON
NORWALK
NORWALK
NORWICH
PLAINVILLE
SOUTHINGTON
STAMFORD
TORRINGTON
WALLINGFORD
WATERFORD
WINDHAM
ROCKLAND
AGAWAM
AMESBURY
AMHERST :
ANDOVER ...;.
ARLINGTON
ATHOL . .
ATTLE:BORO
BEDFORD
BELMONT
BEVERLY.
NO BILLERICA
BRAINTREE
BROOKLINE
BURLINGTON
CAMBRIDGE
CANTON
CHELSEA
CHICOPEE
CLINTON
CONCORD
DANVERS
NORTH DARTMOUTH
DRACUT
EAST LONGMEADOW
EVERFTT .
FALL RIVER
FALMOUTH
FITCHBURG
FRAMINGHAM
GARDNER
GLOUCESTER
GREENFIELD
HAVERHILL
HINGHAM
HOLBROOK
HOLYOKE
IPSWICH
LAWRENCE
LFOMINSTER
LEXINGTON
2IJ Wll LIAMS ST
LOWELL
LUDLOW
LYNN
MALDFN
MARBLEHEAD
MARLBORO
MEDFORD
MELROSE
METHEUN
MILTON
NATICK
Population
48173
58000
40500
25900
90677
45000
41800
35108
35000
19159
35256
85000
29000
39360
13757
16240
29635
28572
14056
33000
29154
44347
10321
33000
12500
27600
37000
37029
36000
59202
22560
90290
18000
25000
53325
14000
16295
27500
27000
18000
13000
35000
1 00000
26500
39580
62000
18000
36969
19000
45000
31875
11100
40000
12000
55000
35000
30255
16600
100000
18000
78500
51000
20209
40000
56000
27692
38000
25794
31000
-------
6380
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
....
44*.
....
*«..
**.*
**•(*
***>•
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
1
.....
.....
1 .....
.....
.....
.....
....*
1
st
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MP
Me
Me
Me
Me
Me
ft 1C
Me
Me
Nn
Nn
Nn
M14
Nn
Nn
Nn
Nn
HI
HI
Dl
Dt
Rt
PWSID
MA^IQQftOA
MAxonif\nn
MA^onflnnn
MAionvfinn
MAionQfWi
MA**91Onnn
MAOO-J qnfin
MA^oonnno
MA499Qrmn
MA197RIW1
MA49^Q(V1O
MA4944nnn
MA^944nnn
MA**94finon
MA^OROflfVI
MA*wR9nfM"i
MA49R4nnn
MA-iov^rum
MAooyflnnn
MA^oA^nnn
MA*woiftfvn
MA49QWVI
MA49Q£nnn
MA9144flnn
MAOIAIAfWl
MA^sfmnnn
MA*MfiRnfifi
MAiio^nnn
MA9**9A(Vin
MAa-vaannn
M A
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6361
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
1
•
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 .....
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
St.
Rl
Rl
VT
VT
VT
VT
VT
VT
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
PWS ID
RI1615627
RI1559518
VT0005254
VT0005016
VT0005290
VT0005053
VT0005229
VT0005091
NJ01 02001
NJ0901001
NJ0701001
NJ0702001
NJ1 506001
NJ0704001
NJ1204001
NJ1 205001
NJ0211001
NJ0217001
NJ1 808001
NJ1316001
NJ0221001
NJ1 326001
NJ21 08001
NJ1 603001
NJ0904001
NJ1207001
NJ0905001
NJ0907001
NJ1416001
NJ0231001
NJ0232001
NJ1811001
NJ1 328002
NJ1213002
NJ0713001
NJ1214001
NJ1 605001
NJ1 352005
NJ0239001
NJ1215001
NJ0716001
NJ1209002
NJ0717001
NJ2013001
NJ0257001
NJ1219001
NJ 1339001
NJ1 424001
NJ1612001
NJ0325001
NJ0720001
NJ1352003
NJ0265001
NJ1614001
NJ0721001
NY0000136
NY0001710
NY0000544
NY0002760
NY0000191
NY0001651
NY0002860
NY0001039
NY0004309
NY0001150
NY0004381
NY0004342
NY0020767
NY0004344
Name
WARWICK— CITY OF
WOONSOCKET— CITY OF
BARRE CITY WATER SYSTEM
BENNINGTON WATER DEPT
BRATTLEBORO WATER DEPT
BURLINGTON WATER RES
RUTLAND CITY WATER DEPT
SO. BURLINGTON W D
ATLANTIC CITY MUA
BAYONNE W DEPT
BELLEVILLE WATER DEPT
BLOOMFIELD WATER DEPT
BRICK TOWNSHIP
CEDAR GROVE WATER DEPT
EAST BRUNSWICK WATER DEP
EDISON W DEPT
ELMWOOD PARK WATER DEPT
FAIRLAWN WATER DEPT
FRANKLIN TWP DEPT PUBLIC
FREEHOLD TWP WATER DEPT
GARFIELD W DEPT
GORDON'S CORNER WATER CO
HACKETTSTOWN MUA '.
HALEDON WATER DEPT
HARRISON W DEPT
HIGHLAND PARK W DEPT
HOBOKEN W DEPT
KEARNY W DEPT
LINCOLN PARK WATER DEPT
LODI WATER DEPT
LYNDHURST W DEPT
MANVILLE W DEPT
MARLBORO MUA
MONROE TWP MUA
MONTCLAIR WATER BUREAU
NEW BRUNSWICK W DEPT
NJ AMERICAN W CO LITTLE
NJ WATER SUPPLY AUTH MAN
NORTH ARLINGTON W DEPT
NORTH BRUNSWICK W DEPT
NUTLEY WATER DEPT
OLD BRIDGE MUA
ORANGE WATER DEPT
RAHWAY W DEPT
SADDLE BROOK WATER DEPT
SAYREVILLE W DEPT
SHORELANDS WATER CO., INC
SOUTHEAST MORRIS COUNTY
TOTOWA W DEPT
U S ARMY FORT DIX
VERONA MUA
WALL TWP WATER DEPT
WALLINGTON WATER DEPT
WAYNE TWP DIVISION OF WA
WEST CALDWELL W DEPT
AMSTERDAM CITY WATER WORKS
AUBURN
BATAVIACITY
BEACON CITY
BETHLEHEM WD NO. 1
BINGHAMTON CITY
BOWLING GREEN WATER DISTRICT
BROCKPORT VILLAGE
CAMILLUS CONSOLIDATED WO
CANANDAIGUA CITY
CANTON VILLAGE
CICERO WD'S
CLARENCE, TOWN WATER DEPT.
CLAY WD'S
City
WARWICK
WOONSOCKET
BARRF CITY
BENNINGTON
BRATTLEBORO
BURLINGTON
RUTLAND CITY
SOUTH BURLINGTON
ATLANTIC CITY
BAYONNE
BELLEVILLE
BLOOMFIELD
MUA EIRICK TWP
CEDAR GROVE TWP
EAST BRUNSWICK
EDISON TWP
ELMWOOD PARK
FAIRLAWN
FRANKLIN TWP
FREEHOLD TWP
GARFIELD
MANALAPAN TWP
H ACKFTTSTOWN
NORTH HALEDON
HARRISON
HIGHLAND PARK
HOBOKEN
KEARNY
LINCOLN PARK
LODI ..
LYNDHURST TWP
MANVILLE
MARLBORO TWP
MONROE TWP
MONTCLAIR
NEW BRUNSWICK
LITTLF FALLS
CLINTON ..
NORTH ARLINGTON
N BRUNSWICK TWP
NUTLE:Y
OLD BRIDGE TWP
ORANGE
RAHWAY
SADDI E BROOK
SAYRFVILLE
HAZLET TWP
MORRISTOWN
TOTOWA
NEW HANOVER TWP
ViERONA
WALL TWP
WALLINGTON
WAYNE
WEST CALDWELL
AMSTFRDAM
AUBURN
BATAVIA
BFACON
DELMAR
BINGHAMTON
EAST MEADOW
BROCKPORT
CAMILLUS
CANANDAIGUA
CANTON
SYRACUSE
CILARFNCE CENTER
CLAY
Population
77111
54000
14000
nnnn
12000
47521
18500
loeyc
'jTnnn
sunn
•jpnnn
d^nfi
R70R7
•t/ionn
4Qfinn
oRnnn
18700
30548
44nnn
oonnn
ofinon
S7101
•ffinnn
H4nn
11800
i
-------
6382
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population] ;
Reg.
.....
.....
4....
.....
.....
*....
2 «*...
4....
.....
4....
.....
.....
.....
2
.....
.....
....
....
....
*«••
....
.....
9 ...
st
K1V
MV
MV
MV
MV
NY
NY
MV
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
NY
MV
MV
NY
NY
NY
NY
MV
MV
NY
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
NY
MV
MV
NY
NY
NY
NY
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
MV
NY
NY
K1V
NY
NY
PWSID
MV1VWI1Q9
MV/VI1 7RRR
Mvrwvi^io^
MVfWVW*4^
NVftftnniv?n
MVftnOfit^lQ
KIVftAHl finft
MVfW\n7RA
MVfWM 1 %R
MVIWVHflA
MV/W\4KO7
MVfinnioiR
MVfWW*n7
MVfWW41 R
MVfWVld^ll Q
MVAfll fi1 AO
MVHAn(W74
MVlWVmiY/
MvnnnniQft
Nivf\nnnRfi4
Mvivwwmfi'i
MVfWHW^Qn
MV/WMR3A
MVfiAn*5Rftfi
Mvnnmo7O
Mvnnn*v\4Q
MVfWWmfiR
MV(Ylfvn*V79
Mvnfmi7d*5
MVfUV^fififi
MVfWW^QA
MVlWWWi
MVnnfl9*3A1
MVfwvH*^i
MVf)flnA4fi1
MVnAfi^lR9
MVfVWl917
MVftAf>4^Q7
MVflfl.n94(V5
Mvnnfl444fi
Mvnnnflifift
MVfWVWi7
wvnnn^R^fi
MVfWWTWfifi
MVfVMT*R7^
MVlWl'Wfil
MVATUWWA
MVlWM^Rfi
MvnfHVMmn
MvnnofiMR
MVAnm R7A
NY0002346
Name
COHOES CITY
PORNFI 1 1 INIVFRSITY
CORTLANDT CONSOLIDATED WD
DPwnTWDIcv EOLITH
DUNKIRK CITY
PI MA WATFR DI^TRIPT NO 1
PI MIRA WATFR ROARD
FRFDOMIA VII 1 AfiF
ftFMPVA PITY
HI FMQ FAI 1 ^ P.ITY
f2l n\/PPQ\/ll 1 F PITY WATFR WORKS
nQAMn ICI AMH TPiWM WATFR DFPT
ftppcpp ppiN^Pil IDATFn WD
i^nFPMRt IPf^H PPiMQPjl inATFD WD NO 1
ftil III HPRI AND WD AA/F^TMFRF WD\
WFKIRIFTTA WD tf1
WORMFI I PITY
II ION VII 1 AftF
ITHACA CITY
ITHACA TOWN WD
KFNMORF VII 1 AGF
KINGSTON CITY
LANCASTER VILLAGE
1 ATHAM WATFR DISTRICT
1 F\WI«?TnM WATFR IMPROVFMENTAREA
LOCKPORT CITY
1 PiPKPORT WD IW -
MAQQFNA VII 1 AfiF
MPWA 1 IPI AND QY^TFM
MIDHI FTOWN CITY
Mm IMT VFRKIOM WATFR DISTRICT it1
MFW PA^TI F/QTANWOOD W D ....
MFW HARTFORD WATFR IMPROV DIST
NFW WINDSOR HONSOI IDATFD WD
NFWARK VII I ARF
NPWRI IRRH PITY
MP\A/RI IRC3M PON^OI IDATFD WD
NIAGARA FAI I R HITY
NORTH TONAWANDA CITY
NORWICH CITY
NYA("!K VII I AGE
nrtnFM^RI IRR CITY
Dl FAN CITY
ONEIDA CITY
ONFONTA PITY
OQQIMIMR WATFR DFPARTMFNT
OSWEGO CITY
ppCK<3KII I CITY
PLAYTSBURG CITY
Dl FAQAMTVII I F WATFR DISTRICT
pnT
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6383
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
0
2
2
2
2
2
y
2
2
2
2
2
2
o
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
•j
3
St.
MY
NY
NY
NY
NY
NY
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
VI
DE
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
MD
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PWSID
NYnni m y?
NY0003435
NY0000585
NY0003464
NY0003469
NY0003456
pRnnn^ndfi
PROOC4545
PR0004605
PR0004635
PR0002752
PR0004695
PR0003914
PR0004705
PR0005487
PR0005306
PR0004645
PR0004745
PR0002662
PR0002672
PR0004034
PR0005166
PR0003343
PR0002692
PR0005316
PR0002762
PR0005507
PR0004044
PR0004835
PR0004324
PR0002872
PR0002682
PR0003333
PR0003323
PR0005106
PR0003303
PR0002702
PR0002772
PR0003924
PR0005196
PR0004314
VI0000097
DE0000564
MD01 20002
MD01 60021
MD0020038
MD0010008
MD0100015
MD0010011
MD0020012
MD0210010
MD0120016
MD0120012
MD01 20003
MD01 50003
MD0060015
PA4070023
PA5040008
PA5040012
PA1 090078
PA41 90008
PA3480055
PA6420014
PA1 090001
PA2359001
PA1 090079
PA7210002
PA2409002
Name
WATERVLIET CITY
WESTCHESTER JOINT WATER WORKS
WHEATFIELD WD
WHITE PLAINS CITY
YORKTOWN WATER STORAGE & DIST
25 WILLET AVE
AGUAS BUENAS URBANO
AIBONITO URBANO
BARRANQUITAS URBANO
CAYEY URBANO
CIALES URBANO
CIDRA URBANO
COAMO URBANO
COMERIO URBANO
COROZAL URBANO
FAJARDO CEIBA
GUAVATE
GUAYAMA URBANO
HATILLO-CAMUY
ISABELA
JUANA DIAZ URBANO
JUNCOS URBANO
LAJAS
LARES URBANO
LUQUILLO URBANO
MOROVIS URBANO
NARANJITO URBANO
OROCOVIS URBANO
PATILLAS URBANO
PEFUELAS ....
QUEBRADA
QUEBRADILLAS URBANO
SABANO GRANDE
SAN GERMAN '.
SAN LORENZO URBANO
SAN SEBASTIAN
UTUADO URBANO
VEGA BAJA URBANO
VILLALBA URBANO
YABUCOA URBANO
YAUCO
V I WAPA STX (GOVT)
WILMINGTON SUBURBAN
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE
BALTO CITY AP PUBLIC WORKS
CUMBRLND-EVITTS CRK BEDFORD PA
FREDERICK
FROSTBURG
FT GEORGE MEADE
HAGERSTOWN
HARFORD COUNTY DPW
HAVRE DE GRACE MUN UTIL COMM
MD-AMERICAN WATER CO
ROCKVILLE FILTRATION PLANT
WESTMINSTER
ALTOONA CITY AUTHORITY
AMBRIDGE WATER AUTHORITY
BEAVER FALLS MUNICIPAL AUTH
BENSALEM TOWNSHIP .
BLOOMSBURG WATER COMPANY
BLUE MTN CON WATER CO
BRADFORD CITY WATER AUTHORITY
BRISTOL BORO WATER/SEWER AUTH . . ..
BROWNELL WTP
BUCKS CO WATER AND SEWER AUTH
CARLISLE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
CEASETOWN RESERVOIR PA GAS & W
! City
WATERVLIET
MAMARONECK
NORTH TONAWANDA
WHITF PLAINS
YORKTOWN HEIGHT
PORT CHESTER
AGUAS BUENAS
AIBONITO
BARRANQUITAS
CAYEY
CIALES
CIDRA
COAMO
COMERBO
COROZAL .
FAJARDO CEIBA
CAYEY
GUAYAMA
HATILLO
ISABE-'LA
JUANA DBAZ
JUNCOS
LAJAS
LARES
LUQUILLO
MOROVIS
MARANJITO ~
OROCOVIS
PATILLAS
PEEUELAS
HATILLO
QUEBRADILLAS
SABANA GRANDE
SAN GERMAN
SAN LORENZO
SAN SEBASTIAN
UTUADO
VEGA BAJA
VILLALBA
YABUCOA
YAUCO
CSTED ST CROIX
WILMINGTON
ABERDEEN
ANDREWS AIR FORCE
; BASE.
GLEN BURNIE
CUMBERLAND
FREDERICK
F:ROSTBURG
FT MFADE
HAGERSTOWN
BEL AIR
HAVRE DE GRACE
BEL AIR
ROCKVILLE
WESTMINSTER
ALTOONA
AMBRIDGE .
KASTVALE BORO ......
BENSALEM
BLOOMSBURG
WIND GAP
BRADFORD
BRISTOL
CAREiONDALE TWP
WARRIBGTON
CARLISLE
HUNLOCK CREEK
Population
13500
47933
10000
48718
33000
46648
20828
32332
23368
64440
11844
30512
32472
12940
27296
, 60000
10840
45204
28988
45408
27908
41916
30321
24324
28076
21904
31416
13484
15108
18936
10316
32952
17702
15654
21044
32459
17752
47404
13400
18000
34216
11000
93000
11000
17000
14000
35000
35000
11000
30000
70000
60000
10000
10200
40000
17000
62500
28000
53632
58200
20000
19474
12000
30000
18756
15000
21500
26285
-------
6384
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, Slate, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
3 .....
3
3
3
3 .....
3
3
3
3 ....
3 .....
3 ..
3
3
3 .....
3 .....
3 .
3
3
3 .. ..
3
3
3
3
3 .....
3 .....
3 .....
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 .....
3
3 . .
3
3
3
3 ....
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 .....
3
3
3
3
3 . .
3 .....
3 ....
3 .....
3 . .
3 .
3
3
3 . .
3
3
3
3
3 . „
3
3 . ..
3 .....
3 .....
St
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PWSID
PA7280005
PA5630039
PA1150166
PA1150106
PA3480050
PA41 80048
PA3060059
PA6170008
PA7360123
PA51 00094
PA2409003
PA7220015
PA3480064
PA7360124
PA7360045
PA5020040
PA7010019
PA4110014
PA5020061
PA7670076
PA7220049
PA5020108
PA2408001
PA41 10017
PA4310012
PA5650060
PA7380010
PA4440010
PA1 090026
PA1 230011
PA1 090024
PA6250076
PA5020027
PA1 090037
PA4490007
PA5650070
PA1090043
PA5260019
PA5020030
PA3480057
PA1 090089
PA5020036
PA2359008
PA4140087
PA5100012
PA6370011
PA6370034
PA3480038
PA6160001
PA5320025
PA1 460046
PA6330010
PA4490023
PA5260022
PA5260020
PA5260005
PA23S0022
PA7210029
PA7220017
PA1 090074
PA2409004
PA2409005
PA2409010
PA1 150077
PA5020041
PA1 460037
PA4490024
PA5020045
PA3540038
Name
CHAMBERSBURG BORO WATER SYSTEM
CHARLEROI MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
CITIZENS UTILITIES HOME WATER
CITY OF COATESVILLE AUTHORITY
CITY OF EASTON-BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF LOCK HAVEN-WATER DEPT
CITY OF READING
CLEARFIELD MUNICIPAL AUTH
COLUMBIA WATER COMPANY
CRANBERRY TWP SEWER AND WATER
CRYSTAL LAKE PG&W
DAUPHIN CONSOLIDATED WATER CO
EASTON SUBURBAN WATER AUTHORIT
ELIZABETHTOWN BOROUGH WATER
EPHRATA JOINT AUTHORITY
FOX CHAPEL AUTHORITY
GETTYSBURG MUNICIPAL AUT
GREATER JOHNSTOWN WATER AUTHOR
HAMPTON TOWNSHIP MUN AUTHORITY
HANOVER MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS
HARRISBURG AUTHORITY
HARRISON TOWNSHIP WATER AUTH
HAZLETON CITY AUTH WATER DEPT
HIGHLAND SEWER & WATER AUTH
HUNTINGDON BOROUGH WATER DEPT
LATROBE MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
LEBANON WATER AUTHORITY
LEWISTOWN BORO MUNICIPAL AUTH
LOWER BUCK CO. JOINT MIUN AUTH
MEDIA BOROUGH WATER COMPANY
MIDDLETOWN TWP
MILLCREEK TWP WATER AUTH
MONROEVILLE WATER AUTHORITY
MORRISVILLE MWW
MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY SUNBURY '.
NEW KENSINGTON MUNIC AUTHORITY
NEWTOWN ARTESIAN WATER CO
NORTH FAYETTE COUNTY MUN AUTH
NORTH VERSAILLES TWP AUTHORITY
NORTHAMPTON BORO MUN AUTH
NORTHAMPTON BUCKS CO. MUN AUTH
OAKMONT BORO MUNIC AUTHORITY
P G AND W LAKE SCRANTON ARCH B
PA AMER WATER CO.-MOSHANNON
PA AMER WATER CO. BUTLER
PA AMER WATER CO. ELLWOOD CTY
PA AMER WATER CO. NEW CASTLE
PA AMERICAN BANGOR PLANT
PA AMERICAN WATER CO CLARION
PA AMERICAN WATER CO-INDIANA D
PA AMERICAN WATER COMPANY
PA AMERICAN WATER PUNXSY
PA AMERICAN WHITE DEER
PA-AMERICAN WATER CO-CONNELLSV
PA-AMERICAN WATER-UNIONTOWN
PA-AMERICAN WATER-BROWNSVILLE . ...
PENN AMERICAN— ABINGTON DIST
PENN AMERICAN WATER CO WEST 1
PENN AMERICAN WATER COMPANY
PENNA. AMERICAN WATER CO
PG&W GARDNER-MILL CREEK
PG&W HUNTSVILLE HF
PG&W NESBITT ... .
PHOENIXVILLE WATER DEPT
PLUM BOROUGH MUNICIPAL AUTHOR!
POTTSTOWN BOROUGH WATER AUTH
ROARING CREEK WATER COMPANY
ROBINSON TWP MUNICIPAL AUTH
SCHUYLKILL CO MUN. AUTH
City
FAYETTEVILLE
CHARLEROI
SPRING CITY
WEST CALN
EASTON
LOCK HAVEN :
READING
CLEARFIELD
COLUMBIA
MARS
MOUNTAINTOP
HARRISBURG i..
EASTON
ELIZABETHTOWN
EPHRATA
PITTSBURGH
GETTYSBURG
JOHNSTOWN ...
ALLISON PARK L
HANOVER ...
HARRISBURG ...
NATRONA HEIGHTS ...
PACKER TWP ...
JOHNSTOWN ...
HUNTINGDON
LATROBE
LEBANON
LEWISTOWN
TULLYTOWN (LEVITTOWN)
MEDIA ...
LEVITOWN
ERIE
MONROEVILLE ...
MORRISVILLE
SUNBURY ...
NEW KENSINGTON
NEWTOWN
DUNBAR ...
NORTH VERSAILLES
WHITEHALL
RICHBORO ....
OAKMONT
WILKES BARRE
PHILLIPSBURG
BUTLER
ELLWOOD CITY
NEW CASTLE
BANGOR
CLARION ...
INDIANA
NORRISTOWN
INDIANA
MILTON
CONNELLSVILLE
UNIONTOWN ....
BROWNSVILLE ........
CLARKS SUMMIT
MECHANICSBURG
HUMMELSTOWN
YARDLEY
JENKINS
WILKES BARRE . .
WILKES-BARRE
PHOENIXVILLE
PITTSBURGH
STOWE
SHAMOKIN ....
CORAOPOLIS
POTTSVILLE ....
Population
17500
30484
13507
13000
26276
11000
85905
14500
18000
14000
10190
23000
30000
11000
14300
18500
11000
65000
21462
33000
65000
11763
38022
27100
12000
22800
43320
21576
85000
45000
16500
12000
33000
12000
13000
47350
24675
30540
10647
36000
27750
40688
57984
18000
38000
18400
42000
10000
10000
24000
80900
10313
38000
16800
31000
20000
11000
74816
27700
28400
58179
18982
59039
24000
25000
36000
51000
10500
31850
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6385
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
....
....
....
....
....
....
3 ....
....
3 —
3 ....
....
....
3 ....
....
....
....
3 ....
3 ...
...
o
St.
rA
rA
rA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
\/A
VA
\/A
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
WV
WV
\AA/
PWSID
PA 040 f»nRA
PA**nfinnfi7
pA79inn41^
DACORfinQA
PA 1 flonn99
pAinonneo
pAinonnfiQ
DAOAnom 1
PATOQflfVlO
PAH Hcnnoft
pAQQQfinftl
\/AiR9nfY7n
\/A1 191AQn
wAfififimnn
wA^RRnonn
\/A^7^fY7Rn
v/Afifi'wwo
\/ARi7Qinn
\i AftH 77*inn
\/A^ftnnfln*s
\/A1 -i9inR9
\/AO1 A7AOR
\/AfifiRQR^n
\/Aftm7^nn
\/A1 IIWRV?
\A/\/QQn^on'^
\*/\/Qon4m 1
\AA/A3n9nfti
Name
SHENANGO VALLEY WATER COMPANY
SHILLINGTON BOROUGH
SHIPPENSBURG BORO WATER •
SOUTHWESTERN PA WATER AUTH
ST MARY'S AREA JOINT WATER AU
STROUDSBURG MUNICIPAL AUTHORIT
PWTA MAIN ^Y^TFM
TRI-COUNTY JOINT MUN AUTHORITY
TWP OF FALLS AUTHORITY
UPPER SOUTHAMPTON MUN AUTH
WARMINSTER MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY
WATRES RESERVOIR PG&W
WAYNESBORO BOROUGH AUTHORITY
WEST CHESTER AREA MUNIC AUTH
WEST QQ MUN AUTH MCKEESPORT
m/coTPRM RFRKQ WATFR AUTHORITY
WHITEHALL TWP AUTHORITY
WILLIAMSPORT MUNICIPAL AUTH
ARFI I AKE WATER TREAT PLANT
AMHERST CO SERVICE AUTHORITY
B'BURG-C'BURG-VPI WATER AUTH
BASE BIO-ENVIRONMENTAL ENG
BRISTOL VA FILTER PLANT
PHRI<5TIANSBURG TOWN OF
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
CITY OF CHESAPEAKE WEST BR
PITY OF DANVILLE WATER TREAT P
CITY OF FAIRFAX
PITY OF HARRISONBURG WATER DEP
CITY OF LYNCHBURG
CITY OF MANASSAS— WATER PLANT
CITY OF MARTINSVILLE
CITY OF PETERSBURG
CITY OF RADFORD WTP
PITY OF WMQRfi WATER PLANT
CITY WATERWORKS
COLONIAL HEIGHTS-KURT E ANKROM
COUNTY OF STAFFORD
EUBANKS-HECHLER SYSTEM
FORT Fl I'STIS
FORT LEE ATTN LT COL W MUNSON
NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER
Nl RIVER WTP RT 627
ni IAMTIPO MARIwr RAIF MAINSIDE
OAI FM WTP #1 J W GRAHAM — SUPT
-------
6386
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
3
3
3
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .„..
4 —
4 .....
4 —
4 .....
4 .....
4 —
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 —
4
4
4
4 —
4 .....
4 .....
4 —
4
4 .....
4 —
4 .....
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4 —
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4 .....
4 .....
St
WV
wv
WV
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
=l
FL
=L
:L
:L
:L
FL
FL
:L
:L
FL
PWSID
WV3302839
WV3300608
WV3301030
AL0000933
AL0001265
AL0000133
AL0000934
AL0000824
AL0000804
AL0000737
AL0000131
AL0000547
AL0000213
AL0000394
AL0000398
AL0001432
AL0001084
AL0000940
AL0000174
AL0000783
AL0001493
AL0000509
AL0000577
AL0000943
AL0001086
AL0001336
AL0000833.
AL0000888
AL0000885
AL0000321
AL0001422
AL0001088
AL0001307
AL0000103
AL0000816
AL0000162
AL0001142
AL0001015
AL0000899
AL0001145
AL0000610
AL0000729
AL0000728
AL0000327
AL0000820
AL0001258
AL0001260
AL0000331
AL0000870
AL0000413
AL0000763
AL0000801
AL0001092
:L6588002
:L1 030050
FL4500105
FL6410182
FL1030141
FL5084100
FL5260053
FL6582295
FL5360170
FL6580651
FL4470257
FL1030517
FL6080051
FL6581591
FL6581641
FL6588003
Name
WV WATER— PRINCETON DISTRICT
WVAWC— HUNTINGTON DIST
WVAWC— OAK HILL DISTRICT
ALBERTVILLE UTILITIES BOARD
ALEXANDER CITY WATER DEPARTMENT
ANNISTON WATER & SEWER BOARD
ARAB WATER WORKS BOARD
ATHENS WATER DEPARTMENT
AUBURN WATER WORKS
BESSEMER WATER SERVICE
CALHOUN COUNTY WATER & FIRE PR AUTHORITY
CENTRAL ELMORE WATER AUTHORITY
CLANTON WATER DEPARTMENT
CULLMAN COUNTY COMMISSION
CULLMAN UTILITIES BOARD
CURRY WATER AUTHORITY
DECATUR UTILITIES
DOUGLAS WATER & FIRE PRO AUTH
EAST ALABAMA WATER & FIRE PRO AUTHORITY
FLORENCE WATER & SEWER BOARD
FORT MCCLELLAN
FORT PAYNE WATER WORKS BOARD ;
GADSDEN WATER WORKS
GUNTERSVILLE WATER WORKS & SEWER BOARD
HARTSELLE UTILITY BOARD
JASPER UTILITIES BOARD
LIMESTONE COUNTY WATER SYSTEM
MADISON COUNTY WATER DEPT
MADISON WATER WORKS & SEWER
MUSCLE SHOALS WATER DEPARTMENT
NORTHEAST ALABAMA WATER SYSTEM
NORTHEAST MORGAN COUNTY WATER AUTH
NORTHPORT WATER WORKS
ONEONTA UTILITIES BOARD
OPELIKA WATER WORKS BOARD
OXFORD WATER WORKS & SEWER BOARD
PHENIX CITY UTILITIES
PRICHARD WATER WORKS BOARD
REDSTONE ARSENAL
RUSSELL COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
RUSSELLVILLE WATER WORKS
SCOTTSBORO WATER WORKS
SECTION-DUTTON WATER SYSTEM
SHEFFIELD UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
SMITHS WATER AUTHORITY
SYLACAUGA UTILITIES BOARD
TALLADEGA WATER & SEWER BOARD
TUSCUMBIA WATER WORKS
TUSKEGEE UTILITIES BOARD
V.A.W WATER SYSTEM, INC
WARRIOR RIVER WATER AUTHORITY
/VEST LAWRENCE WATER CO-OP
WEST MORGAN WATER & FIRE PRO AUTHORITY
ATLANTIC UTILITIES OF SARASOTA
BAY COUNTY WATER SYSTEM
BELLE GLADE WATERWORKS
BRADENTON CITY OF
CALLAWAY, CITY OF WATER SYSTEM
CHARLOTTE COUNTY UTILITIES PORT
CITY OF CLEWISTON
FLORIDA CITIES WATER CO
LEE COUNTY UTILITIES— OLGA .'.
NORTH PORT UTILITIES
OKEECHOBEE, CITY OF
'ANAMA CITY WATER SYSTEM
PUNTA GORDA, CITY OF
SARASOTA CO SPECIAL UTIL DIST
SIESTA KEY UTILITIES AUTHORITY
SOUTHGATE UTILITIES
City
PRINCETON
HUNTINGTON
OAK HILL
ALBERTVILLE >
ALEX CITY
ANNISTON
ARAB
ATHENS
AUBURN
BESSEMER
ALEXANDRIA
WETUMPKA
CLANTON
CULLMAN ...
CULLMAN
JASPER
DECATUR
DOUGLAS
VALLEY
FLORENCE
FT MCCLELLAN
FORT PAYNE
GADSDEN
GUNTERSVILLE ..
HARTSELLE
JASPER
ATHENS
HUNTSVILLE
MADISON
MUSCLE SHOALS
FORT PAYNE
LACEY SPRINGS
NORTHPORT
ONEONTA
OPELIKA
OXFORD
PHENIX CITY
PRICHARD
REDSTONE ARSENAL
PHENIX CITY
RUSSELLVILLE
SCOTTSBORO
RAINSVILLE
SHEFFIELD V
SMITH
SYLACAUGA
TALLADEGA
TUSCUMBIA
TUSKEGEE
VINEMONT
BESSEMER
MT HOPE
DECATUR
SARASOTA
PANAMA CITY
BELLE GLADE
BRADENTON
CALLAWAY ;
CHARLOTTE
CLEWISTON
SARSOTA
ALVA
NORTH PORT
OKEECHOBEE
PANAMA CITY
PUNTA GORDA
SARASOTA
SARASOTA
SARASOTA
Population
10CO7
7R771
19RS7
PPOQ«;
22254
58500
25500
iqnsn
wr/wi
797QK
20457
1 7QR4
10000
33150
00079
ipnnQ
CCQOQ
1 1 14^
11*wn
481 05
191R1
iftfinn
52500
10005
IRfiflO
iQcnn
9df|fi^
A9&4K
oyyce
locnn
i7mn
•icyofs
o-tonn
1fiQQ9
9fi7fin
•1COQC
97finn
42000
ORRQC
1PQ4R
m?7n
ifinhn
21600
1/T7-JO
13527
23100
1 71 nn
117QQ
14PRQ
i9nnr>
11269
innn
16623
10Q9!>
18529
ocnnn
dnnnn
10504
7finnn
in"V7n
iKfinn
36300
20475
i7nnn
•jonnn
-toKfin
53000
25880
17809
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6387
APPENDIX B-2 —CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4
.....
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 ....;
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ...
4 ...
4 ...
4 ...
...
/I
St
FL
FL
GA
CaA
(aA
oA
(aA
oA
CaA
oA
vaA
uA
oA
GA
fciA
iaA
w\
GA
oA
uA
GA
PA
GA
GA
CaA
iaA
vaA
r»A
CaA
oA
oA
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
l^V
PWS1D
Lo4i iuyo
i_4oui ooy
CjAUbyUUUU
f*&f\At\nr\M
/•^Artvonnnn
/^Anft^nnnn
CaAloiuUUl
/iAfY77finn9
raAoi7nnfiA
CaA121UUUo
(jiAZ^oUUlM
/^Anfsvnnnft
/^AoQonnnn
fiAOKynnm
KYOU/U^o^i
KYUiyUUOf
KY1UUU4UO
KYlloUUoO
KYOoiUll4
KY 1 UOUl p/
tf vnnnm fifi
Name
QQI I/MARPO 1^1 AND
TO\A/M OP 1 OMf3ROAT KFY
\A/CQT PAI M RFAPH PITY OF
ATUFMQ PI ARKF PO WATFR ^YSTFM
AI if5l IQTA
r*AI HOI IM
PARROI 1 not INTY
PARRO1 1 TON
f-*ApTpRQVII 1 F
f->upR/-\tf FF POI IMTY
POI 1 FttF PARK
QQUj|y|R|A. COUNTY
POMYFR^
POWIKIRTON
r»i iMMINin ,
HARF nONMTY
HAI TOM 1 ITU ITIFQ
noi \m AQV/II i F.noi IRI A^ no AUTH
ni IRI IN
CAOT POINT ......
FAVFTTF POI INTY .......
FORF
-------
6388 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
.4
4 —
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .4...
4 .....
4
4 —
4 —
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 .
4
St.
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY
KY.
MS
MS
MS
NO
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
PWSID
KY0470393
KY0470175
KY0840180
KY0970184
KY0510189
KY0510188
KY0240201
KY0630238
KY0030239
KY0540936
KY0810275
KY0740276
KY1 030480
KY1 030292
KY0980575
KY0870298
KY01 50300
KY0890302
KY0190313
KY0570315
KY0920332
KY0730533
KY0580340
KY0090343
KY0070353
KY0360358
KY01 70360
KY0760370
KY1 030375
KY0300387
KY1 060394
KY0590424
KY1 200439
KY1 140487
KY0250473
KY0630477
MS0440003
MS0290019
MS0410015
NC0184010
NC0102015
NC0276010
NC0136015
NC0195010
NC0410045
NC0201010
NC0392020
NC01 23055
NC01 13010
NC0279040
NC0229025
NC0230015
NC0279010
NC0470010
NC0326344
NC0392025
NC01 36010
NC0496010
NC0201015
NC0474010
NC0377010
NC0291010
NC0145010
NC01 18010
NC0241020
NC0368015
NC01 80065
NC0234020
NC0285010
Name
HARDIN CO WD #1
HARDIN COUNTY WATER DIST #2
HARRODSBURG MUN WATER DEPT
HAZARD WATER DEPARTMENT
HENDERSON COUNTY WATER DIST
HENDERSON MUN WATER/SWR DEPT
HOPKINSVILLE SWR/WTR WKS COMM
LAUREL CO WATER DIST #2
LAWRENCEBURG WATER/SEWER DEPT
MADISONVILLE LIGHT/WATER
MAYSVILLE UTILITY COMMISSION
MCCREARY COUNTY WATER DIST
MOREHEAD STATE UNIVERSITY WTP
MOREHEAD UTILITY PLANT BD
MOUNTAIN WATER DISTRICT
MT STERLING WATER WORKS
MT WASHINGTON WATER CO
MUHLENBERG COUNTY WATER DIST
NEWPORT WATER WORKS
NICHOLASVILLE WATER DEPARTMENT
OHIO COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
PADUCAH WATER WORKS
PAINTSVILLE MUN WATER WORKS
PARIS WATER WORKS
PINEVILLE WATER SYSTEM
PRESTONSBURG WATER CO
PRINCETON WT & WSTEWATER COMM
RICHMOND WATER/GAS/SEWER WORKS
ROWAN WATER INC
S E DAVIESS CO WATER DIST
SHELBYVILLE WATER/SEWER COMM :
TAYLOR MILL WATER DEPT
VERSAILLES WATER SYSTEM/SI
WARREN COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
WINCHESTER MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
WOOD CREEK WATER DIST
COLUMBUS LIGHT & WATER DEPT
N. E. MS. REGIONAL W/S
TUPELO LIGHT &. WATER DEPT
ALBEMARLE, CITY OF
ALEXANDER CO WATER CORP
ASHEBORO, CITY OF
BELMONT COVERTING CO WTP
BOONE, CITY OF
BRUNSWICK COUNTY WATER SYSTEM
BURLINGTON, CITY OF
GARY, TOWN OF
CLEVELAND CO SANITARY DIST
CONCORD, CITY OF
DAN RIVER WATER INC
DAVIDSON WATER INC
DAVIE COUNTY WATER SYSTEM
EDEN, TOWN OF
ELIZABETH CITY WATER SYSTEM
FORT BRAGG DIR OF FAC ENGR
GARNER, TOWN OF
GASTONIA WTR TRTMT FAC
GOLDSBORO WATER SYSTEM
GRAHAM, CITY OF
GREENVILLE UTILITIES COMM
HAMLET, CITY OF
HENDERSON-KERR LAKE REG WTR
HENDERSONVILLE WTR TRTMT PLT
HICKORY WTP
HIGH POINT, CITY OF
HILLSBOROUGH, TOWN OF
KANNAPOLIS, CITY OF
KERNERSVILLE, TOWN OF
KING, CITY OF .-.
City
RADCLIFF
ELIZABETHTOWN
HARRODSBURG
HAZARD
HENDERSON
HENDERSON
HOPKINSVILLE i
LONDON
LAWRENCEBURG
MADISONVILLE
MAYSVILLE
WHITLEY CITY
MOREHEAD
MOREHEAD ;
PIKEVILLE
MT STERLING
MT WASHINGTON
GREENVILLE
FORT THOMAS
NICHOLASVILLE
CROMWELL
PADUCAH ..
PAINTSVILLE
PARIS
PINEVILLE
PRESTONSBURG
PRINCETON
RICHMOND
MOREHEAD
OWENSBORO
SHELBYVILLE
COVINGTON
VERSAILLES
BOWLING GREEN
WINCHESTER
LONDON
COLUMBUS
TUPELO
TUPELO
ALBEMARLE
STONY POINT
ASHEBORO
BELMONT
BOONE
BRUNSWICK CO
BURLINGTON
GARY
SHELBY
CONCORD
EDEN
LEXINGTON
COOLEEMEE
EDEN
ELIZABETH CITY :
FORT BRAGG
GARNER
GASTONIA
GOLDSBORO
GRAHAM/MEBANE
GREENVILLE
HAMLET
HENDERSON
HENDERSONVILLE
HICKORY
HIGH POINT
HILLSBOROUGH
KANNAPOLIS
KERNERSVILLE
KING
Population
OTTCO
pfif)7n
in?wn
iQcnn
14853
29568
35769
11R5R
mnss
9R711}
14520
14850
mnnn
10415
171 fin
19*^01
mon^
i47fin
001 m
20000
107P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6389
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, .City, and Population]
Reg.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 ....
4 ....
....
....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
4 ....
^
St.
NO
NO
NO
NC
NO
NC
NC
NC
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NC
NC
NC
NC
bO
SO
bO
bO
bO
SO
bO
SC
bO
bO
bO
SC
oO
bO
bO
bO
SC
bO
bO
bO
bO
SC
bO
bO
SC
oO
OO
so
oO
or?
PWSID
Mpfiionnm
NOUoboU i U
NOU44^UiU
Mpn^ofinon
QpnTi nnm
Qp**m nnn^
QpoAiflfifiR
QPOAI nnni
Qpo^mnn^
bO4^<£UUU^
Qp**ftinnni
SO04ZUUU*:
GPAoonnrv?
Name
FNOIR WTR TRTMT PI T
FYINHTON TOWN OF
I IMRFRTON PITY OF
MONROE CITY OF
JORP.ANTON WTR TRTMT PL TS
NFWTOKI PITY OF
DPAKir^F WATFR & ^FWFR AUTHORITY
RFin^VII I F PITY OF
PIPUMONin POI INTY WATFR ^Y^TFM
PfiAMOtfF RAPin^ ^AMITARY HI^T
ROPKINOHAM PITY OF
pnptfv MOI INT WATFR ^Y^TFM
ROYRORO PITY OF
QAIIC2RMRY PITY OF
QANFORD PITY OF
QLjpi RY WTR TRTMT PI T
QOI ITWFRN PINFQ TOWN OF
SPRING LAKE TOWN OF
QTATFQWII 1 F WTR TRTMT PI T
TARRORO WATFR QYQTFM
THOMAQVII 1 F PITY OF
INIinM POI IMTY WATFR ^Y^TFM
UV/AVMFQVII 1 F WTR TRTMT PI T
\MH KAIM(^iTOM WATFR ^YQTFM
XA/II QOM WATFR ^Y^TFM
AIK"FM PITY OF
RPXA/QA QAMrtARFF W/D •
RFAIIFORT PITY OF
RFMMFTTQVH 1 F PITY OF
RI i IF Rinnp w/n
PAMOFM PITY OF
PAYPF PITY OF
PHFQTFR MFTRO
PI FMQOM 1 IMIV/FRQITY
PI FM^OM TOWN OF
PI INTON PITY OF
CONWAY CITY OF
ni 1KF POWFR WATFR PPW ...
PAQI FV POMRINFn 1 ITII ITY
Fn^FFIFI H PO W/^ AI1TH
FORT lAPK^ONI
(^AFFNFY RPW
/•^nO^F PRFFK PITY OF
(^RAMn STRAND WASA
fiRFFNWOOD OPW
rjpppR PPW
1MMANI OAKVIPORFI 1 O W/H
1 P F WATFR DISTRICT
LANCASTER CO WATER
1 AMPAQTFR PITY OF
luiYRTI F RFAPH PITY OF
NIFWRFRRY PITY OF
KinPTH Al Irtl IQTA PITY OF
ORANP.FRI IRfi DPU
PIONFFR RI IRAI WATFR DIST
RAROM PRFFK RI IRAI W/D
ROPl^ HII 1 PITY OF
GAI 1 IHA DOWHFRQWII 1 F W/H
QFNFPA PITY OF
Q.1Wn WATFR ni^TRIPT
CDAPTAMRI IRf5 WATFR ^Y^TFM ....
Ql IMMFRV/H 1 F TOWN OF
1 1KIION PPW
WAI HAI 1 A TOWN OF
\MpoT AMnFR^OM W/D
\A/F^T POI 1 IMRIA PITY OF
WOODRUFF ROEBUCK W/D
City
LENOIR
LEXINGTON
LUMBERTON
MONROE
MORGANTON
NEWTON
CARRBORO
REIDSVILLE
RICHMOND COUNTY
ROANOKE RAPIDS
ROCK1NGHAM
ROCKY MOUNT
ROXBORO
SALISBURY
SANFORD
SHELE3Y
SOUTHERN PINES
SPRING LAKE
STATEESVILLE
TARBORO
THOMASVI LLE
MONROE
WAYNESVILLE
WILMINGTON
WILSON
AIKEM
GOOSE CREEK
BEAUFORT
BENNETTSVILLE
GREER
CAMDEN
CAYCE .,
FT LAWN
CLEMSON
CLEMSON
CLINTON
CONWAY
ANDERSON
EASLEY .'.
E-DGEFIELD
F:ORT JACKSON
GAFFNEY
GOOSE CREEK
CONWAY
GREENWOOD
GREER
IMMAN
CHESNEE
I.ANCASTER
LANCASTER
1.AURENS
MYRTLE BEACH
NEWBERRY .<...
N AUGUSTA
ORANGEBURG
PARRIS ISLAND
WESTMINSTER
I.AURENS
ROCK HILL
FASLEY
3ENE-CA
LYMAN
3PARTANBURG
SUMMERV1LLE
UNION
WALHALLA
ANDERSON
WEST COLUMBIA
WOODRUFF
Population
14597
19000
20484
17000
19500
11204
60000
12966
11955
23576
10304
50000
12000
30000
23057
21380
10723
10848
31000
10750
18000
27047
10550
57262
40274
31540
17734
17072
12172
13720
15651
11340
14840
19982
13174
10582
15890
40916
24377
18023
24000
21430
15176
51304
37478
18535
18231
12678
25987
11140
13386
43858
10134
25944
51584
10000
10147
17562
53058
16731
20368
29320
92841
42502
11718
13304
10579
23339
14906
-------
6390
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID '#, Name of Utility, City, and Population] •
Reg.
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4 —
4
4
4 .....
4 —
4
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 —
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4 —
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4
4
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 .....
4
4 .....
4
4
4
4 .....
4 .....
4
4 .....
4 .....
4 .....
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
6 .....
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
5
St.
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
L
IL
L
PWSID
TN0000007
TN0000014
TN0000024
TN0000056
TN0000069
TN0000073
TN0000116
TN0000117
TN0000120
TN0000128
TN0000791
TN0000133
TN0000150
TN0000297
TN0000242
TN0000369
TN0000820
TN0000246
TN0000253
TN0000273
TN0000280
TN0000286
TN0000294
TN0000331
TN0000338
TN0000349
TN0000367
TN0000374
TN0000392
TN0000393
TN0000400
TN0000402
TN0000764
TN0000424
TN0000429
TN0000438
TN0000423
TN0000474
TN0000491
TN0000500
TN0000515
TN0000522
TN0000617
TN0000628
TN0000639
TN0000643
TN0000666
TN0000715
TN0000818
TN0000371
TN0000743
TN0000745
TN00007S4
IL0430050
IL0310030
IL0314030
IL0894070
IL0314120
IL0434140
IL0310210
IL0430100
IL1 130200
IL0310240
IL0310270
IL0310330
IL0314180
IL0310390
10570250
IL0770150
Name
ALCOA WATER SYSTEM
ALPHA-TALBOTT UTILITY DIST
ATHENS UTILITIES BOARD
BLOOMINGDALE UTILITY DISTRICT
BRENTWOOD WATER DEPT
BRISTOL DEPT. UTILITIES
CLARKSVILLE WATER DEPARTMENT
CLEVELAND UTILITIES
CLINTON UTILITY BOARD :
COLUMBIA WATER DEPT
CONSOLIDATED UD 1, RUTHERFORD
COOKEVILLE WATER DEPT
CROSSVILLE WATER DEPT
CUMBERLAND UTILITY DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE WATER SYSTEM
FIRST UTIL DIST OF KNOX COUNTY
FORT CAMPBELL WATER SYSTEM
FRANKLIN WATER DEPT „.. .
GALLATIN WATER DEPARTMENT
GREENVILLE WATER/LIGHT
HALLSDALE POWELL U D
HARPETH VALLEY U D
HENDERSONVILLE U D
JOHNSON CITY WATER DEPT
JONESBORO WATER DEPT
KINGSPORT WATER DEPT
KNOX-CHAPMAN UTILITY DISTRICT
LA FOLLETTE WATER DEPT
LAWRENCEBURG WATER SYSTEM
LEBANON WATER SYSTEM
LEWISBURG WATER SYSTEM
LEXINGTON
LINCOLN CO. BD. P U #1
MADISON SUBURBAN UD _
MANCHESTER WATER DEPARTMENT
MARYVILLE DEPT OF WAT QUAL CON
MCMINNVILLE WATER DEPT
MORRISTOWN WATER SYSTEM
MURFREESBORO WATER DEPARTMENT
NEWPORT UTILITIES BOARD {....
NORTHEAST KNOX U D
OAK RIDGE DEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS
SEVIERVILLE WATER DEPARTMENT ;
SHELBYVILLE WATER SYSTEM
SMYRNA WATER SYSTEM
SOUTH BLOUNT UTILITY DISTRICT
SPRINGFIELD WATER SYSTEM
TULLAHOMA BOARD OF UTILITIES
WARREN COUNTY UTILITY DISTRICT
WEST KNOX UTILITY DISTRICT
WEST WILSON UTILITY DISTRICT
WHITE HOUSE UTILITY DISTRICT
WINCHESTER WATER SYSTEM
ADDISON J
ALSIP
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS .„
AURORA
BARTLETT
BENSENVILLE
BERWYN
BLOOMINGDALE
BLOOMINGTON
BLUE ISLAND
3RIDGEVIEW
BROOKFIELD
BUFFALO GROVE
CALUMET CITY
CANTON
CARBONDALE
City
ALCOA
TALBOTT
ATHENS
KINGSPORT
BRENTWOOD
BRISTOL
CLARKSVILLE
CLEVELAND
CLINTON
COLUMBIA
MURFREESBORO
COOKEVILLE
CROSSVILLE
HERMITAGE
FAYETTEVILLE
KNOXVILLE
FT CAMPBELL
FRANKLIN
GALLATIN
GREENVILLE
KNOXVILLE
NASHVILLE • -
HENDERSONVILLE
JOHNSON CITY
JONESBORO
KINGSPORT
KNOXVILLE
LA FOLLETTE
LAWRENCEBURG
LEBANON
LEWISBURG
LEXINGTON
FAYETTEVILLE
MADISON
MANCHESTER
MARYVILLE
MCMINNVILLE
MORRISTOWN
MURFREESBORO
NEWPORT
CORRYTON
OAK RIDGE
SEVIERVILLE
SHELBYVILLE
SMYRNA ...
MARYVILLE
SPRINGFIELD
TULLAHOMA
MCMINNVILLE
KNOXVILLE
MT JULIET
WHITE HOUSE
WINCHESTER
ADDISON
ALSIP
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
AURORA
BARTLETT
BENSENVILLE
BERWYN
WESTON
BLOOMINGTON
BLUE ISLAND
BRIDGEVIEW
BROOKFIELD
BUFFALO GROVE
CALUMET CITY
CANTON
CARBONDALE
Population
20378
unnft
•IOOQC
11RRO
i^niQ
oOfice
7RPR4
*i49R7
1VM1
38920
41964
PRADR
ipocy
p-aopn
in?np
417RO
4^nnn
07740
P17Q7
pooeo
Q74CQ
pnflftf;
Q(Y7nK
60025
I47nn
7CQCC
17690
1 RflPfl
1**RP4
1QQ4R
19174
1R17Q
109flf1
ooyfin
10244
27902
14R-IO
27689
39703
1fi^4R
1 1 171
pQ7nn
•\f\AAQ
1 7*^0
14295
I7nfy>
21317
19696
IQKPfl
33880
0=774
4711Q
I^-MSO
OOflRft
iftnnn
7=nnn
qnnnn
1 0-370
iynnn
4C4OR
1BR14
Sd^fiR
919m
•\AAf\9
•\RK7fi
"1R4O7
40000
iqfinn
26414
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6391
APPENDIX B-2 —CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
....
5 ....
5 ....
....
5 ....
5 ....
....
5 ...
5 ...
5 ...
5 ...
5 ...
...
5 ...
5 ...
a
St.
L
L
L
l-
L
L
"-
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
II
PWSID
ILibolVoU
it nodfiinn
IL091 5030
ILUO1UO4U
ILUol uoyu
ILUoi44UU
ILUol Uol U
ILUol uyou
ILUollUzU
IL0975227
ILUollllU
IL1 1 951 50
IL1195030
I L1 8351 20
IL031 5820
ILUol looU
ILUoloooU
ILUoll/AJ
ILUy/lloU
it nyynfinn
Name
OAROI QTRFAM
fFNTRAI IA
PHARLESTON •
PmPAOO HFIfiHT°i
PIPFRO
POMMONFIFI n°. OF flAHOKIA PWD «..
rvMvlQl IMPPQ. U \ATTR KANKAkFF DIV
POI IMTRV PI 1 1R HII 1 °.
HARIFN '•
DEERFIELD »•• •'—"
PACT MOI INF
FFFIMftHAM
PI If <^iRO\/F VII 1 A(3F
Fl MHI IRQT ^ ....
FI Mwoon PARK
FVFRORFFN PARK
HI FN Fl 1 YN
fZl FNHAI F HFlfiHTP, ^
/"3I FKJVIFW "
/"*QCAT 1 Ak'PQ MAX/ A) TRfS STATION
r»i IRMPP
MA7F1 PRF^T ......
HIPKORY Hll 1 R ....
uiMcnAI F •
II AMCDir*AM \A/TH PMPWY-AI TON
II AMCQIPANI VA/TP PMPMY-fiRAMITFn
IMTCDCTATF VA/ATFR f**MPY HANVII IF
lAPk'QnMV/ii IF ;
I A ftRANf^F •
I CVnPM TVA/QP WTR n^TRfTT ....
1 IRPPTYVI1 1 F
i IMPOI wwnon .
1 101 p *
1 OMRARR
MAPHMR •
MARION . •»
MATTOON .
MFI RO^F PARK .
Mini OTHI AN *....
MORTON! OROVF
MOI INT PROSPFCT •
MOI INT VFRNON
MURPHYSBORO •
City
AROL STREAM
;ASEYVILLE ......
lENTRALIA
HARLESTON
;HICAGO HEIGHTS
;HICAGO RIDGE
ilCERO
iENTREVILLE TWP
IANKAKEE
IOUMTRY CLUB HILS
;RESTWOOD
IARIIEN
)ECATUR
)EERFIELD
)ES PLAINES
)OLTON
)OWNERS GROVE
=AST MOL1NE
EFFINGHAM
-:LGIN
ELK GROVE
ELMHURST
ELMWOOD PARK
EVAMSTON
EVERGREEN PARK
:OREST PARK
=RAMKLIN PARK-
3LEM ELLYN
3LEMDALE HEIGHTS
3LENVIEW
>JORTH CHICAGO
GURNEE
HANOVER PARK
HARVEY
HAZEL CREST
HERRIN
HICKORY HILLS
HIGHLAND PARK
HINSDALE
HOFFMAN ESTATES
HOMEWOOD
ALTON
GRANITE CITY
DANVILLE
JACKSONVILLE
JUSTICE
LA GRANGE
LA GRANGE PARK
LAKIE FOREST
LANSING ..;
LEYDEN TWP
LIBERTYVILLE
LINCOLNWOOD
LISLE
LOMBARD
MACOMB
MARION
;MARKHAM
MATTESON
MATTOON .:
MAYWOOD
MELROSE PARK
MIDLOTHIAN
MOLINE
MORTON GROVE
MOUNT PROSPECT
MOUNT VERNON
MUNDELEIN
MURPHYSBORO
Population
33800
13600
16500
14014
33072
14576
61000
15200
55000
15341
10783
18639
83885
17800
53223
24766
45000
20907
11851
77010
33429
42029
23206
73233
20874
15000
18000
24944
27980
56000
41000
15489
33100
29771
14000
11135
13775
30575
17750
46561
19750
45000
35000
38000
19424
14700
15683
12861
17836
28086
16000
19174
11921
14700
39408
19840
14610
13136
11378
21000
28100
20895
14372
45709
22408
40750
18524
21400
11118
-------
6392 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population] :
Reg.
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
& ...»
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5 .**•*
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5 .....
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
S .....
St.
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IL
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
Ml
PWSID
IL0434670
IL0312010
IL0312040
IL0971250
IL0314710
IL0315350
IL0312070
IL1055030
IL0995030
IL1631100
IL0430700
IL0312190
IL0312220
IL0312250
IL0312310
IL0312340
IL0312370
IL0312400
IL0312460
IL0010650
IL0312610
IL0312580
IL1610650
IL0312730
IL0434820
IL0971550
IL0314890
IL0312850
IL0312880
IL0312970
IL0317370
IL0313060
IL0210600
IL0314910
IL0971750
IL0430800
IL0971900
IL0550700
IL0313150
IL0430950
IL0431050
IL0314970
IL0313300
IL0313330
IL0431200
IL0431250
IL0313360
IL0972000
IN5247001
IN5253002
IN5245012
IN5245019
IN5245020
IN5245021
IN5219009
IN5234007
JN5209006
IN5246020
IN5218012
IN5245031
IN5222005
IN5289012
IN5245041
IN5236005
IN5249008
IN5272002
IN5284012
IN5264029
M10000040
Name
NAPERVILLE
NILES
NORRIDGE
NORTH CHICAGO
NORTH LAKE
NORTH SUBURBAN PUBLIC UTL CPY
NORTHBROOK
NORTHERN IL WTR CORP-PONTIAC
NORTHERN IL WTR CORP-STREATOR
OFALLON
OAK BROOK
OAK FOREST
OAK LAWN
OAK PARK
ORLAND PARK
PALATINE
PALOS HEIGHTS
PALOS HILLS
PARK RIDGE
QUINCY
RIVER FOREST ,
RIVERDALE
ROCK ISLAND
ROLLING MEADOWS
ROSELLE
ROUND LAKE BEACH
SCHAUMBURG
SCHILLER PARK
SKOKIE
SOUTH HOLLAND
SOUTH STICKNY SNDST
STREAMWOOD
TAYLORVILLE
TINLEY PARK
VERNON HILLS
VILLA PARK
WAUKEGAN
WEST FRANKFORT
WESTCHESTER
WESTMONT
WHEATON
WHEELING
WILMETTE
WINNETKA
WOOD DALE
WOODRIDGE
WORTH ,
ZION
BEDFORD WATER WORKS
BLOOMINGTON WATER DEPT
EAST CHICAGO WATER WORKS
GRIFFITH WATER DEPARTMENT
HAMMOND WATER WORKS DEPARTMENT
HIGHLAND WATER WORKS
JASPER MUNICIPAL WATER UTILITY
KOKOMO DISTRICT-INDIANA AMERICAN WATER
LOGANSPORT MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
MICHIGAN CITY DEPARTMENT OF WATER WORKS
MUNCIE DISTRICT, INDIANA AMERICAN WATER
MUNSTER WATER COMPANY ,
NEW ALBANY-INDIANA CITIES WATER
RICHMOND DIST; IND.-AMER
SCHERERVILLE WATER DEPARTMENT
SEYMOUR DISTRICT; INDIANA-AMERICAN WATER
SPEEDWAY WATER WORKS
STUCKER FORK WATER UTILI
TERRE HAUTE, IND.-AMER.W
VALPARAISO DEPT OF WATER
ADRIAN
City :
NAPERVILLE
NILES •
NORRIDGE
NORTH CHICAGO
NORTH LAKE
MAINE TWP
NORTHBROOK
PONTIAC
STREATOR ..
O FALLON
OAK BROOK
OAK FOREST
OAK LAWN
OAK PARK
ORLAND PARK
PALATINE
PALOS HEIGHTS
PALOS HILLS
PARK RIDGE
QUINCY
RIVER FOREST
RIVERDALE
ROCK ISLAND
ROLLING MEADOWS
ROSELLE
ROUND LAKE BEACH
SCHAUMBURG
SCHILLER PARK
SKOKIE
SOUTH HOLLAND
BURBANK
STREAMWOOD •
TAYLORVILLE
TINLEY PARK
VERNON HILLS
VILLA PARK
WAUKEGAN
WEST FRANKFORT
WESTCHESTER
WESTMONT
WHEATON
WHEELING
WILMETTE
WILMETTE
WOOD DALE
WOODRIDGE
WORTH
ZION
BEDFORD
BLOOMINGTON
EAST CHICAGO
GRIFFITH
HAMMOND
HIGHLAND
JASPER
KOKOMO
LOGANSPORT
MICHIGAN CITY
MUNCIE ...
MUNSTER
JEFFERSONVILLE
RICHMOND
SCHERERVILLE
SEYMOUR
SPEEDWAY
SCOTTSBURG
TERRE HAUTE
VALPARAISO
ADRIAN
Population
yuuuu
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6393
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
5-
5-
c
g
5
c
5
St.
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
KM
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Mt
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
PWSID
MI0000130
MI0000160
MI0005450
MI0000390
MI0000470
MI0000530
MI0000600
Ml 0000630
MI0000690
MI0000710
MI0000730
MI0000790
MI0000840
MI0000940
MI0001010
MI0001100
MI0001390
MI0001440
MI0001480
MI0001730
MI0001740
MI0001960
MI0001950
MI0002050
Ml 0002 170
MI0002230
MI0002240
MI0002280
MI0002320
MI0002460
MI0002500
MI0002527
Ml 0002550
MinnrwfiiR
Minnn9fi9fl
MI0002750
Ml 0002820
Minnre>8QO
MI0002900
MinnnpQpn
MinnnpQfin
MI0002970
MI0003020
MI0003040
MI0003100
MI0003140
MI0003190
MI0003195
Ml 0003320
MinniTWiO
MI0003520
MI0003620
MI0003870
MI0003990
MI0004000
Minnfutpn
MI0004220
MI0004370
Minnnd/t'tf)
MinnfW4n
MI0005440
Name
ALLEN PARK
ALPENA
AUBURN HILLS
BANGOR TOWNSHIP
BAY CITY
BEDFORD TOWNSHIP
BENTON HARBOR
BERKLEY
BEVERLY HILLS
BIG RAPIDS
BIRMINGHAM
BLOOMFIELD TOWNSHIP
BRIDGEPORT TOWNSHIP
BROWNSTOWN TWP
BURTON
CANTON TWP
CHESTERFIELD TOWNSHIP
CLAWSON
CLINTON TOWNSHIP
DEARBORN
DEARBORN HEIGHTS ...
EAST GRAND RAPIDS
EAST POINTE
ECORSE
ESCANABA
FARMINGTON .'
FARMINGTON HILLS
FERNDALE
FLINT TOWNSHIP
FRASER
FRENCHTOWN TOWNSHIP
GAINES TOWNSHIP
GARDEN CITY
GENESEE COUNTY DRAIN COMM
GEORGETOWN TOWNSHIP
GRAND HAVEN
GRANDVILLE
GROSSE POINTE FARMS
GROSSE POINTE PARK '.
GROSSE POINTE WOODS
HAMPTON TOWNSHIP
HAMTRAMCK
HARPER WOODS
HARRISON TOWNSHIP
H/\ZEL PARK
HIGHLAND PARK
HOLLAND
HOLLAND TOWNSHIP
HURON TWP
INKSTER
KALAMAZOO
KENTWOOD
LINCOLN PARK
MACOMB TOWNSHIP
MADISON HEIGHTS
MARQUETTE
MELVINDALE '. .
MIDLAND
MONROE
MONROE SOUTH COUNTY SYSTEM
MOUNT CLEMENS
MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON HEIGHTS
NORTHVILLE TOWNSHIP
NORTON SHORES •
NOVI
OAK PARK
PLYMOUTH TWP •••— ••
PONTIAC -
': City
ALLEN PARK
ALPENA
PONTIAC
BAY CITY
BAY CITY
MONROE
BENTON HARBOR
BEIRKLEY
BIRMINGHAM
BIG RAPIDS
BIRMINGHAM
BLOOMFIELD HILLS
BRIDGEPORT
TRENTON
BURTON
CANTON
CHESTERFIELD TWP
CLAWSON
MT CLEMENS
DIEARE1ORN
DEARBORN HEIGHTS
GRAND RAPIDS
EAST POINTE
ECORSE
ESCANABA
FARMINGTON
FARMINGTON HILLS
FERNDALE
FLINT
FRASEiR
MONROE
GRAND RAPIDS
GARDEN CITY
Fl INT
JE:NISON
GRAND HAVEN
GRANDVILLE
GROSSE PTE FARMS
GROSSE PTE PARK
GROSSE PTE WOODS
ESSEXVILLE
HAMTRAMCK
HARPER WOODS
MT CLEMENS
HAZEL PARK
HIGHLAND PARK
HOLLAND
HOLLAND
NEW BOSTON
INKSTER
KALAMAZOO
KENTWOOD
LINCOLN PARK
MT CLEMENS
MADISON HEIGHTS
MARQUETTE ....
MELVINDALE
MIDLAND
MONROE
MONROE
MOUNT CLEMENS
MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON HEIGHTS
NORTHVILLE
NORTON SHORES
NOVI
OAK PARK
PLYMOUTH
PONTIAC
Population
31092
11800
17076
14000
38936
11368
14612
16960
10610
12601
19997
41773
12000
18800
12000
52000
19788
13874
80000
89286
60838
10807
35283
12180
13659
10132
73332
25084
15400
13899
12410
10800
31846
32000
25000
12000
15624
10092
12857
17715
11000
18372
14903
23000
20051
20121
30745
17523
10400
30772
79722
37826
41832
17031
32196
21977
11216
38053
22902
17159
18405
40823
14611
10000
22025
19306
30462
16000
71166
-------
6394
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
5 .....
5 .....
5 .....
5
5 .....
5 .....
5 .....
5 .....
5
5 .....
5 .
5 .....
5 .....
5
5 .....
5
5 .....
5 .....
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5 .....
5
5 ....
5 ....
5 . ..
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5....
5....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ...
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 ....
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5 ....
5....
5 ....
5 ....
5....
5 .....
5
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
5
5 .....
5
5 .....
5
5
5
5
St
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
MI
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
MN
MN
MN
MN
MN
MN
MN
MN
MN
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
PWSID
MI0005480
MI0005640
MI0005690
MI0005710
MI0000325
MI0005785
MI0005820
MI0005830
MI0005850
MI0005860
MI0005950
MI0006010
MI0006160
MI0006170
MI0006280
MI0006315
MI0006490
MI0006545
MI0006580
MI0006640
MI0006650
MI0006690
MI0006770
MI0006860
MI0006950
MI0006975
MI0007040
MI0007180
MI0007210
MI0007220
MN1 620001
MN1270001
MN1020016
MN1270008
MN1560014
MN1270014
MN1 140008
MN1270040
MN1620013
OH7600011
OH4700003
OH4700311
OH7700411
OH1 800003
OH1800111
OH2500103
OH8700311
OH1 700011
OH3000111
OH1 800403
OH0400411
OH2000111
OH21 00221
OH21 00211
OH21 00311
OH1800503
OH1 500811
OH4700411
OH2200603
OH3200111
OH7400411
OH2501003
OH7200311
OH2501303
OH1700211
OH7801103
OH1900714
OH3600514
OH4400711
Name
PORT HURON
REDFORD TWP
RIVER ROUGE
RIVERVIEW
ROCHESTER HILLS
ROMULUS
ROSEVILLE
ROYAL OAK
SAGINAW
SAGINAW TOWNSHIP
SAULT STE MARIE
SHELBY TOWNSHIP
SOUTHFIELD
SOUTHGATE
ST CLAIR SHORES
ST JOSEPH TOWNSHIP
SUPERIOR TOWNSHIP
TAYLOR .
THOMAS TOWNSHIP
TRAVERSE CITY
TRENTON
TROY
VAN BUREN TWP
WALKER :
WAYNE
WEST BLOOMFIELD TOWNSHIP
WESTLAND
WOODHAVEN ;....
WYANDOTTE
WYOMING
ARDEN HILLS
BLOOMINGTON
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MUNICIPAL i
CRYSTAL MUNC. WATER SUPPLY
FERGUS FALLS MUNI WATER SUPPLY
GOLDEN VALLEY MINICIPAL SUPPLY
MOOORHEAD MUNC WATER SUPPLY
NEW HOPE
ROSEVILLE MUNI WATER SUPPLY
ALLIANCE, CITY OF
AMHERST WATER DEPARTMENT
AVON LAKE WATER DEPARTMENT
BARBERTON, CITY OF
BEDFORD WATER DEPARTMENT ;
BEREA WATER DEPARTMENT
BEXLEY WATER DEPARTMENT
BOWLING GREEN WATER DEPARTMENT
BUCYRUS WATER DEPARTMENT
CAMBRIDGE WATER DEPARTMENT
CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, CITY OF
CONNEAUT WATER DEPARTMENT
DEFIANCE WATER DEPARTMENT
DEL-CO WATER CO/ALUM CR PLANT
DEL-CO WATER CO/OLENTANGY PLNT
DELAWARE WATER DEPARTMENT
EAST CLEVELAND WATER DEPT
EAST LIVERPOOL WATER DEPT
ELYRIA WATER DEPARTMENT
ERIE CO PERKINS DIST
FINDLAY, CITY OF
FOSTORIA WATER DEPARTMENT
FRANKLIN CO, SANITARY DIST 4
FREMONT WATER TREATMENT PLANT
GAHANNA WATER DEPARTMENT
GALION WATER DEPARTMENT
GIRARD WATER DEPARTMENT
GREENVILLE WATER DEPARTMENT
HIGHLAND COUNTY WATER CO., INC
IRONTON WATER DEPARTMENT
City
PORT HURON
DETROIT
RIVER ROUGE
RIVERVIEW
ROCHESTER
ROMULUS
ROSEVILLE
ROYAL OAK
SAGINAW
SAGINAW
SAULT STE MARIE
SHELBY TOWNSHIP
SOUTHFIELD .
SOUTHGATE
ST CLAIR SHORES
ST JOSEPH
YPSILANTI
TAYLOR
SAGINAW
TRAVERSE CITY
TRENTON .
TROY
BELLEVILLE
WALKER
WAYNE
WEST BLOOMFIELD ........
WAYNE
WOODHAVEN
WYANDOTTE
WYOMING
ARDEN HILLS
BLOOMINGTON
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
CRYSTAL
FERGUS FALLS
GOLDEN VALLEY
MOORHEAD
NEW HOPE
ROSEVILLE
ALLIANCE
AMHERST .. . .
AVON LAKE
BARBERTON
BEDFORD .. .:
BEREA
COLUMBUS
BOWLING GREEN
BUCYRUS .
CAMBRIDGE ; ..
CLEVELAND HEIGHTS
CONNEAUT
DEFIANCE
DELAWARE
DELAWARE
DELAWARE
EAST CLEVELAND
EAST LIVERPOOL
LORAIN
SANDUSKY
FINDLAY . .
FOSTORIA
COLUMBUS
FREMONT
GAHANNA
GALION
GIRARD ....
GREENVILLE
BAINBRIDGE ....
IRONTON
Population
33694
54387
11314
13894
61281
22897
51412
65410
69512
37684
14689
40000
75118
30771
68107
10973
10000
70811
10500
15155
20586
72884
19800
17279
19899
26500
84724
11631
30938
63891
10920
83780
20000
28000
12600
24200
32100
23500
35800
25000
10644
16500
28600
14800
19500
13900
30000
13651
17500
53500
13500
17000
12500
11800
21000
36000
13400
56746
15116
40000
15062
11200
20500
250CO
11859
15000
13200
22747
12643
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6395
APPENDIX B-2— CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utijity, City,.and Population]
Reg.
5'
g
K
St.
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
AH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
Wl
PWSID
nH4^fl9Q1 1
OHd^fKM1 1
OH1flfl1fl(n
OH(V>f)f)R1 1
ow47nn7i 1
r>H7nn9Qi4
nnflnnfv*i4
OH4800603
OH^9m on^
OHR9finm4
OHA^n9^14
OH7ftn9A(T*
oH47nnftfv*
OH^om 111
OH^imyn^
OH240071 4
OH4**fi1*^1 1
oHnAnnflfi^
OH^flfl1fi1 1
OHn4fifl7i 1
oH,d£nflflfn
oH74.nnRi A
OHRinn4id
OH4ftflflQi 1
OH4^niR11
OHft7niftrr*
OH*WH911
oH7**nni 1 1
OHR7fl^91 1
nHo^fMPfM
OH4701 803
OHi^n9ni 1
OH99D1411
OH7^O1914
OH4102411
OH770A^n^
OH4flm *3fM
OH77fM7n^
OH7Rn^9n^
OH7QO171 1
OHflinnfii 1
OH99fi1^1 1
nH7RfMft1 1
OH250341 1
OH14fl191 1
WI4450333
WI941 fWRfi
WI94inifiQ
WI9Ainifift
WIAOROVifi
W 1241 0571
\MioonnnAfi
\A/MOfin^R4
WI4380395
\M\A7-\ (YVU.
WI5>41f)77R
WI471 nidR
IA/IO4-) OC-I C
WI941 01 79
WI471 04*57
\AiiocofinR9
WI4600354
WI941 nfi(Y7
VUI9410144
\A/lR1fifl147
\A/14^R04^f5
WI241 0596
WI241 0595
WI2410597
Name
LAKE CO EAST WATER SUBDISTRICT
LAKE COUNTY WEST WATER SUBDIST .
LAKEWOOD WATER DEPARTMENT
LIMA WATER DEPARTMENT
LORAIN WATER DEPARTMENT
MANSFIELD WATER DEPARTMENT
MARYSVILLE CITY OF
MAUMEE CITY OF
MEDINA CO/NORTHWEST WATER DIST
MEDINA WATER DEPARTMENT
NEWARK WATER DEPARTMENT . .
NILES WATER DEPARTMENT
NORTH RIDGEVILLE WATER SYSTEM
NORWALK WATER DEPARTMENT
NORWOOD WATER DEPARTMENT
OHIO WATER SER/WASH CH
OHIO WATER SERVICE MENTOR
OHIO WATER SERVICE LEE DIST
OHIO WATER SERVICE STRUTHERS
OHIO-AMER WATER CO ASHTABULA ....
OHIO-AMER WATER CO LAWRENCE CO
OHIO-AMER WATER CO TIFFIN DIST
OHIO-AMERICAN WATER CO MARION
OREGON WATER DEPARTMENT .....
PAINESVILLE CITY OF ••
PERRYSBURG WATER DEPARTMENT
PIQUA WATER DEPARTMENT .
PORTSMOUTH WATER DEPARTMENT
RAVENNA WATER DEPARTMENT
REYNOLDSBURG WATER DEPARTMENT
RURAL LORAIN CO WATER AUTH
SALEM WATER DEPARTMENT
SANDUSKY WATER DEPARTMENT
SIDNEY WATER DEPARTMENT ;
STEUBENVILLE WATER DEPT
SUMMIT CO STOW SERVICE AREA
SYLVANIA WATER DEPARTMENT
TALLMADGE WATER DEPARTMENT
TRUMBULL CO/SOUTHEAST W DIST
TWIN CITY WATER & SEWER DIST
VAN WERT WATER DEPARTMENT
VERMILION WATER DEPARTMENT
WARREN CITY OF •••
WESTERVILLE WATER DEPT •
WILMINGTON WATER DEPARTMENT
APPLETON WATERWORKS
BROWN DEER WATERWORKS
CUDAHY WATERWORKS
GLENDALE WATERWORKS
GREEN BAY WATERWORKS
GREENDALE WATERWORKS
KENOSHA WATERWORKS
MANITOWOC WATERWORKS
MARINETTE WATERWORKS
MENASHA ELEC & WATER UTIL
MILWAUKEE COUNTY GROUNDS '
NEENAH WATERWORKS
NORTH SHORE WATER COMMISSION
OAK CREEK WATERWORKS
OSHKOSH WATERWORKS
RACINE WATERWORKS
SHEBOYGAN WATERWORKS
SHOREWOOD WATERWORKS
SOUTH MILWAUKEE WATERWORKS
SUPERIOR WATER LIGHT&POWER
TWO RIVERS WATERWORKS
WAUWATOSA WATERWORKS
WEST ALLIS WATERWORKS :.
WHITEFISH BAY WATERWORKS i ......
City
PAINESVILLE
WiLLOIJGHBY
LAKEWOOD
LIMA
LORAIN
MANSFIELD
MARYSVILLE
MAUMEE
MEDINA
MEDINA
NR/VARK
NILES
NORTH RIDGEVILLE
NORWALK
NORWOOD
WASHINGTON C.H
MENTOR
GENEVA
STRUTHERS
AJ5HTABULA
CHESAPEAKE
TIFFIN
MARION
OREGON
PAINESVILLE
PFRRYSBURG
PIQUA
PORTSMOUTH
RAVENNA ....
REYNOLDSBURG
LAGRANGE
SALEM
SANDUSKY
SIIDNEY
STEUEJENVILLE
AKRON
SYLVANIA
TALLMADGE
WARREN
URICHSVILLE
VAN WERT
VERMILION
WARREN ....
WESTERVILLE
WILMINGTON
APPLE-TON
BROWN DEER
CUDAHY
GLENDALE
GREEN BAY
GREENDALE
KENOSHA
MANITOWOC
MARINETTE
MENASHA
MILWAUKEE
NIEENAH
GLENDALE
OAK CREEK
OSHKOSH
RACINE
SHEBOYGAN
SHOREWOOD
SOUTH MILWAUKEE
SUPERIOR
TWO RIVERS
WAUWATOSA
WEST ALLIS
WHITEFISH BAY
Population
21615
80800
58000
70000
71000
51000
11000
17000
11700
20500
45000
23500
21500
14800
26000
14000
81000
20000
41850
27500
10000
21000
45500
23840
23000
20200
20500-
• 44000
15000
25415
39000
18500
29900
18710
24300
21663
18007
10800
12100
11000
11000
11000
70000
31000
11199
59032
12236
18659
13426
96466
16928
81848
33430
12696
14728
15163
23272
36875
19549
54000
93400
48085
14327
20512
29571
13354
49366
63240
15800
-------
6396 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6
6 .....
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6 .....
6
6
6 ...„
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6 .....
6 .....
6
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
St.
Wl
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
AR
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
LA
NM
NM
NM
NM
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
PWSID
AR0000085
AR0000250
AR0000039
AR0000484
AR0000041
AR0000404
AR0000119
AR0000189
AR0000569
AR0000507
AR0000062
AR0000104
AR0000230
AR0000209
AR0000466
AR0000025
AR0000055
AR0000446
AR0000590
AR0000575
AR0000360
AR0000142
LA1 007001
LA1 075001
LA1101002
LA1015004
LA1101003
LA1 109001
LA1051003
LA1 057001
LA1 073031
LA1 101005
LA1 069007
LA1071001
LA1 075006
LA1087001
LA1 089001
LA1 089002
LA1 093005
LA1 095003
LA1 109002
LA1 109003
LA1 057003
LA1051005
NM3513319
NM3510224
NM3518025
NM3505126
OK1011501
OK1010814
OK1021401
OK1021508
OK1010821
OK1021512
OK1010828
OK1 020805
OK1010809
OK1010601
OK1 020723
OK1010829
OK3001601
OK1 020903
OK1 020609
OK1 020806
OK1021607
OK1 020801
OK1 020502
OK1 020708
OK1020910
Name
ARKADELPHIA WATERWORKS
BATESVILLE WATER UTILITIES
BELLA VISTA P.O.A
BENTON WATERWORKS
BENTONVILLE WATERWORKS
CAMDEN WATERWORKS
CONWAY CO. REGIONAL WATER DIST
CONWAY WATER SYSTEM
FAYETTEVILLE WATERWORKS
FORT SMITH WATERWORKS
HARRISON WATERWORKS
HEBER SPRINGS WATER SYSTEM
HOPE WATER & LIGHT COMM
HOT SPRINGS WATERWORKS
JACKSONVILLE WATER DEPT
MOUNTAIN HOME WATERWORKS
ROGERS WATERWORKS
RUSSELLVILLE WATERWORKS
SEARCY WATERWORKS
SPRINGDALE WATERWORKS
TEXARKANA WATER UTILITIES
VAN BUREN WATERWORKS
ASSUMPTION PAR WW DIST 1
BELLE CHASSE WATER DIST
BERWICK-BAYOU VISTA WW C
BOSSIER CITY WATER SYS
CITY OF FRANKLIN WS
CITY OF HOUMA WATER SYS ..!.
GRETNA WATERWORKS
LAFOURCHE WATER DIST #1
MONROE WATER SYSTEM
MORGAN CITY WATER SYSTEM
NATCHITOCHES W. SYSTEM
NEW ORLEANS-ALGIERS WW
PORT SULPHUR WATER DIST
ST BERNARD WW DIST
ST CHARLES WATER DIST #1
ST CHARLES WATER DIST #2
ST JAMES WATER DIST #2
ST JOHN WATER DIST #1 .<
TERREBONNE DIST NO 1
TERREBONNE DIST NO 2
THIBODAUX WATERWORKS
WESTWEGO WATERWORKS
ALAMOGORDO DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM
FARMINGTON WATER SYSTEM
LAS VEGAS WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
SANGRE DE CRISTO WATER COMPANY
ALTUS
ARDMORE
BARTLESVILLE
BROKEN ARROW WTP
CHICKASHA
CLAREMORE
CLINTON
DEL CITY WP
DUNCAN
DURANT
EDMOND PWA (LK ARCADIA)
FOSS RESERVOIR MOD
FT SILL
GUTHRIE
MCALESTERPWA
MIDWEST CITY
MUSKOGEE
NORMAN
OKC OVERHOLSER
OKMULGEEPWS
OSU WATER PLANT
City
ARKADELPHIA
BATESVILLE
BELLA VISTA
BENTON
BENTONVILLE
CAMDEN
MORRILTON ..
CONWAY
FAYETTEVILLE '
FORT SMITH
HARRISON
HEBER SPRINGS
HOPE
HOT SPRINGS
JACKSONVILLE
MOUNTAIN HOME
ROGERS
RUSSELLVILLE
SEARCY . ...
SPRINGDALE
TEXARKANA
VAN BUREN
NAPOLEONVILLE
BELLE CHASSE . .
BERWICK
BOSSIER CITY
FRANKLIN
HOUMA
GRETNA
LOCKPORT
MONROE
MORGAN CITY
NATCHITOCHES .
NEW ORLEANS
BELLE CHASSE
CHALMETTE
LULING :
LULING
VACHERIE
GARYVILLE
HOUMA
HOUMA
THIBODAUX
WESTWEGO
ALAMOGORDO
FARMINGTON
LAS VEGAS
SANTA FE
ALTUS
ARDMORE
BARTLESVILLE
BROKEN ARROW
CHICKASHA
CLAREMORE
FOSS
DEL CITY
DUNCAN
DURANT
EDMOND
FOSS
FT. SILL
GUTHRIE
MCALESTER
MIDWEST CITY
MUSKOGEE
NORMAN
OKLAHOMA CITY
OKMULGEE
STILLWATER ....
Population
10725
11691
11Q04
opfjnn
10825
15356
12642
29100
42811
75000
15309
10560
10274
60000
25840
11858
25750
19600
17340
33982
21131
15000
25624
11807
12135
55000
10001
30000
24160
86000
60000
25000
19000
56707
12076
72164
21743
20694
12000
36500
74592
37000
15810
11218
24024
371 80
16000
50000
23600
24000
34900
58000
16000
12000
10005
22690
22000
13000
53000
10000
16900
12000
18000
50000
37708
60000
46000
17000
23000
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6397
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
g
g
g
g
g
g
-ft
g
g
g
R ....
St.
f\lf
r\if
ClK
HK
HK
f\ If
f\if
nK
TV
TV
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TV
TY
TY
TV
TY
TY
TY
TY
TV
TV
TV
TV
TY
TY
TV
TY
TV
TY
TY
TV
TV
TY
TV
TV
TY
TY
TY
TY
TY
TV
TV
TY
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TX
PWSID
OKinonfiiR
/^i/Hnoion9
OKI non^on
r»Ki non^n*!
ni(1fl9fWnd
nKifKM^i^
0^1091990
OK3Q07304
TV 111 nf\f\7
TYi9**nnm
TYfwvinp^
TYn^nnnnp
TY1 CIQflflfift
TYin7onn5
TYKVinnOT
TY99nnnn^
TYm ^nnm
TYniAonnp
Tvoonnn9Q
TYii4nnni
TYniAmfip
TY1 i7flftm
TY9*vjnnni
TYfi9**nni4
TYfwmnm
TYn9Rnnfl9
TYOA^nnn^
TYi9finnn9
TYiomnni
TYn*V7fin**d
TY1 ififlfiift
TYn(\7nrv*fi
TYo^finnftQ
TYinmrrcfi
TY1 pfifinfv*
TYoonnnd^
TYnRi nnfti
TY1 1^f1fl19
TYiw/ftfldo
TYfwnnnm
TY1 7^nno9
TVrtcTnn^o
TYinmnn7
TYflQI fifin^
TX06 10002
TYfW7nnnfi
TYinannn?
TYn*v7nnn7
TYI Ronnm
TYfiftynmo
TYinftnnn^
TYn7ini**A
TYn7nnnni
TY99nnfv*i
TYfW700A7
TYfifiinfW*
Tvoonnni 1
Tvnonnnn^
TYnRAflfifl9
TvnQ^nnnQ
Tvncnnnn?
TYOARflfifll
TYn*\7finAR
Tvoonnm^
TYfiQAnnpfl
TYI 1 Rnnnd
TVHoonni9
TX2200014
Name
PITTSBURG CO WATER AUTHORITY
PONCA CITY MUN WATER
SAND SPRINGS
SAPULPA
SHAWNEE WTP
SKIATOOK PWA
STILLWATER WATER PLANT
WAGONER CO RWD #4
ACTON MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
ALICE CITY OF
ALLEN CITY OF
ANGLETON CITY OF
AQUILLA WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT
ATHENS CITY OF
BAYTOWN CITY OF
BEDFORD CITY OF
BEEVILLE CITY OF
BELTON CITY OF
BENBROOK WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY
BIG SPRING CITY OF
BLUEBONNET WATER SUPPLY CORP
BORGER MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
BRENHAM CITY OF
BROWN COUNTY WID NO 1
BROWNSVILLE PUBLIC UTILITY DIST
BROWNWOOD CITY OF
BURKBURNETT CITY OF
BURLESON CITY OF
CANYON MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
CARROLLTON CITY OF
CASH WATER SUPPLY CORPORATION
PFDAR HII 1 niTY OF
CEDAR PARK CITY OF
CLEAR LAKE CITY WATER AUTHORITY
CLEBURNE CITY OF
QOLLEYVILLE CITY OF
COLONY CITY OF
CONSOLIDATED WATER SUPPLY CORP
QOPPELL CITY OF
COPPERAS COVE CITY OF
CORS1CANA CITY OF
DALLAS COUNTY WCID NO 6
DEER PARK CITY OF
DENISON CITY OF
DENTON CITY OF
DESOTO CITY OF
DONNA CITY OF
DUNCANVILLE CITY OF
EAGLE PASS CITY OF
EASTLAND CO WATER SUPPLY DIST NO 1
EDINBURG CITY OF
EL PASO CO LOWER VALLEY WTR DIS AU
ENNIS CITY OF
EULESS CITY OF
FARMERS BRANCH CITY OF
FLOWER MOUND TOWN OF
FOREST HILL CITY OF
FREEPORT CITY OF
FRIENDSWOOD CITY OF
GALVESTON CITY OF
ftAI WPQTOM POI IWTY WHID NO 1
GATESVILLE CITY OF •
GEORGETOWN CITY OF
GRAND PRAIRIE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE CITY OF
GREEN VALLEY SPECIAL UTILITY DIST
GREENVILLE CITY OF
GROVES CITY OF
HALTOM CITY CITY OF ,
City
MCALESTER
PONCA CITY
SAND SPRINGS
SAPULPA
SHAWNEE
SKIATOOK
STILLWATER
BROKEN ARROW
GRANBURY
ALICE
ALLEN
ANGLETON
HILLSBORO
ATHENS
BAYTOWN
BEDFORD
BEEVILLE
BEI.TON
BENBROOK
BIG SPRING
TEMPLE
BORGER
BRENHAM
BROWNWOOD
BROWNSVILLE
BROWNWOOD ....
BURKBURNETT
BURLESON
CANYON
CARROLLTON
GREENVILLE
CEIDAR HILL
CEDAR PARK
HOUSTON
CLIEBURNE
COLLEYVILLE
THE COLONY
LATEXO
COPPELL
COPPERAS COVE
CORSICANA
BAILCH SPRINGS
DEER PARK ;
DENISON
DENTON
DESOTO
DONNA
DUNCANVILLE
EAGLE PASS
RANGER
EDINBURG
EL PASO
ENNIS
EULESS
FARMERS BRANCH
FLOWER MOUND
FT WORTH
FREEPORT
FRIENDSWOOD
GALVESTON
DICKINSON
GATESVILLE
GEORGETOWN
GRAND PRAIRIE
GRAPEVINE
MARION
GREENVILLE
GROVES
HALTOM CITY
Population
10000
29000
17000
19000
27500
10000
20000
10500
10278
19788
20000
16170
12000
12267
70000
48000
14780
10660
19512
22857
17706
15615
11990
36000
98000
18262
10145
16800
11500
85000
10197
21313
10000
45969
23000
15000
22113
11574
17500
24079
22951
17750
27000
23800
66470
33006
13376
35206
23469
10651
32214
17000
14200
40000
24250
17201
11000
13296
26964
61692
21403
11492
19566
99616
29202
11307
23071
18015
32800
-------
6398
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-2.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE—Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 —
6
6
6 .....
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6
6
6 ...„
6
6
6
6 .....
6
6 .....
6 —
6
6
St
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
TX
PWSID
TX0140023
TX0310002
TX1 130010
TX2360001
TX2200054
TX0340005
TX0370002
TX1260018
TX2200096
TX1 330001
TX0920003
TX0140006
TX1 080022
TX0840006
TX0200006
TX1390015
TX0580001
TX0570013
TX1010018
TX0840007
TX1 100002
TX0610004
TX1870129
TX0920004
TX2200018
TX1 020002
TX1 080006
TX0430039
TX1 080007
TX1 650001
TX1 080067
TX1 820001
TX1 080008
TX2250001
TX1740003
TX1230006
TX0460001
TX1 080029
TX1 380009
TX2200063
TX1580065
TX1 780005
TX0010001
TX0900003
TX1390002
TX1 080009
TX0950004
TX1230009
TX0290002
TX1230010
TX2050005
TX0570015
TX0700033
TX0040002
TX1 990001
TX2140007
TX2460003
TX0570056
TX2260001
TX0310007
TX1 080010
TX1010062
TX0940002
TX1 080033
TX2430007
TX2080001
TX0140107
TX1 010294
Name
MARKER HEIGHTS CITY OF
HARLINGEN WATER WORKS SYSTEM
HOUSTON COUNTY WCID NO 1
HUNTSVILLE CITY OF
HURST CITY OF
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY
JACKSONVILLE CITY OF
JOHNSON COUNTY RURAL WATER SUPPLY
KELLER CITY OF
KERRVILLE CITY OF
KILGORE CITY OF
KILLEEN CITY OF
LA JOYA WATER SUPPLY CORPORATION
LA MARQUE CITY OF
LAKE JACKSON CITY OF
LAMAR COUNTY WSD
LAMESA CITY OF
LANCASTER CITY OF
LAPORTE CITY OF
LEAGUE CITY CITY OF
LEVELLAND CITY OF
LEWISVILLE CITY OF
LIVINGSTON REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY
LONGVIEW CITY OF
MANSFIELD CITY OF
MARSHALL CITY OF
MCALLEN CITY OF
MCKINNEY CITY OF
MERCEDES CITY OF
MIDLAND CITY OF
MILTARY HIGHWAY WATER SUPPLY CORP
MINERAL WELLS CITY OF
MISSION CITY OF
MT PLEASANT CITY OF
NACOGDOCHES CITY OF
NEDERLAND CITY OF
NEW BRAUNFELS UTILITIES
NORTH ALAMO WATER SUPPLY CORP
NORTH CENTRAL TX MUNICIPAL WTR AUT
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY OF
NORTHEAST TEXAS MUNICIPAL WTR DIST
NUECES COUNTY WCID NO 3
PALESTINE CITY OF
PAMPA MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
PARIS CITY OF
PHARR CITY OF
PLAINVIEW MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
PORT ARTHUR CITY OF
PORT LAVACA CITY OF
PORT NECHES CITY OF
PORTLAND CITY OF
RICHARDSON CITY OF
ROCKETT SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT
ROCKPORT CITY OF
ROCKWALL CITY OF
ROMA CITY OF
ROUND ROCK CITY OF
ROWLETT CITY OF
SAN ANGELO CITY OF
SAN BENITO CITY OF
SAN JUAN CITY OF
SEABROOK CITY OF
SEQUIN CITY OF
SHARYLAND WATER SUPPLY CORPORATION
SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE
SNYDER CITY OF
SOUTH FORT HOOD
SOUTH HOUSTON CITY OF
City
HARKER HEIGHTS
HARLINGEN
CROCKETT ..
HUNTSVILLE
HURST
TEXARKANA
JACKSONVILLE
CLEBURNE
KELLER
KERRVILLE
KILGORE
KILLEEN
LA JOYA
LAMARQUE
LAKE JACKSON
BROOKSTON
LAMESA
LANCASTER
LA PORTE
LEAGUE CITY '
LEVELLAND
LEWISVILLE
HUNTSVILLE ;
LONGVIEW
MANSFIELD
MARSHALL
MCALLEN
MCKINNEY
MERCEDES
MIDLAND
PROGRESO
MINERAL WELLS
MISSION
MT PLEASANT
NACOGDOCHES
NEDERLAND
NEW BRAUNFELS
EDINBURG
MUNDAY
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS
HUGHES SPRING
ROBSTOWN
PALESTINE
PAMPA ..
PARIS
PHARR
PLAINVIEW
PORT ARTHUR
PORT LAVACA
PORT NECHES
PORTLAND
RICHARDSON
RED OAK
ROCKPORT
ROCKWALL
ROMA
ROUND ROCK
ROWLETT
SAN ANGELO
SAN BENITO
SAN JUAN
SEABROOK
SEGUIN
MISSION
SHEPPARD AIR FORCE
BASE.
SNYDER
PORT HOOD
SOUTH HOUSTON
Population
12841
48775
22455
o7Qoe
OOC74
10850
12722
20000
1B7oe
91DRQ
11f)fifi
ROCOC
16200
1R1OQ
ponnn
15000
1 1 fioo
99 inn
ponnn
o.ni<;Q
1VI0.1
47cna
10000
70707
i«v7nn
23682
Q7f«>9
poaqn
•IOCOQ
OCM/O
30120
iRnnn
3P14R
144Q1
30872
iRmp
32661
49805
12000
68704
10503
13400
18060
19959
94RQQ
3O,7fi7
20000
58700
13000
i4cnp
•Mnnn
78nnn
16785
13986
mnn
10/100
ocnnn
oo.nnn
82000
23500
111R4
11703
17880
23202
13000
ipnnn
O.R4R1
11400
-------
Proposed Rules
6399
St.
PWSID
Name
TX2140018
TX1120002
TX1770002
TX0140005
TX1290006
TX0190004
TX0840008
TX2120004
TX0570061
TX0470015
TX0700008
TX1840005
TX1080011
TX1070190
TX2200081
TX2430001
IA2909053
IA7820080
IA5131033
IA525062
IA5229079
IA5640019
IA9083012
IA0400900
IA7780042
IA9000742
KS2003509
KS2000506
KS2012513
KS2001511
KS2011105
KS2004603
KS2010317
KS2009115
KS2005906
KS2009914
KS2016914
KS2003513
KS2004513
MO1010061
MO4010136
MO6010282
MO2010344
MO1024275
MO3010409
MO6024292
MO6024293
MO6024294
MO2010429
MO6010430
MO1010459
MO2024363
MO2010533
MO4010656
MO1010676
MO3010728
MO1010714
MO6010845
CO0130001
CO0107155
CO0122100
CO0118015
CO0162122
CO0139180
CO0130020
CO0101040
CO0134150
CO0135233
CO0103045
City
STARR COUNTY W C I D NO 2
SULPHUR SPRINGS CITY OF ....'."."" Rl° GRANDE CITY
SWEETWATER CITY OF
TEMPLE CITY OF .
TERRELL CITY OF .
TEXARKANA WATER UTILITY
TEXAS CITY CITY OF
TYLER CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK aTY"6'F".'ZZ.".".".".'
WEATHERFORD CITY OF '
WESLACO CITY OF
SULPHUR SPRINGS
SWEETWATER
TEMPLE
TERRELL
TEXARKANA
TEXAS CITY ..
TYLER
DALLAS
COMANCHE
WAXAHACHIE
WEATHERFORD
WESLACO
KEMP
WHITE SETTLEMENT"
WICHITA FALLS
BURLINGTON
COUNCIL BLUFFS
FAIRFIELD .......
FORT MADISON
IOWA CITY
KEOKUK ........
OTTUMWA ....
CENTERVILLE
URBANDALE ..
OTTUMWA ..
ARKANSAS CITY
ATCHISON
COFFEYVILLE "'"
EL DORADO
WICHITA FALLS CITY OF
BURLINGTON MUNICIPAL WATERWORKS
C°UNCIL BLUFFS WATER WORKS S
FAIRFIELD WATER SUPPLY
FrL^^!™ N MUNI WATER WORKS .............................................
IOWA CITY WATER DEPARTMENT .............................................
KEOKUK MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS ...........................................
OTTUMWA WATER WORKS ..........................................
RATHBUN REGIONAL WATERASSN ..............................................
URBANDALE WATER DEPARTMENT ................................... ' ........
WAPELLO RURAL WATER ASSOC .............................................
CITY OF ARKANSAS CITY ................................................
CITY OF ATCHISON [[[
CITY OF COFFEYVILLE [[[ -
CITY OF EL DORADO [[[
CITY OF EMPORIA .....' [[[
CITY OF LAWRENCE [[[ EMPORIA ...
CITY OF LEAVENWORTH ......................................... ' ....................... LAWRENCE
CITY OF OLATHE ...
CITY OF OTTAWA
CITY OF PARSONS
CITY OF SALINA ............. "
CITY OF WINFIELD
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
BELTON ......
CAPE GIRARDEAU
FLORISSANT ..
HANNIBAL... .....
JACKSON CO PWsb"#1
JEFFERSON CITY ...
JEFFERSON CO PWSD #i
JEFFERSON CO PWSD #2 ........................ '
JEFFERSON CO PWSD #3
KIRKSVILLE ...
KIRKWOOD .....
LEES SUMMIT ...„'
MACON CO PWSD #1
MOBERLY ...... ........................................... -
POPLAR BLUFF
RAYTOWN WATER'COMPANY [[[
SEDALIA ........... [[[
ST JOSEPH
WEBSTER GROVES
ARVADA, CITY OF
BROOMFIELD, CITY OF"
CANON CITY, CITY OF
CLIFTON WD
...
DURANGO, CITY OF [[[
LEAVENWORTH
OLATHE
OTTAWA
PARSONS
SALINA
WINFIELD ..
LAWRENCEE ..
BELTON ....
CAPE GIRARDEAU"
FLORISSANT
HANNIBAL ...
GRANDVIEW
JEFFERSON CITY""
ARNOLD .
HIGH RIDGE.:
ARNOLD ....
KIRKSVILLE
KIRKWOOD
LEES SUMMIT ...
MACON ....
MOBERLY
POPLAR BLUFF .. ""
RAYTOWN
SEDALIA
ST. JOSEPH
WEBSTER GiROVFs""
ARVADA .... " '
BROOMFIELD
CANON CITY
HIGHLANDS RANCH'"
GREELEY
CLIFTON
LAKEWOOD
DENVER ..
DURANGO ..
FT. COLLINS
ENGLEWOOD
Population
11454
17592
11500
46109
12490
62688
41000
80000
23000
11820
18169
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28
Thursday. February 10. 1994 / Proposed Rules
[By Region, State, Public Water System I
Name of Utility, City, and Population]
Reg.
PWS1D
Name
CO0135292
CO0135291
CO0130040
CO0139321
CO0162321
CO0107473
CO0135477
CO0135476
CO0107485
C00107487
CO0135485
CO0143518
CO0101115
CO0143621
C00151500
CO0121775
CO0135718
COQ101150
CO0139791
CO0101170
CO0121900
MT0000153
MT0000155
MT0000161
MT0000170
MT0000525
MT0000524
MT0000241
ND0800080
ND4500242
ND0900336
ND1800410
ND3000596
ND5100660
ND5301012
SD4600020
SD4680004
SD4600169
SD4600214
SD4600406
SD4600356
SD4601089
SD4600423
j UT4900345
UT4900101
UT4900115
UT4903012
UT4900125
UT4900193
UT4900214
UT4900233
UT4900235
UT4900254
UT4900272
UT4900286
UT4900328
UT4900332
UT4900375
UT4900381
UT4900398
UT4900408
UT4900409
UT4900382
UT4900429
UT4900512
UT4900463
UT4900465
WY5600011
WY5600150
FT COLLINS-LOVELAND WD
FT. COLLINS, CITY OF
GOLDEN, CITY OF .......... •»•••
GRAND JUNCTION. CITY OF
GREELEY. CITY OF ..
LAFAYETTE, CITY OF
LONGMONT, CITY OF
LOUISVILLE. TOWN OF
PUEBLO! BOARD OF WATER WORKS
SECURITY W&SD ..................................
SOLDIER CANYON FP ..........................
THORNTON. CITY OF .......................... ••
WIDEFIELD HOMES WC
GREAT FALLS CITY OF
iSE^KBE
BISMARCK CITY OF
DICKINSON CITY OF
FARGO CITY OF ............
GRAND FORKS CITY OF
MANDAN CITY OF
MINOT CITY OF ......
WILLISTON CITY OF
ELLWORTH AIR" FORCE BASE
HURON
MITCHELL
BOUNTIFUL CITY
HOLLIDAY WATER CO
WATER
OGDEN CITY
SAND'YCI'TY WATER SYSTEM
SOUTH JORDAN CITY
SOUTH OGDEN CITY
TA
WEBER BASIN WCD WEBER CO
WEST JORDAN CITY WTR SYS
WHITE CITY WATER CO
City
FT. COLLINS
FT. COLLINS
GOLDEN
GRAND JUNCTION
LOVELAND
LAFAYETTE
BERTHOUD
BERTHOUD
LONGMONT
LOUISVILLE
LOVELAND
MONTROSE ...-
NORTHGLENN
MONTROSE
PUEBLO
COLORADO SPRING S
FT. COLLINS
THORNTON
GRAND JUNCTION
WESTMINSTER :
COLORADO SPRING S
BILLINGS
BILLINGS ••
BOZEMAN
BUTTE •
GREAT FALLS -
HAVRE •
HELENA
BISMARCK •
DICKINSON :
FARGO •
GRAND FORKS ..:
MANDAN
MINOT
WILLISTON
ABERDEEN
ELLSWORTH AFB
HURON
MITCHELL
RAPID CITY :
WATERTOWN
ABERDEEN
YANKTON
OGDEN
BOUNTIFUL
CENTERVILLE
OREM
CLEARFIELD,
WEST VALLEY
SALT LAKE
KAYSVILLE
KEARNS ;
LAYTON
MAGNA
MIDVALE
OGDEN
OREM
RIVERTON, -
ROY
SANDY
SO JORDAN
SO OGDEN,
ST GEORGE
SALT LAKE
LAYTON •
WEST JORDAN ...
SANDY
CHEYENNE
Population
13408
76135
13000
30000
65000
14448\
14000 I
29000 I
54500
12500
39020
10005
31100
35000
100000
10007
32000
50000
50000
76000
12300
81151 !
100001
226601
333361
550971
10201[
245691
492561
160971
741111
494251
151771
34544)
131311
249181
100001
124481
137981
542731
175921
139501
127031
175001
369611
115161
7000
206
85000|
ie
ie
32000
41497
2150
10142
CHEYENNE BOARD PUB UTILITIES • •"-.•• EVANSTON
EVANSTON, CITY OF '
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6401
• Reg
I 8 ....
• 8....
• 8....
• 8 ....
I 8 ....
I 9 ....
I 9 ....
1 9 ....
1 9 ....
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
I 9
9
9
9
9
9
9
1 9
9
9
9
9.
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9 .....
9
9
9
9
9 .....
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9 .....
9
9
9
9 (
9 (
9 (
9 <
9 (
9 (
9 (
. St.
. WY
. WY
. WY
WY
WY
AZ
AZ
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
DA
DA
SA
DA
DA
DA (
DA (
DA (
DA <
DA (
PWSID
WY5601181
WY5600029
WY5601182
WY5600052
WY5601198
AZ0403008
AZ0403083
AZ0414024
CA1910045
CA3410001
CA1210001
CA1610002
CA4510014
CA41 10001
CA1310001
CA1910104
CA1310002
CA4010830
CA41 10007
CA41 10006
CA01 10003
CA5610016
CA3710001
CA3710005
CA3410004
CA5610024
CA0510016
CA0710001
CA1910206
CA4810001
CA3010002
CA41 10003
CA4810003
CA3010018
CA01 10011
CA0710006
CA4110017
CA3010023
CA4910006
CA0710008
CA41 10022
CA4010009
CA2310003
CA4810008
CA4410011
CA3610114
CA41 10011
CA3310037
CA1910128
CA3310005
CA2410950
CA1510006
CA3010093
CA3610064
CA1310004
CA0910001
CA0910020
CA3010079
fc^Aooi 00 1 2
CA41 10021
CA1210004
DA3410032
DA3410030
DA3410014 1
DA1910032 1
DA4210004 (
DA4110016 f
DA1210013 t
DA3310021 J
[By Reg.on, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City and Population]
Name
GREEN RIVER CITY OF
LARAMIE, CITY OF '
ROCK SPRINGS, CITY OF
SHERIDAN, CITY OF
SHOSHONE MUNICIPAL PIPELINE
FLAGSTAFF MUNICIPAL WATER
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSI
YUMA— MUNICIPAL WATER DEP
ANTELOPE VALLEY-EAST KERN WATER AGENCY '
ARCADE WD.-TOWN & COUNTRY
ARCATA, CITY OF
AVENAL, CITY OF
BELLA VISTA WATER DISTRICT
BELMONT COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
BRAWLEY, CITY OF ...
CAL. WATER SERVICE CO, PALOS VERDES
CALEXICO, CITY OF
CALIFORNIA MENS COLONY
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-WESTLAKE
CALIFORNIA-AMERICAN WATER CO
CARLSBAD MWD
CARMICHAEL WATER DISTRICT
CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DIST
CCWD EBBETTS PASS
CITY OF ANTIOCH
CITY OF BELLFLOWER ..
CITY OF BENICIA
CITY OF BREA "
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY OF FAIRFIELD .
CITY OF LA HABRA
CITY OF LIVERMORE
CITY OF MARTINEZ
CITY OF MENLO PARK
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY OF PETALUMA
CITY OF PITTSBURG
CITY OF REDWOOD CITY
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO WD '
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY OF VACAVILLE
CITY OF WATSONVILLE
CLAWA WHOLESALE
COASTSIDE COUNTY WATER DIST
CORONA— CITY OF
COVINA IRRIGATING CO
DESERT WATER AGENCY
DWR— SAN LUIS DIVISION O&M
EAST NILES COMM SERV DIST
EAST ORANGE COUNTY WD
EAST VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
EL CENTRO— CITY OF
EL DORADO ID— MAIN
EL DORADO IRRIGATION DISTRICT
EL TORO WATER DISTRICT ..
:LSINORE VALLEY MWD
ESTERO MUNI IMPROVEMENT DIST
EUREKA, CITY OF
:OLSOM PRISON
-OLSOM, CITY OF— ASHLAND ,
:OLSOM, CITY OF— MAIN .
-OOTHILL MUNICIPAL WATER DIST
3OLETA WATER DISTRICT /
HILLSBOROUGH WATER DEPT """" L
^MBOLDT BAY MWD [
URUPA CSD .... 5
City
. GREEN RIVER
. LARAMIE
. ROCK SPRINGS
. SHERIDAN
norw
FLAGSTAFF
FLAGSTAFF
YUMA
QUARTZ HILLS
SACRAMENTO
ARCATA
AVENAL
REDDING
BELMONT, CA
BRAWL EY
SAN JOSE
CALEXiCO
SAN LUIS OBISPO
SAN JOSE ...
ATHERTON
LIVERMORE
WESTL^KE VILLAGE
IMPERIAL BEACH
CARLSBAD
CARMICHAEL
OAKVIEW
SAN ANDREAS ..
ANTIOCH
BELLFLOWER
BENICIA
BREA
BURLINGAME
FAIRFIELD
LA HABRA
LIVERMORE
MARTINEZ
MENLO PARK
NEWPORT BEACH
PETALUMA
PITTSBURG
REDWOOD CITY ..
SAN LUIS OBISPO
UKIAH
VACAVILLE
WATSONVILLE
CRESTLINE
HALF MOON BAY
CORONA
COVINA
PALM SPRINGS
SANTA NELLA
BAKERSKIELD
ORANGE
SAN BERNARDINO
EL CENTRO
PLACERVILLE
PLACERVILLE
EL TORO
LAKE ELSINORE
FOSTER CITY
EUREKA
3EPRESA
=OLSOM
rOLSOM
A OANADA-FI INT R
3OLETA
•HLLSBOROUGH
:UREKA
RIVERSIDE
Population
12000
25000
19000
15500
16250
44500
15000
58000
70000
70700
16740
11073
12000
27000
20089
96100
21000
15000
39000
66000
47500
26500
80000
52500
38700
60000
11500
64442
93500
25541
33000
27700
72000
51500
14000
28500
10400
66643
45080
48700
71551
42136
15000
76200
47000
18000
13100
100000
28000
63010
50000
21382
90000
50000
34517
10740
21573
50528
20491
30661
27829
10000
25674
25674
80000
73000
11500
60000
30000
-------
CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE-Contmued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID f, Name of Utility. City, and Populate]
g .....
g
g.
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g..
g,
g.,
g.
g.
g.
g.
g.
g.
g.
9.
9!
g
g
g
g
g ..
g
9
g
g
g
9
g
9
9
g
9
9
9
g
g
g
g.
g,
g
g
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA3010017
CA3310022
CAigi0225
CA4010022
CAigi0204
CA1210016
CA4210007
CA2810003
CA4110025
CA2110003
CA3110001
CA0710007
CA371002g
CA3410016
CAigi0101
CA3710034
CA0410006
CAigi0102
CA0410007
CA331002g
CA3110005
CA3110025
CA5510002
CA3710015
CA3810700
LACUNA BEACH COUNTY WD
LAKE HEMET MWD
LAS VIRGENES MWD
LOS ANGELES Co'wW bTsT 29
MCKINLEYVILLE COMM SER DIST
MONTECITO WATER DIST
NAPA-CITY
NORTH COAST COUNTY WATER DIST
NORTH MARIN WATER DISTRICT
NORTH TAHOE PUD—MAIN
OAKLEY WATER DISTRICT
OLIVENHAIN MWD
ORANGEVALE WATER COMPANY
ORCHERD DALE WATER DISTRICT
OTAYWD
OWID—MINERS RANCH
PALMDALE WATER DIST
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT
PERRIS—CITY OF
PLACER CWA—AUBURN/BOWMAN
PLACER CWA-FOOTHILL
PONDEROSA WATER COMPANY
POWAY—CITY OF
PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
GU
GU
CA3710016
CA3710019
CA4510005
CA3610037
CA3610038
CA3710018
CA1510018
CA3110008
CA1910194
CA5610030
CA3710021
CA3610041
CA3410021
CA4410014
CA3010039
CA4210010
CA4410010
CA3710023
CA3010101
CA4510006
CA1910150
CA0510012
CA3010042
CA0910002
CA3410015
CA0710002
CA561005g
CA4810005
CA5610020
CA3910011
CA3010071
CA3610050
CA3710002
CA5610017
CA3710027
CA1910014
CA5710003
CA4110027
CA331004g
CA5110002
CA3610055
GU0000006
GU0000003
RAINBOW MWD ,
RAMONAMWD
REDDING, CITY OF ••
REDLANDS CITY MUD-WATER DIV
RIALTO-CITY
RINCON DEL DIABLO MWD
ROSAMOND COMMUNITY SERV DIST
ROSEVILLE, CITY OF
ROWLAND WATER DISTRICT
RUSSELL VALLEY MWD •
SAN DIEGUITO WD
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY WC-FONTANA
SAN JUAN SUBURBAN WATER DISTRICT
SAN LORENZO VALLEY WTR DIST
SANTA ANA HEIGHTS WC •""":•"""•
SANTA BARBARA WATER DEPARTMENT
SANTA CRUZ WATER DEPARTMENT
SANTA FE I D
SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT
SHASTA DAM AREA PUD
SOMERSET MUTUAL WATER CO
SOUTH CAMANCHE SHORE
SOUTH COAST WATER DISTRICT
ISSc^
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER CO ••»•»••»••••"•••"
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY—SIMI ....
SUISUN SOLANO WATER AUTHORITY
THOUSAND OAKS WATER DEPT
TRACY, CITY OF
TRI-CITIES MUNICIPAL WD
UPLAND CITY OF
VALLECITOSWD
VENTURA WATER DEPARTMENT
VISTA I.D •••
WEST COVINA-CITY, WATER DEPT
WEST SACRAMENTO, CITY OF •
WESTBOROUGH COUNTY WATER DIST
WESTERN MWD
YUBA CITY, CITY OF
YUCAIPA VALLEY CWD ID—A&2
PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY OF GUAM
PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY OF GUAM
LAGUNA BEACH
HEMET
CALABASAS
SAN LUIS OBISPO
ALHAMBRA
MCKINLEYVILLE
SANTA BARBARA
NAPA
PACIFICA
NOVATO
TAHOE VISTA
OAKLEY
ENCINITAS
ORANGEVALE
WHITTIER ;
SPRING VALLEY
OROVILLE
PALMDALE
PARADISE
PERRIS
AUBURN
AUBURN
TUOLUMNE
POWAY
PRESIDIO OF SAN FRAN-
CISCO.
FALLBROOK
RAMONA
REDDING -
REDLANDS
RIALTO
ESCONDIDO
ROSAMOND
ROSEVILLE :
ROWLAND HEIGHTS
WESTLAKE VILLAGE
ENCINITAS
FONTANA ,
ROSEVILLE
BOULDER CREEK
SANTA ANA
SANTA BARBARA
SANTA CRUZ
RANCHO SANTA FE
MISSION VIEJO
CENTRAL VALLEY
BELLFLOWER
VALLEY SPRINGS
LAGUNA BEACH
SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
SAN DIMAS :
PITTSBURG i
SIMI VALLEY
VACAVILLE
THOUSAND OAKS
TRACY
SAN CLEMENTE
UPLAND
SAN MARCOS .:.
VENTURA , •
VISTA
WEST COVINA
WEST SACRAMENTO
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ..
RIVERSIDE :
YUBA CITY :
YUCAIPA
AGANA •
AGANA
240001
433651
620001
1000001
305531
11347
110001
62000
385201
550001
10000
15600
35000
25000
20000
100000
20600
90000
26657
27275
11500
30500
16978
45500
12300
14662
34000
72777
69300
50072 I
25350
12000
47000
52000
15000
35154
29284
45000
20000
10000
90000
80000
25000
81000
14000
15000
66000
19000
46900
41840
17884
47532
22985
40200
38000
51000
64973
39000
97000
84042
20050
45000
11000
41549
30200
32600
61750
11165
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6403
APPENp^2c»;?LASDIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING SURFACE WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 10,000-100,000 PEOPLE-Continued
[By Region, State, Public Water System ID #, Name of Utility, City, and Population]
1 Heg.
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
1 9
I 9
1 9
1 9
I 9
I 9
I 10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
10 ...
St.
GU
HI
HI
NV
NV
NV
NV
NV
NV
NV
TT
AK
AK
AK
ID
ID
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
OR
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
PWS ID
GU0000010
HI0000213
HI0000130
NV000001 1
NV0000015
NV0000076
NV0000158
NV0003004
NV0000175
NV000021 1
TT3007035
AK21 10342
AK2212039
AK2211423
ID2350014
ID5420058
OR41 00012
OR4100047
OR41 00055
OR41 00081 .
OR4100100
OR4100187
OR41 00594
OR41 00205
OR41 00225
OR41 00236
OR41 00305
OR41 00342
OR41 00357
OR41 00379
OR41 00457
OR41 00473
OR41 00483
OR41 00497
OR4100513
OR41 00528
OR41 00580
OR4100591
OR41 00666
OR41 00668
OR41 00720
OR41 00768
OR41 00869
OR41 00878
OR4100944
OR41 00660
WA5300050
WA5302200
WA5305600
WA5308200
WA5312200
WA5324050
WA5348100
WA5363450
WA5363600
WA5366400
WA5369000
WA5372250
WA5379500
WA5392500
WA5399150
Name
U S NAVY
DWS SOUTH KOHALA
BOULDER CITY WATER COMPANY
CARSON CITY WATER
CITY OF HENDERSON WATER CO
INCLINE VILLAGE GID
LAS VEGAS WASH RESORT
NORTH LAS VEGAS UTILITIES
SUN VALLEY WATER AND SAN DIST
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF JUNEAU
US ARMY FT RICHARDSON SHIP CRK
USAF ELMENDORF AFB ' :
LEWISTON CITY OF .
TWIN FALLS CITY OF
ALBANY, CITY OF
ASHLAND WATER DEPARTMENT
ASTORIA CITY OF
BEAVERTON, PUBLIC WORKS DEFT
BEND WATER DEPARTMENT
CLACKAMAS WATER DISTRICT ..
CLAIRMONT WATER DISTRICT
COOS BAY-NORTH BEND WATER BD
CORVALLIS, CITY OF ..
COTTAGE GROVE, CITY OF ....
FOREST GROVE, CITY OF
GRANTS PASS, CITY OF .
GRESHAM PWO-WATER SECTION
HILLSBORO, FOREST GROVE, BEAVER-
LAKE OSWEGO MUNICIPAL WATER
LEBANON CITY OF
LINCOLN CITY WATER DISTRICT" ..
MCMINNVILLE WATER & LIGHT
MEDFORD WATER COMMISSION
MILWAUKIE -CITY OF
OAK LODGE WATER DisTRicif
OREGON CITY— SOUTH FORK W B
POWELL VALLEY ROAD WATER DIST
ROCKWOOD WATER DISTRICT
ROSEBURG, CITY OF— WINCHESTER
SUBURBAN EAST SALEM WATER DIST
THE DALLES, (WATER TREATMENT) "
TIGARD WATER DISTRICT
WEST LINN CITY OF "
WEST SLOPE WATER bTsTRICT
ABERDEEN WATER DEPARTMENT .
ANACORTES CITY OF
BELLINGHAM-WATER DIVISION, CITY OF
BREMERTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
CENTRALIA WATER DEPT., CITY OF
EVERETT PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. CITY OF
LONGVIEW WATER DEPARTMENT
OLYMPIA WATER SYSTEM, CITY OF
OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT
PASCO WATER DEPARTMENT
PORT TOWNSEND, CITY OF
RICHLAND, CITY OF
SKAGIT COUNTY PUD #1— JUDY RES
WALLA WALLA WATER DIVISION ...
YAKIMA WATER DEPT, CITY OF .
'' City
MAKAWAO, MAUI
KAMUE:LA
BOULDER CITY
CAR9OKI PITY
HENDERSON
INCLINE VILLAGE
BOIII DFR PITV
NO LAS! VEGAS
SPARKS
KOLONIA, PONAPE, E.C.I
II IMPAI 1
FT RICHARDSON
ELMFNIIDDRIP APR
LEWISTON
TWIN F&l 1 Q
ALBANY
ASHLAND
ASTORIA
BEAVERTON
BEND
CLACKAMAS
OREfiOM ("MTV
COOS BAY
CORVAI LIS
COTTAGE GROVE
FOREST fiROVF
GRANTS PA'SS
GRESHAM
HILLSBORO
WEST LINN
LEBANON
LINCOLN CITY
MCMINNVILLE
MEDFORD
PORTLAND
MILWAUKIE
OREGON CITY
PORTLAND
PORTLAND
ROSEBURG
SALEM
THE DAL LES
TIGARD
WEST LINN
PORTLAND
ABERDEEN
MTVERNON
BELLINGHAM
BREMERTON
CENTRAI IA
EVERETT
LONGVIEW
OLYMPW
EDMONDS
PASCO
PORT TOWMCSCMn
RlfSHI AMD
MT VERNON
/VALLA WALLA
YAKIMA
Population
14300
16375
11344
12500
27060
57000
12735
23000
75900
10000
10000
23965
11500
13100
14052
28400
35000
16500
12300
48974
22000
22060
15000
27000
42000
10000
11900
16200
33000
38722
26985
10400
10300
17500
60429
17900
25000
14500
24215
35000
24000
11000
11800
30324
12600
12000
19500
12110
55684
52000
14000
72480
37815
39949
13082
25015
10500
32600
38921
28130
42860
APPENDIX B-3.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT
REQU.REMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 50,000 AND 99?999 PEOPLE
PWS ID
REGION II:
PWS NAME
POPULATION
-------
6404
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday. February 10. 1994 / Proposed Rules
B-3 -CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
PERTA,N.NG TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 50.000 AND 99,999 PEOPLE-Contmued
OPULATION
N MJQ251001 RIDGEWOOD WATER DEPT RINGWOOD TWP 60,100
NJ03270011: NJ AMERICAN w co DELAWAR PALMYRA , 60,727
NJ0408001 CAMDEN CITY WATER DEPT CAMDEN CITY
NJ070500 '".:: EAST ORANGE WATER DEPT EAST ORANGE
NJ1507005 ..". TOMS RIVER WATER COMPANY DOVER TWP 78'8401
SCHENECTADY CITY WATER WKS SCHENECTADY 67,9721
s -• 825i
"SSeOSW OKALOOSA CO. WTR. & SWR. SYSTEM FORT WALTON BEACH
FL2161344 CITY OF JAX-MANDARIN GRID JACKSONVILLE75404
FL3481482 Z WINTER PARK, CITY OF WINTER PARK —' 76 373
FL3484132 .. OCPU/EASTERN WATER SYSTEM ORLANDO " 54 600
FL3590 59 ... CASSELBERRY, CITY OF, N, S, HF' CASSELBERRY 79 664
FL3640275 DAYTONA BEACH, CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH 71 400
FL3640287 SOUTHERN STATES UTIL/DELTONA DELTONA , 72350|
FL4060163 BCOES 2A POMPANO BEACH 50,100
FL4060167 BCOES 1A LAUDERDALE LAKES -- 50,500
FL4060787 ... LAUDERHILL, CITY OF LAUDERHILL 50i400
r
::
FL4061410 SUNRISE *1, CITY OF SUNRISE >„. ™ZI2 65,9031
FL4130977 NORTH MIAMI, CITY OF NORTHI MIAMI 80500I
FL4134357 ..... FKAA FLORIDA CITY PLANT FLORIDA CITY 61 125|
iffi
Ei =
FL5360313 FLA. CITIES WATER-GREEN MEADOWSFORT MYERS
FL5360325 .... CAPE CORAL, CITY OF CAPE CORAL ;- 58>00o
FL5364048 LEE COUNTY UTILITIES-SOUTH FORT MYERS 51 Q001
FL6271696 '.". SPRING HILL UTILITIES SPRING HILL ;—;; 99;548
FL6511361 ... PCUD-WEST NEW PORT RICHEY 52>000
FL6580326 ... SARASOTA-CITY OF SARASOTA-
Georgia: 85,0001
GA0950000 ... ALBANY ALBANY 80,0001
GA2450004 ... RICHMOND COUNTY AUGUSTA
KeKY0300336 ..... OWENSBORO MUNICIPAL UTILITIES OWENSBORO • 57'695
ONSLOW COUNTY WATER SYSTEM ONSLOW CO • • 57'716
FLORENCE. CITY OF FLORENCE
REGION IV:
JACKSON WATER SYSTEM JACKSON • '
REGION V: „„„„,
Illinois: 78,000]
IL1970450 JOLIET JOLIET
ANDERSON WATER DEPT ANDERSON"~ 62'148
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6405
APPENDIX B-3.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 50,000 AND 99,999 PEOPLE—Continued
PWSID
PWS NAME
POPULATION
IN5279013 LAFAYETTE WATER WORKS LAFAYETTE
Michigsn:
MI0000450 BATTLE CREEK—VERONA SYSTEM BATTLE CREEK
MI0001995 E LANSING MERIDIAN TWP WAUTH EAST LANSING
MI0004340 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING
MI0006910 WATERFORD TOWNSHIP WATERFORD .,
. Minnesota:
MN1550010 .... ROCHESTER MUNC WATER SUPPLY ROCHESTER
MN1690011 .... DULUTH MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY DULUTH
Ohio:
OH0901022 .... HAMILTON/SOUTH WATER PLANT HAMILTON
OH0901712 .... MIDDLETOWN WATER DEPARTMENT MIDDLETOWN
OH1204412 .... SPRINGFIELD WATER PLANT SPRINGFIELD
OH1300412 .... CLERMONT COUNTY WATER, PUB BATAVIA
OH3100422 .... CINCINNATI, CITY OF-BOLTON PLANT CINCINNATI
OH5700712 .... DAYTON, CITY OF-MIAMI PLANT DAYTON
OH7601032 .... CANTON SUGARCREEK WTP CANTON
OH7604512 .... OHIO WATER SERVICE-MASSILLON MASSILLON
Wisconsin:
WI1540127 JANESVILLE WATER UTILITY JANESVILLE
WI2680238 WAUKESHA WATER UTILITY WAUKESHA
WI6180230 EAU CLAIRE WATERWORKS EAU CLAIRE
WI6320309 LA CROSSE WATERWORKS LA CROSSE
REGION VI:
Arkansas:
AR0000272 .... PB/GENERAL WATERWORKS COMPANY PINE BLUFF
Louisiana:
LA1019029 LAKE CHARLES WATER CO. LAKE CHARLES
LA1033019 PARISH WATER CO., INC. BATON ROUGE
LA1079001 ALEXANDRIA, CITY OF ALEXANDRIA
New Mexico:
NM3511707 .... LAS CRUCES MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM LAS CRUCES
Texas:
TX0150249 BEXAR METRO WTR DIST—S SANTONIO SAN ANTONIO
TX0210001 BRYAN CITY OF BRYAN
TX0210017 TEXAS A & M UNIV/MAIN CAMPUS COLLEGE STATION ..
TX2350002 VICTORIA CITY OF VICTORIA
REGION VII:
Indiana:
IA0790074 WATERLOO WATER WORKS WATERLOO
IA3126052 DUBUQUE WATER WORKS DUBUQUE
IA9778054 SIOUX CITY WATER SUPPLY SIOUX CITY
Missouri:
MO3010181 .... COLUMBIA COLUMBIA
REGION VIII:
Utah:
UT4900359 PROVO CITY PROVO
Wyoming:
WY5600009
REGION IX:
Arizona:
AZ0407096 PEOPIA, CITY OF PEORIA
California:
CA0110008 .... CITY OF PLEASANTON PLEASANTON ..
CA0310300 .... LSP INDIAN GRINDING ROCKS.P. ARNOLD
CA0410002 .... CAL—WATER SERVICE CO.—CHICO CHICO
CA1010003 .... CLOVIS, CITY OF CLOVIS „
CA1910001 .... ALHAMBRA—CITY, WATER DEPT. ALHAMBRA
CA1910019 .... CITY OF CERRITOS CERRITOS
CA1910026 .... COMPTON—CITY, WATER DEPT. COMPTON
CA1910034 .... CITY OF DOWNEY DOWNEY
CA1910036 .... CAL. WATER SERVICE CO.—EAST L.A. MONTEBELLO
CA1910049 .... HUNTINGTON PARK—CITY HUNTINGTON PARK
CA1910070 .... LOS ANGELES CO WW DIST 4 & 34—LANCASTER ALHAMBRA
CA1910079 .... LYNWOOD—CITY, WATER DEPT. LYNWOOD
CA1910092 .... MONTEREY PARK—CITY, WATER DEPT. MONTEREY PARK
CA1910146 .... SANTA MONICA—CITY, WATER DIVISION SANTA MONICA
CA1910152 .... SOUTH GATE—CITY, WATER DEPT. SOUTH GATE
50,525
51,600
75,500
50,000
66,692
64,800
87,000
50,400
60,000
69,800
64,152
92,500
67,000
70,000
67,000
52,133
56,985
65,000
51,000
63,114
80,000
78,200
65,000
63,000
82,257
55,502
50,000
55,000
66,467
57,546
80,505
64,000
.86,000
54,500
50,618
52,528
51,000
76,700
60,004
82,110
53,300
69,000
91,444
86,800
52,000
93,879
61,945
58,000
86,900
79,170
-------
6406 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX B-3.—CLASSIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS USING GROUND WATER WHICH MAY BE SUBJECT TO
REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SYSTEMS SERVING BETWEEN 50,000 AND 99,999 PEOPLE—Continued
PWSID
PWS NAME
POPULATION
CA1910174 .... SUBURBAN WATER SYSTEMS-WHITTER LA PUENTE 51,255
CA1910179 .... BURBANK—CITY, WATER DEPT. BURBANK • ;••• 94,489
CA1910199 .... CAL DOMESTIC WATER CO. WHITTER 54,000
CA1910205 .... SUBURBAN WATER SYSTEMS—SAN JOSE LA PUENTE 91,700
CA1910211 .... PARK WC—BELLFLOWER. NORWALK DOWNEY 67,739
CA1910239 .... CITY OF LAKEWOOD LAKEWOOD 58,845
CA2410009 .... MERCED, CITY OF MERCED 60,187
CA2710010 .... CWS-SALINAS SAN JOSE ••••• 90,400
CA3010003 .... CITY OF BUENA PARK BUENA PARK 68,800
CA3010004 .... MESA CONSOLIDATED WD COSTA MESA 97,000
CA3010037 .... YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT YORBA LINDA 70,000
CA3010064 .... CITY OF WESTMINSTER WESTMINSTER 78,803
CA3010069 .... CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY FOUNTAIN VALLEY 53,691
CA3410006 .... CITRUS HEIGHTS IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITRUS HEIGHTS 68,189
CA3410024 .... NORTHRIDGE WATER DISTRICT SACRAMENTO 72,400
CA3610012 .... CHINO—CITY OF CHINO 56,000
CA3610024 .... HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT HESPERIA' 53,200
CA3910004 .... LODI. CITY OF LODI 53,186
CA3910012 .... STOCKTON, CITY OF STOCKTON —• 92,000
CA4110009 .... CALIFORNIA WTR SERV CO SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 56,200
CA4110013 .... CITY OF DALY CITY DALY CITY ••••• 92,311
CA4210011 .... SANTA MARIA WATER DEPARTMENT SANTA MARIA 55,000
CA4310001 .... CALIFORNIA WTR SERV CO SAN JOSE 71,300
CA4310005 .... CITY OF MILPITAS MILPITAS —• £1,576
CA4310007 .... CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW MOUNTAIN VIEW 67,460
CA4310009 .... CITY OF PALO ALTO PALO ALTO —• 56,000
CA4310012 .... CITY OF SANTA CLARA SANTA CLARA 93,600
CA4310020 .... CITY OF SAN JOSE—EVERGREEN/EDENVALE SAN JOSE 70,000
CA4310022 .... GREAT OAKS WATER CO INC SAN JOSE 62,853
CA5410016 .... VISALIA-CALIF. WTR SERVICE CO VISALIA • 92.700
CA5610023 .... WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 8—SIMI VALLEY 500 W. LOS ANGELES AVE 72,344
Hawaii: ,0 _nn
HI0000360 PEARL HARBOR PEARL HARBOR ••••• 73.°00
REGION X:
WWA5334°9'97 .... FEDERAL WAY WATER & SEWER DISTRICT FEDERAL WAY .; | 89,000
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141 ground water under the direct influence (§ 141.74(a)(2)) or each total coliform-
ou -IT »«w,o,,»™m»T,t0i of surface water as a source that are positive colony from the Membrane
Chemicals, Intergovernmental requirements of subpart H Filter Technique (§ 141.74(a)(2)) is
relatons, Reporting and Recordkeepmg • ^.g * * transferred to at least 10 ml of EC+
requirements, Water supply. ^ ^ , 4 , MUG); or Nutrient agar supplemented
Dated: January 24,1994. 3 Section 141.74 is proposed to be with 100 ug/ml of MUG, as specified in
Carol M. Browner, amended by adding paragraphs (a)(8), § 141.21(f)(6)(ii), except that E. coli
Administrator. (9), and (10) to read as follows: colonies are counted; or Minimal
For the reasons set out in the J , , Medium ONPG-MUG Test, often
preamble, part 141 of title 40 of the §141-74 Analytical and monitoring referred to as the Colilert Test, as
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed requirements. specified in § 141.21(f)(6)(iii), using a
to be amended as follows: jjj ^.Q ^ Cryptosporidium_ Jj or ten tube Most Probable Number
PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY ICR Protozoan Method, as described in * ' * .
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Appendix D. The minimum sample
volume must be 140 liters for source 4. A new Subpart M is added to read
1. The authority citation for Part 141 water and 1,400 liters for treated water. as follows:
continues to read as follows: (9) Total Culturable Viruses—ICR
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f. 300g-i. 300g-2 Virus Method, as described in Appendix Subpart M-lnformation Collection
300g-3,300g-4,300g-5,300g-6,300j-4, E. The minimum sample volume must Requirements (ICRJ for PUDIIC water
300J-9. be 120 liters,,for source water and 1,200 Systems
2. Section 141.2 is proposed to be litersfor treated water. §141.140 Microbiological ICR monitoring
amended by adding a definition for l i /7 -t^n ™ i f* and reporting requirements for Subpart H
"Subpart H systems" to read as follows: supplemented with 50 ug/ml ot 4- systems serving 10,000 or more persons.
* J methylumbelliferyl-beta-D-glucuromde
§ 141.2 Definitions. (MUG), as specified in § 141.21(f)(6)(i) (a) Applicability. (1) The requirements]
***** (In this method, a total coliform-positive of this section apply to subpart H
Subpart H systems means public broth culture from the Multiple Tube systems that serve 10,000 or more
water systems using surface water or Fermentation (MTF) Technique persons.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6407
(2) Consecutive systems. If a system
supplies water to other systems, only
the supplier, which uses raw water as a
source, must comply with this section.
In determining population served, the
supplier-must include the population of
its system and those for all consecutive
systems that do not further disinfect the
water.
(b) Schedule. Systems required to
monitor under the provisions of
§ 141.141 (Disinfection Byproduct ICR
Monitoring) must begin monitoring for
this section and § 141.141 in the same
month.
(1) Subpart H systems serving 100,000
or more people must begin monitoring
no earlier than three months after
, publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register and no later than
October 1995. Prior to the start of
monitoring, systems must arrange to
have samples analyzed by a laboratory
which meets the standards specified in
paragraph (d) of this section. If systems
are not able to arrange to have samples
analyzed by a laboratory which meets
the standards specified in paragraph (c)
of this section by six months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, they are required to
notify Technical Support Division,
ATTN: ICR Laboratory Coordinator
(Micro), OGWDW, USEPA, 26 West
Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati,
OH 45268. EPA will then provide a list
of approved labs or other necessary
guidance. Once a system has begun
monitoring, it must continue to monitor
for 18 consecutive months. All
monitoring must be completed no later
than March 31,1997. .
(2) Subpart H systems serving at least
10,000, but less than 100,000 people,
must begin monitoring no earlier than
three months after publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register and no
later than April 1996. Prior to the start
of monitoring, systems must arrange to
have samples analyzed by a laboratory
which meets the standards specified in
paragraph (c) of this section. If systems
are not able to arrange to have samples
analyzed by a laboratory which meets
the standards specified in paragraph (d)
of this section by nine months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, they are required to
notify Technical Support Division,
ATTN: ICR Laboratory Coordinator
(Micro), OGWDW, USEPA, 26 West
Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati,
OH 45268. EPA will then provide a list
of approved labs or other necessary
guidance. Once a system has begun
monitoring, it must continue to monitor
for 12 consecutive months. All
monitoring must be completed no later
than March 31,1997.
(c) Monitoring Requirements—(1)
Parameters. Except as allowed below,
systems must sample for the following
parameters for the period specified in
paragraph (b) of this section and at the
frequency and location specified in this
paragraph, using the analytical methods
specified in this paragraph. For each
sample, systems must determine the
concentration of total coliforms, fecal
coliforms or Escherichia coli, Giardia,
and Cryptosporidium. In addition,
subpart H systems serving 100,000 or
more people must determine the
concentration of total culturable viruses.
(2) Frequency and sample location, (i)
Subpart H systems serving 100,000 or
more people must collect one sample
per month of the source water at the
intake of each plant within that system.
Subpart H systems serving at least
10,000 but less than 100,000 people
must collect one sample every other
month of the source water at the intake
of each plant within that system. The
"intake" is defined as a point
subsequent to surface water runoff, as
determined by the system, but before
the first treatment step used to comply
with the Giardia/vims removals
required by the Surface Water
Treatment Rule (40 CFR141, subpart H).
If a plant has several sources or intakes
of water, the system must sample the
blended water from all sources; if the
system determines that this is not
possible because of the plant
configuration, the system must sample
the source with the expected highest
pathogen concentrations.
(ii) Systems serving 100,000 or more
people that (A) detect one or more
Giardia cyst, Cryptosporidium oocyst, or
total culturable virus in one liter of
water during the first twelve months of
monitoring, or (B) calculate a numerical
value of the pathogen concentration
equal to or greater than 1.00 per liter,
must also collect one sample per month
of the finished water, beginning in the
first calendar month after the system
learns of such a result. (E.g., if the
numerical value is <1.00, the system .
does not have to monitor finished water;
if the value is >1.00, the system must
monitor finished water.) For each
finished water sample, systems must
determine the density of totaLcoliforms,
fecal coliforms or E. coli, Giardia,
Cryptosporidium, and total culturable
viruses. Systems must continue finished
water monitoring monthly until 18
months of source water monitoring has
been completed.
(iii) Systems required to monitor total
culturable viruses under this section
that do not detect total culturable
viruses during the first 12 months of
monitoring are not required to monitor
for total culturable viruses during the
last six months of monitoring.
(iv) Systems required to monitor total
culturable viruses under this section
that have tested the source water at each
plant for either total coliforms or fecal
coliforms at least five times per week
between four months before publication
of this final rule in the Federal Register
and two months after publication need
not monitor for total culturable viruses
if: (A) The density of total coliforms is
less than 100 colonies/100 ml for at
least 90 percent of the samples, or (B)
the density of fecal coliforms is less
than 20 colonies/100 ml for at least 90
percent of the samples. Coliform
monitoring data must be reported as
required in paragraph (d) of this section.
Systems may use monitoring conducted
under the provisions of § 141.71(a)(l) to
meet this requirement. Systems that
elect to use such monitoring must
submit separate monitoring reports to
meet the requirements under both
subpart H and this section.
(3) Analytical methods. Methods for
total coliforms, fecal coliforms, Giardia
and Cryptosporidium, total culturable
viruses, and E. coli are specified in
§141.74(a) (1), (2), (8), (9) and (10),
respectively. Analysis under this section
for microbiological contaminants shall
be conducted by laboratories that have
received approval from EPA to perform
sample analysis for compliance with
this, rule.
(d) Reporting. (1) In addition to
reporting specified in § 141.141, systems
serving 100,000 or more people must
report data and information in the
format described in appendix A using
an EPA-specified computer readable
format beginning four months after
starting monitoring and monthly
thereafter. Systems serving between at
leasit 10,000 but fewer than 100,000
people must report raw water data and
information (except for viruses) in the
format described in appendices A and B
beginning four months after starting
monitoring and every two months
thereafter.
(2) Systems that wish to avoid
monitoring for total culturable viruses
under the provisions of
§ 141.140(c)(2)(iv) must report the dates
and results of all total coliform and/or
fecal coliform monitoring not later than
three months after ICR promulgation.
(!t) All reports required by this
paragraph will be submitted to
. Coordination for
electronic reports will be made through
-------
6408 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
§141.141 Disinfection Byproduct ICR
Monitoring.
(a) Applicability. (1) All community
and nontransient noncommunity water
systems that serve a population of
100,000 or more people must comply
with the requirements in this section.
Community and nontransient
noncommunity water systems that use
only ground water not under the direct
influence of surface water and serve a
population between 50,000 and 99,999
people, must only comply with the total
organic carbon (TOC) monitoring
requirements at the entry point to the
distribution system as indicated in
Table 1; no other monitoring in this
section is required for these systems.
(2) Consecutive systems, (i) Systems
that receive only some of their water
from a supplier must comply with all
requirements of this section.
(li) Systems that receive all their
water from a supplier and further
disinfect this water must comply with
the monitoring requirements in this
section associated with sampling
locations at and subsequent to the entry
point to the distribution system.
(iii) Systems that receive all their
water from a supplier and do not further
disinfect this water need not comply
with the requirements in this section.
(3) In determining population served,
systems must include their own
population and populations for all
consecutive systems.
(b) Schedule. Systems required to
monitor under the provisions of
§141.140 (Microbiological ICR
Monitoring) must begin monitoring for
this section and § 141.140 in the same
month, except as noted in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section.
(1) Except as required by paragraph
(b)(2), systems must begin monitoring
no earlier than [three months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register] and no later than
October 1995. Prior to the start of
monitoring, systems must arrange to
have samples analyzed by a laboratory
which meets the standards specified in
paragraph (c) of this section. If systems
are not able to arrange to have samples
analyzed by a laboratory which meets
the standards specified in paragraph (c)
of this section oy [six months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register], they are required to
notify Technical Support Division,
ATTN: ICR Laboratory Coordinator
(Chem), OGWDVV, USEPA, 26 West
Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati,
OH 45268. EPA will then provide a list
of approved labs or other necessary
guidance. Once a system has begun
monitoring, it must continue to monitor
for 18 consecutive months. All
monitoring must be completed no later
than March 31,1997.
(2) Subpart H systems must begin
monitoring for source water TOC [three
months after publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register] and
continue this monitoring until all other
monitoring required by this section is
complete. Community and nontransient
noncommunity water systems that use
only ground water not under the direct
influence of surface water and serve
100,000 or more people must begin
monitoring for finished water TOC
[three months after publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register] and
continue this monitoring until all other
monitoring required by this section is
complete. Community and nontransient
noncommunity water systems that use
only ground water not under the direct
influence of surface water and serve at
least 50,000 but fewer than 100,000
people must begin monitoring for
finished water TOC [three months after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register] and continue this
monitoring for 12 months.
(c) Monitoring requirements. All
systems must obtain representative
samples at the frequency and location
noted in Table 1 of this section.
(1) Additional requirements for
systems using chloramines. Systems that
use chloramines for treatment must also
conduct the additional sampling
identified in Table 2 of this section.
(2) Additional requirements for
systems using hypochlorite solutions.
Systems that use hypochlorite solutions
for treatment must also conduct the
additional sampling identified in Table
3 of this section.
(3) Additional requirements for
systems using ozone. Systems that use
ozone for treatment must also conduct
the additional sampling identified in
Table 4 of this section.
(4) Additional sampling requirements
for systems using chlorine dioxide.
Systems that use chlorine dioxide for
treatment must also conduct the
additional sampling identified in Table
5 of this section.
(5) Additional information reporting
requirements for all systems serving at
least 100,000 people. Such systems
must also report the applicable
information in Table 6 of this section.
(6) Analytical methods. Systems must
use the methods identified in Table 7 of
this section for conducting analyses
required by this section. Analysis under
this section for disinfection byproducts
shall be conducted by laboratories that
have received approval from EPA to
perform sample analysis for compliance
with this rule.
(d) Reporting. (1) Systems serving
100,000 or more people must report the
required data and information in Tables
1-6 to EPA, using an EPA-specified
computer readable format, beginning
two months after starting monitoring,
and every month thereafter. At the time
of the first report, subpart H systems
must submit the results of monthly
source water TOC monitoring to date
and subsequent monthly results as part
of subsequent monthly reports. At the
time of the first report, systems that use
only ground water not under the direct
influence of surface water and serve at
least 100,000 people must submit the
results of monthly finished water TOC
monitoring to date and subsequent
monthly results as part of subsequent
monthly reports. Systems that use only
ground water not under, the direct
influence of surface water and serve
between 50,000 and 99,999 people must
submit the results of 12 months of
finished water TOC monitoring not later
than [date 17 months after ICR
promulgation],
(2) All reports required by this
paragraph will be submitted to
__. Coordination
for electronic reports will be made
through .
§141.142 Disinfection Byproduct
Precursor Removal ICR.
(a)(l) Applicability. Except for
systems meeting one or more criteria in
paragraphs (a) (2) through (4) of this
section, the following community and
nontransient noncomniunity water
systems must conduct a disinfection
byproduct precursor removal study
(treatment study):
(i) Subpart H systems that serve a
population of 100,000 or more; and
(ii) Systems that serve a population of
50,000 or more that use only ground
water not under the direct influence of
surface water and add a disinfectant to
the water at any point in the treatment
process.
(2) Systems that use chlorine as the
primary and residual disinfectant and
have, as an annual average of four
quarterly averages (quarterly averages
are the arithmetic average of the four
distribution system samples collected
under the requirements of § 141.141(c)), I
levels of less than 40 [ig/1 for total THMsf
and less than 30 u/1 of HAAS, are not
required to conduct a treatment study.
(3) Subpart H systems,that do not
exceed a TOC levelroA.O mg/1 in the
treatment plant influent, measured in
accordance with § 141.141(c) and
calculated by averaging the initial 12
monthly TOC samples, are not required |
to conduct a treatment study.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
B40&
(4) Groundwater systems that do not
exceed a TOG level of 2.0 mg/1 in the
treated water at the entry point to the
distribution system, measured in
accordance with § 141.141(c) and
calculated by averaging the initial 12
monthly TOG samples, are not required
to conduct a treatment study.
(5) For systems that already use full
scale GAG or membrane technology, full
scale plant data must be submitted
along with copies of any prior bench/
pilot studies. Systems meeting criteria
for avoiding treatment studies must
continue to monitor as prescribed in
§141.141.
(b) The treatment study shall consist
of bench- and/or pilot-scale systems for
at least one of the two appropriate
candidate technologies (GAG or
membrane processes) for the reduction
of organic DBF precursors. The
treatment studies shall be designed to
yield representative performance data
and allow the development of treatment
cost estimates for different levels of
organic disinfection byproduct control.
The treatment study shall be conducted
with the effluent from treatment
processes already in place that remove
disinfection byproduct precursors and
TOG. Depending upon the type of
treatment study, the study shall be
conducted in accordance with the
following criteria.
(1) Bench-scale testing shall be
defined as continuous flow tests using:
i (i) Rapid small scale column test
(RSSCT) for GAG; and (ii) Reactors with
a configuration that yield representative
flux loss assessment for membranes.
Tests shall be preceded by particle
removal processes, such as
microfiltration.
(A) GAG bench-scale testing shall
include the following information on
each RSSCT: pretreatment conditions,
: GAG type, GAG particle diameter,
j height and dry weight (mass) of GAG in
the RSSCT column, RSSCT column
inner diameter, volumetric flow rate,
and operation time at which each
i sample is taken. At least two empty bed
1 contact times (EBCTs) shall be tested
j using the RSSCT. These RSSCT EBCTs
must be designed to represent a full-
scale EBCT of 10 min and a full-scale
EBCT of 20 min. Additional EBCTs may
be tested. The RSSCT testing shall
include the water quality parameters
and sampling frequency listed in Table
8. The RSSCT shall be run until the
effluent TOG concentration is 75% of
the average influent TOG concentration
I or a RSSCT operation time that
I represents the equivalent of one year of
I full-scale operation, whichever is
shortest. The average influent TOG is
defined as the running average of the
influent TOG at the time of effluent
sampling. RSSCTs shall be conducted
quarterly over one year in order to
determine the seasonal variation. Thus,
a total of four RSSCTs at each EBCT is
required. If, after completion of the first
quarter RSSCTs, the system finds that
the effluent TOC reaches 75% of the
average influent TOC within 20 full-
scale equivalent days on the EBCT=10
min test and within 30 full-scale
equivalent days on the EBCT=20 min
test, then the last three quarterly tests
shall be conducted using membrane
bench-scale testing with only one
membrane, as described in § 141.142
.
(B) Membrane bench-scale testing
shall include the following information:
Pretreatment conditions, membrane
type, membrane area, configuration,
inlet pressure and volumetric flow rate,
outlet (reject) pressure and volumetric
flow rate, permeate pressure and
volumetric flow rate, recovery, and
operation time at which each sample is
taken. A minimum of two different
membrane types with nominal
molecular weight cutoffs of less than
1000 must be investigated. The
membrane test system must be designed
and run to yield a representative flux
loss assessment. Membrane tests must
be conducted quarterly over one year to
determine the seasonal variation. Thus,
a total of four membrane tests with each
membrane must be run. The membrane
bench-scale testing shall include the
water quality parameters and sampling
frequency listed in Table 9 of this
section.
(2) Pilot-scale testing shall be defined
as continuous flow tests: (i) Using GAG
of particle size representative of that
used in full-scale practice, a pilot GAG
column with a minimum inner diameter
of 2.0 inches, and hydraulic loading rate
(volumetric flow rate/column cross-
sectional area) representative of that
used in full-scale practice; and (ii) using
membrane modules with a minimum of
a 4.0 inch diameter for spiral wound
membranes or equivalent membrane
area if other configurations are used.
(A) GAG pilot-scale testing shall
include the following information on
the pilot plant: Pretreatment conditions,
GAG type, GAG particle diameter,
height and dry weight (mass) of GAG in
the pilot column, pilot column inner
diameter, volumetric flow rate, and
operation time at which each sample is
taken. At least two EBCTs shall be
tested, EBCT=10 min and EBCT=20
min, using the pilot-scale plant.
Additional EBCTs may be tested. The
pilot testing shall include the water
quality parameters listed in Table 10 of
this Section. The pilot tests shall be run
until the effluent TOG concentration is
75% of the average influent TOG
concentration, with a maximum run
length of one year. The average influent
TOG is defined as the running average
of the influent TOG at the time of
sampling. The pilot-scale testing shall
be siafficiently long to capture the
seasonal variation.
(B) Membrane pilot-scale testing shall
include the following information on
the pilot plant: Pretreatment conditions,
membraae type, configuration, staging,
inlet pressure and volumetric flow rate,
outlet (reject) pressure and volumetric
flow rate, permeate pressure and
volumetric flow rate, recovery,
operation time at which each sample is
taken, recovery, cross flow velocity,
recycle flow rate, backwashing and
cleaning conditions, and
characterization and ultimate disposal
of the reject stream. The membrane test
system must be designed to yield a
representative flux loss assessment. The
pilot-scale testing shall be sufficient in
length and conducted throughout the
year in order to capture the seasonal
variation, with a maximum run length
of one year. The pilot testing shall
include the water quality parameters
listed in Table 11.
(3) For either the bench- or pilot-scale
tests, systems must collect influent
water samples at a location before the
first point at which oxidants or
disinfectants that form chlorinated
disinfection byproducts are added. If the
use of these oxidants or disinfectants
precedes any full-scale treatment
process that removes disinfection
byproduct precursors, then bench- and
pilot-scale treatment processes that
represent these full-scale treatment
processes are required prior to the GAG
or membrane process.
(4) Simulated distribution system
(SDS) conditions with chlorine will be
used prior to the measurement of THMs,
haloacetic acids (six) (HAA6), TOX, and
chlorine demand. These conditions
should be based on the site specific SDS
sample as defined in § 141.141(c) (Table
1) with regards to holding time,
temperature, and chlorine residual. If
chlorine is not used as the final
disinfectant in practice, then a chlorine
dose should be set to yield a free
chlorine residual of at least 0.2 mg/1
after a holding time equal to the longest
period of time the water is expected to
remain in the distribution system or 7
days, whichever is shortest. The holding
time prior to analysis of THMs, HAA6,
TOX, and chlorine demand shall remain
as that of the SDS sample as defined in
§141.141(c) (Table 1). .
f5) For systems with multiple source
waters, bench- or pilot scale testing
-------
6410
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
shall be required for each treatment
(6) All systems conducting bench or
—— —-- —••— -> •— ^™»..— »v« WUVM-* uvwM**w*^b \**J **-»A o V OLOlllO liU.UU.U.liLUlK UVli\j
plant that serves a population greater pilot scale studies must report the
tit nn 4l«nt «nt f««*Xt •«. C *t A •* *t A nf—\ 3 3J1*M*1««» . • * m 11 _
than that set forth in § 141.142(a) and
use other source waters that exceed the
TOC criteria set forth in § 141.142(a)(l)
unless the source waters are of similar
water quality.
(Note: Guidance Manual will specify)
additional information in Table 6 of
§ 141.141 as appropriate for source
water and treatment processes that
precede the bench/pilot systems. This
information is to be reported for full-
scale pretreatment processes and for
pilot- or bench-scale pretreatment
processes where appropriate.
(c) Schedule. Systems must begin the
disinfection byproduct precursor
removal study not later than [date 18
months following promulgation] and
submit the report(s) of the completed
study to EPA not later than September
30,1997.
TABLE 1.—SAMPLING POINTS FOR ALL SYSTEMS
Sampling point
Analyses >
Frequency
Treatment Plant Influent*
Treatment Plant Influent (optional for waters with high
oxldant demand due to the presence of inorganics).
Treatment Plant Influent
After Air Stripping
Before and After Filtration
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium and
Total Hardness, TOC, UV254, Bromide, and Ammonia.
Optional oxidant demand test
At each Pdnt of Disinfection* ,
At End of Each Process in which Chlorine is Applied
After Filtration (If Chlorine is Applied Prior to Filtration) ..
Entry Point to Distribution System
Entry Point to Distribution System
4 THM Compliance Monitoring Points in Distribution
System (1 sample point will be chosen to correspond
to the SDS sample*, 1 will be chosen at a maximum
detention time, and the remaining 2 will be represent-
ative of the distribution system).
TOX
Ammonia
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium and
Total Hardness, TOC, and UV**.
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium and
Total Hardness, TOC, and UV254.
Disinfectant Residual3
THMs, HAAs(6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, and TOX '.'.'.'".
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium and
Total Hardness, TOC, UV254, and Disinfectant Resid-
uals.
THMs, HAAs(6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, TOX, and SOS* ..
THMs, HAAs (6), HANs, CP, HK, CH, TOX, pH, Tem-
perature, Alkalinity, Total Hardness and Disinfectant
Residual^.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Quarterly.
JSftl UfV2S4: il?f °£ance of % ^av'°let. ''?nt at 254 nanometers. THMs: chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
artWMn, ' ^ bromoform- HAAs(6): mono-, di-, and trichloroacetic acid; mono-, and di- bromoacetic acid; and bromochloroacetic
acid. HANs: dichloro-, trichloro-, bromochloro-, and dibromo- acetonitrile. CP: chloropicrin. HK: 1,1-dichlorobrooanone and 1 1 1-
trichtoropropanone. CH: chloral hydrate. TOX: total organic halide. SDS: simulated distribution system test '•'^'cr"°r°ProPanone ana 1-1-1
?c^UHLfe'isin?,SZOine-0,ruChforine dit»ide- Tables 4 a.nd 5. respectively, show additional monitoring requirements at this sampling point
^ US'n9 ^ Chl°rine 3S the reSidUal d<-fe°'«aT chlorine residua, wil, be meTu'red in
ater from other sources-
f m6^ system with multiple wells from the same aquifer is only required to monitor TOC from one sampling point. A ground water
TABLE 2.— Additional Sampling Required of Systems Using Chloramines
Sampling point
Entry Point to Distribution System
One THM Compliance Monitoring Sample Point Representing
a Maximum Detention Time in Distribution System.
Analyses
Cyanogen Chloride
Cyanogen Chloride
Frequency
TABLE 3.—Additional Sampling Required of Systems Using Hypochlorite Solutions
Sampling point
Treatment Plant Influent ,
Hypochtorita Stock Solution
Entry Point to Distribution System
Analyses
Chlorate ..
oH Temoerature Frpp Rp^iHunl Phlnrino anH
Chlorate.
Chlorate
Frequency
Quarterly.
TABLE 4.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING OZONE
Sampling point
Analyses
Frequency
Ozone Contactor Influent
Ozona Contactor Influent
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium and
Total Hardness, TOC, UV254, Bromide, and Ammonia.
Aldehydes' and AOC/BDOC^
Monthly.
Quarterly.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING OZONE—Continued
6411
Sampling point
Ozone Contactor Effluent
Ozone Contactor Effluent
Before Filtration
Entry Point to Distribution System
Entry'Point to Distribution System
Analyses
Ozone Residual
Aldehydes' and AOC/BDOCz
Ozone Residual
Bromate
Aldehydes' and AOC/BDOCz
Frequency
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
• The aldehydes to be included in this analysis are: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, butanal, propanal, pentanal, glyoxal, and methyl glyoxal.
organic carbon (AOC) or biodegradeab.e organic carbon (BDOC) is optional.
TABLE 5.—ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIRED OF SYSTEMS USING CHLORINE DIOXIDE
Sampling point
Analyses
Frequency
Treatment Plant Influent
Before each Chlorine Dioxide Application
Before First Chlorine Dioxide Application .,
Before Application of Ferrous Salts, Sulfur Reducing
Agents, or GAG.
Before Downstream Chlorine/Chloramine Application
Entry Point to Distribution System
Entry Point to Distributipn System
3 Distribution System Sampling Points (1 near first cus-
tomer, 1 in middle of distribution system, and 1 at a
detention time in the system)
Chlorate •
pH, Alkalinity, Turbidity, Temperature, Calcium
Total Hardness, TOC, UV254, and Bromide. '•
Aldehydes1 andAOC/BDOC2 •••••
pH, Chlorine Dioxide Residual, Chlorite, Chlorate ..
and
Aldehydes' and AOC/BDOC2
Chlorite, Chlorate, Chlorine Dioxide Residual, Bromate .
Aldehydesi and AOC/BDOC2
Chlorite, Chlorate, Chlorine Dioxide Residual, pH, and
Temperature.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
Quarterly.
Monthly.
iTlclXlfl lui II UCW3IIUWH ill IIO Hi M iw *»jw»wni/» -
iThe aldehydes to be included in this analysis are: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, butanal, propanal, pentanal, glyoxal, and methyl glyo>
...MMAn* *\f ntt-ietr* olHohl/^JQS JS OptJOHdl.
data for AOC or BDOC is optional.
iTne aldehydes to oe inciuaea —
Measurement of other aldehydes is optional.
2 Analysis or submission of data f
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PLANT
INFORMATION
Utility Information:
Utility Name
Mailing Address
Contact Person & Phone Number
Public Water Supply Identification Number
. FRDS (PWSID)
Population Served
Plant Information:
Name of plant
Design flow (MGD)
Annual minimum water temperature (C)
Annual maximum water temperature (C)
Hours of operation (hours per day)
Source Water Information:
Name of source
Type of source (One of the following)
1 River
2 Stream
3 Reservoir
4 Lake
5 Ground water under the direct influ-
ence of surface water
6 Ground water
7 Spring
8 Purchased from Utility Name, FRDS
PWSID
9 Other
Surface water as defined by SWTR (YES/
NO)
Monthly Average Flow of this Source
(MGD)
Upstream sources of microbiological con-
tamination
Wastewater plant discharge in watershed
(yes/no)
Distance from intake (miles)
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PLANT
INFORMATION—Continued
Monthly average flow of plant discharge
(MGD)
Point source feedlots in watershed (yes/no)
Distance of nearest feedlot discharge to
intake (miles)
Non-point sources in watershed
Grazing of animals (yes/no)
Nearest distance of grazing to intake
(miles)
Plant Influent: (ICR influent sampling point)
Monthly average flow (MGD)
Monthly peak hourly flow (MGD)
Flow at time of sampling (MGD)
Plant Effluent: (ICR effluent sampling point)
Monthly average flow (MGD)
Monthly peak hourly flow (MGD)
Flow at time of sampling (MGD)
Sludge Treatment:
Monthly average solids production (Ib/day)
Installed design sludge handling capacity
(Ib/day)
General Process Parameters:
The following will be requested for all unit
processes.
Number of identical parallel units in-
stalled.
Number of identical parallel \ units in
service at time of sampling.
The following parameters will be requested
for all unit processes except chemical
feeders.
Design flow per unit (MGD)
Liquid volume per unit (gallons)
Tracer study flow (MGD)
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PLANT
INFORMATION—Continued
1'50 (minutes)
T10 (minutes)
Presedimentation Basin:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ft2)
Chemical Feeder:
Type of feeder (one of the following)
1 Liquid
2 Gas
3 Dry
Capacity of each unit (Ib/day)
Purpose (one or more of the following)
1 Coagulation
2 Coagulation aid
3 Corrosion control
4 Dechlorination
5 Disinfection
6 Filter aid
7 Fluoridation
8 Oxidation
9 pH adjustment
1C) Sequestration
11 Softening
12! Stabilization
13 Taste and odor control
14 Other
Chemical Feeder Chemicals: (one of the fol-
lowing)
• Alum
• Anhydrous ammonia
• Ammonium hydroxide
• Ammonium sulfate
• Calcium hydroxide
• Calcium hypochlorite
• Calcium oxide
•' Carbon dioxide
-------
6412
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PUNT
INFORMATION—Continued
• Chlorine dioxide—acid chlorite
• Chlorine dioxide—chlorine/chlorite
• Chlorine gas
• Ferric chloride
• Ferric sulfate
• Ferrous sulfate
• Ozone
• Polyaluminum chloride
• Sodium carbonate
• Sodium chloride
• Sodium fluoride
• Sodium hydroxide
• Sodium hypochlorite
• Sodium hexametaphosphate
• Sodium silicate
• Sulfurte acid
• Zinc orthophosphate
* Other
Notes:
1. The above list is intended to be a com-
prehensive list of chemicals used at
water treatment plants. If the name of a
chemical does not appear in the list then
"Other Chemical" information will be re-
quested.
2. Formulas and feed rate units will be in-
cluded In data reporting software.
Monthly average feed rate based on inven-
tory (mg/L)
Feed rate at time of sampling (mg/L)
Other Chemical:
Note: In addition to Chemical Feeder infor-
mation the following will be requested for
any chemical not included in the Chemi-
cal Feeder list of chemicals.
Trade name of chemical
Formula
Manufacturer
Rapid Mix:
Type of mixer (one of the following)
1 Mechanical
2 Hydraulic jump
3 Static
4 Other
If mechanical: horsepower of motor
If hydraulic: head loss (ft)
If static: head loss (ft)
RocculaMon Basin:
Type of mixer (one of the following)
1 Mechanical
2 Hydraulic
3 Other
If mechanical: Mixing power (HP)
If hydraulic: head loss (ft)
Sedimentation Basin:
Loading at Design Flow (gpm/fP)
Dept(ft)
Filtration:
Loading at Design Flow (gpm/ft2)
Media Type (one or more of the following)
1 Anthracite
2 GAG
3 Garnet
4 Sand
5 Other
Depth of top media (in)
If more than 1 media: Depth of second
media (in)
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PLANT
INFORMATION—Continued
If more than 2 media: Depth of third media
(in)
If more than 3 media: Depth of fourth
media (in)
If GAG media: Carbon replacement fre-
quency (months):
Water depth to top of media (ft)
Depth from top of media to bottom of back-
wash trough (ft)
Backwash Frequency (hours)
Backwash volume (gallons)
Contact Basin: (Stable liquid level)
Baffling Type (one of the following as de-
fined in SWTR guidance manual)
1 Unbaffled (mixed tank)
2 Poor (inlet/outlet only)
3 Average (Inlet/Outlet and intermediate)
4 Superior (Serpentine)
5 Perfect (Plug flow)
Clearwell: (Variable liquid level)
Baffling Type (one of the following as de-
fined in SWTR guidance manual)
1 Unbaffled (mixed tank)
2 Poor (inlet/outlet only)
3 Average (Inlet/Outlet and intermediate)
4 Superior (Serpentine)
5 Perfect (Plug flow)
Minimum liquid volume (gallons)
Liquid volume at time of tracer study (gal-
lons)
Ozone Contact Basin:
Basin Type
1 Over/Under (Diffused O3)
2 Mixed (Turbine O3)
Number of Stages
CT (min mg/L)
EPA requests comments on the design
and operating paramenters to be re-
ported for ozone contact basins.
Tube Settler:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ft^)
Tube angle from horizontal (degrees)
Upflow Clarifier:
Design horse power of turbine mixer (HP)
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ftz)
Special Equipment (none, one, or more of
the following)
1 Lamella plates
2 Tubes
Plate Settler:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ftz)
DE Filter:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fts)
Precoat(1b/ft3)
Bodyfeed (mg/L)
Run length (hours)
Granular Activated Carbon:
Empty bed contact time at design flow
(minutes)
Design regeneration frequency (days)
Actual regeneration frequency (days)
Membranes: other treatment:
Type (one of the following) Name
TABLE 6.—TREATMENT PLANT
INFORMATION—Continued
1 Reverse osmosis
2 Nanofiltration
3 Ultrafiltration
4 Microfiltration
5 Electrodialysis '
6 Other
Name of other type
Membrane type (one of the following)
1 Cellulose acetate and derivatives
2 Polyamides
3 Thin-film composite
4 Other
Name of other membrane type
Molecular weight cutoff (gm/mole) •
Configuration (one of the following)
1 Spiral wound
2 Hollow fiber
3 Tube
4 Plate and frame
5 Other
Name of other configuration
Design flux (god/ft?)
Design pressure (psi)
Purpose of membrane unit (one or more of
the following)
1 Softening
2 Desalination
3 Organic removal
4 Other
5 Contaminant removal—name of con-
taminant
Percent recovery (%)
Operating pressure (psi)
Air Stripping:
Packing height (ft)
Design liquid loading (gpm/ft2)
Design air to water ratio
Type of packing (name)
Nominal size of packing (inch)
Operating air flow (SCFM)
Adsorption Clarifier:
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/ftz)
Dissolved Air Flotation: ;
Surface loading at design flow (gmp/ftz)
Slow Sand Filtration:
Surface loading at design flow (gpd/fta)
Ion Exchange:
Purpose (one or more of the following)
1 Softening
2 Contaminant removal
Contaminant name
Media type (Name)
Design exchange capacity (equ/fts)
Surface loading at design flow (gpm/fts)
Bed depth (ft)
Regenerant Name (one of the following)
1 Sodium Chloride (NaCI)
2 Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4)
3 Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)
4 Other
If other: Name and formula
Operating regeneration frequency (hr)
Regenerant concentration (%)
Regenerant Used (Ib/day)
-------
6413
Purpose
Design Parameters j
TABLE T.-ANALYTICAL METHODS APPROVED FOR MONITORING RULE
Analyte
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Temperature
Calcium Hardness
Free Residual Chlorine
Total Residual Chlorine
Chlorine Dioxide Residual
Ozone Residual ...
Chloroform '
Bromodichloromethane .
Dibromochloromethane
Bromoform
Monochloroacetfc Acid ....
Dichloroacetic Acid ......
Trichloroacetic Acid .....
Monobromoacetic Acid ....
Dibromoacetic Acid
Bromochioroacetic Acid
Chloral Hydrate .
Trichloroacetonitrile ....."." •
Dichloroacetonitrile
Bromochloroacetonitrile
Dibromoacetonitrile •'
1,1-Dichloropropanone
1,1,1,-Trichloropropanone ....
Chloropicrin
Chlorite
Chlorate
Bromide .
Bromate "'.
Cyanogen Chloride
Aldehydes
Total Organic Halide (TOX) ...
developed)06 *' 254 "m (method described in preamble— protocol will be
Simulated Distribution System Test (SDS)
Total Hardness '
Ammonia
Oxidant Demand/Requirement (optional)
AOC/BDOC (optional)
Methodology
| 40 CFR reference 1
. 141.74(a)(7),
141.89(3)
141.89(a)
141.22(3),
141.74(3)(4)
141.74(3)(6),
141.89(3)
141.89(3)
141.74(a)(5)
141.74(a)(5)
141.74(a)(5)
141.74(a)(5)
141 Subpt C, App.
C
141 Subpt C, App.
C
141 Subpt C, App.
C
141 Subpt C, App.
EPA method
180.13
200.74
502.25,524.25.6,,
5517.8
502.2 ••>, 524.25.6,
5517.8
502.2 « 524.25.6,
5517.8
502.26,524.25.6.
5517.8
5«2!l e
5E12.1 e
5ei2.1 e
552.1 e
5517
5517.8
5517,8
5517.8
5517.8
5517.8
5517.8
5517.8
300.010
300.010
300.010
300.010
524.26
t
i
Standard methods
4500-H +
2320 B
2130 B
2550 B
3111 B, 3120 B,
3500-Ca D
4500-CI D, 4500-CI
F, 4500-CI G,
4500-CI H
4500-CI D, 4500-CI
E, 4500-CI F,
4500-CI G,
4500-CI I
4500-CIO2 C,
4500-CIO2 D,
4500-CIOz E
4500-O3 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B
6233 B9
Draft method sub-
mitted to 19th
Edition
5320 B
531 OC, 5310 D
5710 E
2340 B, 2340 C
»500-NH3 D, 4500-
NH3F
>350 B, 2350 C,
2350 D
1 Currently approved methodoloav for drinkinn water />n>nniionn -I • • ~ ' 1 *J*L|; °>
trans referenced in this column. 9 compliance monitoring is listed in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations in the sec-
-------
Federal »»»^ / Vol. 59. No. 28 / Thursday, February 10. 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8— Sampling of GAC Bench-scale Systems
— •
Analyses
Alkalinity, total & calcium hardness, ammonia and bromide
pH, turbidity, temperature, TOC and UN/as* SDS^ for
THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand
pH. temperature, TOC, and UV^. SDSi for THMs, HAA6,
TOX, and chlorine demand.
SDSi for THMs, HAA6,
RSSCT run.
"
Sampling point
.«_•^«^—^—-^-«
GAC Influent
GAC Influent ....
GAC Effluent @
EBCT-10 min
(scaled).
GAC Effluent <§>
EBCT-20 min
jscaled). .
1—SDS conditions are defined in § 141.142(b)(4).
TABLE 9—SAMPLING OF BENCH-SCALE MEMBRANE SYSTEMS
_ —i —
Sampling point
_———
Membrane Influent
pH, temperature, TOC and
TOX, and chlorine demand.
Two samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over the
Three samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
A mfnimum of 12 samples. One after one hour, and there-
after at 5% to 8% increments of the average influent
A minimum of 12 samples. One after one hour, and there-
after at 5% to 8% increments of the average influent
TOC. .
Membrane Influent
Membrane Permeate
for each membrane
tested.
and bromide.
pH, turbidity, temperature, HPC, TOC and UV254.
for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine demand.
pH. alkalinity, total dissolved solids, turbidity, itemperature,
total & calcium hardness, bromide, HPC, TOG and
UV2S4. SDSi for THMs, HAA6, TOX, and chlorine de-
mand.
Sample frequency 2
Two samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over the
membrane run. If a continuous flow (non-batch) influent
is used then samples are taken at the same time as the
membrane effluent samples.
Three samples per batch of influent evenly spaced over
the membrane run. If a continuous flow (non-batch) in-
fluent is used then samples are taken at the same time
as the membrane effluent samples.
A minimum of 8 samples evenly spaced over the mem-
brane run.
*agp
GAC Influ-
ent
Analyses
pH, alkalinity,
turbidity,
tempera-
ture, total &
calcium
hardness,
ammonia,
bromide,
TOC and
UVj54. SDSi
for THMs,
HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine
demand.
Sample fre-
quency
A minimum of
15 samples
taken at the
same time
as the sam-
ples for
GAC efflu-
ent at
EBCT=20
min.
Sampling
point
GAC Efflu-
ent
EBCT=10
min.
Analyses
pH, turbidity,
tempera-
ture, amrno^
nia^, TOC
and UV254.
SDS' for
THMs,
HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine
demand.
Sample fre-
quency
A minimum of
15 samples.
One after
one day,
and there-
after at 3%
to 7% incre-
ments of the
average in-
fluent TOC.
Sampling
point
GAC Efflu-
ent @
EBCT=20
min.
Analyses
pH, turbidity,
tempera-
ture, ammc-
niaz, TOC
and UV254.
SOS' for
THMs,
HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine
demand.
Sample fre-
quency
A minimum of
15 samples.
One after
one day,
and there-
after at 3%
to 7% incre-
ments of the
average in-
fluent TOC.
i—SDS conditions are defined in
§141.142(b)(4).
2—if present in the influent.
Note- More frequent effluent monitoring may
be necessary to predict the 3% to 7% incre-
ments of average influent TOC.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6415
TABLE 11 .—SAMPLING OF PILOT-
SCALE MEMBRANE SYSTEMS
Sampling
point
Mem-
brane •
Influent.
Analyses
pH, alkalinity,
total dis-
. solved sol-
ids, turbidity,
temperature,
total & cal-
cium hard-
ness, ammo-
nia, bromide,
HPC, TOG
and UV 254.
SDS ' for
THMs,
HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine
demand..
Sample fre-
quency 3
A minimum of
15 samples
to be taken
at the same
time as the
membrane
effluent sam-
ples.
TABLE 11.—SAMPLING OF PILOT-
SCALE MEMBRANE SYSTEMS—Con-
tinued
2—If present in the influent.
3~More frequent monitoring of flow rate and
pressure will be required to accurately assess
flux loss.
Sampling
point
Mem-
brane
Per-
meate.
Analyses
pH, alkalinity,
total dis-
solved sol-
ids, turbidity,
temperature,
total & cal-
cium hard-
ness, ammo-
nia 2, bro-
mide, HPC,
TOG and
UV254- SDS'
for THMs,
HAA6, TOX,
and chlorine
demand..
Sample fre-
quency 3
A minimum of
15 samples
evenly
spaced over
the mem-
brane run.
'—SDS conditions are defined
§141.142(b.4).
in
APPENDIX A TO SUBPART M—MONITORING SCHEME FOR MICROORGANISMS
Data needed
Sample collection- date.
Plant id.
Source
water
!
Fin-
ished
water
Source
water
Fin-
ished
water
Source
water
etc.
Glardia and Cryptosporidium
Sample analysis date.
Sample volume collected (liters).
Sample volume examined (liters).
Giardia
Presumptive count'.
Total density/100 liter 2 (based on presumptive count).
Confirmed count i.
Density/100 liters 2 (confirmed count).
]
Cryptosporidium
Presumptive count 1.
Total density/100 liters (based on presumptive count).
Confirmed count1.
Density/100 liters 2 (confirmed count).
i
I
Total culturable viruses (systems >100,000 people)
Sample analysis date.
Sample volume collected.
% of total volume of concentrate examined.
MPN density/liters.
Upper 95% confidence bound (of MPN).
Lower 95% confidence bound (of MPN).
Total Conforms
Confirmed or validated counts per 100 ml.
Fecal Coliforms/E. coll
Counts per 100 ml.
1 Alternate terms being considered are "total count" for "presumptive count" and "count with internal structures" for "confirmed count" "Pre-
sumptive and total count are semantic equals. However, "confirmed" Giardia cysts, unlike Cryptosporidium oocysts, require demonstration of
two internal structures, while "count with internal structures only requires the identification of one internal structure in Giardia cysts
-------
6416 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
a|f organism is not detected, report data as < the detection limit per volume examined. For example, if no organism is detected in 200 L, report
as < 0.5/1 OOL. If no organism is detected in SOL, report as < 2/1OOL.
Appendix B to SubPart M—Treatment
process information for systems serving
at least 10,000 but less than 100,000
population
Instructions:
Unit Processes
1. Indicate existing treatment
processes) and corresponding hydraulic
loading rates at design flow in gallons
per minute per square foot.
2. Indicate liquid volume in gallons.
3. Indicate baffling type, and T!0/T
during average flow if known, as
defined in Appendix C of the guidance
manual to the Surface water Treatment
Rule.*
Chemical Additions
1. Indicate the name of chemical
coogulants and disinfectants and the
applied dose in mg/L.
2. If a chemical is not added at an
indicated step then enter "None" for the
chemical name.
1. Plant Information:
Design Flow (MGD)
Average Monthly Flow
(MGD)
Maximum Daily Flow (MGD)
Average Water Temperature
(C)
Minimum Water Temperature
(C)
2. Chemical Addition:
Name
Dose (mg/L)
3. Presedimentation Processes
Design Liquid Loading
(gpm/ft2)
Liquid Volume (gallons)
Baffling (Check one of the following)
Unbaffled Poor
Average Superior Perfect
Ratio of Tio/T during
average flow
4. Chemical Addition:
Name Dose (mg/L)
5. Clarification/Sedimentation Processes
Design Liquid Loading
(gpm/ft2)
Liquid Volume (gallons)
Baffling (Check one of the following)
Unbaffled Poor
Average r Superior Perfect
Ratio of Tio/T during
average flow
Check all that apply:
Gravity Settling Basin
Upflow Solids Contact Basin
Adsorption Clarification
Dissolved Air Flotation
Tubes Installed
Lamella Plates Installed
6. Chemical Addition:
Name Dose
7. Filtration
Design Liquid Loading
(gpm/ft2)
Liquid Volume
. (mg/L)
lU.S.EnvItonmontal Protection Agency. 1991.
Guidance manual for compliance with the filtration
and disinfection requirements for public water
systems using surface water sources. Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water, Washington,
DC.
. (gallons)
Baffling (Check one of the following)
Unbaffled Poor
Average Superior Perfect
Ratio of Tio/T during average
flow
Filter Type. Check one of the
following:
Rapid Sand Filter
Direct Filtration
Roughing Filter
Slow Sand Filtration
Diatomaceous Earth
Membrane Filtration
Media Type. Check all that apply
Sand
Anthracite
Garnet
Granular Activated Carbon
8. Chemical Addition:
Name Dose
(mg/L)
9. Contact Tank and/or Clearwell
Liquid Volume (gallons)
Baffling (Check one of the following)
Unbaffled Poor
Average Superior Perfect
Ratio of Tio/T
average flow
during
Appendix C to Subpart M—Proposed
ICR Protozoan Method for Detecting
Giardia Cysts and Cryptosporidium
Oocysts in Water by a Fluorescent
Antibody Procedure
1. Scope
1.1 This test method describes the
detection and enumeration of Giardia cysts
and Cryptosporidium oocysts in ground,
surface, and finished waters by a fluorescent
antibody procedure. These pathogenic
intestinal protozoa occur in domestic and
wild animals as well as in humans. The
environment may become contaminated
through direct deposit of human and animal
feces or through sewage and wastewater
discharges to receiving waters. Ingestion of
water containing these organisms may cause
the disease.
1.2 It is the user's responsibility to ensure
the validity of this test method for waters of
untested matrices. Results obtained by this
method should be interpreted with extreme
caution. Samples with high turbidity are not
recommended with this procedure. A
negative count and low detection limit does
not ensure pathogen-free water.
1.3 This method does not purport to
address all of the safety problems associated
with its use. It is the responsibility of the user
of this method to establish appropriate safety
and health practices and determine the
applicability of regulatory limitations prior to
use.
2. Terminology
2.1 Description of Terms Specific to this
Method:
2.1.1 axoneme—an internal flagellar
structure which occurs in some protozoa,
e.g., Giardia, Spironucleus, and
Trichomonas.
2.1.2 cyst—a phase or a form of an
organism produced either in response to
environmental conditions or as a normal part
of the life cycle of the organism. It is
characterized by a thick and
environmentally-resistant cell wall.
2.1.3 median bodies—prominent, dark-
staining, paired organelles consisting of
microtubules and found in the posterior half
of Giardia. In G. lamblia (from humans),
these structures often have a claw-hammer
shape while in G. muris (from mice), the
median bodies are round.
2.1.4 oocyst—the encysted zygote of some
Sporozoa, e.g., Cryptosporidium. This is a
phase or a form of the organism produced
either in response to environmental
conditions or as a normal part of the life
cycle of the organism. It is Characterized by
a thick and environmentally-resistant cell
wall.
2.1.5 sporozoite—a motile, infective,
asexual stage of certain sporozoans, e.g.,
Cryptosporidium. There are four sporozoites
in each Cryptosporidium oocyst, and they are
generally banana-shaped.
2.1.6 nucleus—a prominent internal
structure seen both in Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts. Sometimes 2 to 4
nuclei can be seen in Giardia cysts. In
Cryptosporidium oocysts there is one nucleus
per sporozoite.
3. Summary of Test Method
3.1 Pathogenic intestinal protozoa are
concentrated from a large volume of water
sample by retention on a yarn-wound filter.
Retained particulates are eluted from the
filter with a eluting solution and are
concentrated by centrifugation. Giardia cysts
and Cryptosporidium oocysts are separated to
some extent from other particulate debris by
flotation on a Percoll-sucrose solution with a
specific gravity of 1.1. A monolayer of the
water layer/Percoll-sucrose interface is
placed on a membrane filter, indirectly
stained with fluorescent antibody, and
examined under a microscope. Cysts and
oocysts are classified as presumptive and
confirmed,1 according to specific criteria
(immunofluorescence, size, shape, and
i Alternate terms being considered are "total
count" and "count with internal structures",
respectively. "Presumptive" and "total count" are
semantic equals. However, "confirmed" Giardia
cysts, unlike Cryptosporidium oocysts, require
demonstration of 2 internal structures, while "count
with internal structures" only requires the
identification of 1 internal structure in Giardia
cysts.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6417
internal morphological characteristics), and
the results are reported in terms of the
number per 100 L. The confirmed number of
cysts and/or oocysts is a subset of the
presumptive number of cysts and/or oocysts.
4. Significance and Use
4.1 This test method will provide a
quantitative indication of the level of
contamination in raw and treated drinking
waters with the environmentally resistant
stages of two genera of pathogenic intestinal
protozoa: Giardia and Cryptosporidium.
4.2 This test method will not identify the
species of protozoa, it will not identify the
host species of origin, it cannot determine the
viability status, nor can it determine the
infectivity status of detected cysts and
oocysts.
4.3 This test method may be useful in
determining the source or sources of
contamination of water supplies, the
occurrence and distribution of protozoa in
water supplies, and in evaluating the
effectiveness of treatment practices.
5. Interferences
5.1 Turbidity due to inorganic and
organic debris and other organisms, can
interfere with the concentration, purification
and examination of the sample for Giardia
cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts.
5.2 Inorganic and organic debris may be
naturally-occurring, e.g., clays and algae, or
may be added to water in the treatment
process, e.g., iron and alum coagulants and
polymers.
5.3 Organisms and debris that
autofluoresce or demonstrate non-specific
fluorescence, e.g., algal and yeast cells and
Spironucleus (Hexamita) sp.2, when
examined by epifluorescent microscopy
could interfere with the detection of cysts
and oocysts and contribute to false positive
values.
5.4 Chlorine compounds, and perhaps
other chemicals used to disinfect or treat
drinking water and wastewater, may interfere
with the visualization of internal structures
of Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium
oocysts.
5.5 Freezing filter samples, eluates or
concentrates could interfere with the
detection and/or identification of cysts and
oocysts originally present in the sample.
6. Apparatus
6.1 Sample Collection.
6.1.1 Filter and filter holder, a 25 A cm
(10 in.) long 1 pm nominal porosity, yarn-
wound polypropylene cartridge Commercial
honeycomb fFilter tube (M39R10A;
Commercial Filters Parker H annifin Corp.,
P.O. Box 1300, Lebanon, IN) or Filterite
(Filterite Corporation, Timmonium, MD),
with VIH # 10 Clear w/pr (with pressure
relief) (Ametek part # 150163; Ametek,
Plymouth Products Division, P.O. Box 1047,
Sheboygan, WI) should be used.
6.1.2 Water meter.
6.1.3 Fluid proportioner (or proportioning
injector) for chlorinated water.
6.1.4 Flow control valve, 4 L/min.
6.1.5 Pump, electric or gasoline powered.
6.1.6 Ice chest or cooler.
6.2 Sample Processing.
6.2.1 Centrifuge, with swinging bucket
rotors having a capacity of 15 to 250 mL per
conical tube or bottle.
6.2.2 Mixer, vortexer.
6.2.3 Vacuum source.
6.2.4 Membrane filter holder, Hoefer
manifold, model FH 225V.3 10 place holder
for 25 mm diameter filters.
6.2.5 Slide warming tray, or incubator,
37°C.
6.2.6 pH meter.
6.2.7 Rubber policeman.
6.3 Sample Examination.
6.3.1 Microscope, capable of
epifluorescence and D.I.C. or Hoffman
modulation® optics, with stage and ocular
micrometers and 20X (N.A. = 0.6) to 100X
(N.A. = 1.3) objectives. Equip the microscope
with appropriate excitation and band pass
filters for examining fluorescein
isothiocyanate-labeled specimens (exciter
filter: 450-490 nm; dichroic beam-splitting
mirror: 510 nm; barrier or suppression filter:
515-520 nm).
7. Reagents and Materials
7.1 Purity of Reagents—Reagent grade
chemicals shall be used in all tests. Unless
otherwise indicated, it is intended that all
reagents shall conform to the specifications
of the committee on Analytical Reagents of
the American Chemical Society where such
specifications are available.*
7.2 Preparation of Reagents—Prepare
reagents as specified by the formulations.
7.3 Purity of Waters-Use distilled
deionized or double distilled water.
7.4 Sample Collection.
7.4.1 Sodium Thiosulfate Solution (0.5
%)—Dissolve 0.5 g of sodium thiosulfate
(Na2S2O3« 5H2O) in 50 mL water and then
adjust to a final volume of 100 mL.
7.5 Sample Processing.
7.5.1 Neutral Buffered Formalin Solution
(10 %)—Dissolve 0.762 g disodium hydrogen
phosphate (Na2HPO4), 0.019 g sodium
dihydrogen phosphate (NaH2PO4), and 100
mL formalin in water to a final volume of 1
L.
7.5.2 Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS)—
Prepare a 10X stock solution by dissolving 80
g sodium chloride (NaCl), 2 g potassium
dihydrogen phosphate {KH2PO.»), 29 g
hydrated disodium hydrogen phosphate
(Na2HPO4» 12 H2O) and 2 g potassium
chloride (KC1) in water to a final volume of
1 L. The 10X solution is used to prepare IX
PBS by diluting one volume of the 10X
solution with 9 volumes of water and adjust
the pH with a pH meter to 7.4 with 0.1 N HC1
or 0.1 N NaOH before use.
7.5.3 Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate Stock
Solution (1%)—Prepare solution by
z Januschka, M.M., et al. 1988. A Comparison of
Giardia mictoti and Spironucleus muris cysts in the
vole: an immunocytochemical, light, and electron
microscopic study. Journal of Parasitology
74(3):452-458.
3 Hoefer Scientific Instruments, 654 Minnesota
Street, Box 77387, San Francisco, California 94107.
< "Reagent Chemicals, American Chemical
Society Specifications," American Chemical
Society, Washington, DC. For suggestion on the
testing or reagents not listed by the American
Chemical Society, see "Analar Standards for
Laboratory Chemicals," BDH, Poole, Dorset, U.K.
and the "United States Pharmacopeia."
dissolving 1.0 g of sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) in water to a final volume of 100 mL.
7,5.3 Tween 80 Stock Solution (1%)—
Mix 1.0 mL of polyoxyethylenesorbitan
moaooleate 80 (Tween 80) stock solution
with 99 mL of water.
7,5.4 Eluting Solution (Buffered Detergent
Solution)—Prepare solution by mixing 100
mL 1% SDS, 100 mL 1% Tween 80,100 mL
10X PBS, and 0.1 mL Sigma Antifoam A with
50G mL water. Adjust the pH to 7.4 using a
pH meter. Adjust the final volume to 1 L with
additional water. Use within one week of
preparation.
7,5.5 Sucrose Solution (2.5 M)—Dissolve
85.!58 g of sucrose in 40 mL prewarmed water
then adjust the final volume to 100 mL with
water.
7,5.6 Percoll-Sucrose Flotation Solution,
Sp. Gr. 1.10—Mix 45 mL Percoll (sp. gr. 1.13;
Sigma), 45 mL water and 10 mL 2.5 M
sucrose solution. Check the specific gravity
with a hydrometer. The specific gravity
should be between 1.09 and 1.10 (do not use
if less than 1.09). Store at 4°C and use within
a week. Allow to reach room temperature
before use.
7.6 Sample Examination
7,6.1 Meridian Hydrofluor-Combo kits
(cat. no. 240025) for detecting Giardia cysts
and Cryptosporidium oocysts in water
sairiples. The expiration date for the reagents
is printed on the Hydroflour-Combo kit label.
Discard the kit once the expiration date is
reached. Store the kit at 2-8°C and return it
promptly to this temperature range after each
use. The labeling reagent should be protected
from exposure to light. Do not freeze any of
the reagents in this kit. Diluted, unused
working reagents should be discarded after
48 hours.
7,6.2 Ethanol, (95%).
7,.6.3 Glycerol.
7,6.4 Ethanol/Glycerol Series—Prepare a
series of solutions according to the following
table:
95%
ethanol
10 mL
20mL
40 mL
SOmL
95 mL
Glyc-
erol
5mL
5mL
5mL
5mL
5mL
Rea-
gent
water
SOmL
70 mL
SOmL
10 mL
OmL
Final
volume
95 mL
95 mL
95 mL
95 mL
95 mL
Final
%
etha-
nol
10
20
40
80
95
7,6.5 DABCO-Glycerol Mounting Medium
(2%)—Prewarm 95 mL glycerol using a
magnetic stir bar on a heating stir plate. Add
2 g 1,4 diazabicyclo [2.2.2] octane (DAB'CO,
Sigma #D-2522) to the warm glycerol with
continuous stirring until it dissolves.
(CAUTION: hygroscopic; causes burns; avoid
inhalation, as well as skin and eye contact.)
Adjust the final volume to 100 mL with
additional glycerol. Store at room
temperature and discard after 6 months.
7.6.6 Bovine Serum Albumin (1%)—
Sprinkle 1.0 g bovine serum albumin (BSA)
crystals over 85 mL IX PBS, pH 7.4. Allow
crystals to fall before stirring into solution
'Meridian Diagnostics, Inc., 3471 River Hills
Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45244.
-------
6418 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
with a magnetic stir bar. After the BSA is
dissolved, adjust the volume to 100 mL with
PBS. For prolong storage, sterilize by filtering
through a 0.22 pm membrane filter into a
sterile tube or bottle. Store at 4°C and discard
after 6 months.'
7.7 Sample Collection Materials.
7.7.1 Filters, a 25.4 cm (10 in.) long 1 |iin
nominal porosity, yarn-wound
polypropylene cartridge commercial
Honeycomb Filter Tube (M39R10A) or
Fllterlto (Filterite Corporation, Timmonium,
MD).
7.7.2 Garden hose and connectors.
7.7.3 \Vhirl-pak or zip-loc bags, 15 in. (38
cm) x 15 in (38 cm).
7.7.4 Co/dpocJisorwetice.
7.8 Sample Processing Materials.
7.8.1 Pans or trays, stainless steel or glass
trays, approx. 16.5 in. (41.91 cm) x 10 in.
(25.4 cm) x 2 in. (5.08 cm) deep.
7.8.2 Knife/cutting tool, for cutting the
polypropylene filter fibers off filter core.
7.8.3 Hydrometer, for liquids heavier
than water (range: 1.000-1.225), for adjusting
specific gravity of flotation solutions.
7.9 Sample Examination Materials.
7.9.1 Slides, glass microscope, 1 in. (2.54
cm.) X 3 in. (7.62 cm) or 2 in. (5.08 cm.) x
3 in. (7.62 cm.).
7.9.2 Cover slips, 25 mmz, No. IVfe.
7.9.3 Filters, Sartorius brand cellulose
acetate, either 0.45 or 0.2 jun pore size, 25
mm diameter.
7.9.4 Support Filters, ethanol-compatible
membrane, any pore size, 25 mm.
7.9.5 Fingernail polish, clear or clear
fixative (cat. no. 60-4890; PGC Scientifics).
7.9.6 Splinter forceps, fine tip.
7.9.7 Blunt-end filter forceps.
8. Precautions,
8.1 The analyst/technician must know
and observe the normal safety procedures
required in a microbiology laboratory while
preparing, using and disposing of sample
concentrates, reagents and materials and
while operating sterilization equipment.
8.2 Do not mouthpipet in any portion of
this procedure.
9. Sampling.
9.1 Sampling Apparatus Preparation and
Assembly.
9.1.1 The sampling apparatus (Fig. 1)
consists of ah inlet hose, filter holder, a 1 Jim
nominal porosity filter, an outlet hose, a
water meter, and a flow control valve or
dovico (4 L/min). A pump will be needed for
unpressurlzed sources and a fluid
proportioner or proportioning injector will be
needed for chlorinated or other disinfectant
treated waters.
9.1.2 Ths sampling apparatus does not
have to be sterile but it must be clean and
uncontaminated by cysts and/or oocysts.
Thoroughly clean the apparatus, including
filter holder, hoses and pumps, and rinse
between samples. If multiple samples are to
be collected with the same apparatus (but
using different filters and, preferably,
different filter holders), arrange the sampling
sequence to begin with the least
contaminated water (e.g., treated drinking
water) and end with the most contaminated
water (o.g., source water). If field conditions
preclude complete disassembly and thorough
cleaning of apparatus components between
samples, thoroughly rinse all surfaces that
will come in contact with the water with at
least 50 gal (190 L) of the water to be sampled
prior to tike installation of the filter cartridge.
9.1.3 Filter Holder.
9.1.3.1 Thoroughly wash the filter holder
with a stiff brush in hot water containing
detergent.
9.1.3.2 Rinse the filter holder with tap
water until the soap residue is gone. Follow
with a thorough rinse in reagent water and
air dry.
9.1.3.3 Attach a water-resistant label
containing the following information to the
filter holder:
Start Time: Meter Reading:
Turbidity:.
Stop Time: _
Turbidity:
Operator's Name: _
Volume Filtered:.
Date:
. Meter Reading:.
Total
. Sampling
Location:.
9.1.3.4 The turbidity value should be
recorded, if available.
9.1.4 Hoses.
9.1.4.1 Inlet and outlet hoses for the filter
holder consist of standard garden hoses and
fittings. It is helpful to use different colors for
inlet and outlet hoses.
9.1.4.2 Outlet hoses may be used
repeatedly without washing but inlet hoses
are considered contaminated after one use.
Use the shortest length of inlet hose
necessary for collecting the sample and
discard the inlet hose after use. If this is not
practical, rinse the inlet hose thoroughly
with at least 50 gal (190 L) of the water to
be sampled prior to connecting the filter
holder.
9.1.5 Pump.
9.1.5.1 If a pump must be used to collect
the sample, it is recommended that the pump
be installed on the outlet end of the sampling
apparatus. In this manner, the sample will be
pulled through the filter and the pump may
be used repeatedly without the fear of
contamination and without the need for
washing.
9.1.5.2 If the pump is installed on the
inlet side of the sampling apparatus,
thoroughly clean and rinse all parts that
come in contact with the sampled water prior
to collection of the next sample. If pump
disassembly is not practical between
samples, rinse thoroughly with at least 50 gal
(190 L) of the water to be sampled prior to
connecting the filter holder.
9.1.6 Fluid Proportioner or Proportioning
Injector.
9.1.6.1 If the water to be sampled is
chlorinated or disinfected by any other
chemicals, the disinfectant must be
neutralized during sample collection. While
the assay system allows detection of
disinfected cysts and oocysts, exposure to
disinfectant may interfere with the
visualization of internal morphologies of
these organisms.
9.1.6.2 Use sodium thiosulfate solution to
neutralize the disinfectant in water samples.
Add the sodium thiosulfate solution to the
water during sample'collection with a
mechanical fluid proportioner pump or an
in-line Venturi-operated injector.e
9.2 Sample Collection.
9.2.1 Connect inlet end of sampling
apparatus to a pressurized water tap or
follow pump manufacturer's instructions for
priming the pump if an unpressurized source
is being sampled. , :
9.2.2 Use a water-resistant marking pen to
record the start time, meter reading, name of
person collecting the sample, turbidity, date
and sampling location on the filter holder ,
label. ' .
9.2.3 Start water flow through the filter. ,
The flow rate should not exceed 4 L/min.
9.2.4 A minimum sample size of 140 L of
raw water and. 1400 L of finished water is
required.
9.2.5 If the water must be neutralized,
add sodium thiosulfate solution via the
proportioner system to produce a final
concentration in the sampled water of 50 mg/
L. One L of 0.5% sodium thiosulfate solution
will be needed for each 100 L of water
sampled. Periodically check a sample of,
effluent to be certain that no residual .
chlorine remains after the addition of the
thiosulfate. Measure chlorine using Test
Method D1253.7 ,
9.2.6 After the required'volume of water
has passed through the filter, shut off the
water flow, record the stop time, final meter
reading and turbidity of the water at the end
of filtration on the filter holder label.
9.2.7 Disconnect sampling apparatus
while maintaining the inlet hose level above
the level of the opening on the outlet hose
in order to prevent backwashing and the loss
of particulate matter from the filter.
9.2.8 Pour the residual water remaining
in the filter holder into a 15 in. (38 cm.) x
15 in. (38 cm.) whirl pack or zip-lock bag.
9.2.9 Aseptically remove the filter from
the holder and transfer the filter to the bag
containing the residual water,
9.2.10 Seal the bag and place it inside a
second 15 in. (38 cm.) x 15 in. (38 cm.) whirl
pack or zip-lock bag. Transfer the label or
label information from the filter holder to the
outside of this second bag.'
9.2.11 Transport the sample to the
laboratory on wet ice or cold packs and
refrigerate at 2-5 °C. Do not freeze during
transport or storage.
10. Procedure
10.1 Filter Elution. The initiation of
sample collection and elution from the
collection filter must be performed within 96
hrs. Two approaches to eluting the
particulates from the filter may be used:
either washing by hand or using a stomacher.
10.1.1 Handwashing.
10.1.1.1 Pour the residual solution in the
bag into a beaker, rinse the bag with eluting
solution, add the rinse solution to the beaker ,
and discard the bag.
10.1.1.2 Using a razor knife or other
appropriate cutting instrument, cut the filter
o Details on the operation and use of proportioner
pumps and injectors can be found in Standard
Methods for the Examination Water and
Wastewater, Section 9510C, "Virus Concentration
from Large Sample Volumes by Adsorption to and
Elution from Microporous Filters (PROPOSED),"
18th ed., 1989, pp. 9-105 to 9-109.
' Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.01.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6419
fibers lengthwise down to the core. Divide
the filter fibers into a minimum of three
equal portions with one-third consisting of
those cleanest fibers nearest the core; the
second one-third being the middle layer of
fibers, and the final one-third consisting of
the outer-most filter fibers (the dirtiest
fibers).
10.1.1.3 Beginning with the cleanest
fibers (the one-third nearest the core), hand
wash the fibers in three consecutive 1.0 L
volumes of eluting solution. Wash the fibers
by kneading them in the eluting solution
contained either in a beaker or a plastic bag.
Wring the fibers to express as much of the
liquid as possible before discarding. Main-
tain the three 1.0 L volumes of eluate
separate throughout the washing procedure.
10.1.1.4 Using the three 1.0 L volumes of
eluate used in the above section (11.1.4),
repeat the washing-procedure on the middle
one-third layer officers and then on the final
outer one-third layer of fibers.
10.1.1.S The minimum total wash time of
fibers should be 30 min. After all the fibers
have been washed, combine the three 1.0 L
volumes of eluate with the residual filter
water obtained in 10.1.1 and discard the
fibers.
10.1.2 Stomacher Washing.
10.1.2.1 Use a stomacher with a bag
capacity of 3500 mL. Using a razor knife or
other appropriate cutting instrument, cut the
filter fibers lengthwise down to the core.
10.1.2.2 After loosening the fibers, place
all the filter fibers in a stomacher bag. To
insure against bag breakage and sample loss,
place the filter fibers in the first stomacher
bag into a second stomacher bag.
10.1.2.3 Add 1.75 L of eluting solution to
the fibers. Homogerienize for 2 five minute
intervals. Between each homogenization
period, hand kneed the filter material to
redistribute the fibers in the bag.
, 10.1.2.4 Wring the fibers out to express as
much of the liquid as-possible before
discarding.
10.1.3 Concentrate the combined eluate
and residual water into a single pellet by
centrifugation at 1,050 x g for 10 min using
a swinging bucket rotor and plastic conical
centrifuge bottles. Carefully aspirate and
discard the supernatant fluid and resuspend
the pellet by vortexing. After pooling the
particulates in one conical bottle, record the
packed pellet volume. Resuspend the packed
pellet in an equal volume of 10% neutral
buffered formalin solution. If the packed
pellet volume is less than 0.5 mL, add
enough buffered formalin solution to bring
the resuspended pellet volume to 1.0 mL.
10.1.4 All raw water sample particulates
must be archived. A minimum of 25% or a
maximum of 5 ml packed pellet volume of
the raw water sample should be transferred
to 15 ml conical, plastic centrifuge tube. The
tube size is manditory due to storage
considerations. Attach a water resistant label
containing the following information to the
tube:
Date:
. Sampling Location:
Start Time:.
. Meter Reading:.
Turbidity:
Stop Time: Meter Reading:.
Turbidity:
Operator's Name:.
Filtered:
10.2 Flotation Purification.
10.2.1 In a clear plastic 50 mL conical
centrifuge tube(s), vortex a volume of
resuspended pellet equivalent to not more
than 1 mL of packed pellet volume with a
sufficient volume of eluting solution to make
a final volume of 20 mL.
10.2.2 Using a 50 mL syringe and 14
gauge cannula, underlay the 20 mL vortexed
suspension of particulates with 30 mL
Percoll-sucrose floatation solution (sp. gr.
1.1). An alternate procedure would be to
overlay the 30 mL of Percoll-sucrose
floatation solution with the 20 mL of
suspended particulates.
10.2.3 Without disturbing the pellet
suspension/Percoll-sucrose interface,
centrifuge the preparation at 1,050 x g for 10
min using a swinging bucket rotor. Slowly
accelerate the centrifuge over a 30-sec
interval up to the speed where the tubes are
horizontal in order to avoid disrupting the
interface. Similarly, at the end of
centrifugation, decelerate slowly. DO NOT
USE THE BRAKE.
10.2.4 Using a polystyrene 25 mL pipet
rinsed with eluting solution, draw off the top
20 mL particulate suspension layer, the
interface, and 5 mL of the Percoll-sucrose
below the interface. Place all these volumes
in a plastic 50 mL conical centrifuge tube.
. 10.2.5 Add additional eluting solution to
the plastic conical centrifuge tube (10.2.4) to
a final volume of 50 mL. Centrifuge at 1,050
x g for 10 min.
10.2.6 Aspirate and discard the
supernatant fluid down to 5 mL (plus pellet).
Resuspend the pellet by vortexing and save
this suspension for further processing with
fluorescent antibody reagents.
10.2.7 At this point, a break may be .
inserted if the procedure is not going to
progress immediately to the Indirect
fluorescent Antibody procedure (10.3) below.
If a break is inserted, then the pellet from
10.2.6 should be washed with eluting
solution to ensure eliminating osmotic stress
to cysts and oocysts from residual Percoll-
sucrose floatation solution. Wash the pellet
two or more times by resuspending it in 50
mL of eluting solution, centrifuging at 1,050
X g for 10 min, and aspirating the
supernatant down to 5 mL above the pellet.
Store the pellet at 4 °C.
10.3 Indirect Fluorescent Antibody (IFA)
Procedure.
10.3.1 Determining Sample Volume per
Filter.
10.3.1.1 Determine the volume of sample
concentrate (from 10.2.7) that may be
applied to each 25-mm diameter membrane
filter used in the IFA assay.
10.3.1.2 Vortex the sample concentrate
and apply 40 (iL to one 5-mm diameter well
of a 12-well red heavy teflon-coated slide.®
10.3.1.3 Allow the sample to sit
approximately 2 min at room temperature.
10.3.1.4 Examine the flooded well at
200X total magnification. If the particulates
are distributed evenly over the well surface
area and are not crowded or touching, then
apply 1 mL of the undiluted sample to a 25-
mm diameter membrane filter in 10.3.4.6.
10.3.1.5 ^Adjust.the volume of the sample
accordingly if the particulates are too dense
or are widely spread. Retest on another well.
Always adjust the sample concentrate
volume so that the density of the particulates
is just a little sparse. If the layer of sample
particulates on the membrane filters is too
dense, any cysts or oocysts present in the, -
sample may be obscured during microscopic
examination. Make sure the dilution factor, if
any, from this step is recorded.
10.3.2 Preparing the Filtration Manifold.
10.3.2.1 See Fig. 2 for a diagram of the
filtration manifold assembly.
10.3.2.2 Connect the filtration manifold
to the vacuum supply using a vacuum tube
containing a "T"-shaped tubing connector.
Attach a Hoffman screw clamp to 4-6 cm of
latex tubing and then attach the latex tubing
to the stem of the "T" connector. The screw
clamp is used as a bleeder valve to regulate
the vacuum to 2—4 in Hg.
10.3.2.3 Close all the manifold valves and
open the vacuum all the way. Using the
bleeder valve on the vacuum tubing, adjust
the applied vacuum to 2—4 in. of Hg. Once
adjusted, do not readjust the bleeder valve
during filtration. If necessary, turn the
vacuum on and off during filtration at the
vacuum source.
10.3.3 Membrane Filter Preparation.
10.3.3.1 One Sartorius 25 mm diameter
cellulose acetate filter, 0.5-0.45 (im pore
size a and one 25-mm diameter ethanol
compatible membrane support filter,'" any
porosity, are required for each 1 mL of
adjusted suspension obtained in 10.3.1:5.
Soak the required number of each type of
filteir separately in Petri dishes filled with IX
PBS, Drop the filters, handling them with
blunt-end filter forceps, one by one flat on
the surface of the buffer. Once the filters are
wetted, push the filters under the fluid
surface with the forceps. Allow filters to soak
for a minimum of 1 min before use.
10.3.3.2 Turn the filtration manifold
vacuum source on. Leaving all the manifold
well support valves closed, place one support
filter on each manifold support screen. This
filter ensures even distribution of sample.
10.3.3.3 Place one Sartorius 25-mm
diameter cellulose acetate filter on top of
each support filter. Use a rubber policeman
to adjust the cellulose acetate filter, if
necessary. Open the manifold well support
valves to flatten the filter membranes. Make
sure that no bubbles are trapped and that
there are no creases or wrinkles on any of the
filter membranes.
10.3.3.4 Use as many filter positions as
there are sample volumes to be assayed.
Record the number of sample 25-mm
membrane filters prepared and the volume of
floated pellet (10.3.1) represented by these
membranes. In addition, include at least one
positive control for Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts and one negative
control each time the manifold is used.
10.3.3.5 Position the 1 Ib (454 g) stainless
steel wells firmly over each filter.
Total Volume
o Gel-line Associates, Inc., 33 Gorgo Lane,
Newfield, NJ 08344, Cat. #10-111.
a Sartorius Corp., Filter div., 30940 San Clemente,
Hayward, CA 94544.
10 Nitrocellulose, 8 tan porosity, Cat. No. SCWP
025, Millipore'Corp., Bedford, MA, or equivalent.
-------
6420
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
10.3.3.6 Label each sample and control
well appropriately with little pieces of tape
on tho top of the stainless steel wells.
10.3.4 Sample Application.
10.3.4.1 Open the manifold support valve
for each well containing filters.
10.3.4.2 Rinse the inside of each stainless
stool well and membrane filter with 2 mL 1%
BSA applied with a Pasteur pipet. Drain the
BSA solution completely from the
mcmbrano.
10.3.4.3 Close the manifold valves under
each membrane filter.
10.3.4.4 For the positive controls, add
500-1000 Giardia lamblia cysts and 500-
1000 Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts or use
the Meridian diagnostic positive control
antigen as specified in the kit to a well.
10.3.4.5 For a negative control, add 1.0
mL IX PBS to one well.
10.3.4.6 Add 1.0 mL of vortexed, adjusted
water sample from 10.3.1.5 to a well.
10.3.4.7 Open the manifold valve under
each mcmbrano filter to drain the wells.
Rinso each stainless steel well with 2 mL 1%
BSA. Do not touch the pipet to the membrane
filter or to the well. Close the manifold valve
under each membrane filter.
10.3.5 Indirect Fluorescent Antibody
Staining.
10.3.5.1 Dilute the primary antibody
mixture and labeling reagent according to the
manufacturer's instructions using IX PBS.
10.3.5.2 Pipet 0.5 mL of the diluted
primary antibody mixture onto each
mcmbrano and allow to remain in contact
with tho filter for 25 min at room
temperature.
10.3.5.3 At the end of the contact period,
open tho manifold valve to drain the antisera.
10.3.5.4 Rinse each well and filter 5 times
with 2 mL IX PBS. Do not touch the tip of
the pipet to the membrane filter or to the
stainless steel wells. Close all manifold
valves after the last wash is completed.
10.3.5.5 Pipet 0.5 mL labeling reagent
onto each membrane and allow to remain in
contact with the filter for 25 min at room
temperature. Cover all wells with aluminum
foil to shield the reagents from light and to
prevent dehydration and crystallization of
tho fiuorescein isothiocyanate dye during the
contact period.
10.3.5.6 At this point start the 10.3.6.
procedure.
10.3.5.7 At the end of the contact period,
opon tho manifold valves to drain the
labeling reagent.
10.3.5.8 Rinse each well and filter 5 times
with 2 mL IX PBS. Do not touch the tip of
the pipet to the membrane filter or to the
stainless steel wells. Close all manifold
valves after tho last wash is completed.
10.3.5.9 Dehydrate the membrane filters
in each well by sequentially applying 1.0 mL
of 10, 20,40,80 and 95% ethanol solutions
containing 5% glycerol. Allow each solution
to drain thoroughly before applying the next
in the series.
10.3.6 Filter Mounting.
10.3.6.1 Label glass slides for each filter
and place them on a slide warmer or in an
incubator calibrated to 37 °C.
10.3.6.2 Add 75 uL 2% DABCO-glycerol
mounting medium to each slide on the slide
warmer or in the incubator and allow to
warm for 20-30 min.
10.3.6.3 Remove the top cellulose acetate
filter with fine-tip forceps and layer it over
the correspondingly labeled DABCO-glycerol
mounting medium prepared slide. Make sure
the sample application side is up. If the
entire filter is not wetted by the DABCO-
glycerol mounting medium, pick up the
membrane filter with the same forceps and
add a little more DABCO-glycerol mounting
medium to the slide under the filter.
10.3.6.4 Use a clean pair of forceps to
handle each membrane filter. Soak used
forceps in a beaker of diluted detergent
cleaning solution.
10.3.6.5 After a 20 min clearing period on
the slide warmer, the filter should become
transparent and appear drier. After clearing,
if the membrane starts to turn white, apply
a small amount of DABCO-glycerol mounting
medium under the filter.
10.3.6.6 After the 20 min clearing period,
apply 20 nL DABCO-glycerol mounting
medium to the center of each membrane filter
and cover with a 25 mm x 25 mm cover glass.
Tap out air bubbles with the handle end of
a pair of forceps. Wipe off excess DABCO-
glycerol mounting medium from the edge of
each cover glass with a slightly moistened
Kim wipe.
10.3.6.7 Seal the edge of each cover glass
to the slide with clear fingernail polish.
10.3.6.8 Store the slides in a "dry box".
A dry box can be constructed from a covered
Tupperware container to which a thick layer
of Drierite has been added. Cover the
dessicant with paper towels and the slides
should be laid fiat on the top of the paper
towels. Place the lid on the dry box and store
at 4 °C.
10.3.6.9 Examine the slides
microscopically as soon as possible but
within 5 days of preparation, because they
may become opaque if stored longer, and
D.I.C. or Hoffman modulation® optical
examination would then no longer be
possible.
10.4 Microscopic Examination.
10.4.1 Genera/—Microscopic work by a
single analyst should not exceed 4 hours/day
nor more than 5 consecutive days/week.
Intermittent rest periods during the 4 hours/
day are encouraged.
10.4.1.1 Remove the dry box from 4 °C
storage and allow it to warm to room
temperature before opening.
10.4.1.2 Adjust the microscope to assure
that the epifluorescence and Hoffman
modulation® or differential interference
contrast optics are in optimal working order.
Make sure that the fiuorescein isothiocyanate
cube is in place in the epifluorescent portion
of the microscope (see 6.3.1). Detailed
procedures required for adjusting and
aligning the microscope are found in
appendix X4.
10.4.2 Assay Controls. >
10.4.2.1 The purpose of these controls is
to assure that the assay reagents are
functioning, that the assay procedures have
been properly performed, and that the
microscope has been adjusted and aligned
properly.
10.4.2.2 Assay Giardia/Cryptosporidium
Control
(a) Using epifluorescence, scan the positive
control slide at no less than 200X total
magnification for apple-green fluorescence of
Giardia cyst and Cryptosporidium oocyst ,
shapes. Background fluorescence of the
membrane should be either very dim or non-
existent.
(b) If no apple-green fluorescing Giardia
cyst or Cryptosporidium oocyst shapes are
observed, then the fluorescent staining did
not work or the positive control cyst
preparation was faulty. Do not examine the
water sample slides for Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts. Recheck reagents
and procedures to determine the problem.
(c) If apple-green fluorescing cyst and
oocyst shapes are observed, change the
microscope from epifluorescence to the 100X
oil immersion Hoffman modulation® or
differential interference contrast objective.
(d) At no less than 1000X total oil
immersion magnification, examine Giardia
cyst shapes and Cryptosporidium oocyst
shapes for internal morphology.
(e) The Giardia cyst internal morphological
characteristics include 1-4 nuclei, axonemes,
and median bodies. Giardia cysts should be
measured to the nearest 0.5 urn with a
calibrated ocular micrometer. Record the
length and width of cysts. Also record the
morphological characteristics observed.
Continue until at least 3 Giardia cysts have
been detected and measured in this manner.
(f) The Cryptosporidium, oocyst internal
morphological characteristics include 1-4
sporozoites. Examine the Cryptosporidium
oocyst shapes for sporozoites and measure
the oocyst diameter to the nearest 0.5 um
with a calibrated ocular micrometer. Record
the size of the oocysts. Also record the
number, if any, of the sporozoites observed.
Sometimes a single nucleus is observed per
sporozoite. Continue until at least 3 oocysts
have been detected and measured in this
manner.
10.4.2.3 Assay Negative Control.
(a) Using epifluorescence, scan the
negative control membrane at no less* than
200X total magnification for apple-green
fluorescence of Giardia cyst and
Cryptosporidium oocyst shapes.
(b) If no apple-green fluorescing cyst or
oocyst shapes are found, and if background
fluorescence of the membrane is very dim or
non-existent, continue with examination of
the water sample slides.
(c) If apple-green fluorescing cyst or oocyst
shapes are found, discontinue examination
since possible contamination of the other
slides is indicated. Clean the equipment (see
Appendix XI), recheck the reagents and '
procedure and repeat using additional
aliquots of the sample.
10.4.3 Sample Examination.
10.4.3.1 Scanning Technique.
(a) Scan each membrane in a systematic
fashion beginning with one edge of the
mount and covering the entire membrane. An
up-and-down or a side- to-side scanning
pattern may be used. See Fig. 3 for an
illustration of 2 alternatives for systematic
slide scanning.
10.4.3.2 Presumptive Count and
Confirmed Count
(a) When appropriate responses have been
obtained for the positive and negative
controls, use epifluorescence to scan the
entire membrane from each sample at not
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6421
less than 200X total magnification for apple-
green fluorescence of cyst and oocyst shapes.
(b) When brilliant apple-green fluorescing
round to oval objects (8 to 18 Jim long by 5
to 15 nm wide) are observed, switch the
microscope to either Hoffman modulation®
or differential interference contrast optics.
Look for external or internal morphological
characteristics atypical of Giardia cysts (e.g.,
spikes, stalks, appendages, pores, one or two
large nuclei filling the cell, red fluorescing
chloroplasts, crystals, spores, etc.). If these
atypical structures are not observed, then
identify such apple-green fluorescing objects
of the aforementioned size and shape as
presumptive Giardia cysts. Record the shape
and measurements (to the nearest 0.5 Jim at
1000X) for each such object as the part of the
presumptive count. If two or more internal
morphological structures are observed at this
point, record this as a comfirmed Giardia
cyst as well. Counts with internal structures
must be confirmed by a senior analyst.
(c) When brilliant apple-green fluorescing
ovoid or spherical objects (3 to 7 jun in
diameter) are observed, switch the
microscope to either Hoffman modulation®
or differential interference contrast optics.
Look for external or internal morphological
characteristics atypical of Cryptosporidiutn
oocyst (e.g., spikes, stalks, appendages, pores,
one or two large nuclei filling the cell, red
fluorescing chloroplasts, crystals, spores,
etc.). If these atypical structures are not
observed, then identify such apple-green
fluorescing objects of the aforementioned size
and shape as presumptive Crypiosporidium
oocysts. Record the shape and measurements
(to the nearest 0.5 \aa at 1000X) for each such
object as part of the presumptive count.
Although not a defining characteristic,
surface oocyst folds may be observed in some
specimens. If one or more sporozoites are
observed at this point, record this as a
comfirmed Cryptosporidium oocyst as well.
Counts with internal structures must be
confirmed by a senior analyst.
11. Calculation
11.1 Percentage of Floated Sample
Examined.
11.1.1 Record the percentage of floated
sediment examined microscopically.
[Calculate this value from the total volume of
floated pellet obtained (10.1.8), the number
of S!5-mm membrane filters prepared together
with the volume of floated pellet represented
by these membrane filters (10.3.1.6), and the
number of membrane filters examined.]
11.2 The following values are used in
calculations:
V=volume (liters) of original water sample
(9.2.2 and 9.2.6)
P=eluate packed pellet volume (10.1.8),
(mL),
Infraction of eluate packed pellet volume
(P) subjected to flotation, determined as
mL P subjected to flotation 2
P
R=Percentage (expressed as a decimal) of
floated sediment examined (11.1.1)
PRG=Presumptive no. of Giardia cysts
detected (10.4.3.2b)
PRC=Presumptive no. of Cryptospo'ridium
oocysts detected (10.4.3.2c)
CG=Confirmed number of Giardia cysts
detected with internal structures
(10.4.3.2b)
CC=Confirmed number of Cryptosporidium
oocysts detected with internal structures
(10.4.3.2c)
11.3 For positive samples, calculate the
number of cysts or oocysts per 100 liters of
sample as follows:
X/100L =
(PRO or PRC or CG or CC) (100)
FVR
A sample calculation is shown in
Appendix X2.
11.4 For samples in which no cysts or
oocysts are detected, (PRG or PRC or CG or
CC) = <1. Calculate the detection limit as
follows:
-------
6422 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
XI.2,1 Place a cloth on the bottom of an
autoclavablo container which is large
enough to accommodate all 10 stainless
steel wells in a single layer.
Xl.2.2 Put the stainless steel wells top side
down on the cloth. The rim on the
underside of the well is fragile. Care
must be taken to avoid scratching and
denting the rim.
Xl.2.3 Add enough reagent water
containing detergent to cover the
stainless steel wells by an inch or more.
Xl.2.4 Autoclave the stainless steel
container with the stainless steel wells
for 15 min at 15 Ibs/inz and 121 °C. Use
the slow exhaust mode at the completion
of the autoclave cycle.
Xl.2.5 Transfer the wells to a pan of hot
detergent cleaning solution.
Xl.2.6 Individually scrub the inside and
bottom of stainless steel wells with a
sponge.
Xl.2.7 Rinse each well with tap water
followed by reagent water. Drain and air
dry the wells.
Xl.2.8 Always check the bottom ridge of
each stainless steel well for dents and
scratches.
XI.2.9 If dents or scratches are found on the
bottom of a stainless steel well, do not
use it until it is properly reground.
X2. Sample Calculation
X2.1 Positive Samples
X2.1.1 Assume that a 100 gal (380 L) water
sample was collected. The sample was
eluted resulting in 5 mL of sediment.
Fifty percent (2.5 mL) of the sediment
was purified by Percoll-sucrose flotation.
Forty percent of the floated material was
examined microscopically. A total of 8
presumptive and 3 confirmed Giardia
cysts were found. No presumptive or
confirmed Cryptosporidium oocysts were
observed. Using the formula in 12.1:
V = 380L
P = 5mL
F = 2.5/5 = 0.5
R = 40% = 0.4
PRG = 8
CG = 3
Presumptive Giardia cysts _ (PRG)(100)
100 L FVR
_ (8X100)
(0.5)(380)(0.4)
= 10.5
Confirmed Giardia cysts
100L
FVR
_ (3X100)
(0.5)(380)(0.4)
= 4
X2.2 Negative Samples
X2.2.1 Using the description given in
X2.1.1, no Cryptosporidium oocysts were
observed. The calculated detection limit
per 100 liters would be:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6423
Presumptive Cryptosporidium oocysts (PRC)(l(X))
100L FVR
(< 1X100)
(0.5X380X0.4)
=< 1.3
Confirmed Cryptosporidium oocysts (CCXlOO)
100L ~ FVR
_ (<1X100)
(0.5X380X0.4)
=< 1.3
X3.1 Giardia Report Form
Slide prepared by:
Date prepared:
• Analyst:
Date analyzed: •
Object lo-
cated by
IFA No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
Total
Shape (oval
or round)
Size LxW
(lim)
Morphological Characteristics
Nucleus (#)
Median
body(V)
Axonemfes
(V)
Presumptive
Count (V)
Confirmed
Count (V)
Calculated number of presumptive cysts/100 Calculated number of confirmed cysts/100 li- Slide prepared by:
liters — ters —— Date prepared:
X3.2 Cryptosporidium Report Form
Analyst:
Date analyzed: •
Object lo-
cated by
IFA No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Total
Shape (oval
or round)
Size LxW
(|tm)
Morphologi-
cal char-
acteristic
Sporozoite
(#)
'
Presumptive
count (V)
i
Confirmed
count (V)
.
-------
6424 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
Calculated number of presumptive oocysts/
100 liters ;—
Calculated number of confirmed oocysts/100
liters
X4. Microscope Adjustments «
The microscopic portion of this procedure
depends upon very sophisticated optics.
Without proper alignment and adjustment of
tho microscope the instrument will not
function at maximal efficiency and the
probability of obtaining the desired image
(Information) will not be possible.
Consequently, it is imperative that all
portions of the microscope from the light
sources to tho oculars are properly adjusted.
While microscopes from various vendors
are configured somewhat differently, they all
operate on the same general physical
principles. Therefore, slight deviations or
adjustments may be required to make these
guidelines work for the particular instrument
at hand.
X4.1. Adjustment of the Epifluorescent
Mercury Bulb and Transmitted Light
Bulb Filament. The sole purpose of these
procedures is to insure even field
illumination.
X4.1.1 Mercury Bulb Adjustment. This
section assumes that you have
successfully replaced the mercury bulb
in your particular lamp socket and
reconnected the lamp socket to the lamp
house. These instructions also assume
the condenser has been adjusted to
produce KShler illumination. Make sure
that you have not touched any glass
portion of the mercury bulb with your
bare fingers while installing it. Warning:
Never look at the ultraviolet light coming
out of the mercury lamp house or the
ultraviolet light image without a barrier
filter in place.
X4.1.1.1. Usually there is a diffuser lens
between tho lamp and the microscope
which either must be removed or swung
out of tho light path.
X4.1.1.2. Using a prepared microscope
slide, adjust the focus so the image in the
oculars is sharply defined.
X4.1.1.3. Replace the slide with a business
card or a piece of lens paper.
X4.1.1.4. Close the field diaphragm {iris
diaphragm in the microscope base) so
only a small point of light is visible on
the card. This dot of light tells you where
tho center of the field of view is.
X4.1.1.5. Mount the mercury lamp house on
tho microscope without the diffuser lens
in place and turn on the mercury bulb.
X4.1.1.6. Remove the objective in the light
path from the nosepiece. You should see
a primary (brighter) and secondary image
(dimmer) of the mercury bulb arc on the
card after focusing the image: with the
appropriate adjustment.
X4.1.1.7. Using the other lamp house
adjustments, adjust the primary and
secondary mercury bulb images so they
are side by side (parallel to each other)
with tho transmitted light dot in between
them.
"Smith. R.F. 1982. Microscopy and
Photomicrography: A Practical Guide. Appelton-
Century-Crofls, Now York.
X4.1.1.8. Reattach the objective to the
nosepiece.
X4.1.1.9. Insert the diffuser lens into the
light path between the mercury lamp
house and the microscope.
X4.1.1.10. Turn off the transmitted light,
remove the card from the stage, and
replace it with a slide of fluorescent
material. Check the field for even
fluorescent illumination. Adjustment of
the diffuser lens will most likely be
required. Additional slight adjustments
as in step 6 above may be required.
X4.1.1.11. Maintain a log of the number of
hours the U.V. bulb has been used. Never
use the bulb for longer than it has been
rated. Fifty watt bulbs should not be
used longer than 100 hours; 100 watt
bulbs should not be used longer than 200
hours.
X4.1.2. Transmitted Bulb Adjustment. This
section assumes that you have
successfully replaced the transmitted
bulb in your particular lamp socket and
reconnect the lamp socket to the lamp
house. Make sure that you have not
touched any glass portion of the
transmitted light bulb with your bare
fingers while installing it. These
instructions also assume the condenser
has been adjusted to produce Kohler
illumination.
X4.1.2.1. Usually there is a diffuser lens
between the lamp and the microscope
which either must be removed or swung
out of the light path. Reattach the lamp
house to the microscope.
X4.1.2.2. Using a prepared microscope slide
and a 40X objective (or similar), adjust
the focus so the image in the oculars is
sharply defined.
X4.1.2.3. Without the ocular or Bertrand
optics in place the pupil and filament
image inside can be seen at the bottom
of the tube.
X4.1.2.4. Focus the lamp filament image
with the appropriate adjustment on your
lamp house.
X4.1.2.5. Similarly, center the lamp
filament image within the pupil with the
appropriate adjustment(s) on your lamp
house.
X4.1.2.6. Insert the diffuser lens into the
light path between the transmitted lamp
house and the microscope.
X4.2. Adjustment of Interpupillary Distance
and Oculars for Each Eye. These
adjustments are necessary, so eye strain
is reduced to a minimum. These
adjustment must be made for each
individual using the microscope. This
section assumes the use of a binocular
microscope.
X4.2.1. Interpupillary Distance. The spacing
between the eyes varies from person to
person and must be adjusted for each
individual using the microscope.
X4.2.1.1. Place a prepared slide on the
microscope stage, turn on the
transmitted light, and focus the
specimen image using the course and
fine adjustment knobs.
X4.2.1.2. Using both hands, adjust the
oculars in and out until a single circle of
light is observed while looking through
the two oculars with both eyes.
X4.2.2. Ocular Adjustment for Each Eye.
This section assumes a focusing
ocular(s). This adjustment can be made
two ways, depending upon whether or
not the microscope is capable of
photomicrography and whether it is
equipped with a photographic frame
which can be seen through the
binoculars. Precaution: Persons with
astigmatic eyes should always wear their
contact lenses or glasses when using the
microscope.
X4.2.2.1. For microscopes not capable of
photomicrography. This section assumes
only the right ocular is capable of
adjustment.
(a) Place a prepared slide on the
microscope stage, turn on the
transmitted light, and focus the
specimen image using the course and
fine adjustment knobs.
(b) Place a card between the right ocular
and eye keeping both eyes open. Using
the fine adjustment, focus the image for
the left eye to its sharpest point.
(c) Now transfer the card to between the
left eye and ocular. Without touching the
course or fine adjustment and with
keeping both eyes open, bring the image
for the left eye into sharp focus by
adjusting the ocular collar at the top of
the ocular.
X4.2.2.2. For microscopes capable of
viewing a photographic frame through
the viewing binoculars. This section
assumes both oculars are adjustable.
(a) Place a prepared slide on the
microscope stage, turn on the
transmitted light, and focus the
specimen image using the course and
fine adjustment knobs.
(b) After activating the photographic frame,
place a card between the right ocular and
eye keeping both eyes open. Using the
correction (focusing) collar on the left
ocular focus the left ocular until the
double lines in the center of the frame
are as sharply focused as possible.
(c) Now transfer the card to between the
left eye and ocular. Again keeping both
eyes open, bring the image of the double
lines in the center of the photographic
frame into as sharp a focus for the right
eye as possible by adjusting the ocular
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6425
correction (focusing) collar at the top of
the right ocular.
X4.3. Calibration of an Ocular
Micrometer**—This section assumes
that an ocular reticle has been installed
in one of the oculars by a microscopy
specialist and that a stage micrometer is
available for calibrating the ocular
micrometer (reticle). Once installed the
ocular reticle should be left in place. The
more an ocular is manipulated the
greater the probability is for it to become
contaminated with dust particles. This
calibration should be done for each
objective in use on the microscope. If
there is an optivar" on the microscope,
then the calibration procedure must be
done for the respective objective at each
optivar setting.
X4.3.1. Place the stage micrometer on the
microscope stage, turn on the
transmitted light, and focus the
micrometer image using the course and
fine adjustment knobs for the objective to
be calibrated. Continue adjusting the
focus on the stage micrometer so you can
distinguish between the large (0.1 mm)
and the small (0.01 mm) divisions.
0.0125 mm
X4.3.2. Adjust the stage and ocular with the
micrometer so the 0 line on the ocular
micrometer is exactly superimposed on
the 0 line on the stage micrometer.
X4.3.3. Without changing the stage
adjustment, find a point as distant as
possible from the two 0 lines where two
other lines are exactly superimposed.
X4.3.4. Determine the number ocular
micrometer spaces as well as the number
of millimeters on the stage micrometer
between the two points of
superimpositibn.
For example: Suppose 48 ocular
micrometer spaces equal 0.6 mm.
X4.3.5. Calculate the number of mm/ocular
micrometer space.
For example: 0.6 mm/48 ocular micrometer
spaces = 0.0125 mm/ocular micrometer
space
X4.3.6. Since most measurements of
microorganisms are given in fim rather
than mm, the value calculated above
must be converted to |im by multiplying
it by 1000 nm/mm.
For example:
1000 jim
ocular micrometer space
mm
= 12.5 urn/ocular micrometer space
is he!pful to record this information - a tabular
ltem#
1
2
3
4
Obj.
power
10X
20X
40X
100X
Description
N.A.3 =
N.A. =
N.A. «
N.A. =
Ocular
microm.
space
Stage
microm.
space
(mm)i
urn/Ocular
micrometer
space 2
1000 jim/mm
2 Stage micrometer length in mm X 1000/# of Ocular Micrometer Spaces
is «
"Melvin, D.M. and M.M. Brooke. 1982.
Laboratory Procedures for the Diagnosis of
Intestinal Parasites. U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, HHS Publication No. (CDC) 82-
8282.
"A device between the objectives and the
oculars that is capable of adjusting the total
magnification.
-------
6426 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
X4.4. Kohler Illumination. This section
assumes that Kohler illumination will be
established for only the 100X oil
differential interference contrast or
Hoffman modulation® objective which
will be used to identify internal
morphological characteristics in Giardia
cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts. If by
chance more than one objective is to be
used for either differential interference
contrast or Hoffman modulation® optics,
then each time the objective is changed,
KShler illumination must be
reestablished for the new objective lens.
Previous sections have adjusted oculars
and light sources. This section aligns and
focuses the light going through the
condenser underneath the stage at the
specimen to be observed. If Kohler
illumination is not properly established,
then differential interference contrast or
Hoffman modulation® optics will not
work to their maximal potential. These
steps need to become second nature and
must be practiced regularly until they are
a matter of reflex rather than a chore.
X4.4.1. Place a prepared slide on the
microscope stage, place oil on the slide,
move the 100X oil objective into place,
turn on the transmitted light, and focus
the specimen image using the coarse and
fine adjustment knobs.
X4.4.2. At this point both the radiant field
diaphragm in the microscope base and
the aperture diaphragm in the condenser
should be wide open. Now close down
the radiant field diaphragm in the
microscope base until the lighted field is
. reduced to a small opening.
X4.4.3. Using the condenser centering
screws on the front right and left of the
condenser, move the small lighted
portion of the field to the center of. the
visual field.
X4.4.4. Now look to see whether the leaves
of the iris field diaphragm are sharply
defined (focused) or not. If they are not
sharply defined, then they can be
focused distinctly by changing the height
of the condenser up' and down with the
condenser focusing knob while you are
looking through the binoculars. Once
you have accomplished the precise
focusing of the radiant field diaphragm
leaves, open the radiant field diaphragm
until the leaves just disappear from view,
X4.4.5. The aperture diaphragm of the
condenser is adjusted now to make it
compatible with the total numerical
aperture.of the optical system. This is -
done by removing an ocular, looking into
the tube at the rear focal plane of the
objective, and stopping down the
aperture diaphragm iris leaves until they
are visible just inside the rear plane of
the objective.
X4.4.6. After completing the adjustment of
the aperture diaphragm in the condenser,
return the ocular to its tube and proceed
with the adjustments required to
establish either differential interference
contrast or Hoffman modulation® optics.
BILLING CODE 8560-SO-P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6427
-------
6428
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday. February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
c
O if) O HJ O
I (O CD C/3 00
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6429
G)
C
OB
0)
Q)
0)
D)CO
.£ w
C CO
C CO
go
CO w
og
co -o
.c c
+* 3
-------
6430
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday. February 10. 1994 / Proposed Rules
Appendix D to Subpart M—Proposed
Virus Monitoring Protocol
Foreword
The surface water treatment rule (40 CFR
part 141) established the maximum contam-
ination level for enteric virus in public water
systems by requiring that systems using
surface water or ground water under the
influence of surface water reduce the amount
of virus in source water by 99.99%. The rule
requirements are currently met on basis of
treatment alone (i.e., disinfection and/or
filtration), and thus the degree of actual
protection against waterborne viral disease
depends upon the source water quality.
Utilities using virus-free source water or
source water with low virus levels may be
overtreating their water, while utilities using
highly contaminated water may not be
providing adequate protection. In order to
more adequately determine the degree of
protection and to reduce the levels of
disinfection and disinfection byproducts,
whoro appropriate, EPA is requiring all
utilities serving a population of over 100,000
to monitor their source water for viruses
monthly for a period of 18 months. Systems
finding greater than one infectious enteric
virus particle per liter of source water must
also monitor their finished water on a
monthly basis. The authority for this
requirement is Section 1445(a)(l) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act, as amended in 1986.
Tho presence of coliphage in water in
temperate climates is perceived as an
indicator of fecal pollution, as a practical
model to be applied in the evaluation of
treatment processes, and as a possible
indicator of the presence of enteric viruses.
As a secondary approach in the
establishment of water quality criteria in
public water systems serving a population of
over 100,000, the U.S. EPA recommends that
coliphage be surveyed along with human
enteric viruses. These studies are to generate
and provide specific monitoring data and
other information characterizing water
utilities. , .
This protocol was developed by virologists
at tha U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
and modified to reflect the consensus
agreements from national experts attending a
Virus Monitoring Workshop held in
Cincinnati, Ohio, on August 12,1993. The
protocol was subsequenfly revised to reflect
comments obtained from many of the
Workshop attendees in light of the consensus
agreements. The procedures contained herein
do not preclude the use of additional tests for
research purposes (e.g., polymerase chain
reaction-based detection methods for non-
cytopathic viruses).
Tho concentrated water samples to be
monitored may contain pathogenic human
enteric viruses. Laboratories performing virus
and coliphage analyses are responsible for
establishing an adequate safety plan and
must rigorously follow the guidelines on
sterilization and aseptic techniques given in
PartS. ,_ . ,
Analytical Reagent or ACS grade chemicals
(unless specified otherwise) and deionized,
distilled water (dHiO) should be used to
prepare all media and reagents. The dH2O
must have a resistance of greater than 0.5
megohms-cm, but water with a resistance of
18 megohms-cm is preferred. Water and other
reagent solutions may be available
commercially. For any given section of this
protocol only apparatus, materials, media
and reagents which are not described in
previous sections are listed, except where
deemed necessary. The amount of media
prepared for each Part of the Protocol may be
increased proportionally to the number of
samples to be analyzed.
Virus Monitoring Protocol
Table of Contents
Foreword
Table of Contents
Part 1—Sample Collection Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
Media and Reagents
Procedure
Part 2—Processing of Collected Sample
Elution Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
Media and Reagents
Procedure
Organic Flocculation Concentration
Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
Media and Reagents
Procedure
Part 3—Total Culturable Virus Assay
Quantal Assay
Apparatus and Materials
Media and Reagents
Sample Inoculation and CPE Development
Virus Quantitation:
Reduction of Cytotoxicity in Sample
Concentrates
Media and Reagents
Procedure for Cytotoxicity Reduction
Part 4—Coliphage Assay of Processed Sample
Plaque Assay Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
Media and Reagents
Sample Processing
Storage of E. coli C Host Culture for
Somatic Coliphage Assay
Preparation of Host for Somatic Coliphage
Assay
Preparation of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6431
connecting the insert to the inlet of the
water meter (WM). Attach another
swivel female insert to the outlet of the
meter and connect a piece of tubing for
discharge. This discharge portion does
not have to be sterilized and should be
attached to the filter housing after
flushing of the system.
Teflon tape (Cole Farmer Product No.
G-08782-27) must be used on all
fittings.
2. Filter apparatus for waters
exceeding 100 NTU (see Figure 2).
a. Additional parts needed: PP—10
um Polypropylene Prefilter (Parker
Hannifin Product No. M19R10-A).
b. Apparatus assembly—connect a
second cartridge housing to the standard
apparatus by connecting a short piece of
tubing between the two housings via
additional HF1 hose fittings and clamps.
Add a presterilized prefilter (see Part 5)
using aseptic technique.
3. Filter apparatus for water pressures
exceeding 50 psi (see Figure 3).
a. Additional parts needed:
i. HF2—Hose Fitting, nylon, %" male
NPTxV2" tubing ID (United States
Plastic Product No. 61141).
ii. PR—Pressure Regulator (Watts
Regulator Product No. %" 26A, Suffix
C).
iii. PN—PVC Nipple, %"x2" (Ryan
Herco Product No. 3861-057).
iv. TE—PVC TEE with %" female
NPT ports (Ryan Herco Product No.
3805-003).
v. KB—Reducing Bushing, %"
NPT(M)xV4" NPT(F) (Cole Farmer
Product No. G-06349-32).
vi. PG—Pressure Gauge 0-30 psi (Cole
Farmer Product No. G-68004-03).
b. Apparatus assembly—assemble as
described for the standard apparatus,
except clamp the other end of the tubing
with the backflow regulator and swivel
female insert to a 3/a"xW fitting (HF2).
Screw the fitting into the inlet of the
pressure regulator (PR). Connect the
outlet of the pressure regulator to the
PVC TEE (TE) via the 2" nipple (PN).
Connect the pressure gauge (PG) to the
top of the TEE using the bushing (RB).
Attach a 3/8"xy2" fitting to the other end
of the TEE. Clamp a piece of tubing to
the fitting and connect the other end to
the HFl fitting on the cartridge housing.
4. Filter apparatus for finished waters
requiring dechlorination (see Figure 4).z
a. Additional parts needed:
i. IN—In-line INjector (DEMA
Engineering Product No. 204B W NPT).
ii. HF3—Hose Fitting, nylon, Vz" male
NPT x Vz" tubing ID (United States
Plastic Product No. 62142).
2 The standard filter apparatus may be used as an
alternative to the apparatus described here if
thiosulfate is added to a water sample in a
calibrated container as described in Step 5 of the
Sample Collection Procedure.
b. Apparatus assembly—assemble as
described for the standard apparatus,
except clamp the other end of the tubing
with the backflow regulator and swivel
female insert to a WxW fitting (HF3).
Attach the water inlet of the injector
(IN) to the HF3 fitting. Attach another
V2"x%" fitting to the outlet of the
injector and connect this fitting to the
inlet of the cartridge housing with a
short piece of tubing. Connect a piece of
sterile standard Tygon tubing (TT) to the
injection port of the injector.
5. Portable pH probe (Omega Product
No. PHH-1X).
6. Portable temperature probe (Omega
Product No. HHl 10).
7. Commercial ice packs (Cole Farmer
Product No. L-06346-85).
8.1 liter polypropylene wide-mouth
bottles (Nalge Product No. 2104-0032).
9.17"xl7"xl3" styrofoam shipping
box with carrying strap (Cole Farmer
Product No. L-03 748-00 and L-03742-
30).
10. Miscellaneous—aluminum foil,
data card (see Part 8), surgical gloves,
screwdriver or pliers for clamps,
waterproof marker.
11. Chemical resistant pump and
appropriate connectors (if a garden
hose-type pressurized faucets for the
source or finished water to be monitored
are unavailable).
Media and Reagents
1.10% sodium thiosulfate
(Na2S2O3)—dissolve 100 g of Na2S2O3 in
a total of 1000 ml dH2O to prepare a
stock solution. Autoclave for 15 minutes
at 121°C.
Procedure
Operators must wear surgical gloves
and avoid conditions which can
contaminate a sample with virus.
Step 1. Purge the water tap to be
sampled for at least one minute prior to
connecting the filter apparatus.
Surface water sampling must be
conducted at the plant intake, prior to
impoundment or any other treatment.
Finished water sampling must be
conducted at the point of entry into the
distribution system.
Step 2. Remove the foil and connect
the backflow regulator of the inlet hose
to the tap. Loosen the clamp on the
tubing at the inlet side of the cartridge
housing (1MDS filter housing or, if
used, the inlet side of the prefilter
housing). Remove the housing(s) and
cover the inlet with sterile foil. Place the
tubing removed from the housing into a
1 liter plastic bottle. Flush the system
for at least ten minutes with the water
to be sampled. While the system is
being flushed, measure and record onto
the Sample Data Sheet (see Part 8) the
pH and temperature values from the
water collecting in and overflowing
from the 1 liter plastic bottle. The pH
meter should be calibrated prior to each
use for the pH range of the water to be
sampled.
Step 3. After flushing the system, turn
off the flow of water at the sample tap
and reconnect the filter housing to the
inlet hose. Connect the discharge hose
(with water meter) to the filter housing
outlet.
Step 4. Record the sample number,
locution, date, time of day and initial
cubic feet (or gallon) reading from the
water meter onto the sample data sheet.
A consistent system for assigning
unique utility-specific sample numbers
will be developed prior to the start of
the monitoring period.
Step Ji. Slowly turn on the water with
the filter housing placed in an upright
position, while pushing the red vent
button on top of the filter housing to
expel air. When the air is totally
expelled from the housing, release the
button, and open the sample tap
completely.
For taps with pressures exceeding 50
psi, use an apparatus with a pressure
regulator (Figure 3) and adjust the
pressure to below 50 psi.
For sampling chlorinated finished
water place the sterile end of the tubing
from the injection port of the injector
into a graduated container containing
the 10% sodium thiosulfate solution
and adjust the injector to add thiosulfate
at a rate of 0.5 ml per liter of water
sample. Alternatively, place the water
sample into a sterile calibrated
polyethylene (e.g., garbage container) or
polypropylene container, add 0.5 ml per
liter thiosulfate, mix and pump the
dechlorinated solution through a
standard apparatus.
Step 6. Sample a minimum volume
for surface water of 200 liters (7.1 ft?,
52.9 gallons) and for finished water of
1200 liters (42.4 fts, 317.0 gallons). For
surface water the flow rate and the total
amount of sample that can be passed
before the filter clogs will depend upon
wat€ir quality and will have to be
determined from experience.
It may be convenient to start the
sampling in the afternoon and sample
overnight so that the sample can be
shipped to the testing laboratory during
the morning. Sampling should not be
performed throughout the night if
experience shows that the filters may
clog during the collection period, unless
it can be monitored.
Step 7. Turn off the flow of water at
the sample tap at the end of the
sampling period and record the date,
time^f day, and cubic feet (or gallon)
-------
6432 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
reading from the water meter onto the
Sample Data Sheet.
Step 8. Disconnect the filter
housing(s) from the inlet and outlet
hoses. Turn the filter housing(s) upside
down and allow excess water to flow
out as waste water. Turn the housing(s)
upright and cover completely with
aluminum foil, making sure to cover the
inlet and outlet ports.
Step 9. Pack the filter housing(s) and
all apparatus components prior to the
housing(s) into an insulated shipping
hox. Add refrigerated ice packs to keep
the sample cool in transit (the number
of ice packs may have to be adjusted
based upon experience to ensure that
the samples remain cold). Place the
Sample Data Sheet (protected with a
closable plastic bag) in with the sample
and ship by overnight mail to the
contracted, approved laboratory for
virus analysis. Notify the laboratory by
phone upon the shipment of sample.
The approved laboratory will elute
virus from the 1MDS filter (and
profilter, if appropriate) and analyze the
eluates as described in Parts 2,3, and 4.
After removing the filter, the laboratory
will sterilize the apparatus components
with chlorine and dechlorinate with
sodium thiosulfate as described in Part
5. After flushing with sterile dH2O, a
new 1MDS cartridge (and prefilter, if
appropriate) will be added, the openings
sealed with sterile aluminum foil, and
the apparatus returned to the utility for
the next sample. The discharge hoses
with water meter can be stored at the
utility between samplings. Openings
should be covered with aluminum foil
during storage.
Part 2—Processing of Collected Sample
The cartridge filters must arrive at the
approved laboratory in a refrigerated,
but not frozen, condition. The arrival
condition should be recorded on the
Sample Data Sheet (Part 8). Filters
should be refrigerated upon arrival and
eluted within 72 hours of the start of the
sample collection.
Bullion Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
1. Positive pressure air or nitrogen
source equipped with a pressure gauge.
If the pressure source is a laboratory
air line or pump, it must be equipped
with an oil filter.
2. Dispensing pressure vessels—5 or
20 liter capacity (Millipore Corp.
Product No. XX67 OOP 05 and XX67 OOP
20).
3. pH meter, measuring to an accuracy
of at least 0.1 pH unit, equipped with a
combination-type electrode.
4. Autoclavable inner-braided tubing
with screw clamps for connecting
tubing to equipment.
5. Magnetic stirrer and stir bars.
Media and Reagents
1. Sodium hydroxide (NaOH)—
prepare 1M and 5 M solutions by
dissolving 4 or 20 g of NaOH in a final
volume of 100 ml of dH2O, respectively.
NaOH solutions may be stored for
several months at room temperature.
2. Beef extract V powder (BBL
Microbiology Systems Product No.
97531) prepare buffered 1.5% beef
extract by dissolving 30 g of beef extract
powder and 7.5 g of glycine (final
glycine concentration = 0.05 M) in 1.9
liters of dH2O. Adjust the pH to 9.5 with
1 or 5 M NaOH and bring the final
volume to 2 liters with dH2O. Autoclave
at 121°C for 15 min and use at room
temperature.
When used in the organic flocculation
concentration step, each beef extract lot
must be screened prior to use to
determine adequate virus recoveries
(mean recovery of 50% with poliovirus
in 3 trials). Beef extract solutions may
be stored for one week at 4°C or for
longer periods at -20°C. A 3% beef
extract solution may be prepared by
doubling the amount of beef extract and
used if the 1.5% solution fails the
proficiency testing.
Procedure
Step 1. Attach sections of inner-
braided tubing (sterilized on inside and
outside surfaces with chlorine and
dechlorinated with thiosulfate as
described in Part 5) to the inlet and
outlet ports of a cartridge filter housing
containing a 1MDS filter to be tested for
viruses. If a prefilter was used, keep the
prefilter and 1MDS housing connected
and attach the tubing to the inlet of the
prefilter housing and to the outlet of the
1MDS housing.
Step 2. Place the sterile end of the
tubing connected to the outlet of the
1MDS housing into a sterile 2 liter glass
or polypropylene beaker.
Step 3. Connect the free end of the
tubing from the inlet port of the filter
housing to the outlet port of a sterile
pressure vessel and connect the inlet
port of the pressure vessel to a positive
air pressure source.
Sterile tubing and a peristaltic pump
may be used as an alternative to the
pressure vessel.
Step 4. Remove the top of the pressure
vessel and pour 1000 mL of buffered
1.5% beef extract (pH 9.5) into the
vessel.
Step 5. Replace the top of the pressure
vessel and close its vent/relief valve.
Step 6. Open the vent/relief valve(s)
on the cartridge filter housing(s). Apply
sufficient pressure to purge the trapped
air from the filter housing(s). Close the
vent/relief valve(s) as soon as the
buffered beef extract solution begins to
flow from it.
Wipe up spilled liquid with
laboratory disinfectant.
Step 7. Increase the pressure to force
the buffered beef extract solution
through the filter(s).
The solution should pass through the
cartridge filter(s) slowly to maximize the
elution contact period. When air enters
the line from the pressure vessel, elevate
and invert the filter housing to permit
complete evacuation of the solution
from the filters. :
Step 8. Turn off the pressure at the
source and open the vent/relief valve on
the pressure vessel. Place the buffered
beef extract from the 2 liter beaker back
into the pressure vessel. Repeat Steps 5-
7.
Step 9. Thoroughly mix the eluate and
adjust the pH to 7.0-7.5 with 1 N HC1.
Measure and record the volume of the
eluate onto the Virus Data Sheet.
Remove exactly one tenth of the eluate,
freeze at - 70°C and ship to the
laboratory designated for archiving.
Remove 40 ml of the eluate for
coliphage analysis as described in Part
4.
Proceed to the organic flocculation
concentration procedure immediately. If
the concentration of enteric virus cannot
be undertaken immediately, store the
eluate for up to 24 hours before
concentration at 4°C or for longer
periods at - 70°C.
Organic Flocculation Concentration
Procedure
Apparatus and Materials
1. Refrigerated centrifuge capable of
attaining 2,500-10,000 x g and screw-
capped centrifuge bottles with 100 to
1000 ml capacity. ;
Each bottle must be rated for the
relevant centrifugal force.
Media and Reagents:
1. Hydrochloric acid (HC1)—Prepare 1
and 5 M solutions by mixing 10 or 50
ml of concentrated HC1 with 90 or 50 ml
of dH2O, respectively.
2. Sodium phosphate, dibasic
(Na2HPO4 • 7H2O)—0.15 M.
Dissolve 40.2 g of sodium phosphate
in a final volume of 1000 ml. The pH
should be checked to ensure that it is
between 9.0-9.5 and adjusted with
NaOH, if necessary. Autoclave at 121°C
for 15 minutes. !
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6433
Procedure
Step 1. Place a sterile stir bar into the
beaker containing the buffered beef
extract eluate from the cartridge filter(s).
Place the beaker onto a magnetic stirrer,
and stir at a speed sufficient to develop
a vortex.
To minimize foaming (which may
inactivate viruses), do not mix faster
than necessary to develop a vortex.
Step 2. Insert a combination-type pH
electrode into beef extract eluate. Add 1
M HC1 to the flask slowly until pH of
beef extract reaches 3.5 ± 0.1. Continue
to stir slowly for 30 minutes at room
temperature.
The pH meter must be standardized at
pH 4 and 7. Electrodes must be
sterilized before and after each use as
described in Part 5.
A precipitate will form. If pH is
accidentally reduced below 3.4, add 1M
NaOH to bring it back to 3.5 # 0.1.
Exposure to a pH below 3.4 may result
in some virus inactivation.
Step 3. Remove the electrode from the
beaker, and pour the contents of the
beaker into a centrifuge bottle. Cap the
bottle and centrifuge the precipitated
beef extract suspensions at 2,500 x g for
15 minutes at 4°C. Remove and discard
the supernatant.
To prevent the transfer of the stir bar
into a centrifuge bottle, hold another stir
bar or magnet against the bottom of the
beaker when decanting the contents.
The beef extract suspension will usually
have to be divided into several
centrifuge bottles.
Step 4. Place a stir bar into the
centrifuge bottle that contains the
precipitate. Add 30 ml of 0.15 M
sodium phosphate. Place the bottle onto
a magnetic stirrer, and stir slowly until
the precipitate has dissolved
completely.
Support the bottle as necessary to
prevent toppling. Avoid foaming, which
may inactivate or aerosolize viruses.
The precipitate may be partially
dissipated with a spatula before or
during the stirring procedure or may be
dissolved by repeated pipetting in place
of stirring. When the centrifugation was
performed in more than one bottle,
dissolve the precipitates in a total of 30
ml and combine into one bottle. If the
precipitate is not completely dissolved
before proceeding, significant virus loss
may occur in Step 5. Virus loss may also
occur by prolonged exposure to pH 9.0-
9.5, thus, for some samples it may be
beneficial to resuspend the precipitate
initially in 0.15 M sodium phosphate
that has been adjusted to pH 7.5 with 1
M HC1. After the precipitate is
completely dissolved, the pH should be
adjusted to 9.0-9.5 with 1M NaOH and
mixed for 10 minutes at room
temperature before proceeding to Step 5.
Step 5. Check the pH and readjust to
9.0-9.5 with 1 M NaOH, as necessary.
Remove the stir bar and centrifuge the
dissolved precipitate at 4,000 -10,000
x g for 10 minutes at 4°C. Remove the
supernatant and discard the pellet.
Adjust the pH of the supernatant
(designated the final concentrated
sample from this point on) to 7.0-7.5
with 1 M HC1 and record the final
volume on the Virus Data Sheet (see
Part8).
Step 6. Refrigerate the final
concentrated sample immediately and
hold at 4°C until it is assayed in
accordance with the instructions given
below. If the virus assay cannot be
undertaken within 24 hours, store at
-70°C.
Final concentrated samples processed
to this point by a laboratory not doing
the virus assay must be frozen at - 70°C
immediately and then shipped on dry
ice to the laboratory approved for virus
assay.
Part 3—Total Culturable Virus Assay
Quanted Assay
Apparatus and Materials
1. Incubator capable of maintaining
the temperature of cell cultures at 36.5
±1°C.
2. Sterilizing filter—0.22 urn (Costar
Product No. 140666).
Always pass about 10 ml of 1.5% beef
extract adjusted to pH 7.0-7.5 through
the filter just prior to use to minimize
virus adsorption to the filter.
Media and Reagents
1. Prepare BGM cell culture test
vessels using standard procedures.
BGM cells are a continuous cell line
derived from African Green monkey
kidney cells and are highly susceptible
to many enteric viruses (Dahling et al.,
1984; Dahling and Wright, 1986). The
characteristics of this line were
described by Barren et al. (1970). The
use of BGM cells for recovering viruses
from environmental samples was
described by Dahling et al. (1974). For
laboratories with no experience with
virus recovery from environmental
samples, the media described by
Dahling and Wright (1986) is
recommended for maximum sensitivity.
The U.S. Environmental Protection "
Agency will supply an initial culture of
BGM cells to all laboratories seeking
approval. Upon receipt, laboratories
must prepare an adequate supply of
frozen BGM cells using standard
procedures to replace working cultures
that become contaminated or lose virus
sensitivity. BGM cells have been held at
- 70°C for more than 15 years with a
minimum loss in cell viability.
Sample Inoculation and CPE
Development
Cell cultures used for virus assay are
generally found to be at their most
sensitive level between the third and
sixth days after their most recent
passage. Those older than seven days
should not be used.
Step 1. Identify cell culture test
vessels by coding them with an
indelible marker. Return the cell culture
test vessels to a 36.5 ± 1°C incubator and
hold at that temperature until the cell
moiiolayer is to be inoculated.
Step 2. Thaw the final concentrated
sample from Step 6 of the Organic
Flocculation Concentration Procedure
in Part 2, if frozen, and hold at 4°C for
no more than 4 hours. Warm the sample
to room temperature just prior to
inoculation.
Step 3. Decant and discard the
medium from cell culture test vessels.
Do not disturb the cell monolayer.
Step 4. Inoculate each BGM cell
monolayer with a volume of the final
concentrated sample appropriate for the
cell surface area of the cell culture test
vessels used.
Inoculum volume should be no
greater than 0.04 ml/cm 2 of surface
area. '
Avoid touching either the cannula or
the pipetting device to the inside rim of
the cell culture test vessels to avert the
possibility of transporting contaminants
to the remaining culture vessels.
a. Inoculate one or more BGM
cultures with an appropriate volume of
0.15 M Na2HPO4 • 7H2O (see the Media
and Reagents section in the Organic
Flocculation Concentration Procedures
in Part 2) preadjusted to pH 7.0-7.5.
Theae cultures will serve as negative
controls.
b. Inoculate one or more BGM
cultiires with an appropriate volume of
0.15 M Na2HPO4 • 7H2O preadjusfed to
pH 7.0-7.5 and spiked with 20-40 PFU
of the Lederle Fox strain of poliovirus
type 3. These cultures will serve as a
positive control for the quantal assay.
Additional positive control samples
may be prepared by adding virus to a
small portion of the final concentrated
sample and/or by using additional virus
types.
c. Using the same volume of inoculum
per cell culture vessel, inoculate a
portion of the final concentrated sample
that represents at least 100 liters of
surface water or 1,000 liters of finished
water. Calculate the total amount of the
original water sample assayed by
multiplying the sample volume (in
liters) from the Sample Data Sheet (Part
-------
6434 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
8) by tho fraction of the total final
concentrated sample inoculated. Record
this value on the Virus Data Sheet (Part
8).
It is advisable to inoculate a small
subsample several days before
inoculating the remaining samples as a
control for cytotoxicity.
The volume of the final concentrated
sample that represents 100 or 1,000
liters may be inoculated onto cultures at
the same time or, preferably, inoculated
in aliquots (i.e., a second half of the
sample inoculated onto cultures that are
at least one passage higher than the first
half). If the latter approach is taken, the
sample should be aliquoted before being
frozen at — 70°C and the inoculation of
the second half should not be done until
it is clear from the results of the first
inoculation that cytotoxicity is not a
problem.
Sufficient cultures must be inoculated
to obtain the most probable number of
infectious total culturable viruses (MPN)
with acceptable 95% confidence limits.
In order to demonstrate a total
culturable virus level in source water of
one per liter with an acceptable 95%
confidence range, it is suggested that at
least 20 cultures each be inoculated at
the beginning of the monitoring period
and during the Summer months with
undiluted final concentrated sample
and final concentrated sample diluted
1:5 and 1:25 in 0.15 M sodium
phosphate, pH 7.0-7.5. If the initial
monitoring results demonstrate virus
levels of less than 1.5 MPN units per
liter, then the inoculation of 40 cultures
with only undiluted final concentrated
sample should be sufficient for the
remaining non-Summer collection
periods. Since finished waters should
contain little or no virus, the
inoculation of 20 cultures with only
undiluted final concentrated sample
from finished waters should be
sufficient.
Step 5. Rock the inoculated cell
culture test vessels gently to achieve
uniform distribution of inoculum over
the surface of the cell monolayers. Place
the cell culture test vessels on a level
stationary surface at room temperature
(22~25CC) or at 36.5 ± 1°C so that the
inoculum will remain distributed
evenly over the cell monolayer.
Step 6. Continue incubating the
inoculated cell cultures for 80-120
minutes to permit viruses to adsorb onto
and infect cells.
It may be necessary to rock the vessels
every 15-20 min or to keep them on a
mechanical rocking platform during the
adsorption period to prevent cell death
in the middle of the vessels from
dehydration.
Step 7. Add liquid maintenance
medium and incubate at 36.5 ± 1°C.
To reduce thermal shock to cells,
warm the maintenance medium to 36.5
± 1°C before placing on the cell
monolayer.
To prevent disturbing cells with the
force of liquid against the cell
monolayer, add the medium to the side
of the cell culture vessel opposite the
cell monolayer. Also, if used, avoid
touching either the cannula or syringe
needle of the pipette or the pipetting
device to the inside rim of the cell
culture vessel to avert the possibility of
transporting contaminants to the
remaining culture vessels.
Step 8. Examine each culture
microscopically for the appearance of
cytopathic effects (CPE) daily for the
first three days and then every couple of
days for a total of 14 days.
CPE may be identified as cell
disintegration or as changes in cell
morphology. Rounding-up of infected
cells is a typical effect seen with
enterovirus infections. However,
uninfected cells round-up during
mitosis and a sample should not be
considered positive unless there are
significant clusters of rounded-up cells
over and beyond what is observed in the
uninfected controls. Photomicrographs
demonstrating CPE appear in the
reference by Malherbe and Strickland-
Cholmley (1980).
Step 9. Freeze cultures at - 70°C
when more than 75% of the monolayer
shows signs of CPE. Freeze all
remaining negative cultures, including
controls, after 14 days.
Step 10. In order to confirm the
results of the previous passage, thaw all
the cultures. Filter at least 20% of the
medium from each vessel through a 0.22
jun sterilizing filter. Inoculate another
BGM culture with a volume that
represents 20% of the medium from the
previous passage for each vessel. Repeat
Steps 7 to 8.
Confirmation passages may be
performed in small vessels or multiwell
trays, however, it may be necessary to
distribute the inoculum into several
vessels or wells to insure that the
inoculum volume is less than or equal
to 0.04 ml/cm 2 of surface area. ,
Step 11. Score cultures that developed
CPE in both the first and second
passages as confirmed positives.
Cultures that show CPE in only the
second passage must be passaged a third
time along with the negative controls
according to Steps 9—10. Score cultures
that develop CPE in both the second and
third passages as confirmed positives.
Cultures with confirmed CPE may be
stored in a - 70°C freezer for research
purposes or for optional identification
tests.3
Virus Quantitation
Step 1. Determine the total number of
confirmed positive and negative
cultures and the volume which
represents the amount of the original
final concentrated sample for each
dilution inoculated (e.g., if vessels are
inoculated with 1 ml each of undiluted
sample, sample diluted 1:5 and sample
diluted 1:25, the volumes of the original
final concentrated sample are 1 ml/
vessel for undiluted sample, 0.2 ml/
vessel for the 1:5 dilution and 0.04 ml/
vessel for the 1:25 dilution). Record the
values on the Virus Data Sheet (Part 8).
Step 2. Calculate the MPN/ml value
and 95% confidence limits using a
computer program to be supplied by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Calculate the MPN/liter value of the
original water sample by multiplying
the MPN/ml value by the total number
of milliliters of the final concentrated
sample (S) inoculated onto cultures and
then dividing by the volume in liters of
the original sample assayed (D). Record
the value onto the Virus Data Sheet (Part
8).
MPN values for samples assayed
using several sample dilutions can be
confirmed using the formula from
Thomas: MPN/ml = P/(NQ)°-5, where P
equals the total number of confirmed
positive samples for all dilutions, N
equals the total volume of the original
final concentrated sample (in ml)
inoculated for all dilutions, and Q
equals the total volume (in ml) of
sample inoculated onto cultures that
remained CPE negative. Calculate the
MPN/liter value of the original water
.sample as above. MPN values for the
assay of undiluted samples can be
confirmed with the formula: MPN =
-hi (q/n), where q equals the number
of CPE negative cultures and n equals
the total number of cultures. Calculate
the MPN/liter value of the original water
sample by multiplying the MPN value
by the number of milliliters of the final
concentrated sample inoculated per
culture, multiplying this value by S, and
then dividing by D.
Step 3. Calculate the upper and lower
95% confidence limit per liter values for
each virus sample by multiplying the
limit values obtained from the computer
program by S and dividing by D. Record
the limit per liter values on the Virus
Data Sheet. Finished water must be
tested for viruses following surface
water samples which give a value of 1
or more per liter falling anywhere
3 For more information see Chapter 12 (May 1988
revision) of Berg et al. (1984).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6435
within the range of the 95% confidence
limits.
Reduction of Cytotoxicity in Sample
Concentrates
The procedure described in this
Section may result in a significant liter
reduction and should be applied only to
inocula known to be or expected to be
toxic.
Media and Reagents
1. Washing solution.
a. To a flask containing a stir bar and
an appropriate volume of dH2O, add
NaCl to a final concentration of 0.85%
(weight/volume; e.g., 0.85 g in 100 ml).
Mix the contents of the flask on a
magnetic stirrer at a speed sufficient to
dissolve the salt. Remove the stir bar
and autoclave the solution at 121°C for
15 min. Cool to room temperature.
The volume of the NaCl washing
solution required will depend on the
number of bottles to be processed and
the cell surface area of the vessels used
for the quantal assay.
b. Add 2% (volume/volume, e.g., 2 ml
per 100 .ml) serum to the sterile salt
solution. Mix thoroughly and store at
4°C.
Although the washing solution may
be stored at 4°C for an extended time
period, it is advisable to prepare the
solution on a weekly basis or to store it
at -20°C.
Procedure for Cytotoxicity Reduction
Step 1. Decant and save the inoculum
from inoculated cell culture vessels after
the adsorption period (Step 6 of Sample
Inoculation and CPE Development).
Add 0.25 ml of the washing solution for
each cm2 of cell surface area into each
vessel.
To reduce thermal shock to cells,
warm the washing solution to 36.5 ± 1°C
before placing on cell .monolayer.
To prevent disturbing cells with the
force of liquid against the cell
monolayer, add washing solution to the
side of the cell culture vessel opposite
the cell monolayer. Also, if used, avoid
touching either the cannula or syringe
needle of the pipette or the pipetting
device to the inside rim of the cell
culture vessel to avert the possibility of
transporting contaminants to the
remaining culture vessels.
The inocula saved after the adsorption
period should be stored at — 70°C for
subsequent treatment and may be
discarded when Cytotoxicity is
successfully reduced.
Step 2. Rock the washing solution
gently across the cell monolayer a
minimum of two times. Decant and
discard the spent washing solution in a
manner that will not disturb the cell
monolayer.
It may be necessary to gently rock the
washing solution across the monolayer
more than twice if sample is oily and
difficult to remove from the cell
monolayer surface.
Step 3. Continue with Step 7 of the
procedure for Sample Inoculation and
CPE Development.
If this procedure fails to reduce
Cytotoxicity with a particular type of
water sample, backup samples may be
diluted 1:2 to 1:4 before repeating the
procedure. This dilution requires that
two to four times more culture vessels
be used. Dilution alone may sufficiently
reduce Cytotoxicity of some samples
without washing. Alternatively, the
changing of liquid maintenance medium
at the first signs of Cytotoxicity may
prevent further development.
Determine Cytotoxicity from the
initial daily macroscopic examination of
the appearance of the cell culture
monolayer by comparing the negative
and positive controls from Steps 6a and
6b of the procedure for Sample
Inoculation and CPE Development with
the test samples from Step 6c).
Cytotoxicity should be suspected when
the cells in the test sample develop CPE
prior to its development on the positive
control.
Part 4—Coliphage Assay of Processed
Sample
Plaque Assay Procedure
This section outlines the procedures
for coliphage detection by plaque assay.
It should be noted that the samples to
be analyzed may contain pathogenic
human enteric viruses. Laboratories
performing the coliphage analysis are
responsible for establishing an adequate
safety plan and must rigorously follow
the guidelines on sterilization and
aseptic techniques given in Part 5.
Apparatus and Materials
1. Sterilizing filter—0.45 um (Costar
Product No. 140667).
Always pass about 10 ml of 3% beef
extract through the filter just prior to
use to minimize phage adsorption to the
filter.
2. Water bath set at 44.5 ± 1°C.
3. Incubator set at 36.5 ± 1°C.
Media and Reagents
1. Saline-calcium solution—dissolve
8.5 g of NaCl and 0.22 g of CaCl2 in a
total of 1 liter of dH2O. Dispense in 9
ml aliquots in 16 x 150 mm screw-
capped test tubes (Baxter Product No.
T1356-6A) and sterilize by autoclaving
at 121°C for 15 min.
2. Tryptone-yeast extract agar slants—
add 1.0 g tryptone (Difco Product No.
01123), 0.1 g yeast extract (Difco Product
No. 0127), 0.1 g glucose, 0.8 g NaCl,
0.022 g CaCl2, and 1.2 g of Bacto-agar
(Difco Product No. 0140) to a total
volume of 100 ml of dH2O in a 250 ml
flask. Dissolve by autoclaving at 121°C
for 20 minutes and dispense 8 ml
aliquots into 16 x 150 mm test tubes
with tube closures (Baxter Product Nos.
T-L311-16XX and T1291-16). Prepare
slants by allowing the agar to solidify
with the tubes at about a 20° angle.
Slants may be stored at 4°C for up to
two months.
3. Tryptone-yeast extract bottom
agar—Prepare one day prior to sample
analysis using the ingredients and
concentrations listed for tryptone-yeast'
extract agar slants, except use 1.5 g of
Bsicto-agar. After autoclaving, pipet 15
ml aliquots aseptically into sterile 100 x
15 mm petri plates and allow the agar
to harden. Store the plates at 4°C
overnight or for up to one week in a
sealed plastic bag and warm to room
temperature for one hour before use.
4. Tiyptone-yeast extract top agar—
Prepare the day of sample analysis using
the ingredients and concentrations
listed for tryptone-yeast extract agar
slants, except use 0.7 g of Bacto-agar.
Autoclave and place in the 44.5 ± 1°C
water bath.
5. Tryptone-yeast extract broth—
Prepare as for tryptone-yeast extract agar
slants, except without agar.
Sample Processing
Step 1. Filter the 40 ml eluate sample
from Step 9 of the Elution Procedure
through a 0.45 um sterilizing filter and
store at 4°C.
Step 2. Assay ten 1 ml volumes each
for somatic and male-specific coliphage
within 24 hours of elution. Store the
remaining eluate at 4°C. This will serve
as a reserve in the event of sample
contamination or high coliphage
densities. If the coliphage density is
expected or demonstrated to be greater
thim 100 PFU/ml, dilute the original or
remaining eluate with a serial 1:10
dilution series into saline-calcium
solutions. Assay the dilutions which
will result in plaque counts of 100 or
less.
Storage of E. coli C Host Culture for
Somatic Coliphage Assay
1. For short term storage inoculate a
Escherichia coli C (American Type
Culture Collection Product No. 13706)
host culture onto tryptone-yeast extract
agar slants with a sterile inoculating
loop by spreading the inoculum evenly
over entire slant surface. Incubate the
culture overnight at 36.5 ± 1°C. Store at
4°C for up to 2 weeks.
-------
6436 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
2. For long term storage inoculate a 5-
10 ml tube of tryptone-yeast extract
broth with the host culture. Incubate the
broth culture overnight at 36.5 ± 1°C.
Add Vioth volume of sterile glycerol.
Dispense into 1 ml aliquots in cryovials
(Baxter Product No. T4050-8) and store
at -70°C.
Preparation of Host for Somatic
Coliphage Assay
Step 1. Inoculate 5 ml of tryptone-
yeast extract broth with E. coli C from
a slant with an inoculating loop and
incubate for 16 hours at 36.5 ± 1°C.
Step 2. Transfer 1.5 ml of the 16 hour
culture to 30 ml of tryptone-yeast
extract broth ha a 125 ml flask and
incubate for 4 hours at 36.5 ± 1°C with
gentlo shaking. The volume of inoculum
and broth used in this step can be
proportionally altered according to
need.
Preparation of X174 Positive Control
Step 1. Rehydrate a stock culture of
X174 stocks. Some stocks may
require higher or lower dilutions.
Step 5. Add 1 ml of the 10-9 dilution
into each of five 16 x 150 mm test tubes.
Using the same pipette, add 1 ml of the
10-8 dilution into each of five
additional tubes and then 1 ml of the
10-' dilution into five tubes. Label the
tubes with the appropriate dilution.
Step 6. Add 0.1 ml of the host culture
into each of the 15 test tubes from Step
5.
Step 7. Add 3 ml of the melted
tryptone-yeast extract top agar held in
the 44.5 ± l°Owater bath to one test
tuba at a time. Mix and immediately
pour the contents of the tube over the
bottom agar of a petri dish labeled with
sample identification information.
Rotate the dish to spread the suspension
evenly over the surface of the bottom
agar and place it onto a level surface to
allow the agar to solidify.
An alternative order of the procedural
steps here and in the assay procedures
described below is to add the top agar
to the tubes first, then the host culture,
followed by the sample.
Step 8. Incubate the inoculated plates
at 36.5 ± 1°C overnight and examine for
plaques the following day.
Step 9. Count the number of plaques
on each of the 15 plates (don't count
plates giving plaque counts significantly
more than 100). The five plates from one
of the dilutions should give plaque
counts of about 20 to 100 plaques.
Average the plaque counts on these five
plates and multiply the result by the
reciprocal of the dilution to obtain the
titer of the undiluted stock.
Step 10. Dilute the filtrate to 30 to 80
PFU/ml in tryptone-yeast extract broth
for use in a positive control in the
coliphage assay. Store the original
filtrate and the diluted positive control
at 4°C.
Before using the positive control for
the first time, place 1 ml each into ten
16 x 150 mm test tubes and assay using
Steps 6-8. Count the plaques on all
plates and divide by 10. If the result is
not 30 to 80, adjust the dilution of the
positive control sample and assay again.
Procedure for Somatic Coliphage Assay
Step 1. Add 1 ml of the water eluate
to be tested to each of ten 16 x 150 mm
test tubes and 1 ml of the diluted ()>X174
positive control to another tube.
Step 2. Add 0.1 ml of the host culture
to each test tube containing eluate or
positive control.
Step 3. Add 3 ml of the melted
tryptone-yeast extract top agar held in
the 44.5 ± 1°C water bath to one test
tube at a time. Mix and immediately
3our the contents of the tube over the
sample identification information. Tilt
and rotate the dish to spread the
suspension evenly over the surface of
the bottom agar and place it onto a level
surface to allow the agar to solidify.
Step 4. Incubate the inoculated plates
at 36.5 ± 1°C overnight and examine for
plaques the following day.
Step 5. Somatic coliphage
enumeration.
a. For each eluate sample count the
total number of plaques on the ten
plates receiving the water eluate and
calculate the somatic coliphage titer (VJ
in PFU per liter according to the
formula: Vs = ((P/I) x D x E)/C, where
P is the total number of plaques in all
test vessels for each sample, I is the
volume (in ml) of the eluate sample
assayed, D is the reciprocal of the
dilution made on the inoculum before
plating (D = 1 for undiluted samples), E
is the total volume of eluate recovered
(from the Virus Data Sheet) and C is the
amount of water sample filtered in liters
(from the Sample Data Sheet). Record
the value of Vs on the Virus Data Sheet.
b. Count the plaques on the positive
control plate. Record the plaque count
onto the Virus Data Sheet as a check on
the virus sensitivity of the E. coli C host.
Assay any water eluate samples again
where the positive control counts are
more than one log below their normal
average.
Storage of E. coli C-3000 Host Culture
for Male-Specific Coliphage Assay: *
1. For short term storage inoculate a
Escherichia coli C-3000 (American
Type Culture Collection Product No.
15597) host culture onto tryptone-yeast
extract agar slants with a sterile
inoculating loop by spreading the
inoculum evenly over entire slant
surface. Incubate the culture overnight
at 36.5 ± 1°C. Store at 4°C for up to 2
weeks.
2. For long term storage inoculate a 5—
10 ml tube of tryptone-yeast extract
broth with the host culture. Incubate the
broth culture overnight at 36.5 ± 1°C.
Add Vio volume of sterile glycerol.
Dispense into 1 ml aliquots in cryovials
(Baxter Product No. T4050-8) and store
at -70°C.
Preparation of Host for Male-Specific
Coliphage Assay:
Step 1. Inoculate 5 ml of tryptone-
yeast extract broth with E. coli C-3000
from a slant with an inoculating loop
and incubate for 16 hours at 36.5 ± 1#C.
Step 2. Transfer 1.5 ml of the 16 hour
culture to 30 ml of tryptone-yeast
extract broth in a 125 ml flask and
incubate for 4 hours at 36.5 ± 1#C with
gentle shaking. The amount of inoculum
and broth used in this step can be
proportionally altered according to
need.
Preparation of MS2 Positive Control:
Step 1. Rehydrate a stock culture of
MS2 (American Type Culture'Collection
Product No. 15597-B1) and store at 4°C.
Step 2. Prepare a 30 ml culture of E.
coli C-3000 as described in section
titled Preparation of Host for Male-
Specific Coliphage Assay. Incubate for 2
hours at 36.5 ± 1°C with shaking. Add
1 ml of rehydrated phage stock and
^ The term "male-specific" refers to
bacteriophages whose receptor sites are located on
the bacterial F-pilus. In addition to E. coli C-3000,
E. coli Famp and strains of Salmonella which
contain the F gene are considered suitable as
alternative hosts. However, all three of these hosts
will support the replication of strain-specific
somatic bacteriophages in addition to the male-
specific types. In addition, genetically modified
Salmonella strains have the potential to support the
replication of phages whose receptor is on other
types of pili normally produced by Salmonella
species.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6437
incubate for an additional 4 hours at
36.5 ± 1°C.
Step 3. Filter the culture through a
0.45 nm sterilizing filter.
Step 4. Prepare 10-?, 10-s and 10-9
dilutions of the filtrate using saline-
calcium solution tubes.
These dilutions should be sufficient
for most MS2 stocks. Some stocks may
require higher or lower dilutions.
Step 5. Add 1 ml of the 10-9 dilution
into each of five 16 x 150 mm test tubes.
Using the same pipette, add 1 ml of the
10-s dilution into each of five
additional tubes and then 1 ml of the
lO-7 dilution into five tubes. Label the
tubes with the appropriate dilution.
Step 6. Add 0.1 ml of the host culture
into each of the 15 test tubes from Step
5.
Step 7. Add 3 ml of the melted
tryptone-yeast extract top agar held in
the 44.5 ±1°C water bath to one test tube
at a time. Mix and immediately pour the
contents of the tube over the bottom
agar of a petri dish labeled with sample
identification information. Rotate the
dish to spread the suspension evenly
over the surface of the bottom agar and
place it onto a level surface to allow the
agar to solidify.
Step 8. Incubate the inoculated plates
at 36.5 ±1°C overnight and examine for
plaques the following day.
Step 9. Count the number of plaques
on each of the 15 plates (don't count
plates giving plaque counts significantly
more than 100). The five plates from one
of the dilutions should give plaque
counts of about 20 to 100 plaques.
Average the plaque counts on these five
; plates and multiply the result by the
reciprocal of the dilution to obtain the
titer of the undiluted stock.
Step 10. Dilute the filtrate to 30 to 80
PFU/ml in tryptone-yeast extract broth
for use in a positive control in the
coliphage assay. Store the original
filtrate and the diluted positive control
at 4°C.
Before using the positive control for
the first time, place 1 ml each into ten
16x150 mm test tubes and assay using
Steps 6-8. Count the plaques on all
plates and divide by 10. If the result is
not 30 to 80, adjust the dilution of the
positive control sample and assay again.
Procedure for Male-Specific Coliphage
Assay:
Step 1. Add 1 ml of the water eluate
to be tested to each of ten 16 x 150 mm
test tubes and 1 ml of the diluted MS2
positive control to another tube.
Step 2. Add 0.1 ml of the host culture
to each test tube containing eluate or
positive control.
Step 3. Add 3 ml of the melted
tryptone-yeast extract top agar held in
the 44.5 ±1°C water bath to one test tube
at a time. Mix and immediately pour the
contents of the tube over the bottom
agar of a petri dish labeled with sample
identification information. Tilt and
rotate the dish to spread the suspension
evenly over the surface of the bottom
agar and place it onto a level surface to
allow the agar to solidify.
Step 4. Incubate the inoculated plates
at 36.5 ±1°C overnight and examine for
plaques the following day.
Step 5. Coliphage enumeration.
a. For each eluate sample count the
total number of plaques on the ten
plates receiving the water eluate and
calculate the male specific phage titer
(Vm) in PFU per liter according to the
formula: Vm = ((P/I) x D x E)/C, where
P is the total number of plaques in all
test vessels for each sample, I is the
volume (in ml) of the eluate sample
assayed, D is the reciprocal of the
dilution made on the inoculum before
plating (D = 1 for undiluted samples), E
is the total volume of eluate recovered
(from the Virus Data Sheet) and C is the
total number of liters of water sample
filtered (from the Sample Data Sheet).
Record this value on the Virus Data
Sheet.
b. Count the plaques on the positive
control plate. Record the plaque count
onto the Virus Data Sheet as a check on
the virus sensitivity of the E. coli C—
3000 host. Assay any water eluate
samples again where the positive
control counts are more than one log
below their normal average.
Part 5—Sterilization and Disinfection
General Guidelines
1. Use aseptic techniques for handling
test waters, eluates and cell cultures.
2. Sterilize apparatus and containers
that will come into contact with test
waters, all solutions that will be added
to test waters unless otherwise
indicated, and all eluants.
3. Sterilize all contaminated materials
before discarding.
4. Disinfect all spills and splatters.
Sterilization Techniques
Solutions;
1. Sterilize all solutions, except those
used for cleansing, standard buffers,
hydrochloric acid (HC1), sodium
hydroxide (NaOH), and disinfectants by
autoclaving them at 121°C for 15
minutes.
The HC1 and NaOH solutions and
disinfectants used are self-sterilizing.
When autoclaving buffered beef extract,
use a vessel large enough to
accommodate foaming.
Autoclavable Glassware, Plasticware,
and Equipment:
Water speeds the transfer of heat in
larger vessels during autoclaving and
thereby speeds the sterilization process.
Add dHjO to vessels in quantities
indicated in Table 1. Lay large vessels
on sides in autoclave, if possible, to
facilitate displacement of air in vessels
by flowing steam.
1. Cover the openings into
autoclavable glassware, plasticware, and
equipment loosely with aluminum foil
before autoclaving. Autoclave at 121°C
for one hour.
Glassware may also be sterilized in a
dry heat oven at a temperature of 170°C
for at least one hour.
2. Sterilize stainless steel vessels
(dispensing pressure vessel) in an
autoclave at 121°C for 30 minutes.
i Vent-relief valves on vessels so
equipped must be open during
autoclaving and closed immediately
when vessels are removed from
autoclave.
3. Presterilize 1MDS filter cartridges
and prefilter cartridges by wrapping the
filters in Kraft paper and autoclaving at
121°C for 30 minutes.
4. Sterilize working instruments, such
as scissors and forceps, by immersing
them in 95% ethanol and flaming them
between uses.
Table 1. Quantity of Water to be
Added to Vessels during Autoclaving.
Vessel size (liter)
2 and 3
4
8
24
54_
Quantity of
dH2O (ml)
25
50
100
500
1000
Chlorine Sterilization:
Sterilize plasticware (filter housings)
and tubing that cannot withstand
autoclaving or vessels that are too large
for the autoclave by chlorination.
Prefilters, but not 1MDS filters may be
presterilized with chlorine as an
alternative to autoclaving.
1. Media and Reagents
a. 0.1% chlorine (HOCl)^-add 19 ml
of household bleach (Clorox, The Clorox
Co., or equivalent) to 981 ml of dH2O
and adjust the pH of the solution to 6-
7withlMHCl.
2. Procedures
Ensure that the solutions come in full
contact with all surfaces when
psrfoiming these procedures.
a. Sterilize the filter apparatus and
tubing by recirculating or immersing in
0,1% chlorine for 30 minutes. Drain the
chlorine solution from objects being
sterilized. Dechlorinate using a solution
-------
6438 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules;
.e
Use
containing 0.5 ml of 10% sterile sodium
thiosulfate per liter of dH2O. Rinse with
sterile dHzO.
b. Sterilize pH electrodes before and
after each use by immersing the tip of
the electrode in 0.1% chlorine for one
min. Dechlorinate and rinse the
electrode as in Step 2a above.
Procedure for Verifying Sterility of
Liquids
Do not add antibiotics to media or
medium components until after sterility
of the antibiotics, media and medium
components has been demonstrated.
The BGM cell line used should be
checked every six months for
mycoplasma contamination according
to test kit instructions. Cells that are
contaminated should be discarded.
Media and Reagents:
1. Mycoplasma testing kit (Irvini
Scientific Product No. T500-000).
as directed by the manufacturer.
2. Thioglycollato medium (Difco
Laboratories Product No. 0257-01-9).
Prepare broth medium as directed by
the manufacturer.
Verifying Sterility of Small Volumes of
Liquids:
Step 1. Inoculate 5 ml of the material
to be tested for sterility into 5 ml of
thioglycollate broth. Shake the mixture
and incubate at 36.5 * 1°C.
Step 2. Examine the inoculated broth
daily for seven days to determine
whether growth of contaminating
organisms has occurred.
Containers holding the thioglycollate
medium must be tightly sealed before
and after the medium is inoculated.
Visual Evaluation of Media for
Microbial Contaminants:
Step 1. Incubate either the entire stock
of prepared media or aliquots taken-
during preparation which represent at
least 5% of the final volume at 36.5 ±
1°C for at least one week prior to use.
Step 2. Visually examine and discard
any media that lose clarity.
A clouded condition that develops in
the media indicates the occurrence of
contaminating organisms.
Contaminated Materials
1. Autoclave contaminated materials
for 30 minutes at 121°C. Be sure that
steam can enter contaminated materials
freely.
2. Many commercial disinfectants do
not adequately kill enteric viruses. To
ensure thorough disinfection, disinfect
spills and other contamination on
surfaces with either a solution of 0.5%
iodine in 70% ethanol (5 g fe per liter)
or 0.1% chlorine. The iodine solution
has the advantage of drying more
rapidly on surfaces than chlorine, but
may stain some surfaces.
Part 6—Biblography and Suggested
Reading
Adams, M.H. 1959. Bacteriophages.
John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.
ASTM. 1992. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater
(A. E. Greenberg, L. S. Clesceri and A.
D. Eaton, ed), 18th Edition. American
Public Health Association,
Washington, D.C.
Barren, A. L., C. Olshevsky and M. M.
Cohen. 1970. Characteristics of the
BGM line of cells from African green
monkey kidney. Archiv. Gesam.
Virusforsch. 32:389-392.
Berg, G., R. S. Safferman, D. R. Dahling,
D. Berman and C. J. Hurst. 1984.
USEPA Manual of Methods for
Virology. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Publication No.
EPA/600/4-84/013, Cincinnati, OH.
Chang, S. L., G. Berg, K. A. Busch, R. E.
Stevenson, N. A. Clarke and P. W.
Kabler. 1958. Application of the
"most probable number" method for
estimating concentration of animal
viruses by the tissue culture
technique. Virology 6:27-42.
Crow, E. L. 1956. Confidence intervals
for a proportion. Biometrika. 43:423—
435.
Dahling, D. R. and B. A. Wright. 1986.
Optimization of the BGM cell line
culture and viral assay procedures for
monitoring viruses in the
environment. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 51:790-812.
Dahling, D. R. and B. A. Wright. 1987.
Comparison of the in-line injector and
fluid proportioner used to condition
water samples for virus monitoring. J.
Virol. Meth. 18:67-71.
Dahling, D. R., G. Berg and D. Berman.
1974. BGM, a continuous cell line
more sensitive than primary rhesus
and African green kidney cells for the
recovery of viruses from water. Health
Lab. Sci. 11:275-282.
Dahling, D. R., R. S. Safferman and B.
A. Wright. 1984. Results of a survey
of BGM cell culture practices.
Environ. Intemat. 10:309-313.
Debartolomeis, J. and V. J. Cabelli. 1991.
Evaluation of an Escherichia coli host
strain for enumeration of F male-
specific bacteriophages. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 57:1301-1305.
Dutka, B. J., A. El Shaarawi, M. T.
Martins and P. S. Sanchez. 1987.
North and South American studies on
the potential of coliphage as a water
quality indicator. Water Res. 21:1127-
1134.
Eagle, H. 1959. Amino acid metabolism
in mammalian cell cultures. Science.
130:432-437.
EPA. 1989. Guidance manual for
compliance with the filtration and
disinfection requirements for public
water systems using surface water •
sources. Office of Drinking Water,
Washington, D.C.
Freshney, R. 1.1983. Culture of Animal
Cells: A Manual of Basic Technique.
Alan R. Liss, New York, NY.
Havelaar, A. H. and W. M. Hogeboom.
1984. A method for the enumeration
of male-specific bacteriophages in
sewage. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 56:439-
447.
Hay, R. J. 1985. ATCC Quality Control
Methods for Cell Lines. American
Type Culture Collection, Rockville,
MD.
Hurst, C. J. 1990. Field method for
concentrating viruses from water
samples, pp. 285-295. In G. F. Crauh
(ed.), Methods for the Investigation
and Prevention of Waterborne Disease
Outbreaks. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Publication No.
EPA/600/l-90/005a, Washington,
D.C.
Hurst, C. J. 1991. Presence of enteric
viruses in freshwater and their
removal by the conventional drinking
water treatment process. Bull. W.H.O.
69:113-119.
Hurst, C. J. and T. Goyke. 1983.
Reduction of interfering cytotoxicity
associated with wastewater sludge
concentrates assayed for indigenous
enteric viruses. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 46:133-139. ,
Katzenelson, E., B. Fattal and T.
Hostovesky. 1976. Organic
flocculation: an efficient second-step
concentration method for the
detection of viruses in tap water.
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 32:638-
639.
Laboratory Manual in Virology. 1974.
2nd Ed. Ontario Ministry of Health,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Leibovitz, A. 1963. The growth and
maintenance of tissue-cell cultures in
free gas exchange with the
atmosphere. Amer. J. Hyg. 78:173-
180.
Lennette, E. H. and N. J. Schmidt (ed.).
1979. Diagnostic Procedures for Viral,
Rickettsial and Chlamydial Infections,
5th ed. American Pubh'c Health
Association, Washington, D.C.
Malherbe, H. H. and M. Strickland-
Cholmley. 1980. Viral Cytopathology.
CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL.
Morris, R. and W. M. Waite. 1980.
Evaluation of procedures for recovery
of viruses from water—II detection
systems. Water Res. 14:795-798.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6439
O'Keefe, B. and J. Green. 1989.
Coliphages as indicators of faecal
pollution at three recreational beaches
on the Firth of Forth. Water Res.
23:1027-1030.
Paul, J. 1975. Cell and Tissue Culture.
5th Ed. Churchill Livingstone,
London, Great Britain.
Pahnateer, G. A., B. J. Dutka, E. M.
Janzen, S. M. Meissner and M. G.
Sakellaris. 1991. Coliphage and
bacteriophage as indicators of
recreational water quality. Water Res.
25:355-357.
Payment, P. and M. Trudel. 1985.
Influence of inoculum size,
incubation temperature, and cell
culture density on virus detection in
environmental samples. Can. J.
Microbiol. 31:977-980.
Ratto, A., B. J. Dutka, C. Vega, C. Lopez
and A. El Shaarawi. 1989. Potable
water safety assessed by coliphage
and bacterial tests. Water Res. 23:253-
255.
Rovozzo, G. C. and C. N. Burke. 1973.
A Manual of Basic Virological
Techniques. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Simkova, A. and J. Cervenka. 1981.
Coliphages as ecological indicators of
enteroviruses in various water
systems. Bull. W.H.O. 59:611-618.
Sobsey, M. D. 1976. Field monitoring
techniques and data analysis, pp. 87-
96. In L. B. Baldwin, J. M. Davidson
and J. F. Gerber (eds.), Virus Aspects
of Applying Municipal Waste to Land.
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Stetler, R.E. 1984. Coliphages as
indicators of enteroviruses. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 48:668-670.
Thomas, H. A., Jr. 1942. Bacterial
densities from fermentation tube tests.
J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. 34:572-
576.
Waymouth, C., R. G. Ham and P. J.
Chappie. 1981. The Growth
Requirements of Vertebrate Cells In
Vitro. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, Great Britain.
Part 7—Vendors
The vendors listed below represents
one possible source for required
products. Other vendors may supply the
same or equivalent products.
American Type Culture Collection,
12301 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD
20852, (800) 638-6597
Baxter Diagnostics, Scientific Products
Div., 1430 Waukegan Rd., McGaw
Park, IL 60085, (800) 234-5227
Becton Dickonson Microbiology
Systems, 250 Schilling Circle,
Cockeysville, MD 21030, (410) 771-
0100 (Ask for a local distributor)
Cole-Farmer Instrument Co., 7425 N.
Oak Park Ave., Niles, IL 60714, (800)
323-4340,
Costar Corp., 7035 Commerce Circle,
Pleasanton, CA 94588, (800) 882-7711
Cuno, toe., 400 Research Parkway,
Meriden, CT 06450, (800) 243-6894
DEMA Engineering Co., 10014 Big Bend
Blvd., Kirkwood, MO 63122, (800)
325-3362
Difco Laboratories, P.O. Box 331058,
Detroit, MI 48232, (800) 521-0851
(Ask for a local distributor)
Fisher Scientific, 711 Forbes Ave.,
Pittsburgh, PA 15219, (800) 766-7000
Millipore Corp., 397 Williams St.,
Marlboro, MA 01752, (800) 225-1380
Nalge Co., P.O. Box 20365, Rochester,
NY 14602, (716) 586-8800 (Ask for a
local distributor)
Neptune Equipment Co., 520 W. Sharon
Rd., Forest Park, OH 45240, (800)
624-6975
OMEGA Engineering, Inc., P.O. Box
4047, Stamford, CT 06907, (800) 826-
6342
Parker Hannifin Corp., Commercial
Filters Div., 1515 W. South St.,
Lebanon, IN 46052, (317) 482-3900
TOTAL CULTURABLE VIRUS QUANTITATION
Ryan Herco, 2509 N. Naomi St.,
Burbank, CA 91504, (800) 848-1141
United States Plastic Corp., 1390
Neubrecht Rd., Lima, OH 45801, (800)
537-9724
Watts Regulator, Box 628, Lawrence,
MA 01845 , (508) 688-1811
Part 8—Data Sheets
Sample Data Sheet
Sample Number:
Water System Name:
System Location:
Sampler's Name:
Water pH: Water Temperature:
°C
Initial Meter Reading:
_. ft3 gallons
. (check units)
Date:.
.Time:
Final Meter Reading:
ft3 gallons
. (check units)
Date:.
.Time:
Total sample volume:.
. liters
(Final—Initial meter readings x 28.316 (for
readings in ft3 or x 7.481 (for readings in
gallons))
Sample arrival condition:
Comments:
Virus Data Sheet
Sample Number:
Water System Name:
System Location:
Date Sample collected:
Eluate volume recovered:
Date eluted:
Date concentrated:
Final concentrated sample volume:
Datefs) assayed by CPE:
.ml
Original water sample volume assayed:
Liters
Coliphage Quantitation:
Date Assayed:
Somatic Coliphage Titer: -
No. Control plaques PFU/1
Male-Specific phage liter:
P1TJ/1 .
Comments:
Sample
1st Passage:
Negative Control
Positive Control
Undiluted
1:5 Dilution
1:25 Dilution
2nd Passages
Negative Control
Positive Control
Undiluted
1:5 Dilution
1 :25 Dilution
3rd Passaged
Negative Control
Positive Control
Total No.
cultures
No. of nega-
tive cultures
Volume on
negative
cultures
No. of posi-
tive cultures
Volume on
positive cul-
tures
i-
MPN/IO
<«« «
zzzzz zz
NA
NA
95% confidence
limits
Upper
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Lower
«<« « «
zzzzz zz zz
-------
6440
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TOTAL CULTURABLE VIRUS QUANTITATION—Continued
Sample
Undiluted
1-5 Dilution
1:25 Dilution
Total No.
cultures
No. of nega-
tive cultures
Volume on
negative
cultures
No. of posi-
tive cultures
Volume on
positive cul-
tures
MPN/I-
95% confidence
limits
Upper
Lower
• Compute MPN of confirmed samples only according to the Virus Quantitation Section of Part 3.
b Not applicable.
«A pomon of medium from each 1st passage vessel, including controls, must be repassaged for conformation. The terms "Undiluted," "1:5 Di-
lution" and "1:25 Dilution" under the 2nd and 3rd Passage headings refer to the original sample dilutions for the 1st passage.
«> Samples that were negative on the first passage and positive on the 2nd'passage must be passaged a third time for conformation. If a third
passage Is required, all controls must be passaged again.
BILUNQ CODE 65W-W-P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
6441
-------
6442 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules 6443
O
-------
6444 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 1994 / Proposed Rules
0. IE
[FR Doc. 94-2587 Filed 2-9-94; 8:45 am]
BjLUNa CODE 6MO-W-C
-------
-------
oS g.
f &
, <2. O
•I
m c:
s?
51)
O Si.
o -u
S a
O r?
CD
------- |