EPA-812-Z- 9¥-&OJL
Thursday
June 30, 1994
Part V
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 141 and 142
Drinking Water; Maximum Contaminant
Level Goals and National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and
Copper; Final Rule
-------
-------
33860 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 141 and 142
[FRL-5005-2]
Drinking Water; Maximum
Contaminant Level Goals and National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations
for Lead and Copper
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule; technical corrections.
SUMMARY: EPA is amending the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for
Lead and Copper to correct
typographical errors, clarify language,
and restore special primacy
requirements inadvertently deleted from
the Code of Federal Regulations. These
changes clarify Agency requirements.
The intended effect is to simplify
implementation of the regulations by
reducing confusion.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The technical
corrections are effective on June 30,
1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Safe Drinking Water Hotline, toll free
(800) 426-4791, between 9:00 a.m. to
5:30 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday
through Friday; or Judy Lebowich,
Enforcement and Program
Implementation Division, Office of '
Ground Water and Drinking Water, EPA
(4604), 401M Street SW. Washington,
DC 20460, telephone (202) 260-7595.
Supporting documents for this
rulemaking are available for review at
EPA's Water Docket; 401 M Street, SW.
Washington, DC 20460. For access to the
Docket materials, call (202) 260-3027
between 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. for an
appointment.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 7,
1991, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency promulgated
maximum contaminant level goals
(MCLGs) and national primary drinking
water regulations (NPDWRs) for lead
and copper ("lead and copper rule") (56
FR 26460). Subsequently, EPA
published two technical amendments to
the lead and copper rule correcting
typographical errors and clarifying the
Agency's intent (56 FR 32113, July 15,
1991; 57 FR 28785, June 19, 1992).
Today's action corrects errors Jn the ._.
lead and copper regulations and the
preamble discussion of the copper
health effects, and clarifies the intent of
the regulatory requirements in cases
where the language was confusing.
Today's action also reinstates special
primacy condition language in the rule
that was inadvertently deleted when a
section of another rulemaking action
(the Agency's "Phase n rule") became
effective on July 30,1992.
Sections 553(b)(3)(B) and (d)(3) of the
APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, provide that when
an Agency finds good cause to exist, it
may issue a rule without first providing
notice and comment and make the rule
immediately effective. Under the APA,
good cause for not receiving public
comment is present: where notice and
comment is impracticable, unnecessary
or contrary to the public interest.
Today's action corrects errors and
omissions in 40 CFR parts 141 and 142.
These technical revisions are minor and
do not impact any substantive
obligations of public water systems or
States. The Agency therefore finds that
neither comment nor a delayed effective
date is necessary or in the public
interest. Accordingly, EPA finds that
there is good cause not to solicit
comment on this notice and to have the
revisions effective immediately.
A. Clarification and Update to
Preamble Explanation of Copper MCLG
The preamble to the final lead/copper
NPDWR in the Federal Register
contained EPA's rationale for setting the
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
(MCLG) for copper at 1.3 milligrams per
liter (mg/L). In referencing the medical
and epidemiological literature regarding
health risks posed by copper, EPA
provided an incomplete discussion that
is corrected.
On 56 FR 26471, it is stated that:
"This MCLG of 1.3 mg/L is based on a
Lowest Observed Adverse Health Effect Level
(LOAEL) of 5.3 ing/day from human clinical
case studies in which 5.3 mg was the lowest
acute oral dose at which gastrointestinal
effects were seen (Chuttani et al., 1965)."
Chuttani et al. described the clinical
course and treatment of patients who
were hospitalized after suicidal
ingestion of large quantities of copper
sulfate (>250 mg). In fact, the 5.3 mg/
day LOAEL was derived in EPA's
Drinking Water Criteria Document for
copper (EPA, 1987; p.VIII-10) from
analysis of a number of studies, briefly
summarized here, in which individuals
developed gastrointestinal illnesses after
ingesting much lower levels of copper
than in the Chuttani et al. study.
Wyllie (1957) treated nurses for acute
effects of copper poisoning (nausea,
. diarrhea, vomiting).caused by the . ,
dissolution of copper contained in a
cocktail shaker. Analysis of cocktail
fluid prepared in the shaker allowed an
estimate of the amounts of copper
ingested (5.3-32 mg copper; EPA, 1987,
p. VI-6). The following day, 10 of the
15 nurses were still too ill to resume
their duties and suffered from weakness,
abdominal cramps, dizziness, and
headaches.
Similar findings cited in the Criteria
Document were reported among British
workers who experienced nausea,
diarrhea, and vomiting after ingesting
single dosages of approximately 7-10
mg copper in their tea (EPA, 1987, p.
Vm-9; Semple et al., 1960; Nicholas
and Brist, 1968).
Spitalny et al. (1984) reported that
one adult and two children, ages 5 and
7, of a Vermont family had recurrent
episodes of vomiting and
gastrointestinal pain after drinking
water in a newly built home which
contained 2.8 to 8 mg/L copper. In
addition, the Centers for Disease Control
reported 112 cases of copper
intoxication between 1977 and 1982.
The majority of cases involved leaching
of copper into drinking water from
plumbing with reported copper levels
ranging from 4.0-70 mg/L (CDC, 1977-
1982; EPA, 1987, p. VIII-8).
Several other epidemiological and
controlled exposure studies, cited in the
1987 Criteria Document, have found
acute copper intoxication associated
with higher exposure levels among a
wide variety of populations. Based on a
review of human and animal toxicity,
including the studies summarized
above, the Criteria Document concluded
(p. Vm-15):
"A level of 1.3 mg/L is recommended to be
the basis for the drinking water standard for
the following reasons: 1) this level would
satisfy the nutritional requirements for.
copper: the National Academy, of Sciences-
(NAS, 1980) estimated that "an adequate and
safe" intake of 2-3 mg copper in a 70 kg
adult and 1.5-2.5 mg/day for children will
satisfy nutritional requirements and be
protective of human health; and 2) assuming
consumption of 2 L of water per day, 1.3 mg/
L copper in the drinking water would result
in a daily intake of less than the lowest levels
that were seen to result in gastrointestinal
effects in humans (5.3 mg/day, 3-8 mg/L).
This value would thus be protective against
acute toxic effects in humans. This value is
not protective against copper toxicity in
sensitive members of the population, such as
those rare individuals with Wilson's disease.
These individuals would have to further
limit their intake of copper from all sources."
B. Amendments to Regulatory Language
The amendments to regulatory
language included in this action are
described below.
. Questions have been raised by some
States as to how the Agency intended to
regulate small-size water systems (those
serving 3,300 or fewer people) and
medium-size water systems (those
serving between 3,301 and 50,000
people) that meet the lead and copper
action levels during the first two
monitoring periods (and therefore are
-------
-------
deemed to have optimized corrosion
control), but that exceed one of the
action levels in a subsequent monitoring
period. As discussed below, it was
clearly the Agency's intent in
promulgating this rule to require these
systems (where exceedance of one of the
action levels indicates that they may not
have optimized corrosion control) to
implement the rules' corrosion control
treatment requirements as long as they
exceed the action level.
Section 141.8l(b)(D specifies that
small- and medium-size water systems
are deemed to have optimized corrosion
control once they meet both the lead
and copper action levels for two
consecutive six-month monitoring
periods conducted in accordance with
§ 141.86. Sections 141.81(a)(2) and
141.81(c) specify that such systems may
forego (or cease) completion of the
corrosion control treatment steps
specified in § 141.81(e). This language is
consistent with EPA's intent, as
discussed in the preamble to the final
rule (56 FR 26490-26497), that small-
and medium-size water systems not be
required to conduct corrosion control
studies and install additional treatment
as long as they meet both the lead and
copper action levels because the action
levels reflect optimal corrosion control
treatment for these systems.
Section 141.81(e)(l) requires that
small- and medium-size systems
conduct tap sampling for lead and
copper until the system becomes
eligible for reduced monitoring (because
it has met the action levels during the
requisite number of monitoring periods)
or the system exceeds the action level.
If such a system exceeds the action
level, it is then required to begin the
corrosion control treatment steps within
a certain period of time of the
exceedance. Thus, under the current
rule, a system that meets the action
levels during the first two monitoring
periods (and any number of subsequent
monitoring periods) is triggered into the
corrosion control treatment
requirements if it at any time exceeds
the lead or copper action level.
Notwithstanding this provision, some
States have apparently been confused by
the language in § 141.81(c) of the rule,
which addresses small and medium-size
systems that initially exceed one of the
action levels, but subsequently-reduce - -
their levels to below the action levels
and are therefore deemed to have
optimized corrosion control. With
regard to these systems, the second
sentence of § 141.81(c) states:
"If any such water system thereafter exceeds
the lead or copper action level during any
monitoring period, the system (or the State
as the case may be) shall recommence
33861
completion of the applicable treatment steps
beginning with the first treatment step which
was not previously completed in its entirety.
Some parties have apparently
questioned whether the phrase "any
such water system" (emphasis added)
could be read to exclude small- and
medium-size water systems meeting
§ 141.81(b)(l) criteria during the initial
two six-month monitoring periods from
having to begin implementing the
corrosion control treatment steps.
As evident from the language in
§ 141.81(e) of the rule, this was not
EPA's intent. To clarify this point, EPA
has added a sentence at the end of
§ 14l.81(c) stating: "The requirement for
any small- or medium-size system to
implement corrosion control treatment
steps in accordance with paragraph (e)
of this section (including systems
deemed to have optimized corrosion
control under paragraph (b)(l) of this
section) is triggered whenever any
small- or medium-size system exceeds
the lead or copper action level."
Section 141.87 contains the
monitoring requirements for water
quality parameters. The introductory
text in the section states that, "[a]ll large
water systems and all small and
medium-size water systems that exceed
the lead or copper action level shall
monitor water quality parameters in
addition to lead and copper in
accordance with this section." As
written, this sentence could be read to
mean that only large water systems
exceeding the lead or copper action
level must collect water quality
parameter samples. This interpretation
is not consistent with the intent of the
final regulation. EPA's intent is clear in
the preamble of the fimal rule (56 FR
26526 bottom of middle column) which
contains the same sentence, with a
comma after the phrase "all large
systems". EPA's intent is to require all
large water systems to install optimal
corrosion control treatment regardless of
lead and copper tap water levels.
Because the lead and copper action
levels are not surrogate measures of
optimal corrosion control treatment for
large water systems, these systems must
collect water quality parameter samples
to determine if optimal treatment has
been installed, and to establish baseline
-parameters for continued compliance.
The State must evaluate the water
quality data submitted by each water
system and establish enforceable
parameters that the system must
maintain to remain in compliance with
the rule. EPA is correcting the
regulatory language by adding a comma
after the phrase, "all large systems" so
that it is clear that all lairge systems must
conduct water quality parameter
monitoring, regardless of whether they
exceed the lead or copper action level"
The chart entitled "Analytical
Methods" in § 141.89(a) contains
typographical errors in the methodology
listing for orthophosphate. The chart
was printed correctly in the preamble
(56 FR 26510). The corrected chart is
included in this notice, hi addition, EPA
is updating the chart to refer to methods
at § 141.89(a) which are contained in the
current editions of (1) EPA drinking
water methods manuals, (2) Standard
Methods, and (3) the American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Annual Book of Standards. Compared to
the earlier version of a method, the
version now cited at § 141.89(a) is the
same. EPA method 300.0, which had
been published individually, is now
reprinted in a manual issued by EPA in
1993. EPA methods 200.7, 200.8, and
200.9 are now reprinted in a manual
published in 1991. The EPA methods,
the methods in the 18th edition of
Standard Methods, and in the 1993
ASTM book contain changes to the
previous versions that are
typographical, grammatical, or editorial
in nature.
The inclusion or republication of
methods in new manuals or books
requires the following changes to
footnotes at § 141.89(a). Footnote 1 is
updated to include the NTIS order
number. Footnotes 2 and 3 are updated
to the 18th edition of Standard Methods
and the 1993 ASTM book, and are
renumbered as footnotes 3 and 4. The
methods in footnotes 5, 6, and 7 are
contained in the manual cited at the
new footnote 2. Footnote 6, which
explains when to digest water samples
for total metals, is revised slightly to be
identical to the same explanatory
footnote for other metals, which is
found at § 141.23(k). Footnote 9 has also
been renumbered as footnote 6.
Footnote 8 has been revised to cite the
manual which now contains Method
300.0. Footnotes 7, 9 and 10 are
reserved. Footnote 11 has been added
because that method is now found in a
different reference.
The Practical Quantitation Levels
(PQLs) for lead and copper are defined
m § 141.89(a). EPA has received input
from State drinking water programs and
laboratories that the value of these PQLs
are not clearly stated in § 141.89(a)(l)(ii)
anojhat it is unclear whether the
and
rtPO or one-a
the PQL. The PQLs are 0.005 mg/L for
lead and 0.050 mg/L for copper. The
basis for these PQLs is discussed in the
preamble to the final rule (56 FR 26511)
EPA is revising § 141.89(a)(l)(ii) to
-------
33862
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
clearly reflect the PQL of 0.005 mg/L for
lead in subparagraph (A) and the PQL
of 0.050 mg/L for copper in
subparagraph (B). In addition, EPA is
revising § 141.89(a)(3) to consolidate
§§ 141.89 (3) and (4) and to reference
the lead and copper PQLs defined in
Section 141.90(g) requires that any
monitoring data collected in addition to
that required by 40 CFR part 141,
subpart I (The Lead and Copper Rule) be
submitted by the end of the reporting
period. This could be construed as
inconsistent with the other paragraphs
of § 141.90, which require that
monitoring data be submitted within ten
days of the end of the monitoring
period. The ten-day delay is allowed for
processing, collating and reporting of
data. EPA did not intend this
inconsistency. To make § 141.90(g)
consistent with other reporting
requirements in § 141.90, EPA is
amending § 141.90(g) to allow ten days
forsubmittal of additional data.
Section 142.16(d) was reserved
effective July 30,1992, but should
contain the special primacy
requirements specific to the lead and
copper rule that States are required to
adopt in addition to meeting basic
primacy requirements. As explained in
the July 15,1991 (56 FR 32112)
technical correction, EPA intended the
lead and copper special primacy
requirements to take effect July 7,1991.
On July 30,1992, changes to § 142.16
promulgated as part of the Phase II
rulemaking (56 FR 3526, January 30,
1991) took effect. The Phase II
regulations made changes to § 142.16,
reserved paragraph (d) and added
paragraph (e). These changes to § 142.16
had the unintended effect of deleting
paragraph (d). The Agency did not
intend to delete the lead and copper
special primacy requirements. Rather,
the Agency's intent in reserving
paragraph (d) as a part of the Phase II
rulemaking was to establish a
placeholder for lead and copper special
primacy requirements when the lead
and copper regulations were
promulgated. EPA is therefore
repromulgating § 142.16(d) without
revisions to restore the special primacy
requirements initially promulgated in
the final lead and copper rule.
Section 142.62(g)(2) contains a
typographical error in the reference to
regulations pertaining to maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs) and quality
limits for bottled water. "21 CFR
102.35" should be "21 CFR 103.35".
EPA is correcting this error in today's
action.
C. References
The following references are referred
to in this notice and are included in the
public docket. The public docket is
available as described at the beginning
of this notice.
Centers for Disease Control. Centers
for Disease Control: Water-Related
Disease Outbreaks (1977-1982). [CDC,
1977-1982]
Chuttani, H.K., Gupta, P.S., Gulati, S.,
and Gupta, D.N. Acute Copper Sulphate
Poisoning. American Journal of
Medicine. Vol. 39 (November 1965),
849-854. [Chuttani et al., 1965]
Federal Register. Vol. 56, No. 20.
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations—Synthetic Organic
Chemicals and Inorganic Chemicals;
Monitoring for Unregulated
Contaminants; National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations
Implementation; National Secondary
Drinking Water Regulations: Final Rule.
(Wed. Jan. 30,1991), 3526-3614. [56 FR
3526]
Federal Register. Vol. 56, No. 110.
Drinking Water Regulations—Maximum
Contaminant Level Goals and National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for
Lead and Copper; Final Rule. (Fri. Jun.
7,1991), 26460-26564). [56 FR 26460]
Federal Register. Vol. 56, No. 135.
Drinking Water Regulation; Maximum
Contaminant Level Goals and National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for
Lead and Copper; Final Rule;
Correction. (Mon. Jul. 15,1991), 32113.
[56 FR 32113]
Federal Register. Vol. 57, No. 125.
Drinking Water Regulations: Maximum
Contaminant Level Goals and National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for
Lead and Copper; Final Rule; Correcting
Amendments. (Mon. Jun. 29,1992),
28785-28789. [57 FR 28785]
National Academy of Sciences.
Drinking Water and Health. Vol. 3
(1980), 25-67, 312-320. [NAS, 1980]
Nicholas, P.O., and Brist, M.B. Food
Poisoning Due to Copper in the Morning
Tea. Lancet. Vol. 2 (1968), 40-42.
[Nicholas and Brist, 1968].
Semple, A.B., Parry, W.H., and
Phillips, D.E. Acute Copper Poisoning:
An Outbreak traced to Contaminated
Water from a Corroded Geyser. Lancet.
Vol. 2 (1960), 700-701. [Semple et al.,
I960]
Spitalny, K.C., Brondum, J., Vogt,
R.L., Sargent, H.E., and Kappel, S.
Drinking Water Induced Copper
Intoxication in a Vermont Family.
Pediatrics. Vol. 74 (1984), 1103-1106.
[Spitalny et al., 1984] -
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Drinking Water Criteria
Document of Copper. Office of Health
and Environmental Assessment. (Feb. i,
1987). [EPA, 1987]
Wyllie, J. Copper Poisoning at a
Cocktail Party. American Journal of
Public Health. Vol. 47 (1957), 617
[Wyllie, 1957].
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 141 and
142
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure.
Chemicals, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water supply.
Dated: June 23,1994.
Robert Perciasepe,
Assistant Administrator for Water.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, parts 141 and 142 of chapter
I, title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 141
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2,
300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-4 and
300J-9.
2. Section 141.81 is amended by
adding a sentence at the end of
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 141.81 Applicability of corrosion control
treatment steps to small- medium-size and
large water systems.
*****
(c) * * * The requirement for any
small- or medium-size system to
implement corrosion control treatment
steps in accordance with paragraph (e)
of this section (including systems
deemed to have optimized corrosion
control under paragraph (b)(l) of this
section) is triggered whenever any
small- or medium-size system exceeds
the lead or copper action level.
*****
3. Section 141.87 is amended by
revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
§ 141.87 Monitoring requirements for
.water quality parameters.
All large water systems, and all small-
and medium-size systems that exceed
the lead or copper action level shall
monitor water quality parameters in
addition to lead and copper in
accordance with this section. The
requirements of this section are
summarized in the table at the end of
this section.
*****
4. Section 141.89 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) introductory text
and chart, and revising paragraphs
VefDale2^UN-94 16:32 Jun 29.1994 Jkt 150257 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt4701 Sfmt4700 E:\FR\FM\P30JNO.PT2 pfrm06
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
33863
(aKlKii} and (a)(3) to read as follows
and by removing paragraph (a)(4):
§141.89 Analytical methods. '
(a) Analyses for lead, copper, pH,
conductivity, calcium, alkalinity,
ANALYTICAL METHODS
orthophosphate, silica and temperature
shall be conducted using the following
methods:
Lead6
Copper6
pH
Conductivity
Calcium ®
Alkalinity
Orthophosphate
(unfiltered, no di-
gestion or
hydrolosis).
Silica
Temperature
Atomic absorption; furnace technique ,.
Inductively-coupled plasma; mass spectrometry
Atomic absorption; platform furnace technique
Atomic absorption; furnace technique ,.,,.,,..,..,,.,,,.,
Atom"; absorption; direct aspiration
Inductively-coupled plasma '
Inductively-coupled plasma; mass spectrometry
Atomic absorption; platform furnace , , .
Electrometric ;
Conductance
EDTA titrimetric ....
Atomic absorption; direct aspiration
Inductively-coupled plasma
Titrimetric
Electrometric titration
Colorimetric, automated, ascorbic acid colorimetric, ascorbic
acid, two reagent.
Colorimetric, ascorbic acid, single reagent
Colorimetric, phosphomolybdate; automated-segmented
flow; automated discrete.
Ion Chromatography
Colorimetric, molybdate blue; automated-segmented flow ....
Colorometric
Molybdosilicate
Heteropoly blue
Automated method for molybdate-reactive silica
Inductively-coupled plasma 6
Thermometric
EPA
1 239.2
2 200.8
2200.9
1 220.2
12201
22007
2 200.8
2 200 9
1 150 1
1 150.2
1 120 1
12152
'215 1
23007
1310 1
8365.1
1 365.3
1 365.2
8 300.0
1 370.1
2 200.7
Reference
ASTM3
D3559-90D
D1688-90C
D1688-90A
D1293-84B
D1 125-91 A
D51 1—92 A
D51 1-92B
D1067-92B
D515-88A
D4327-91
D859-88
(method No.)
SM<
3113B
3113 B
3111 B
3120 B
4500-H * B
2510 B
ocnfW^a n
3111 B
3120 B
noon R
4500-PF
4500-P E
4110
4500-Si D
4500-Si E
4500-Si F
3120 B
2550 B
USGS s
11 non QC
1-1601-85
1-2601 -90 11
I-2598-85
1-1 700-85
1-2700-85
Notes:
1 "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," EPA-600/4-79-020, March 1983. Available at NTIS as PB84-128677.
2"Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples." EPA-600/4-91-010, June 1991. Available at NTIS as PB91-231498
3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.01, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1993,1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
418th edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992, American Public Health Association, American Water
Works Association, Water Environment Federation.
5 Techniques of Water Resources Investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-1. Third Edition, 1989. "Methods for the
Determination of Inorganic Substances in Water and Fluvial Sediments", Available at Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printina
Office, Washington, DC 20402.
6 Samples may not be filtered. Samples that contain less than .1 .NTU(nephelometric turbidity unit) and are properly preserved (concentrated ni-
tric acid to pH<2) may be analyzed directly (without digestion) for total metals, otherwise, digestion is required. Turbidity must be measured on
the preserved samples just prior to the initiation of metal analysis. When digestion is required, the total recoverable technique as defined in the
method must be used.
7 [Reserved]
8 "Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples", EPA/600/R-93/100, August 1993, Available at NTIS as
PB94-121811. :
9 [Reserved]
10 [Reserved]
1' Methods of Analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of Inorganic and Organic Constituents
in Water and Fluvial Sediments, Open File Report 93-125, Available at Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printina Office Wash-
ington, DC 20402.
(1) * * *
(ii) Achieve quantitative-acceptance- -
limits as follows:
(A) For lead: ±30 percent of the actual
amount in the Performance Evaluation
sample when the actual amount is
greater than or equal to 0.005 mg/L. The
Practical Quantitation Level, or PQL for
lead is 0.005 mg/L.
(B) For Copper: ±10 percent of the
.actual amount in the Performance
Evaluation sample! when the actual
amount is greater (than or equal to 0.050
mg/L. The Practical Quantitation Level,
or PQL for copper is 0.050 mg/L;
*****
(3) All lead and copper levels
measured between the PQL and MDL
must be either reported as measured or
they can be reported as one-half the PQL
specified for lead and copper in
paragraph (a)(l)(ii) of this section. All
levels below the lead and copper MDLs
must be reported as zero.
*****
5. Section 141.90 is amended by
revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:
-------
33864 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
§141.90 Reporting requirements.
*****
(g) Reporting of additional monitoring
data. Any system which collects
sampling data in addition to that
required by this subpart shall report the
results to the State within the first ten
days following the end of the applicable
monitoring period under §§ 141.86,
141.87 and 141.88 during which the
samples are collected.
PART 142—NATIONAL PRIMARY
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION
6. The authority citation for part 142
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300g, 300g-l, 300g-
2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300H
and 300J-9. •
7. Section 142.16 is amended by
adding paragraph (d), currently listed as
reserved, to read as follows:
§ 142.16 Special primacy requirements.
(d) Requirements for States to adopt
40 CFR part 141, Subpart I—Control of
Lead and Copper. An application for
approval of a State program revision
which adopts the requirements
specified in 40 CFR part 141, subpart I,
must contain (in addition to the general
primacy requirements enumerated
elsewhere in this part, including the
requirement tiiat State regulations be at
least as stringent as the federal
requirements) a description of how the
State will accomplish the following
program requirements:
(1) Sections 141.82(d), 141.82(f),
141.82(h)—Designating optimal
corrosion control treatment methods,
optimal water quality parameters and
modifications thereto.
(2) Sections 141.83(b)(2) and
141.83(b)(4)—Designating source water
treatment methods, maximum
permissible source water levels for lead
and copper and modifications thereto.
(3) Section 141.90(e>—Verifying
compliance with lead service line
replacement schedules and of PWS
demonstrations of limited control over
lead service lines.
*****
8. Section 142.62 is amended by
revising the first sentence of paragraph
(g)(2) to read as follows:
§ 142.62 Variances and exemptions from
the maximum contaminant levels for
organic and inorganic chemicals.
(2) The public water system must
receive a certification from the bottled
water company that the bottled water
supplied has been taken from an
"approved source" as defined in 21 CFR
129.3(a); the bottled water company has
conducted monitoring in accordance
with 21 CFR 129.80(g) (1) through (3);
and the bottled water does not exceed
any MCLs or quality limits as set out in
21 CFR 103.35, part 110, and part 129.
[FR Doc. 94-15983 Filed 6-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE S5W-SO-P
VerDate24.JUN-94 16:32 Jun 29.1994 Jkt 150257 POOOOOO FrmOOOOB Fmt4701 Sfmt4700 E:\FR\FM\P30JNO.PT2 pfrm06
------- |