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

-------