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 ------- |