United Stafes4 . " Offi^of Water
Environmental Protection 4607
Agency,
&EPA Supplement A to the
Unr^ulated
CbntaiTiinant
Methods
Control Manual
Printed or? Recycled Paper
-------
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Foreword
This document is the first supplement tp the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual (EPA 815-R-00-006). These two documents, when
considered jointly, provide guidance regarding sampling, analytical methods, and related quality
control issues for the States, EPA offices, water systems, and analytical laboratories participating in
the monitoring for List 1 contaminants as part of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation (UCMR) Program. These documents are written for the personnel at a water system,
laboratory, or agency who will be responsible for UCMR Program planning, implementation, and
oversight. ______
Please JVofe/Because of the evolving nature of the UCMR Program, supplemental role-making
efforts may add addft£onalf contaminants to be monitoredjand henceVthe^speciflc^nalyticai and ]
technical requkernents o| th^prpgram will need to be identified. F^r Ms reasonf EPA^wpL
periodically issue supplements^ jhe*AnaIyticaf Methods and Qualify Control M|nuai EPA
anticipates developing additional supplements when analytical methods^are approved for
monitoring the UCMR (1999) List 2 and>contarmnants in subsequent rules. However, these
additional supplements may also include minor modifications to the requirements for monitoring
noted in the QC Manual andln this Supplement. To ensure compliance with the U£MR, you
should contact the Safe Drinking Waster Hotline at (800) 426-4791 to be directed^ the most
recent" supplements tojtfael UCMR'QC Manual. ^ / .*" !> .. f * ' *
Under § 1445(a)(2)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, die
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to promulgate regulations for a monitoring program for
unregulated contaminants by August 1999. In the past, unregulated contaminant monitoring has
been performed according to the program described in CFR 141.40. The 1996 SDWA Amendments
direct a substantially revised UCMR Program.
The revised UCMR Program has a new list of contaminants to monitor, changes the number of
public water systems (PWSs) that must conduct monitoring, and changes the frequency and schedule
for monitoring (§141.40(a)). Additional regulatory actions include cancellation of unregulated
contaminant monitoring for small systems serving 10,000 or fewer people under the existing
unregulated contaminant monitoring program begun in 1989. The data collected in the revised
UCMR will be used to support the development of the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), to
support the Administrator's determination of whether to regulate a contaminant, and to support the
development of future regulations. The revised monitoring program is one of the cornerstones of
the sound science approach to future drinking water regulation that is an aim of the 1996 SDWA
Amendments.
Further detailed information about the revised UCMR Program can be found in the Preamble to the
proposed regulation (64 FR 23398) and the final Rule (64 FR 50556), as well as other supporting
documents available by contacting the EPA Water Docket at (202) 260-3027 (Docket Number W-
98-02) General information can be obtained from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline, (800) 426-
4791 or through the EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water Internet Homepage at
http7/www epa.gov/ogwdw. This QC Supplement also includes a revised versions of Appendices
A and B from the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual. These appendices have
been revised to reflect additional acronyms and abbreviations used throughout this QC Supplement,
and additional clarifications in the list of definitions.
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
11
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Disclaimers
This supplemental guidance document is designed to implement national poUcy concerning the
UCMR Program .The document does not, however, substitute for the SDWA or EPA's regulations
nor is this document a regulation itself. Thus, it cannot impose legally-binding requirements on
EPA States or the regulated community, and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the
circumstances. EPA decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case
basis that differs from this guidance where appropriate. EPA may change this guidance in the future.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
m
-------
*A _-»-=;
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
IV
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Acknowledgments
This document was prepared in support of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
(UCMR) for EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. Charles Job served as EPA's team
leader for development of the UCMR and James Taft as Targeting and Analysis Branch Chief.
Rachel Sakata and Yvette Selby served as Work Assignment Managers. The UCMR Work Group
provided technical guidance throughout, in particular, Daniel Hautman, David Munch, and Chris
Frebis provided scientific and editorial guidance. The Cadmus Group, Inc., served as the prime
contractor providing support for this work. The major contributions of Chris Higgins, Wendy Chou,
and Jonathan Koplos are gratefully acknowledged. George Hallberg served as Cadmus' Project
Manager. :
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
VI
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Table of Contents
Foreword l
Disclaimers m
Acknowledgments
v
Section 1. Introduction ..................... - ...... ./','" ' ;T'T\ ..... !
1.1 Background on the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR) ---- 1
12 The Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation ......... . . ............. 1
L3 Contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List .................. ....... ......... J
1.3.1 UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants . . . . ................................. 1
1 3 2 UCMR (1999) List 2 and List 3 Contaminants ................. ............ 3
1 4 Analytical Methods for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants ................... 3
1.5 Laboratory Certification Requirements for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants .... 5
Section 2. Sampling Plan . . . ....................... .............. ...... ...... ?
2.1 Monitoring By Public Water Systems ............................... ...... '
2.1.1 Systems Required To Monitor .......... ............................... '
2.2 Sampling Frequency . . , ............................................... '
2.3 Sampling Points .................... . ................................. '
Section 3. Sample Collection and Preservation ............ ........................ 9
3.1 Chemical Contaminants . ................... ............................. ^
3.1.1 Nitrogen- and Phosphorus-Containing Pesticides ...... . .................... V
3.1.2 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Pesticides ........................... ......... 9
3.1.3 Acid Herbicides ...................... .............................. *
3.1.4 Volatile Organic Compounds .......................................... *
3.1.5 Semi-volatile Organic Compounds .................................... *
3.1.6 Inorganic Compounds . . ................... .......................... |y
3.2 Monitoring of Routine Water Quality Parameters .................. ......... u
Section 4. Sample Transport ............... ... ................................. 13
Section 5. UCMR Quality Control Requirements ................................. J5
5.1 Minimum Reporting Level ..... ....................................... |^
5.2 Calibration ............... . ......................................... f'
5.2.1 Calibration Verification .............................................. * '
5.3 Method Detection Limit .............................................. 20
5.4 Laboratory Reagent (Method) Blank .................. .................. ^
5.4.1 Field Reagent Blank (Shipping or Travel Blank) ........ , ................. 22
5.5 Quality Control Sample ............................................... 22
5.6 Sample Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate .................... ...... ^
5.7 Internal Standard [[[ 25
5.8 Surrogate Standard ..... ......... . ................................... .^
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
5.9.1 Gas Chromatographic Methods 25
5.9.2 Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Confirmation ^5
5.9.3 Mass Spectrometry Methods " ' 9^
5.9.4 Ion Chromatography Identification ;f°
5.10 Additional Quality Controls 27
5.10.1 Laboratory Fortified Blank ^°
5.10.2 Matrix Conductivity Threshold Quality Control Requirements 28
5.10.2.1 Conductivity Meter Calibration Verification and Conductance
Determination. 29
5 10 2.2 Instrument Performance Check ^
5.10.2.3 Additional Quality Control Procedures if Dilution or Pretreatment is
Required y
Section 6. Additional Analytical Method Specifications 31
6.1 Clarifications Concerning EPA Methods 515. land 515.2 and the Approved
Equivalent Methods . ; 31
6.2 Recommendations for EPA Method 524.2 and the Approved Equivalent
Methods
33
Section 7. Reporting -
7.1 . Public Water Systems Reporting to EPA ; ^
71.1 Reporting of Results Obtained for the DCPA Mono- and Di-Acid Degradates ... 33
1.12 Reporting of Data Below the Specified Minimum Reporting Level .. 33
7! 13 Reporting of Water Quality Parameter Data ':;; II
1 1 4 Reporting of Matrix Conductance and Pretreated QC Data for Perchlorate 33
7.2 Public Notification of Results (Report of PWS to Consumers) 33
Vlll
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
List of Tables
Table 1.2s UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants ..... 2
Table 1.5s Approved Analytical Methods for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants 4
Table 3.1s Preservation and Holding Times for Approved Analytical Methods 11
Table 5.1s UCMR Methods and Minimum Reporting Levels 16
Table 5.2s Frequency Requirements for Verifying Calibration 18
Table 5.3s UCMR Low-Level Calibration Check Standard Concentrations and
Acceptance Criteria 19
Table 5.4s Mid-Level Calibration Check Standard Concentrations and Acceptance
Criteria ^
Table 5.4.Is High-Level Calibration Check Standard Concentration and Acceptance
Criteria for EPA Method 314.0 20
Table 5.5s Frequency Requirements for Analyzing Laboratory Reagent (Method) Blanks .21
Table 5.6s UCMR Acceptance Criteria for Laboratory Reagent (Method) Blanks 22
Table 5.7s Frequency Requirements for Performing Spiked Sample Analyses 24
Table 5.8s Concentrations for Spiking MS/MSD Samples 24
Table 5.11s Recommended Confirmation Ions 26
Table 5.11.1s Estimated Retention Time for Perchlorate Using EPA Method 314.0 27
Table 5.12s Maximum Holding Times for Samples and Extracts 27
Appendices
Appendix A (revised). Abbreviations and Acronyms A~l
Appendix B (revised). ' Definitions B'l
IX
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Section I. Introduction
1.1 Background on the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR)
No additional information for this section of the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control
Manual is necessary for the monitoring of acetochlor and perchlorate under the UCMR. In
subsequent sections, this is noted by asterisks (see Section 1.2 below).
1.2
The Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
1.3
Contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List
1.3.1 UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
With the publication of the Direct Final Rule (65 PR 11371), EPA has approved analytical methods
for all 12 chemical contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List 1. Monitoring for these contaminants
is to begin in 2001 under the Assessment Monitoring component of the UCMR Program. All
UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants and their corresponding required sampling locations, approved
analytical methods, and other related analytical details are listed in Table 1.2s (§141.40(a)(5)).
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 1.2s UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
Contaminants
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE
Acetochlor
DCPA mono-acid
degradate
DCPA di-acid
degradate
EPTC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
CAS #
121-14-2
606-20-2
72-55-9
34256-82-1
887-54-7
2136-79-0
759-94.4
2212-67-1
1634-04-4
98-95-3
1497-73-0
5902-51-2
Approved Analytical Methods
EPA 525.2
EPA 525.2
EPA 508, EPA 508.1,
EPA 525.2, D58 12.96, 990.06
EPA 525.2
EPA 515.1, EPA 515.2,
D53 17-93, 992.32
EPA 515.1, EPA 515.2,
D53 17-93, 992.32
EPA 507, EPA 525.2,
D5475-93, 991.07
EPA 507, EPA 525.2,
D5475-93, 991.07
EPA 524.2, D5790.95,
SM6210D, SM6200B
EPA 524.2, D5790.95,
SM6210D, SM6200B
EPA 314.0
EPA 507, EPA 525.2,
D5475-93, 991.07
Minimum
Reporting
Level
2^g/La
2^g/La
0.8Aig/La
2^g/Lc
lAzg/La
l^g/La
l^g/La
0.9 ^g/La
5,ug/Ld
IflMg/L"
4/^g/I/
2Mg/La'
Sampling
Point
EPTDSb
EPTDSb
EPTDS b
EPTDSb
EPTDSb
EPTDSb
EPTDS b
EPTDS b
EPTDS b
EPTDS b
EPTDS b
EPTDS b
Note: EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
See Table 1.5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
2 Minimum Reporting Level (MRL) determined by multiplying by 10 the least sensitive method s minimum
detection limit (MDL=standard deviation times the Student's T value for 99% confidence level with n-1
degrees of freedom), or when available, multiplying by 5 the least sensitive method's estimated detection limit
(EDL=concentration of compound yielding approximately a five to one signal to noise ratio or the calculated
MDL, whichever is greater). .
b Entry Point to the Distribution System. This sample collection location is located at the entry point, alter
treatment, that represents each non-emergency water source in routine use over the 12-month period of
monitoring; sampling must occur at the EPTDS, unless the State has specified other sampling points that are
used for compliance monitoring under 40 CFR 141.24(f)(l), (2) and (3) (§141.40(a)(5)). If monitoring at
source (raw) water sampling points indicates detection of any of the contaminants on the UCMR (1999)
monitoring list, then the system must change the location of its unregulated contaminant monitoring to the
EPTDS (§141.40(a)(5)).
c MRL was established at a concentration, which is at least one-fourth the lowest known adverse health
concentration, at which acceptable precision and accuracy has been demonstrated in spiked matrix samples.
d MRL for VOCs determined by multiplying by 10 either the published MDL or 0.5 /zg/L, whichever is greater.
The MDL of 0.5 //g/L (0.0005 mg/L) was selected to conform to the VOC MDL requirements of 40 CFR
-------
March 2000
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
1.3.2 UCMR (1999) List 2 and List 3 Contaminants
1.4 Analytical Methods for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
While EPA has approved the use of alternative (i.e., non-EPA) analytical methods of the voluntary
consensufstandaM organizations (including the ASTM, AOAC, and APHA) for the laboratory
analysis of some UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, no alternative analytical methods have been
approved for use in monitoring either acetochlor or perchlorate under the UCMR.
As discussed in the preamble to the Direct Final Rule approving the methods for acetochlor and
nerchlorate (65 FR 11371), no analytical method for the analysis of acetochlor has been published
by the voluntary consensus standards bodies (ASTM, AOAC, or Standard Methods)^ fc addition,
no analytical method has been published by these organizations that is similar to EPA Method 525.2,
and therefore, acetochlor cannot be added to the scope of any consensus organization s method.
The method that has been approved for use in monitoring perchlorate under the UCMR is a recently
developed EPA Method. While this method is similar to methods that have been published by the
California Department of Health and Dionex Corporation, neither of these methods incorporates; a
quality control element which assesses the impact of high concentrations of total dissolved solids
(TDS) which are frequently present in water samples. The presence of high TDS in samples can
result in inaccurate quantitation of perchlorate or may even mask its presence. Therefore, EPA
incorporated a quality control element into EPA Method 314.0 that both identifies the presence of
high concentrations of TDS and provides a mechanism to reduce their concentrations thereby
Srrdtting accurate quantitation of perchlorate. In addition, EPA's Method 314.0 permits the use
of both the California Department of Health and Dionex procedures within its scope; therefore,
laboratories currently using either of these procedures can convert to EPA Method 314.0 simply by
adopting; theDuality control procedures specified in EPA Method 314.0. None of the consensus
methods organizations have published a method for the analyses of perchlorate.
EPA is specifying that only the analytical methods and procedures listed in Table 1.5s be used in
obtaining data fo? the UCMR. Note, however, that whether EPA or one of the alternative methods
are usedfadditional quality control measures for UCMR.analyses are required (§ 14L40 Agenda
A) The additional quality control measures are included in the revised UCMR (40 CFR 141.40);and
are explained either in the UCMR QC Manual or in this Supplement. As in the QC Manual, EPA
method numbers are used in the following sections of this Supplement as references for the reader.
Subsequent sections of this QC Supplement provide supplemental information on methods,
sampling, and quality control procedures to be used for monitoring acetochlor and perchlorate under
the UCMR Assessment Monitoring program.
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
=============
Table 1.5s Approved A
======================================
Chemical Contaminant
=======
Lnalytical Mel
CAS#
========================================:::
thods for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
'
Methodology
EPA Method
Volatile Organic Compounds
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
1634-04-4
98-95-3
EPA 524.2 a
EPA 524.2 "
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
121-14-2
606-20-2
EPA 525.2 a
EPA525.2a
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Pesticides
DDE
72-55-9
EPA 525.2 a; EPA 508 a;
EPA 508. la
Nitrogen- and Phosphorus-Containing Pesticides
Acetochlor
EPTC
Molinate
Terbacil
34256-82-1
759-94-4
2212-67-1
5902-51-2
EPA 525.2 a
EPA 525 . 2 "; EPA 507 a
EPA 525.2 a; EPA 507 a
EPA 525 .2 a; EPA 507 a
Acid Herbicides
DCPA mono-acid degradate
DCPA di-acid degradate
887-54-7
2136-79-0
EPA 515.1^ ;EPA515.2^
EPA 515.1 ; EPA 515.2 a-e
Inorganic Compounds
14797-73-0
EPA 314.0 f
Equivalent Methods
D5790-95b;SM6210Dc;
SM6200BC
D5790-95b;SM6210Dc;
SM6200BC
none identified
none identified
D58 12-96 b; 990.06 d
none identified
D5475-93b;991.07d
D5475-93b;991.07d
D5475-93b;991.07d
D53 17-93 b; 992.32 d
D53 17-93 b; 992.32 d
none identified
The version or the urA metnoas approved ror me u^iviix
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Wastewater 1992 and 1995, American Public Health Association; either edition may be used. Copies may
KX'fo^
Omcia I Methods of Analysis ofAOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemist) International, Sixteenth
Edition 4* Revision 1998, Volume I, AOAC International, First Union National Bank Lockbox, PO Box
c the use of EPA Method 524 2 for measuring
nitrobenzene and EPA Methods 515.1 and 515.2 for measuring the DCPA degradates m the UCMR Analytical
Methods and Quality Control Manual. . ., , ,
f EPA Method 314 0 (EPA 815-B-99-003) has only recently been published. A copy of this method is available
ty contacting the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791 or accessing the method directly at
http://www.eDa.gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
1.5 Laboratory Certification Requirements for UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
As noted in the revised UCMR (64 FR 50556) and in the QC Manual, laboratories that provide data
to the EPA in support of the UCMR must document that they are currently approved by a State and
that they have State certification and/or approval to perform those analyses using UCMR-specified
methods (§141 40(a)(5)(ii)(G)). Because EPA approved the use of a commonly used method tor
monitoring acetochlor under the UCMR, no performance testing sample analyses are required for
laboratory approval for the analysis of acetochlor under the UCMR: All laboratory s^ currently
certified by their State to perform drinking water compliance monitoring using EPA Method 525.2
are automatically approved to perform acetochlor analyses under the UCMR.
However the method that has been approved for monitoring perchlorate under the UCMR is a new
method that was developed only recently by EPA. Because EPA Method 3 14.0 is a new method and
includes matrix specific quality control criteria, laboratories must go through a separate approval
process to analyze samples for perchlorate (§ 141.40(a)(5)(ii)(G)(ii)). The laboratory approval system
is based on previous certification of the laboratory to conduct analyses in support of regulatory
compliance monitoring of drinking water for any inorganic anion using an Approved ion
chromatographic method (as listed in §141.28, such as nitrate analysis by EPA Method 300.0). In
addition a laboratory must successfully complete the perchlorate Performance Testing (PT) Program
to be approvedforUCMR perchlorate analyses (§ 141. 40(a)(5)(ii)(G)(ii)). This PT Program involves
a blind control study, using a test sample with an unknown value.
Any laboratory wishing to participate in the perchlorate PT Program and obtain approval must
submit a letter of request, to be received by EPA no later than March 31 2000
(§141 40(a)(5)(ii)(G)(ii)). Any interested laboratory which does not meet this deadline or tails to
successfully pass this initial PT study and still wishes to support this monitoring wlli*fd t.?1subj^t
a request letter by October 6, 2000 in order to be eligible for a second PT study EPA will not be
able to consider any laboratory request letters received after October 6, 2000. Any laboratory gaining
approval in the first PT study will not be required to participate in the second PT study These will
be the only two PT studies offered, through December 31, 2003, for laboratories wishing to gam
approval to conduct perchlorate analysis in support of UCMR Assessment Monitoring. Any
laboratory which does not request participation by October 6, 2000 and fails to pass either of these
two PT studies will not be approved to support this perchlorate monitoring. The submitted request
letter must be signed by the laboratory manager with a statement that the laboratory is currently
certified, by the primacy agency in which the laboratory is located, i to perform drinking ; water
compliance monitoring using an approved ion chromatographic method (&141.4U(a;pXW^WJ-
A copy of the letter or certificate issued by the State or primacy agency detailing this certification
must also be submitted, along with a request letter containing the information listed below
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
(§141.40(a)(5)(ii)(G)(ii)). Details pertaining to laboratory certification can be found on-line at
http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/labcint.html.
The laboratory's request letter should include the following information:
1) Laboratory name
2) Complete laboratory mailing address
3) Ion chromatography analytical method the laboratory is certified to perform
4) A copy of the letter or certificate issued by the State or primacy agency which
issued the certification to the laboratory
5) Contact person
6) Contact phone, facsimile, and e-mail (if available)
The letter should be mailed to:
Perchlorate PT Program Coordinator
U.S. EPA, MLK 140
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
To participate successfully in this program the laboratory will also need to become proficient in the
application of U.S. EPA Method 314.0, Determination of Perchlorate in Drinking Water Using Ion
Chromatography (EPA 815-B-99-003). Laboratories must follow the procedure as well as all the
duality control procedures prescribed in the method and outlined in this Supplement (§ 141.4U(ajpj
and § 141 40 Appendix A). To obtain a copy of EPA Method 314.0, contact the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline at (800) 426-4791 or access an electronic copy of the method directly on-line at
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
Upon successful completion of the perchlorate PT Program, EPA will provide each successful
laboratory with an approval letter identifying the laboratory by name and the approval date. This
letter may then be presented to any Public Water System (PWS) as evidence of laboratory approval
for perchlorate analysis supporting the UCMR. Laboratory approval is retained as long as the
laboratory maintains certification by the State or primacy agency in which the laboratory is located
to perform drinking water compliance monitoring using an approved ion chromatographic method.
If a laboratory maintains this certification, the laboratory approval for perchlorate analysis
supporting the UCMR will be limited to the time period beginning on the date specified in the UFA
issued approval letter and extending through January 28, 2004.
To allow data on perchlorate occurrence in public water systems obtained prior to January 2001 to
be grandparented, the data must meet the reporting requirements of the UCMR which include the
successful completion of the perchlorate PT Program by a laboratory approved to perform the
original analyses (§141.35(g)).
-------
^*. «-.
X*
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Section 2. Sampling Plan
2.1 Monitoring By Public Water Systems
2.1.1 Systems Required To Monitor
2.2 Sampling Frequency
2.3 Sampling Points
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Section3. Sample Collection and Preservation
3.1 Chemical Contaminants
The sample collection, preservation, and holding time details for perchlorate are described in Section
3.1.6. Sampling procedures for acetochlor are identical to those listed in the QC Manual for EPA
Method 525.2. For all UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, sample collection, preservation, and
holding time details are summarized in Table 3.1s. The sample collection and preservation
procedures as summarized below and in the QC Manual must be followed for all samples collected
for the UCMR (§ 141.40 Appendix A). If these procedures are not followed, the Rule specifies that
resampling is required within 14 days of the observance of the error (§141.40(a)(5)).
. ' I"
3.1.1 Nitrogen- and Phosphorus-Containing Pesticides 1
3.1.2 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Pesticides
* * '" * * * * * ** *
3.1.3 Acid Herbicides
* * * * * * - * * * *
3.1.4 Volatile Organic Compounds
# * * * * * * * * *
3.1.5 Semi-volatile Organic Compounds
With the addition of acetochlor, there are seven UCMR (1999) List 1 semi-volatile organic
compounds that may be analyzed with EPA Method 525.2. These compounds are: 2,4-
dinitrotoluene, 2,6-dinitrotoluene, 4,4-DDE1, acetochlor, EPTC2, molinate,2 and terbacil. Note that
three of these semi-volatile organic compounds (2,4-dinitrotoluene, 2,6-dinitrotoluene, and
acetochlor) may only be analyzed with the approved EPA analytical method; there are no approved
1 This semi-volatile organic compound is a pesticide and is specifically identified and listed as a chlorinated
pesticide in Table 1.5s.
2 These three semi-volatile organic compounds are pesticides and are specifically identified and listed as
nitrogen/phosphorus pesticides in Table 1.5s.
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
equivalent methods for these three contaminants. See Table 1.5s for a full listing of the approved
analytical methods for each contaminant.
The sampling procedures for contaminants to be monitored with EPA Method 525.2 remain
unchanged from those listed in the QC Manual. For the general sampling procedures for this
method, please refer to Section 3.1.5 of the QC Manual.
3.1.6 Inorganic Compounds
Perchlorate is the only inorganic chemical contaminant on List 1 of the UCMR (1999) List. Under
the UCMR, perchlorate must be analyzed with EPA Method 314.0 (see Table 1.5s; § 141.40(a)(5)).
Sampling procedures based on EPA Method 314.0, including sample containers, chlorine testing,
and sample collection, storage, and holding times are described below.
Sample containers - Use 3.0 milliliter, 125 milliliter, or 250 milliliter high density polyethylene
(HDPE) or glass (amber or clear) bottles. The volume collected should be sufficient to ensure a
representative sample, allow for replicate analysis and laboratory fortified matrix analysis (if
required), and minimize waste disposal.
Residual chlorine determination - If water to be sampled is known or suspected to contain residual
chlorine, determination of the level of residual chlorine is necessary. Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine
(DPD) test-kits are commercially available and can be used to determine the level of residual
chlorine in the field. Determine and record the level of residual chlorine in the water to be sampled.
However, unlike all other samples collected for UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, samples
collected for EPA Method 314.0 should not be dechlorinated, as chemicals typically used for
dechlorination will likely interfere with perchlorate analyses.
Sample collection - When sampling from a water tap, remove any aeration equipment, open the tap
and allow the system to flush until the water temperature has stabilized, usually about two minutes.
Collect the sample directly from a tap and not through any plastic or rubber hoses or tubing. Adjust
the flow from the tap to a slow but steady stream (about the diameter of a pencil) and collect the
sample from the flowing stream. Fill sample to almost overflowing. After the sample bottle has been
filled, close the sample bottle.
Sample storage - As described in EPA Method 314.0, samples do not need to be shipped iced or
stored cold in a refrigerator, but every effort should be taken to protect the samples from temperature
extremes. As all other UCMR (1999) List 1 samples must be refrigerated (§ 141.40(a)(5)), samples
for EPA Method 314.0 may be placed with other UCMR samples on ice or with frozen cold packs
in a cooler, or placed in a refrigerator that can maintain the samples at 4°C (± 2°). Samples should
not be allowed to freeze, and should be protected from extreme temperatures from the time of
collection until analysis.
Sample holding time - Analyze all samples within 28 days of collection (see Table 3.1s for a
summary of holding times). If samples are not analyzed within this period, discard and replace the
samples.
10
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 3.1s Preservation and Holding Times for Approved Analytical Methods
Method(s)
EPA 314.0
EPA 507
D5475-93
991.07
EPA 508
D5812-96
990.06
EPA 508.1
D58 12-96
990.06
EPA 5 15.1
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 5 15.2
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 524.2
D5790-95
SM6210D
SM6200B
EPA 525.2
Preservation
None
Sodium thiosulfate;
Cool 4°C; Dark
Sodium thiosulfate;
Cool 4°C; Dark
Sodium sulfite;
6 N HC1 - pH < 2;
Cool 4°C
Sodium thiosulfate;
Cool 4°C; Dark
Sodium thiosulfate;
6 N HC1 - pH < 2;
Cool 4°C; Dark
Ascorbic acid or
Sodium thiosulfate;
l:lHCl-pH<2;
Cool 4°C
Sodium sulfite; -
6 N HC1 - pH < 2;
Cool 4°C; Dark
Sample
Holding
Time
28 days
14 days
7 days
14 days
14 days
14 days
14 days
14 days
Extract
Holding Time
Not Applicable
14 days
(4°C, Dark)
14 days
(4°C, Dark)
30 days
28 days
(4°C, Dark)
14 days
(4°C, Dark)
Not Applicable
30 days from
extraction
Sample
Size
30 mL,
125 mL, or
250 mL
1L
1L
1L
1L
250 mL
40 - 120 mL
1L
Container
HDPE or Glass
(Amber or
Clear)
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Glass with
PTFE-lined
Septum
Amber Glass
with PTFE-
lined Cap
Note- EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
See Table 1 .5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
3.2
Monitoring of Routine Water Quality Parameters
11
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
12
-------
-."-
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Section 4. Sample Transport
Sample transport requirements are generally the same as those described in the QC Manual. While
EPA Method 314.0 states that samples collected for this method do not need to be shipped iced or
stored cold in a refrigerator, to ensure adequate protection for other UCMR samples, all UCMR
samples should be placed on ice or with frozen cold packs in an insulated container, cooler, or place
in a refrigerator to cool the samples to 4°C (±2°). Keep the samples at 4°C (±2°) from the time of
collection until analysis, including during any necessary transport. It is very important that no
UCMR samples are allowed to freeze. In particular, EPA Method 314.0 indicates that samples
should be protected from temperature extremes.
As stated in the QC Manual, all UCMR samples should be appropriately cooled and transported to
the analytical laboratory as soon as possible after sample collection. Note that samples^must be
packed with sufficient ice or frozen cold packs to ensure that samples are maintained at 4°C (± 2°)
during the entire transport period, but do not let any samples freeze (§141.40 Appendix A). All
samples must be processed by the laboratory within 7 to 14 days of sample collection; therefore,
provide adequate time for sample pick-up, transport, delivery, extraction, and analysis (§141.40
Appendix A). Immediate (sample collection day) transport of samples to the laboratory will ensure
adequate sample analysis time and will greatly reduce the chance that systems will need to re-collect
samples due to late samples exceeding holding times. Transporting the samples within 2 days of
sample collection is strongly recommended; transporting the samples immediatelythe same day
of sample collectionis strongly advised.
13
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
14
-------
^^
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Sections. UCMR Quality Control Requirements
The specific quality control (QC) requirements for the use of EPA Method 525.2 for acetochlor and
EPA Method 314 0 for perchlorate are described in Section 5 of this Supplement. With the
exception of recommending specific ion peaks for the confirmation of acetochlor using EPA Method
525 2 the QC requirements for measuring acetochlor with this method are identical to those
described previously in the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual.
While many of the QC requirements listed in EPA Method 314.0 are the same as those required for
the UCMR there are a few minor modifications that have been noted in this Supplement. In
addition, QC requirements unique to EPA Method 314.0 are discussed in Section 5.10 of this
Supplement.
As noted in the QC Manual, UCMR Assessment Monitoring must be conducted only using the
^aryScal methods specified in the UCMR (see Table 1.5s; §141.4000(5)) The QC procedures
Secified in these approved analytical methods and in Appendix A of the Rule are further described
in the QC Manual £nd this Supplement and must be followed to ensure accurate and precise data
(§141.40 Appendix A).
Because EPA cannot accept monitoring data if the applicable'QC requirements are not met
laboratories must strictly adhere to the QC described in this section (§141.40 Appendix A) The
following failures (in addition to the those listed in the QC Manual) will cause monitoring data to
be excluded from the database: . ,
when applicable, failure to meet the acceptance criteria for the instrument
performance check
when applicable, failure to meet the acceptance criteria for the laboratory
fortified blank
5.1 Minimum Reporting Level
Minimum reporting level (MRL) concentrations are shown in Table 5.1s. The MRL concentrations
for perchlorate and acetochlor were established at a concentration at which acceptable precision and
accuracy has been demonstrated in spiked matrix samples and which is at least l/4th the lowest
Sown adverse health concentration Please consult Section 5.1 of the QC Manual for the MRL
determination process for all other contaminants listed in Table 5.1s.
Laboratories must demonstrate that they can achieve reliable data at the MRL for each contaminant.
Therefore the calibration curve must encompass the MRL concentration (§141.40 Appendix Aj.
The laboratory must verify the accuracy of the curve at the MRL by analyzing a calibration check
standard at the MRL concentration (see Section 5.2 of the QG Manual and Section 5.2 of this
Supplement; §141.40 Appendix A). ,
15
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 5.1s UCMR
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE
Acetochlor
DCPA mono- and di-
acid degradates
EPTC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
'
Note: EPA = EPA Methods
See Table 1.5s for th<
Methods and Minimum Reporting Levels
1
Approved UCMR Analytical Methods
EPA 525.2
EPA 525.2
EPA 508; EPA 508.1; EPA 525.2;
D58 12.96; 990.06
EPA 525.2
EPA 5 15.1; EPA 5 15.2; D53 17-93;
992.32
EPA 507; EPA 525.2; D5475-93; 991.07
EPA 507; EPA 525.2- D5475-93; 991.07
EPA 524.2; D5790.95; SM6210D;
SM6200B
EPA 524.2; D5790.95; SM6210D;
SM6200B
EPA 314.0
EPA 507; EPA 525.2; D5475-93; 991.07
, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methoc
; full reference for each analytical method.
=====
Minimum Reporting
Level
2^g/La
2 Mg/La
0.8/zg/La
2^g/Lb
lMg/La
, lMg/La
0.9 Mg/La
w
10 /ug/Lc
4/;g/Lb
Is, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
Minimum reporting level (MRL) determined by multiplying by 10 the least sensitive method's minimum
SSnlimt (MDL = standard deviation times the Student's t value for 99% confidence level with n-1
de-Trees of freedom), or when available, multiplying by 5 the least sensitive method s estimated detection limit
(EDL=concentration of compound yielding approximately a five to one signal to noise ratio or the calculated
MRL^'estabUshed^aUconcentration,' which is atleast l/4th the lowest known adverse health concentration,
at which acceptable precision and accuracy has been demonstrated in spiked matrix samples.
MRL for VOCs determined by multiplying by 10 either the published MDL or 0.5^g/L, whichever is greater.
The MDL of 0 5 //g/L (0.0005 mg/L) was selected to conform to the VOC MDL requirements of 40 CFR
EPA recognizes that some laboratories are able to provide reliable data at concentrations lower than
those shown in Table 5.1s. To achieve consistency in the National Drinking Water Contaminant
Occurrence Database (NCOD), laboratories are only required to report quantitative results for
concentrations equal to or greater than the MRLs (§ 141.35(d)). However, EPA also recognizes the
usefulness of receiving more complete results to allow evaluation of the analytical method
implementation. Systems and laboratory that are able to reliably report results below the MRL are
16
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
encouraged to do so. To report reliable results obtained below the MRL, laboratories and/or water
systems may consult the instructions provided in Section 5.1 of the QC Manual.
5.2
Calibration
All methods specified in the UCMR, including EPA Method 314.0 and EPA Method 525.2, require
that calibration span the expected concentration range of the samples being analyzed. The number
of calibration standards necessary to meet this requirement varies from three to six, depending on
the method The UCMR does not require laboratories to change method calibration procedures with
the exception that the low level standard must be at or below the MRL specified for each
contaminant, and the mid-level standard must simply be near the midpoint of the calibration range
(§141.40 Appendix A).
5.2.1
Calibration Verification
In general the calibration verification specifications for the analysis of acetochlor with EPA Method
525.2 remain unchanged from those listed in the method and in the QC Manual. Tables 5.2s, 5.3s,
and 5.4s provide a brief summary of these specifications.
As with all other methods approved for UCMR monitoring, complete calibration curves for EPA
Method 314.0 are not required on a daily basis. However, to ensure accuracy of the analytical
results, the calibration curve must be verified for each analysis batch (as described below; §141.40
Appendix A). The frequency requirements for verifying calibration are presented in Table 5.2s.
It is important to note that an analysis batch for EPA Method 314.0 is different than an analysis batch
as defined for all other UCMR analyses in the QC Manual. For EPA Method 314.0 an analysis
batch is defined as a sequence of samples which are analyzed within a 30-hour (rather than 24-hour)
period and include no more than 20 (rather than 30) field samples.
The 30-hour period begins with the analysis of the instrument performance check (IPC) standard (see
Section 5.10.2.2 of this Supplement), and ends with the analysis of the end calibration check
standard. The 30-hour period does not necessarily include the analysis time used to generate the
calibration curve. However, if a new curve is prepared each time samples are analyzed, the 30-hour
period still begins with the analysis of the IPC standard.
EPA Method 314.0 specifies that the lowest level standard used in preparing the calibration curve
must be used for the initial calibration check (§141.40 Appendix A). This initial calibration check
standard (ICCS) must be verified prior to the analysis of any UCMR samples (§141.40 Appendix
A) Acceptance criteria for the Method 314.0 ICCS and the low-level calibration check standards
for all other UCMR methods are listed in Table 5.3s. If the criteria cannot be met, identify and
eliminate the source of the problem, then perform a new instrument calibration according to the
method calibration procedures.
For EPA Method 314.0, unlike all other methods currently approved for UCMR monitoring, EPA
is requiring that the analyst alternate between mid- and high-level calibration check standards (rather
than low- and mid- level standards) every 10 field samples (§ 141.40(a)(5)). Acceptance catena for
the mid-level calibration check standards are summarized in Table 5.4s. The high-level calibration
17
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
check standard specifications for EPA Method 314.0 are listed in Table 5.4.1s. If the acceptance
criteria for any of these standards are not met, reanalyze all samples that were analyzed between this
standard and the last standard meeting acceptance criteria after the calibration problem is resolved.
As with all other methods approved for the UCMR, if the samples cannot be re-analyzed, then the
data are considered invalid for those samples and should not be reported to EPA. .
It is important to note that an acceptable end calibration check standard should be analyzed before
analyses of other samples (i.e., non-UCMR samples) may begin (§141.40 Appendix A). Thus, if the
last five samples analyzed were part of the UCMR, the analyst should perform an acceptable end
calibration check standard before starting non-UCMR analyses.
Table 5.2s Freq
Methods
EPA 314.0
EPA 507
D5475-93
991.07
EPA 508
D58 12-96
990.06
EPA 508.1
D5812-96
992.32
EPA 5 15.1
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 5 15.2
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 524.2
D5790-95
SM6210D
SM6200B
EPA 525.2
uency Requirements for Verifying Calibration
Method
Specifications
each analysis batch
each working day
each working day
each 12 hour shift
each working day
each working shift
every 12 hours
every 12 hours
UCMR Specifications
Initial
each batch (not to
exceed 20 samples)
or daily (whichever
is more frequent)
each batch (not to
exceed 30 samples)
or daily (whichever
is more frequent)
Continuing
alternate' between mid-
and high-level standard
after every 10 samples
alternate between low- and
mid-level standard after
every 10 samples
Note: EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
See Table 1.5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
18
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
»
Table 5.3s UCMR Low-Level Calibration Check Standard Concentrations and
Acceptance Criteria
Contaminant
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE
Acetochlor
DCPA mono- and di-acid
degradates
EPTC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate a
Terbacil
Minimum Reporting
Level (MRL)
2^g/L
- 2 Mg/L
0.8 ,ug/L
2^g/L
lAig/L
IftgfL
0.9 //g/L
S^g/L
IQyUg/L
4/^g/L
2/j.g/L
Concentration of
Low-Level Standard
<;MRL
<;MRL
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Contaminant
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Mid-Level Standard
middle of calibration range
middle of calibration range
middle of calibration range
middle of calibration range
Acceptance
Criteria
±20%
±20%
±15%
±20%
Table 5.4.1s
High-Level Calibration Check Standard Concentration and Acceptance
Criteria for EPA Method 314.0
Contaminant
High-Level Standard
Highest-level calibration standard
Acceptance
Criteria
±15%
5.3
Method Detection Limit
Laboratories must calculate an MDL for acetochlor according to the procedure in CFR §136
Appendix B (included in the QC Manual as Appendix C; § 141.40 Appendix A). Laboratories must
calculate an MDL for perchlorate according to the procedure in CFR §136 Appendix B, but should
extend this MDL determination beyond seven replicate analyses on a single day and instead conduct
these seven replicate analyses over a period of three days, as specified in Method 314.0, Section
9.2.6 (§141.40(a)(5)).
5.4
Laboratory Reagent (Method) Blank
To determine if method contaminants or other interferences are present in the laboratory
environment, the reagents, or the apparatus, all of the methods approved for the UCMR require
periodic analysis of a laboratory reagent (method) blank (LRB).
The required frequencies for analyzing method blanks for the UCMR are listed in Table 5.5s
(§ 141 40 Appendix A). For EPA Method 525.2, these specifications are the same as those described
in the QC Manual. The specifications listed for EPA Method 314.0 are explained below.
For EPA Method 314.0, the method blank must be analyzed as the first sample on the instrument
(immediately following the IPC standard; §I41.40(a)(5)). This differs slightly from all other
methods approved for use under the UCMR, as the method blank for EPA Method 314.0 is analyzed
immediately before, rather than immediately after, the ICCS.
Consistent with the method blank specifications for all other UCMR-approved methods, if
perchlorate is detected with EPA Method 314.0 at a concentration equal to or greater than one-half
the MRL (see Table 5.6s), no further analyses should be performed until the source of the problem
20
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
is identified and eliminated. If the source is traced to any material that was used in the preparation
of the set of samples to be analyzed, then discard all these prepared samples and repeat the
preparation procedure using another aliquot of each sample. If another aliquot is not available, then
consider all data invalid for all samples in the analysis batch and flag the monitoring data as not
meeting QC criteria. Data not meeting UCMR QC criteria should not be reported to EPA.
For EPA Method 314.0, a second method blank may need to be prepared and analyzed if sample
matrices have been pretreated to reduce the risk of high common anion interference. QC procedures
related to the pretreatment of samples for EPA Method 314.0 are explained further in Section
5.10.2.3 of this Supplement. Analysis of a pretreated method blank is necessary to confirm that no
background effects from the pretreatment process are present. If an analysis batch contains only
pretreated samples, then only a pretreated method blank is required (§141.40(a)(5)).
Table 5.5s Frequency Requirements for Analyzing Laboratory Reagent (Method)
Blanks
Method
EPA 314.0
EPA 507
D5475-93
991.07
EPA 508
D58 12-96
990.06
EPA 508.1
D5812-96
992.32
EPA 5 15.1
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 5 15.2
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 524.2
D5790-95
SM6210D
SM6200B
EPA 525.2
Method Specifications
1 per analysis batch (<20 samples) a
1 per sample set or if reagents changed
1 per sample set or if reagents changed
1 per sample set per 12 hour shift
1 per sample set
1 per sample set
each batch or 1 per 20 samples
every 12 hour extraction batch
UCMR Specifications
1 per analysis batch (^20 samples) a
1 per sample batch (^20 samples)
1 per sample batch (^20 samples)
1 per sample batch (<20 samples)
1 per sample batch (^20 samples)
1 per sample batch (<20 samples)
1 per sample batch (^20 samples)
1 per sample batch (^20 samples)
Note: EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
See Table 1.5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
As required in EPA Method 314.0 and for the UCMR, a pretreated method blank may need to be prepared and
analyzed if a sample matrix has been pretreated to reduce the risk of high common anion interference
(§141.40(a)(5)).
21
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 5.6s UCMR Acceptance Criteria for Laboratory Reagent (Method) Blanks
Contaminant
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE
Acetochlor
DCPA mono- and di-acid
degradates
EPTC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
Minimum Reporting Level
2/zg/L
2yUg/L
0.8Mg/L
2//g/L
l^g/L
lMg/L
0.9Mg/L
S^gfL
10yWg/L
4Aig/L
2A
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
5.6 Sample Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate
To provide data on the analytical precision and analytical accuracy of laboratories performing
analyses for the UCMR, matrix spike (MS) and matrix spike duplicate (MSD) samples must be
prepared and analyzed for all methods approved for the UCMR (§141.40 Appendix A). For
information on calculating analytical precision and analytical accuracy (reported as data elements
14 and 15, respectively), as well as more general information on UCMR specifications for MS/MSD
analyses, please refer to the QC Manual.
The frequencies required under the UCMR for the preparation and analysis of MS/MSD samples are
listed in Table 5.7s (§141.40 Appendix A). For EPA Methods 314.0 and 525.2, laboratories are
required to perform MS/MSD sample analyses on a minimum of 5% of the UCMR samples that are
processed in each individual analysis batch (Method 314.0) or extraction batch (Method 525.2)
(§141.40 Appendix A). This would represent 1 sample out of 20 as a minimum or at least one with
each analysis batch. For methods that involve extractions, divide one sample from each extraction
batch into two aliquots (one MS, one MSD), and spike each with a known concentration of the
contaminants prior to extraction. Carry the entire set of unspiked sample and MS/MSD samples
through the entire extraction and analysis process. For methods that do not involve extractions and
for analysis batches of 20 or less, spike and analyze two aliquots of one of the UCMR samples in
the batch. If the analysis batch contains more than 20 UCMR samples, then divide, spike, and
analyze two samples.
Laboratories must also choose a spiking concentration from one of the two concentrations listed in
Table 5 8s (§ 141 40 Appendix A). As described in the QC Manual, the spiking concentration should
be within ± 20% of one of the levels provided in the table. To determine precision data from
laboratory MS/MSD samples at the MRL level and at a higher concentration, spike the samples at
the concentrations listed in approximately a 50% ratio. For example, if a set of 40 samples are
received, spike two aliquots of a sample from the first 20 samples with the low-level (± 20 % MRL)
spike, and spike the MS/MSD for the second set of 20 samples with the mid-level spike.
As noted in Section 5.10.2.3 of this QC Supplement, if the conductivity of the sample matrix exceeds
the matrix conductivity threshold (MCT) and pretreatment is required, a pretreated MS/MSD set
must also be prepared and analyzed (§141.40(a)(5)). This pretreated MS/MSD set should be
subjected to the same pretreatment techniques employed for the pretreated field samples.
Note: A maximum of 20 samples can be included in an analysis batch for EPA Method 314.0.
23
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 5.7s Frequency Requirements for Performing Spiked Sample Analyses
EPA 314.0
EPA 507
D5475-93
991.07
EPA 508
D5812-96
990.06
EPA 508.1
D58 12-96
992.32
EPA 5 15.1
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 5 15.2
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 524.2
D5790-95
SM6210D
SM6200B
EPA 525.2
Method Specifications
1 per 20 samples or analysis batch,
whichever is more frequent
1 per 20 samples or each sample set,
whichever is greater
1 per 10 samples or each sample set,
whichever is greater
1 per sample matrix
1 per 10 samples or each sample set,
whichever is greater
1 per 10 samples or each sample set,
whichever is greater
Not required unless matrix effects
suspected
1 per extraction batch, 1 per 20 samples
UCMR Specifications
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more
frequent3; alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequent2;
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequenta;
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per-
batch, whichever is more frequent3;
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequent";
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequent";
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequent3;
alternate low-, mid-level
MS/MSD per 20 samples or per
batch, whichever is more frequent3;
alternate low-, mid-level
Note: EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series - AOAC Methods.
See Table 1.5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
For example, if a batch contains 20 or fewer samples, then 1 MS/MSD set must be analyzed for toatbatch
However if a batch contains more than 20 samples, then at least two MS/MSD sets must be analyzed (§ 141.40
Appendix A) For EPA Method 314.0, a batch may not contain more than 20 samples.
Table 5.8s Concentrations for Spiking MS/MSD Samples
Contaminant
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE
Low-Level Spike
Concentration
2 pg/L ± 20 %
2//g/L±20'%
0.8 /^g/L ± 20 %
Mid-Level Spike
Concentration
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
24
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Contaminant
Acetochlor
DCPA mono- and di-acid
degradates
EPTC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
Low-Level Spike
Concentration
2 £ig/L ±20 %
1 jUg/L±20%
1 ^g/L ± 20 %
0.9 yUg/L ± 20 %
5//g/L±20%
10//g/L±20%
4 yWg/L ± 20 %
2 Mg/L ± 20 %
Mid-Level Spike
Concentration
± 20% of miid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
±20% of mid-level standard
± 20% of mid-level standard
5.7
Internal Standard
5.8
Surrogate Standard
5.9 Confirmation
5.9.1 Gas Chromatographic Methods
5.9.2 Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Confirmation
As described in the QC Manual, the UCMR requires confirmation of any organic contaminant
detected above the MRLby Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) methods (§141.40
Appendix A). Laboratories retain the option of confirming the presence of an organic analyte using
a second chromatography column prior to submitting the sample for GC/MS analyses, or going
directly from the primary column analyses to GC/MS confirmation. If the organic contaminant
detection is confirmed by the secondary column, then reconfirmby GC/MS using three specified ion
peaks for contaminant identification. Recommended ion peaks for identification purposes are listed
in Table 5.11s. Please refer to the QC Manual for additional specifications for GC/MS confirmation.
25
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 5.11s Recommended Confirmation Ions
Contaminant
Recommended Confirmation Ions
2,4-dinitrotoluene
63, 89,165
2,6-dinitrotoluene
63, 89, 165
4,4'-DDE
246,316,318
Acetochlor
59,132,146
DCPA dimethyl ester
299,300, 302
EPTC
86, 128, 189
Molinate
83, 126, 187
MTBE
41, 57, 73
Nitrobenzene
51,77,123
Perchlorate
Not Applicable
Terbacil
116, 160, 161
Tote- These ions are recommended for use in confirming all positive results. However, since mass spectrometers
using different mass selection techniques may display spectra with different mass intensities, the analyst may
choose alternate ions that better characterize the spectra displayed by their mass spectrometer.
5.9.3 Mass Spectrometry Methods
Identification and confirmation of acetochlor using EPA Method 525.2 must be performed as
described in the method and the QC Manual (§ 141.40(a)(5)).
5.9.4 Ion Chromatography Identification
EPA Method 314.0 is the only ion chromatography method approved for the UCMR. To confirm
perchlorate detection using this method, compare the retention time of a suspected perchlorate peak
within the retention time window in the sample chromatogram to the actual retention time of a
known analyte peak in a calibration standard. If the retention time of a suspect peak corresponds,
within the acceptable limits, to the retention time in the daily calibration check standards, and the
retention time is reproducible during the analysis batch, then identification is presumed positive.
The width of the retention time window used to make identifications should be based on
measurements of actual retention time variations of standards measured over several days. Three
times the standard deviation of retention time may be used as a suggested window size but the
retention time window should not extend beyond ± 5% of the retention time for perchlorate. Table
5 ll.ls lists the estimated retention time for perchlorate that has been achieved by this method.
However, the experience of the analyst should weigh heavily in the interpretation of these
chromatograms.
26
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Table 5.11.1s Estimated Retention Time for Perchlorate Using EPA Method 314.0
Analyte
Retention Time (minutes)
Perchlorate
10.1 ± 0.2
If a low concentration of perchlorate is suspected in an unknown sample, but the retention time has
drifted to the edge of the retention time window, a low-level perchlorate matrix spike should be
prepared and analyzed to confirm the matrix-induced retention time shift.
Dilution of a sample may also be performed if more complete resolution is needed between a
suspected perchlorate peak and a coeluting (i.e., shoulder) peak. If dilution is performed, the analyst
should realize that the dilution will alter the MRL for that diluted sample analysis by a proportion
equivalent to the dilution.
Dilution may also be necessary if a perchlorate response exceeds the highest calibration standard
concentration. After conducting the analysis of the diluted sample, back calculate the actual field
sample concentration by applying the correct dilution factor. Report only those values that fall
between the MRL and the highest calibration standards. For information on reporting results below
the UCMR perchlorate MRL of 4 pg/L, please refer to Section 5.1 of the QC Manual.
5.10 Additional Quality Controls
The requirements for rejecting samples for improper sample collection or shipment are unchanged
from those described in the QC Manual. In addition, the laboratory must ensure each sample is
analyzed within the required holding time listed in Table 5.12s (§141.40 Appendix A). When
appropriate, EPA standardized the holding times across analytical methods for the same contaminant
group.
Table 5.12s Maximum Holding Times for Samples and Extracts
EPA 314.0
EPA 507
D5475-93
991.07
EPA 508
D5812-96
990.06
EPA 508.1
D58 12-96
992.32
Sample
28 days
14 days
7 days
14 days
Extract
Not Applicable
14 days
14 days
30 days
27
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Approved Analytical Methods
EPA 515.1
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 5 15.2
D53 17-93
992.32
EPA 524.2
D5790-95
SM6210D
SM6200B -
EPA 525.2
Sample
14 days
14 days
14 days
14 days
Extract
28 days
14 days
Not Applicable
30 days from extraction
Note: EPA = EPA Methods, D = ASTM Methods, SM = APHA Standard Methods, 900 series = AOAC Methods.
See Table 1.5s for the full reference for each analytical method.
5.10.1 Laboratory Fortified Blank
To ensure the quality of the solution used to prepare the MS/MSD samples, EPA Method 314.0 also
requires the preparation and analysis of a laboratory fortified blank (LFB) (§141.40(a)(5)). This
sample is prepared from the same secondary dilution stock used to fortify the MS/MSD samples.
This secondary dilution stock should be prepared from the same stock used to prepare the calibration
standards, and must not be prepared from an external source stock such as that used to prepare the
QC sample (§141.40(a)(5)).
Laboratories are required to analyze a LFB (filtered, for particulate removal, as if it were a field
sample) with each analysis batch immediately following the ICCS (§141.40(a)(5)). The LFB must
be prepared with the same solution used to prepare the matrix spike and should be prepared at
concentrations no greater than ten times the highest concentration observed in any field sample and
should be varied to reflect the range of concentrations observed in field samples (§141.40(a)(5)).
If any deviations in the perchlorate secondary dilution stock concentration are present, it will be
reflected in the LFB and not exclusively attributed to a matrix upon analysis of the matrix spike.
Calculate accuracy as percent recovery (see Section 9.4.1.3 of EPA Method 314.0). The recovery
for perchlorate must fall in the range of 85 - 115% prior to analyzing samples (§ 141.40(a)(5)). If the
LFB recovery for an analysis batch does not meet these recovery criteria, the data are considered
invalid, and the source of the problem should be identified and resolved before continuing analyses.
5.10.2 Matrix Conductivity Threshold Quality Control Requirements
One of the initial problems in the development of an analytical method for monitoring low-levels
of perchlorate in drinking water was the interference caused by high background concentrations of
total dissolved solids (TDS). To address this problem, EPA Method 314.0 incorporates several steps
designed to keep this interference to a minimum. These steps are centered around a requirement of
each laboratory to determine the matrix conductivity threshold (MCT) of their system during their
28
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
initial demonstration of capability (see Section 9.2.8 of EPA Method 314.0; § 141.40(a)(5)). If a
sample's measured conductivity exceeds this threshold, certain steps (either dilution or pretreatment
of the sample) must be taken to ensure data quality (§141.40(a)(5)). Once a laboratory determines
their MGT, they must also confirm that perchlorate can be recovered at the MRL (± 30%) from
samples that have been prepared with a conductivity at the MCT (± 10% ; see Section 9.2.8.11 of
EPA Method 314.0; § 141.40(a)(5)).
5.10.2.1 Conductivity Meter Calibration Verification and Conductance Determination
Prior to analyzing a sample for perchlorate, the conductance of that sample matrix must be measured
(§141 40(a)(5)). To ensure the accuracy of these measurements, the conductivity meter calibration
must first be verified or established (as described in Section 10.4 of EPA Method 314.0) for each
analysis batch (§141.40(a)(5)).
5.10.2.2 Instrument Performance Check
To verify the MCT as part of each an analysis batch, EPA Method 314.0 requires that an instrument
performance check (IPC) standard be prepared and analyzed prior to the analysis of any other
samples (including the method blank and the ICCS). The PC should be prepared with a mixed
common anion solution at the MCT (±10%) and spiked with a perchlorate (at a suggested level of
25 Aig/L). As specified in the method, before any further analyses are conducted, the analyst must
verify that: .. . .
1) the IPC solution conductance, measured with the calibrated conductivity meter,
is within ±10% of original measured value (when the MCT was initially
determined and the solution was originally prepared);
2) the area to height ratio percent difference (PEW, see Section 9.2.8.8 of the
method) for the observed perchlorate response in the IPC is less than 25%;
3) the level of perchlorate measured in the IPC is between 80 -120% of the spiked
level; and
4) the shift in perchlorate retention time is less than 5%.
If the IPC fails to meet any of the above criteria, the source of the problem must be identified before
sample analyses may begin (§ 141.40(a)(5)). As discussed in the method, if a laboratory frequently
fails to meet these IPC criteria, it may be necessary for that laboratory to revise their MCT to a more
appropriate lower level.
5.10.2.3 Additional Quality Control Procedures if Dilution or Pretreatment is Required
As mentioned in Section 5.10.2.1 above, before any field sample is analyzed, the conductance of the
sample matrix must be measured (§ 141.40(a)(5)). If the conductivity of the sample matrix exceeds
the MCT, then dilution or pretreatment of the sample is necessary.
29
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
If dilution is necessary, the sample should be diluted with reagent water by a factor large enough to
ensure that the diluted sample conductivity is below the MCT. Dilution will also raise the required
MRL for that sample by the same factor. If perchlorate is measured in the diluted sample above the
elevated MRL, back calculate the actual field sample concentration and report the results.
If dilution does not provide the required results, pretreatment of the sample should be performed.
Pretreatment is described in Section 11.1.4 of the method, and usually requires the addition of three
pretreatment cartridges. If pretreatment is performed, EPA Method 314.0 requires that the following
additional quality control samples must also be prepared:
1. a pretreated laboratory reagent (method) blank;
2. a pretreated laboratory fortified blank (LFB); and
3. a pretreated MS/MSD set.
All of these QC samples should be subject to the same pretreatment techniques employed for the
pretreated-field samples. It is important to note that the pretreated method blank and laboratory
fortified blank (LFB) must be prepared and analyzed before any field samples are pretreated
(§ 141 40(a)(5)) This is required to ensure that no background interference or bias is contributed by
the pretreatment process. If background interference or bias is observed, the appropriate steps must
be taken before field samples are pretreated (§141.40(a)(5)). These steps may include increasing the
volume of rinse for the pretreatment columns. Once the interference has been eliminated and the
pretreated method blank and LFB have met the appropriate acceptance criteria, the analyst may begin
pretreating field samples as appropriate.
30
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Section 6. Additional Analytical Method Specifications
6.1 Clarifications Concerning EPA Methods 515.1 and 515.2 and the Approved
Equivalent Methods
6.2 Recommendations for EPA Method 524.2 and the Approved Equivalent Methods
31
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
32
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
Section?. Reporting
7.1 Public Water Systems Reporting to EPA
**********
7.1.1 Reporting of Results Obtained for the DCPA Mono- and Di-Acid Degradates
* *. * * * * * * - * *
7.1.2 Reporting of Data Below the Specified Minimum Reporting Level
*
7.1.3 Reporting of Water Quality Parameter Data
7.1.4 Reporting of Matrix Conductance and Pretreated QC Data for Perchlorate
Each laboratory performing perchlorate analyses using EPA Method 314.0 will need to monitor and
record the conductance of every matrix analyzed for perchlorate(§ 141.40(a)(5)(ii)(G). Furthermore,
EPA Method 314.0 specifies that when field samples exceed the matrix conductivity threshold
(MCT) and pretreatment is employed to reduce the high ionic character of the matrix, additional
quality control samples must be analyzed (§141.40(a)(5)). These additional QC requirements are
discussed in Section 5 of this Supplement and include a pretreated method blank, pretreated
laboratory fortified blank (LFB), and a pretreated MS/MSD set for each pretreated matrix.
It is the responsibility of the laboratory to provide the matrix conductance data as well as these
additional pretreated QC data to their client PWS and to retain these data in the laboratory's official
analytical data archive. It should be clarified, however, that these results do not need to be reported
to EPA since they were not promulgated as specific data reporting elements. The only case in which
the reporting of these data would be required is the rare situation in which all the field samples in
an analysis batch require pretreatment. In this case, the only LRB and LFB analyzed with that
analysis batch might be the pretreated LRB and LFB, as specified in Sections 9.3.1.1 and9.3.3.1 of
EPA Method 314.0. When this occurs, those pretreated QC samples should be reported as the
official LRB and LFB samples, and the first pretreated MS/MSD should be designated as the official
MS/MSD for the analysis batch.
7.2 Public Notification of Results (Report of PWS to Consumers)
33
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual ' March2000
34
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual ,
March 2000
Appendix A (revised)
Abbreviations and Acronyms
- 2,4-dinitrotoluene
- 2,6-dinitrotoluene
_ 4,4'-dichloro dichlorophenyl ethylene, a degradation product of DDT
- alachlor ethanesulfonic acid, a degradation product of alachlor
- Association of Official Analytical Chemists
- American Public Health Association
- Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
- American Society for Testing and Materials
- Buffalo Green Monkey cells, a specific cell line used to grow viruses
- Chemical Abstract Service
- Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number
- Contaminant Candidate List
- Consumer Confidence Reports
- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act
- Code of Federal Regulations
- colony forming unit
- colony forming units per milliliter
- community water system
- dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate, chemical name of the herbicide dacthal
2,4-DNT
2,6-DNT
4,4'-DDE
Alachlor ES A
AOAC
APHA
ASDWA
ASTM
BGM
CAS
CASRN
CCL
CCR
CERCLA
CFR
CPU
CFU/mL
CWS
DCPA
DCPA mono-
and di-acid
degradates
DDE
DDT
DNA
EDL
EPA
EPTC
EPTDS
ESA
FACA
FTE
GC
GLI method
GW
GUDI
- degradation products of DCPA
- dichloro dichlorophenyl ethylene, a degradation product of DDT
- dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane, a general insecticide
- deoxyribonucleic acid
estimated detection limit
Environmental Protection Agency
s-ethyl-dipropylthiocarbamate, an herbicide
- Entry Point to the Distribution System
- ethanesulfonic acid, a degradation product of alachlor
Federal Advisory Committee Act
full-time equivalent
gas chromatography, a laboratory method
Great Lakes Instruments method
ground water
ground water under the direct influence (of surface water)
A-l
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
HPLC
ICCS
ICR-
IMS
IPC
IRFA
IRIS
IS
LFB
LFM
MAC
MOA
MCL
MCT
MDL
MRL
MS
MS
MSD
MTBE
NAWQA
NCOD
NDWAC
NERL
NFS
NTIS
NTNCWS
NTTAA
OGWDW
OMB
PAH
PB
PBMS
210pb
pCi/L
PCR
210p0
PT
PWS
PWSF
- high performance liquid chromatography, a laboratory method'
- initial calibration check standard
- Information Collection Request / Rule
- immunomagnetic separation
- instrument performance check
- initial regulatory flexibility analysis
- Integrated Risk Information System
- internal standard
- laboratory fortified blank
- laboratory fortified matrix (matrix spike)
- liquid/liquid extraction, a laboratory method
- Mycobacterium avium complex
- Memorandum of Agreement
- maximum contaminant level
- matrix conductivity threshold
- method detection limit
- minimum reporting level
- mass spectrometry, a laboratory method
- sample matrix spike
- sample matrix spike duplicate
- methyl tertiary-butyl ether, a gasoline additive
- National Water Quality Assessment Program
- National Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database
- National Drinking Water Advisory Council
- National Environmental Research Laboratory
- National Pesticide Survey
- National Technical Information Service
- non-transient non-community water system
- National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
- Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
- Office of Management and Budget
- Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
- particle beam
- Performance-Based Measurement System
- Lead-210 (also Pb-210), a lead isotope and radionuclide; part of the uranium
decay series
- picocuries per liter
- polymerase chain reaction
- Polonium-210 (also Po-2 10), a polonium isotope and radionuclide; part of the
uranium decay series
- performance testing
- Public Water System
- Public Water System Facility
A-2
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
QA
QC
RFA
RPD
RSD
SBREFA
SD
SDWA
SDWIS
SDWIS FED
SM
SMF
SOC
SPE
SRF
STORET
SW
TBD
TDS
TNCWS
UCM
UCMR
UMRA
USEPA
UV
VOC
quality assurance
quality control
royal demolition explosive, hexahydro- 1 ,3,5-trinitro- 1 ,3,5-triazine
Regulatory Flexibility Act
relative percent difference
relative standard deviation
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
standard deviation
Safe Drinking Water Act
Safe Drinking Water Information System
the Federal Safe Drinking Water Information System
Standard Methods
Standard Compliance Monitoring Framework
synthetic organic compound
solid phase extraction, a laboratory method
State Revolving Fund
Storage and Retrieval System
surface water
to be determined
total dissolved solids
transient non-community water system
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation/Rule
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
United States Environmental Protection Agency
ultraviolet
volatile organic compound
micrograms per liter
A-3
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual March 2000
A-4
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual ' March 2000
Appendix B (revised)
Definitions
Assessment Monitoring means sampling, testing, and reporting of listed contaminants that have
available analytical methods and for which preliminary data indicate their possible occurrence in
drinking water. Assessment Monitoring will be conducted for the UCMR (1999) List 1
contaminants.
Index Systems means a limited number of small CWSs and NTNCWSs, selected from the
Assessment Monitoring systems in State Plans, that will be required to provide more detailed and
frequent monitoring for the UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants (§ 141.40(a)(6)). The Index Systems
will be selected to geographically coincide with watersheds and areas studied under the United States
Geological Survey's National Water Quality Assessment program. In addition to the reporting
information required for Assessment Monitoring, the Index Systems must also report information
on system operating conditions (such as water source, pumping rates, and environmental setting)
(§ 141.40(a)(6)). These systems must monitor each year of the 5-year UCMR cycle, with EPA paying
for all reasonable monitoring costs (§141.40(a)(4)(i)(A)). This more detailed and frequent
monitoring will provide important information with which EPA can more fully evaluate the
conditions under which small systems operate.
Listed contaminant means a contaminant identified as an analyte in Table 1, 141.40(a)(3) of the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR). To distinguish the current 1999 UCMR
listed contaminants from potential future UCMR listed contaminants, all references to UCMR
contaminant lists will identify the appropriate year in parenthesis immediately following the acronym
UCMR and before the referenced list. For example, the contaminants included in the UCMR (1999)
List include the component lists identified as UCMR (1999) List 1, UCMR (1999) List 2 and UCMR
(1999) List 3 contaminants.
Listing cycle means the 5-year period for which each revised UCMR list is effective and during
which no more than 30 unregulated contaminants from the list may be required to be monitored.
EPA is mandated to develop and promulgate a new UCMR List every 5 years.
Monitored systems means all community water systems serving more than 10,000 people, and the
national representative sample of community and non-transient non-community water systems
serving 10,000 or fewer people that are selected to be part of a State Plan for the UCMR. (Note that
for this round of Assessment Monitoring, systems that purchase their primary source of water are
not included in the monitoring.)
Monitoring (as distinct from Assessment Monitoring) means all aspects of determining the quality
of drinking water relative to the listed contaminants. These aspects include drinking water sampling
and testing, and the reviewing, reporting, and submission to EPA of analytical results.
Most vulnerable systems for Systems most vulnerable) means a subset of 5 to not more than 25
systems of all monitored systems in a State that are determined by that State in consultation with the
EPA Regional Office to be most likely to have the listed contaminants occur in their drinking waters,
considering the characteristics of the listed contaminants, precipitation, system operation, and
environmental conditions (soils, geology and land use).
B-l
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
Pre-Screen Testing means sampling, testing, and reporting of the listed contaminants that may have
newly emerged as drinking water concerns and, in most cases, for which methods are in an early
stage of development. Pre-Screen Testing will be conducted by a limited number of systems (up to
- 200) States will nominate up to 25 of the most vulnerable systems per State for Pre-Screen Testing
The actual Pre-Screen Testing systems will be selected from the list of nominated systems through
the use of a random number generator. Pre-Screen Testing will be performed to determine whether
a listed contaminant occurs in sufficient frequency in the most vulnerable systems or sampling
locations to warrant its being included in future Assessment Monitoring or Screening Surveys. Pre-
Screen Testing will be conducted for the UCMR (1999) List 3 contaminants.
Random Sampling is a statistical sampling method by which each member of the population has an
equal probability (an equal random chance) of being selected as part of a sample (the sample being
a small subset of the population which represents the population as a whole).
Representative Sample (or National Representative Sample) means a small subset of all community
and non-transient non-community water systems serving 10,000 or fewer people which EPA selects
using a random number generator. The systems in the representative sample are selected using a
stratified random sampling process that ensures that this small subset of systems will proportionally
reflect (is "representative" of) the actual number of size- and water type-categories of all small
systems nationally. In finalizing State Plans, a State may substitute a system from the replacement
list for a system selected as part of the original representative sample, if a system on the
representative sample list in the State Plan is closed, merged or purchases water from another
system.
Sampling means the act of collecting water from the appropriate location in a public water system
(from the applicable point from an intake or well to the end of a distribution line, or in some limited
cases, a residential tap) following proper methods for the particular contaminant or group of
contaminants.
Sampling Point means a unique location where samples are to be collected.
Screening Survey means sampling, testing, and reporting of the listed contaminants^ for which
analytical methods are recently developed and have uncertain potential for occurrence in drinking
water by a subset of approximately 300 systems from all monitored systems selected through use of
a random number generator for public water system identification numbers. These systems must
conduct the Screening Survey for the contaminants on UCMR (1999) List 2 as will be further
described in the List 2 Rule (§141.40(a)(7)). Two Screening Surveys may be conducted for the
UCMR (1999) List 2 contaminants.
State means, for the purposes of this section, each of the fifty States, the District of Columbia U.S
Territories and Tribal lands. For the national representative sample, Guam, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Trust
Territories of the Pacific Islands are each treated as an individual State. All Tribal water systems in
the U S which have status as a State under Section 1451 of the Safe Drinking Water Act for this
program will be considered collectively as one State for the purposes of selecting a representative
sample of small systems.
State Monitoring Plan for State Plan) means a State's portion of the national representative sample
of CWSs and NTNCWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people which must monitor for unregulated
B-2
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual . March 2000
contaminants (Assessment Monitoring, Screening Survey(s) ancTIndex Systems) and all large
systems (systems serving greater than 10,000 people) which are required to monitor for Screening
Survey contaminants. A State Plan may be developed by a State's acceptance of EPA's
representative sample for that State, or by a State's selection of systems from a replacement list for
systems specified in the first list that are closed, are merged, or purchase water from another system.
A State Plan also includes the process by which the State will inform each public water system of
its selection for the plan and of its responsibilities to monitor. A State Plan will also include the
systems required to conduct Pre-Screen Testing, selected from the State's designation of vulnerable
systems. The State Plan may be part of the Partnership Agreement (PA) between the State and EPA.
Stratified Random Sampling is a procedure to draw a random sample from a population that has been
divided into subpopulations or strata, with each stratum comprised of a population subset sharing
common characteristics. Random samples are selected from each stratum proportional to that
stratum's proportion of the entire population. The aggregate random sample (compiled from all the
strata samples) provides a random sample of the entire population that reflects the proportional
distribution of characteristics of the population. In the context of the UCMR, the population served
by public water systems was stratified by size (with size categories of 500 or fewer people served,
501 to 3,300 people served, and 3,301 to 10,000 people served) and by water source type supplying
the water system (ground water or surface water). This stratification was done to ensure that systems
randomly selected as nationally representative sample systems would proportionally reflect the actual
number of size and water type categories nationally.
Testing means, for the purposes of the UCMR and distinct from Pre-Screen Testing, the submission
and/or shipment of samples following appropriate preservation practices to protect the integrity of
the sample; the chemical, radiological, physical and/or microbiological analysis of samples; and the
reporting of the sample's analytical results for evaluation. Testing is a subset of activities defined
as monitoring.
Unregulated contaminants means chemical, microbiological, radiological and other substances that
occur in drinking water or sources of drinking water that are not currently regulated under the federal
drinking water program. EPA has not issued standards for these substances in drinking water (i.e.,
maximum contaminant levels or treatment technology requirements). EPA is required by Congress
to establish a program to monitor for selected unregulated contaminants in public water systems to
determine whether they should be considered for future regulation to protect public health. The
selected contaminants are listed in 141.40(a)(3), Table 1, the UCMR List.
Vulnerable time (or vulnerable period) means the time (or, in some cases, the 3-month quarter) of
the year determined as the most likely to have the listed group of contaminants present at their
highest concentrations or densities in drinking water. The vulnerable determination, in the ease of
the UCMR, is made by the EPA or by the State (under arrangement with the EPA) for a system,
subset of systems, or all systems in a State. The vulnerable determination is based on characteristics
of the contaminants, precipitation, system operations, and environmental conditions such as soil
types, geology, and land use. This determination does not indicate or imply that the listed
contaminants will be identified in the drinking water with certainty, but only that sampling
conducted during the vulnerable period presumably has the highest likelihood of identifying those
contaminants in higher concentrations relative to other sampling times of the year, if and when the
contaminants occur.
B-3
-------
Supplement A to the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual
March 2000
B-4
------- |