United States Office of Water EPA 815 -R-01 -023
Environmental Protection 4607 October 2001
Agency
Reference Guide for
the Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation
j^lj Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Foreword
Under §1445(a)(2)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to establish criteria for a program to monitor
unregulated contaminants and to publish a list of contaminants to be monitored. In response to this
requirement, EPA published the revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
(UCMR) for public water systems (PWSs) on September 17, 1999 (64 FR 50556), and in
supplemental rules, including the Perchlorate and Acetochlor Rule (March 2, 2000 - 65 FR 11372),
and the List 2 Rule (January 11, 2001 - 66 FR 2273). EPA expects to publish other rules detailing
minor modifications to the UCMR program and List 3 monitoring requirements and analytical methods,
as needed.
This document was designed to provide an overview of the revised UCMR. It is intended to integrate
the most essential elements of the UCMR, and to provide a reference guide to the UCMR guidance
documents and UCMR rules published by EPA. This document briefly describes the three-tiered
monitoring approach to the UCMR, monitoring schedules, reporting requirements, and the roles and
responsibilities of States, EPARegions, and PWSs in UCMR implementation. Note that this document
does not explain all UCMR Program requirements in detail. Where more detailed and comprehensive
information is available through other EPA guidance documents, the reader is referred to these
documents.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
11
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
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 with James Taft as Targeting and Analysis Branch
Chief. Rachel Sakata and Phyllis Branson served as Work Assignment Managers. The UCMR
Work Group provided technical guidance throughout. External expert reviewers and many
stakeholders provided valuable advice to improve the UCMR and this document. The Cadmus
Group, Inc., served as the prime contractor for developing this document.
in
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
IV
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Table of Contents
Foreword i
Acknowledgments iii
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose and Background 1
1.2 Overview of the UCMR Program 2
2. Affected Entities and Their Responsibilities 13
2.1 Large Public Water Systems 13
2.1.1 Assessment Monitoring 13
2.1.2 Screening Surveys 13
2.1.3 Pre-Screen Testing 14
2.2 Small Public Water Systems 14
2.2.1 Assessment Monitoring 14
2.2.2 Screening Surveys 15
2.2.3 Pre-Screen Testing 16
2.3 Index Systems 16
2.4 State and Tribal Participation 17
3. Contaminants to be Monitored 19
3.1 Assessment Monitoring 19
3.2 Screening Surveys 19
3.3 Pre-Screen Testing 20
3.4 Water Quality Parameters 20
4. Sample Collection and Analysis for UCMR (1999) Contaminants 23
4.1 Large Public Water Systems 23
4.2 Small Public Water Systems 23
5. General Monitoring Requirements 25
5.1 Monitoring Frequency and Sampling Location 25
5.2 General Quality Control Requirements 27
5.3 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection 32
5.3.1 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection:
Additional Requirements Specific to Large Systems 32
5.3.2 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection:
Additional Requirements Specific to Small Systems 33
5.3.3 Quality Control Requirements for Laboratories 34
5.3.4 Additional Quality Controls 34
6. UCMR Reporting Requirements 35
6.1 Data Elements 35
6.2 Electronic Reporting and Data Review 38
6.3 Public Notification 39
7. State Responsibilities 41
7.1 State Plan Development 41
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
7.2 Partnership Agreements 41
7.3 State Waivers for Contaminants Monitored at Large Systems 42
7.4 Governors' Petition to Add Contaminants to the Monitoring List 42
8. Participation of Tribal Public Water Systems 43
8.1 Tribal Monitoring Plan Development 43
8.2 Sample Collection Responsibility 43
9. EPA Responsibilities 45
9.1 Partnership Agreements and State Monitoring Plan Development 45
9.2 Sample Collection and Analysis 45
9.3 Reviewing Analytical Results and Reporting Requirements 45
10. Contact Information 47
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Acronym List A - 1
Appendix B — Definitions B-l
Appendix C — Number of Small Systems in Representative Sample, by State C-l
List of Figures
Figure 1. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Approach 7
Figure 2. UCMR (1999) Implementation Timeline and Related Activities 8
List of Tables
Table 1. UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants 3
Table 2. UCMR (1999) List 2 Contaminants 4
Table 3. UCMR (1999) List 3 Contaminants 5
Table 4. Total Number of Small Systems in National Representative Sample to
Conduct Assessment Monitoring (by Size, Type, and Water Source) 15
Table 5. Water Quality Parameters to be Monitored with
UCMR Microbiological Contaminants 20
Table 6. Monitoring Frequency by Contaminant and Water Source Types 26
Table 7. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 1 27
Table 8. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 2 30
Table 9. UCMR Reporting Requirements 35
VI
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose and Background
The requirement to monitor unregulated contaminants was established by the 1986 Amendments to the
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Public water systems (PWSs) were required to report the
monitoring results for up to 48 unregulated contaminants to the States or primacy agency under several
regulations (40 CFR 141.40(e), 0), and (n)(ll) - (12)). Systems with less than 150 service
connections were exempt, provided those systems made their facilities available for the States to
monitor.
Under §1445(a)(2)(A) of the SDWA, as am ended in 1996, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) was required to establish criteria for a program to monitor for unregulated
contaminants and to publish a list of contaminants to be monitored. To fulfill the requirements of the
SDWA, EPA published the Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR)
for PWSs on September 17, 1999 (64 FR 50556). This regulation included programmatic changes to
the UCMR and provided a list of contaminants for which monitoring was required, or would be
required in the future. The UCMR set up a three-tiered approach to monitoring for contaminants based
on the availability of analytical methods and insights on contaminant properties, as well as fate and
transport. In response to public comments, and as relevant analytical methods were refined and
developed, EPA published the Perchlorate and Acetochlor Rule onMarch2, 2000 (65 FR 11372) and
the List2 Rule on January 11,2001 (66 FR 2273). As EPA continues to refine and develop additional
methods and/or identify minor clarifications or modifications needed for the successful
implementation of the UCMR, the Agency will provide additional guidance documents or fact sheets
and will promulgate additional rules, as necessary.
The UCMR program was developed in coordination with the Candidate Contaminant Li st(CCL) and
the National Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD). The UCMR and the CCL
operate on a 5-year cycle to assess the impact of new and emerging drinking water contaminants. The
revised UCMR program is a cornerstone of the sound science approach to future drinking water
regulation. The data collected through the UCMR program will be stored in the NCOD to facilitate
analysis or review of contaminant occurrence, to guide the development of subsequent CCLs, and to
support the Administrator's determination of whether or notto regulate a contaminant in the interest
of protecting public health.
The SDWA provisions and EPA regulations which are described in this document contain legally
binding requirements. This document does not substitute for those provisions or regulations, nor is
it a regulation itself. It does not impose legally-binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated
community, and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. EPA and State
decisionmakers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from this
guidance where appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular facility will be made based on the
applicable statutes and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to raise questions and
objections about the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a particular situation, and
EPA will consider whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance are
appropriate in that situation based on the law and regulations. EPA may change this guidance in the
future without notice or an opportunity for comment. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
1.2 Overview of the UCMR Program
EPA regulates many drinking water contaminants which are known to pose a risk to human health.
There are, however, many other potential contaminants which are not currently regulated because of
a lack of information regarding contaminant occurrence or potential health effects of such
contaminants. Further, there are many new, emerging, or reemerging contaminants that may also need
to be evaluated for their occurrence in drinking water. To address the lack of information on the
occurrence of some of these contaminants, in 1999, EPA promulgated the new UCMR program (40
CFR§§141.35,141.40, and 142.15(c)(3)), replacing the previous unregulated contaminant monitoring
regulation. In addition, EPA published a Direct Final Rule in the January 8, 1999 Federal Register
(64 FR 1493) that suspended the third round of the existing unregulated contaminant monitoring
program for small PWSs (systems serving less than or equal to 10,000 persons). However, large
PWSs (systems serving more than 10,000 persons) were still required to monitor under 40 CFR
§§141.35 and 141.40 for the existing unregulated contaminant monitoring program through January 1,
2001, completing their latest round of that monitoring.
EPA evaluated the availability of analytical methods published by EPA and voluntary consensus
standard organizations such as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC), and the American Public Health Association
(APHA) for all of the unregulated contaminants considered for the UCMR. Based on the availability
of analytical methods for each unregulated contaminant, EPA developed a tiered monitoring approach
comprised of three distinct components.
The first component of the UCMR is Assessment Monitoring, which will be conducted by all of the
approximately 2,800 large community water systems (CWSs) and non-transient non-community water
systems (NTNCWSs) serving more than 10,000 persons, and by a statistically representative sample
of 800 small CWSs and NTNCWSs serving 10,000 or fewer persons (except those systems that
purchase all of their water from another PWS). Assessment Monitoring will be conducted for the
UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, where analytical methods have already been developed and
refined. Table 1 lists the contaminants to be monitored, and their environmental sources.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 1. UCMR (1999) List 1 Contaminants
Contaminant Name
2,4-dinitrotoluene (2,4-
DNT)
2,6-dinitrotoluene (2,6-
DNT)
Acetochlor
DCPA di-acid degradate
DCPA mono-acid degradate
4,4'-dichloro dichlorophenyl
ethylene (4,4'-DDE)
EPIC
Molinate
Methyl-tert-butyl-ether
(MTBE)
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
Environmental Source
Used in the production of isocyanate, dyes, and explosives
Used as mixture with 2,4-DNT (similar uses)
Herbicide used with cabbage, citrus, coffee, and corn crops
Degradation product of DCPA; an herbicide used on grasses and weeds with
and vegetable crops
fruit
Degradation product of DCPA; an herbicide used on grasses and weeds with fruit
and vegetable crops
Degradation product of DDT; a general insecticide
Herbicide used on grasses and weeds, with potatoes and corn
Selective herbicide used with rice; controls watergrass
Octane booster in unleaded gasoline
Used in the production of aniline, which is used to make dyes, herbicides,
drugs
and
Oxygen additive in solid fuel propellant for rockets, missiles and fireworks
Herbicide used with sugarcane, alfalfa, and fruit crops
Note: UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants are required to be monitored under the Assessment Monitoring
component of the revisedUCMR. For more information on Assessment Monitoring, please refer to the final
UCMR Preamble and Rule (64 FR 50556), and the Perchlorate and Acetochlor Rule (65 FR11372). Please
refer to Appendix A for a list of acronyms and Appendix B for definitions.
The second component of the UCMR includes Screening Survey monitoring for the Li st 2 contaminants
for which analytical methods have been developed, but may need to be further refined before large-
scale Assessment Monitoring is conducted. Each Screening Survey will be conducted at 300 PWSs
(120 large PWSs and 120 small PWSs) randomly selected from the pool of systems required to
conduct Assessment Monitoring. Table 2 lists the contaminants to be monitored and their
environmental sources.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 2. UCMR (1999) List 2 Contaminants
Contaminant Name
1 ,2-dipheny Ihy drazine
2-methylphenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Alachlor ESA
Diazinon
Disulfoton
Diuron
Fonofos
Linuron
Nitrobenzene (low levels)
Prometon
RDX
Terbufos
Environmental Source
Used in the production of benzidine and anti-inflammatory drugs
Released in automobile and diesel exhaust, coal tar and petroleum refining, and
wood pulping
Chemical intermediate in herbicide production
Released from mines, metal, and petroleum plants
By-product of fossil fuel burning, used as bactericide and wood/glue
preservative
Degradation product of alachlor and other acetanilide pesticides, herbicides
used with corn, bean, peanut, and soybean crops to control grasses and weeds
Insecticide used with rice, fruit, vineyards, and corn crops
Insecticide used with cereal, cotton, tobacco, and potato crops
Herbicide used on grasses in orchards and with wheat crops
Soil insecticide used on worms and centipedes
Herbicide used with corn, soybean, cotton, and wheat crops
Used in the production of aniline, which is used to make dyes, herbicides, and
drugs
Herbicide used on annual and perennial weeds and grasses
Used in explosives; ammunition plants
Insecticide used with corn, sugar beet, and grain sorghum crops
Microbiological Contaminant
Aeromonas
Present in all freshwater and brackish water
Note: UCMR (1999) List 2 contaminants are required to be monitored under the Screening Survey component of
the revised UCMR. For more information on Screening Surveys, please refer to the final UCMR List 2 Rule
(66 FR 2273). Refer to Appendix A for a list of acronyms and Appendix B for definitions.
The third component of the UCMR is Pre-Screen Testing, which will be conducted at up to 200 large
and small PWSs. States will be asked to nominate systems that are particularly vulnerable to the Pre-
Screen Testing contaminants. Pre-Screen Testing may be conducted for some of the UCMR (1999)
List 3 contaminants for which analytical methods are inlhe initial stages of development. Table 3 lists
the contaminants that may be monitored and their environmental sources.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 3. UCMR (1999) List 3 Contaminants
Contaminant Name
Adenoviruses
Cyanobacteria (blue-green
algae, other freshwater algae,
and their toxins)
Caliciviruses
Coxsackieviruses
Echoviruses
Helicobacter pylori
Microsporidia
Lead-210
Polonium-210
Environmental Source
Fecal or hand to mouth transmission
Bloom in surface water bodies; produce toxins
Contaminated food and water; raw shellfish
Fecal or hand to mouth transmission
Fecal or hand to mouth transmission
Fecal or hand to mouth transmission
Occur in rivers, ponds, lakes, and unfiltered water
A lead isotope and radionuclide; part of the uranium decay series; naturally
occurring
A polonium isotope and radionuclide; part of the uranium decay series;
naturally occurring
Note: UCMR (1999) List 3 contaminants are required to be monitored under the Pre-Screen Testing component
of the revised UCMR. EPA is conducting analytical methods development for UCMR (1999) List 3
contaminants. For more information on Pre-Screen Testing, refer to the final UCMR Preamble and Rule (64
FR 50555). Refer to Appendix A for a list of acronyms and Appendix B for definitions.
EPA also selected 30 small PWSs (PWSs serving 10,000 or fewer persons) to serve as Index
Systems. Index Systems will conduct Assessment Monitoring each year of the 5-year UCMR cycle
to provide additional programmatic and data quality control. The monitoring data that EPA (or its
contractors) will collect for Index Systems will provide information on temporal variations in
contaminant occurrence. Information on the environmental and operating conditions of these 30
systems will also be collected. The detailed information from the Index Systems, together with the
monitoring data generated through the three UCMR monitoring components, will enable EPA to
develop future regulations thatbetter reflect the environmental characteristics and operating conditions
of the approximately 65,000 small PWSs.
General monitoring schedules are related to the type of monitoring (Assessment Monitoring, Screening
Survey, or Pre-Screen Testing) being conducted. Each participating system must conduct Assessment
Monitoring of UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants for a 12-month period in the first three years (2001
through 2003) of the 5-year UCMR contaminant listing cycle (2001-2005), as per
§141.40(a)(5)(ii)(B). Randomly selected large systems will sample for the UCMR (1999) List 2
contaminants in 2002 (for chemical contaminants) and 2003 (for the microbiological contaminant,
Aeromonas\ while small systems will sample in 2001 and 2003, respectively. No time-frame has
been established yet for Pre-Screen Testing of the UCMR (1999) List 3 contaminants, but it would
likely be conducted in 2004 or in the next UCMR 5-year listing cycle. Within this general timeframe,
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
UCMR monitoring schedules may be varied by the States or EPA to allow coordination of UCMR
monitoring with compliance monitoring whenever possible.
Figures 1 and 2 provide a summary of the UCMR three-tiered monitoring approach, illustrate the
interrelation of the UCMR program components, and show the implementation timeline of UCMR
activities. For identification of terms used throughout this guidance document, please see Appendix
A for a list of acronyms and Appendix B for a list of definitions.
EPA will directly implement the UCMR, with State participation through Partnership Agreements
(PAs) with EPA. The Agency will pay for the testing and shipping costs of Assessment Monitoring
for the representative sample of the 800 randomly selected small PWSs. EPA will also pay for the
testing and shipping costs of samples for the small PWSs participating in the Screening Surveys and
Pre-Screen Testing components of the UCMR program. However, EPA will not pay for any
monitoring activities for large systems participating in the UCMR.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Figure 1: Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Approach
EPA UCMR
List
up to 30
contaminants
Assessment Monitoring
List 1 (1999)
Contaminants
Quarterly for surface
water systems, and
2 times, 5 to 7 months
apart for ground water
systems for 1 year, during
2001-2003
All large systems
Representative
Sample of 800
small systems
randomly selected
by EPA
I
Two Screening
Survey(s) for
List 2 (1999)
Contaminants
300 randomly selected
systems in each
Screening Survey
7 or more Governors may petition EPA to add
contaminants to list
State may apply to
EPA for
contaminant
monitoring waiver
State-EPA
Partnership
Agreement for
Implementation
State Monitoring
Plan for
Representative
Sample
EPA Pays
for small systems
in Plan, including
Pre-Screen Testing
PWS Reporting
Electronically
16 Data
Elements
Public
Notification,
Consumer
Confidence
Report
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Figure 2: UCMR (1999) Implementation Timeline and Related Activities
UCMR (1999): IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Programmatic Activities
UCMR Issued,
Guidance
Available
National
Drinking Water
Contaminant
Occurrence
Database
Operational
Perchlorate,
Acetochlor
Methods
Approved
Representative
Sample Selected
State PAs and
State Plans
Developed:
Inform PWSs
EPA Contract
Laboratories
Operational
(for small
systems)
UCMR (1999)
List 2 Rule
Promulgated
Moni
Assessme
^ List 1(19
All large
. Scrt
List
Screening
Survey
•*— Chemical — *
(180 small
PWSs only)
toring Activit
nt Monitoring
99) Contaminant
and 800 small P\
I
3
Ceiling Surveys
2(1999)Contam
Screening
Survey
«- Chemical— »
(120 large
PWSs only)
^
• Results
Next Candidate!
Contaminant
List Issued
Next UCMR
List Issued
es
' k
VSs
idex System Monitoring
9 small PWSs
nants
Screening
Survey
•«— Micro — H
(300 large
and small
PWSs)
i
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
This document provides a general overview of the UCMR program, including a description of how
PWSs, States, and the EPA are affected by this regulation, and the responsibilities each party has in
implementing the UCMR. This document contains a list of all contaminants to be monitored under the
UCMR and describes the contaminant monitoring, analysis, and reporting process. It includes the
following sections: Affected Entities and Their Responsibilities (Section 2), Contaminants to be
Monitored (Section 3), Sample Collection and Analysis (Section 4), General Monitoring
Requirements (Section 5), UCMRReporting Requirements (Section 6), State Responsibility (Section
7), Tribal Responsibility (Section 8), EPA Responsibility (Section 9), and Contact Information
(Section 10). Further information about the UCMR program can be found in the UCMR Preamble and
final Rule (64 FR 50556), the Perchlorate and Acetochlor Rule (65 FR 11372), the List 2 Rule (66
FR 2273), and UCMR guidance documents.
The documents listed below present detailed information on UCMR program requirements for PWSs,
States, and EPA Regions who are responsible for UCMR program planning, implementation, and
oversight.
Please note: Because of the evolving nature of the UCMR program, supplemental rule-making
efforts may add additional contaminants to be monitored and hence, additional sampling and
analytical procedures may need to be identified. For this reason, EPA will issue supplemental
guidance explaining any new requirements. EPA anticipates developing supplemental guidance
after analytical methods are approved for monitoring the UCMR (1999) List 2 and 3 contaminants
in subsequent rules.
Background Documents
1. Technical Background Information for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
EPA815-R-99-007
This document summarizes the process used to select contaminants for the UCMR List
(1999) and a brief summary of the CCL selection process. This document also provides an
overview of the proposed methods for monitoring UCMR contaminants.
2. Statistical Design and Sample Selection for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation (1999}
EPA815-R-01-004
This document replaces National Representative Sample of Small Public Water Systems:
Statistical Design and State Plans for Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring, EPA815-R-
99-003. It describes the way in which the sample of small PWSs was selected for
participation in the UCMR Assessment Monitoring. This document also describes the
selection process for Screening Survey, the probable selection process for the Pre-Screen
Testing systems, and briefly describes how Index Systems were selected.
Guidance Documents
1. UCMR (1999) List 1 and List 2 Chemical Analytical Methods Quality Control Manual
EPA815-R-01-028
This document replaces the UCMR Analytical Methods and Quality Control Manual and
Supplements, and adds the new analytical methods quality control (QC) information from
UCMR (1999) List 2.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
2. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation Guidance for Operators of Public \\ater
Systems Serving 10.000 or Fewer People
EPA815-R-01-002
This document identifies the sampling and reporting responsibilities of small PWSs selected
to participate in the Assessment Monitoring component of the UCMR. This guidance also
highlights important changes in the UCMRwhich reduce the monetary and administrative
burden on small systems.
Please Note: A draft of this document was released for public comment as EPA 815-R-99-
005, and a subsequent final document was release with the number EPA 815-R-00-018.
This final guidance document is being released with the number EPA 815-R-01-002, and
replaces the previous versions.
3. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation Reporting Guidance
EPA815-R-01-029
This document will provide general guidance to PWSs, States, and EPA Regions on
reporting requirements for the results of contaminant monitoring, and inventory
information for the UCMR.
4. Implementation Guide for Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule:
\blume I - Introduction to CDX and UCMR Submission
\blume II - Web Forms
Volume in - [not relevant to UCMR]
\blume IV - XML Standards for Submitting Data
\blume V - Flat File Format
Forthcoming
This five volume document provides detailed information on how to use the EPA Central
Data Exchange and the Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System for the UCMR.
This guidance is available on the Web at: http://epacdx.Imi.org/FAQ.asp.
Fact Sheets
1. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Monitoring for List 1 Contaminants by Large
Public Water Systems
EPA815-F-01-003
This is a fact sheet for large public water systems which provides a brief overview of their
responsibilities in implementing the Assessment Monitoring portion of the UCMR.
2. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Monitoring for List 1 Contaminants by
Small Public Water Systems
EPA815-F-01-004
This is a fact sheet for small public water systems which provides a brief overview of their
responsibilities in implementing the Assessment Monitoring portion of the UCMR.
3. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Screening Survey for List 2 Contaminants
by Selected Large Public Water Systems
EPA815-F-01-005
This is a fact sheet for large public water systems which provides a brief overview of their
responsibilities in implementing the Screening Survey portion of the UCMR.
10
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
4. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Screening Survey for List 2 Contaminants
by Selected Small Public Water Systems
EPA815-F-01-006
This is a fact sheet for small public water systems which provides a brief overview of their
responsibilities in implementing the Screening Survey portion of the UCMR.
5. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Monitoring by Index Systems
EPA815-F-01-007
This is a fact sheet for Index Systems which provides a brief overview of their
responsibilities in implementing the UCMR.
The documents listed above with document numbers are available through the EPA Safe Drinking
Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791, or at EPA's UCMR Website:
http ://www.epa.gov/safewater/ucmr .html. Note that the guidance documents above generally outline
the sampling and reporting responsibilities for the Assessment Monitoring, and Screening Survey
components of the UCMR (1999). EPA will issue further guidance on Pre-Screen Testing
requirements and responsibilities after the List 3 rule is promulgated.
11
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
12
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
2. Affected Entities and Their Responsibilities
2.1 Large Public Water Systems
2.1.1 Assessment Monitoring
All large CWSs and NTNCWSs are required to conduct UCMR Assessment Monitoring including
contaminant sampling, analysis, and reporting (§141.40(a)(ii)). Large systems are those serving
greater than 10,000 persons. CWSs are PWSs which serve at least 15 service connections used by
year-round residents or regularly serve at least 25 year round residents. NTNCWSs are PWSs which
are not CWSs, and that regularly serve at least 25 of the same persons over six months per year.
Transient non-community water systems (TNCWSs), systems that do not regularly serve at least 25
of the same persons over six months per year, are not required to monitor under the UCMR. Large
systems that purchase all of their water from other PWSs are also not required to monitor for the
Assessment Monitoring or Screening Survey portion of the UCMR(§141.40(a)(iii)). However, some
PWSs that purchase water from a PWS selected to monitor for Aeromonas may be asked to collect
a distribution system sample. All of the 2,800 large PWSs will be included in the UCMR Assessment
Monitoring.
Sample collection responsibilities are discussed in Section 4, general monitoring requirements are
discussed in Section 5, and reviewing and reporting responsibilities are discussed in Section 6.
2.1.2 Screening Surveys
The Screening Survey component for large PWSs (§141.40(a)(ii) and §141.40(a)(iii)) is currently
divided into two phases, a Screening Survey for chemical contaminants and a Screening Survey for
microbiological contaminants. One hundred and twenty (120) randomly selected large PWSs will be
required to conduct monitoring for the Screening Survey List 2 chemical contaminants during 2002.
A different group of 120 large PWSs will be required to conduct monitoring for the Screening Survey
List 2 microbiological contaminant Aeromonas during 2003. Each Screening Survey was targeted to
consistof 60 systems serving more than 50,000 persons and 60 systems serving from 10,001 to 50,000
persons. The large Screening Survey Systems are further subdivided by water source type (targeted
to be 30 ground water and 30 surface water systems). Since there were too few small surface water
systems, and too few large ground water systems, the number of systems had to be re-allocated to
small ground water and large surface water systems. These Screening Survey systems were selected
from the pool of systems conducting Assessment Monitoring. Note that some PWSs which purchase
water from a system selected to monitor for Aeromonas may be asked to collect distribution system
samples. EPA has already identified the randomly selected large systems that will monitor for List
2 contaminants, and has placed this list on its Web site at
http ://www. epa.gov/safewater/standard/ucmr/systems.html.
Depending on the terms of PAs developed by EPA and the States, either EPA or the State may have
notified large PWSs of their requirements to monitor for Screening Surveys (see section 7 for more
information on the development of PAs). Selected large PWSs are responsible for Screening Survey
sampling in 2002 for UCMR (1999) List 2 chemical contaminants, or for Screening Survey sampling
for Aeromonas in 2003. Large systems may coordinate Assessment Monitoring with Screening Survey
monitoring by collecting samples atthe same time. Note, however, that all Screening Survey samples
for List 2 chemical contaminants must be collected from the entry points to the distribution system
13
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
(EPTDS), and not raw water sources (§ 141.40(a)(7)). This ensures that Screening Survey analytical
results may be used to provide an accurate estimation of frequency of contaminant occurrence in
finished drinking water sources nationwide.
2.1.3 Pre-Screen Testing
For the Pre-Screen Testing component, up to 200 systems (including both large and small systems)
maybe selected to conduct UCMR List 3 monitoring (§§141.40(a)(ii) and 141.40(a)(iii)). Pre-Screen
Testing may be conducted for contaminants ontheUCMR(1999)List3 whose analytical methods are
in the early stages of development. The Pre-Screen Testing systems will be selected by EPA or
States, based on the system's vulnerability to the UCMR (1999) List 3 contaminants. The goal of this
monitoring is to determine whether the List 3 contaminants can be found in any public water system
under contaminant-specific, most-likely-occurrence conditions. Thus, this tier of UCMR monitoring
is notdesigned to determine the extent of occurrence, but rather to test for appropriateness and validity
of analytical methods that might be used in a broader monitoring effort (i.e., a future round of
Assessment Monitoring). Note that the systems which would be selected to monitor for Pre-Screen
Testing contaminants may or may not be the same systems conducting Assessment Monitoring or
Screening Survey Monitoring. Pre-Screen Testing will begin after EPA promulgates the List 3 rule.
More complete details on the definition of vulnerability and the vulnerable system select! on process
will be provided in future guidance from EPA.
EPA or the State will notify the large systems which have been selected to monitor for UCMR (1999)
List 3 contaminants. Large systems will be responsible for collecting their own samples, sending the
samples to an EPA-specified laboratory, and reporting the results to EPA with a copy to the State
(§141.40(a)(7)(i) and (ii)). EPA will provide further guidance on Pre-Screen Testing, and large PWS
responsibility before Pre-Screen Testing requirements begin (§141.40(a)(7)(i)).
2.2 Small Public Water Systems
2.2.1 Assessment Monitoring
Section 1445(a)(2) of SDWA mandates that only a representative sample of small PWSs be required
to monitor for unregulated contaminants. A group of 800 small CWSs and NTNCWSs was selected
from the total number of approximately 66,000 small systems nationwide to monitor for the UCMR.
The process used to select this subset of small systems was designed to provide a statistically valid,
nationally representative sample of the nation's small PWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people. Only
the small CWSs and NTNCWSs that are notified by their State or EPA will be required to participate
in UCMR sampling. TNCWSs are not required to monitor under the UCMR.
Through its specified contractor, EPA will provide all 800 participating small systems with
instructions to collect samples. The overall program is designed to minimize the burden to the small
systems selected to monitor. Most significantly, EPA will pay for the cost of shipping and analyzing
these samples.
To ensure that the 800 small systems included in the national representative sample adequately
represent the total population of small PWSs, the sample was stratified based on population served,
source water type (ground water or surface water), and geographic location (i.e., State). Small
systems were then randomly selected within these stratifications to ensure that at least two systems
were selected in each State (except in Guam, where there was only one active small system eligible
14
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
for UCMR monitoring). For more information on the statistical design of the national representative
sample, please refer to the document entitled Statistical Design and Sample Selection for the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999), EPA 815-R-01 -004. Table 4 shows the
number of small systems that were selected to monitor for UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants by
system size and source of water. Appendix C shows the number of small systems selected to monitor
for List 1 contaminants in each State.
Table 4. Total Number of Small Systems in National Representative Sample to Conduct
Assessment Monitoring (by Size, Type, and Water Source)
Population
25-500
501-3300
3,301-10,000
Total
CWS
Ground
Water
76
214
231
521
Surface
Water
45
39
105
189
CWS Total
121
253
336
710
NTNCWS
Ground
Water
36
30
4
70
Surface
Water
8
7
5
20
NTNCWS
Total
44
37
9
90
Total
165
290
345
800
Small systems are responsible for properly storing, maintaining, and using the sampling equipment sent
out by the EPA contractor, collecting water samples, and sending the samples to the EPA-specified
laboratory to be analyzed (§141.40(a)(4)(i)(A), (5)(iii)(B) and (5)(iii)(H)). In some cases, States
may elect to conduct the sampling, especially in those that currently collect water samples for
regulated contaminant compliance monitoring. States may inform small PWSs of their responsibilities,
depending on the terms of individual State PAs (see Section 7).
2.2.2 Screening Surveys
One hundred and eighty small systems will be required to conduct monitoring for the Screening Survey
for List 2 chemical contaminants in 2001. A different group of small systems will be required to
conduct monitoring for the Screening Survey for Aeromonas in 2003. The small Screening Survey
systems were randomly selected from the pool of small systems scheduled to conduct Assessment
Monitoring in that same year. Thus, if a system was selected to monitor for UCMR (1999) List 1
contaminants in 2001, that system was only eligible to be selected for the Screening Survey in 2001.
Monitoring years were selected in this manner so that Assessment Monitoring and the Screening
Survey for List 2 chemical contaminants could be coordinated for each small system. Each Screening
Survey was targeted to consist of 60 systems from each of the following service size categories: 25
to 500 persons, 501 to 3,300 persons, and 3,301 to 10,000 persons. The number of systems selected
in each size category was further stratified by source water type (ground water or surface water).
EPA has already identified the Screening Survey Systems for each State. These systems are found in
each UCMR State Monitoring Plan for small systems.
15
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Small PWSs selected to monitor for the Screening Surveys may be notified by their State or EPA,
depending upon the terms of individual State PAs. Sampling for the Screening Survey for List 2
chemical contaminants in 2001 will be collected at the same frequency as for Assessment Monitoring
to minimize the burden of sample collection (§141 .40(a)(7)). Systems selected to participate in the
Screening Survey forAeromonas will collect samples from three sites withinthe distribution system.
The Screening Survey forAeromonas will not be able to be conducted entirely at the same time as
Assessment Monitoring in 2003, since the samples mustbe collected from different locations and at
different frequencies.
The EPA-specified contractor will review the sampling results, and the EPA-specified laboratories
will report the analytical results for small PWSs. Small systems are still responsible for ensuring that
a copy of the results are reported to the State, and for ensuring compliance with any other applicable
State reporting requirements.
2.2.3 Pre-Screen Testing
Up to 200 large and small PWSs will be selected for Pre-Screen Testing. Systems that are most
vulnerable to the particular UCMR ( 1 999) List 3 contaminants will be identified by States or EPA for
Pre-Screen Testing. List 3 contaminants are those whose analytical methods are in the early stages
of development. States or EPA may select systems outside of the 800 selected for Assessment
Monitoring for this targeted testing. More complete details on the definition of vulnerability and the
vulnerable system selection process will be provided in future guidance from EPA, once the List 3
rule is promulgated.
EPA or the State may notify the small systems which have been selected to monitor for these
contaminants, depending on the terms of individual State PAs. For small systems, EPA pays for the
cost of sample shipping, analysis, and reporting. EPA will report the results of Pre-Screen Testing
for the small systems. EPA will provide further guidance on Pre-Screen Testing, and small PWS
responsibility before small systems will be required to monitor for Pre-Screen Testing contaminants
2.3 Index Systems
To provide a more thorough understanding of contaminants and conditions affecting small systems, and
to provide additional data quality assurance for the UCMR data analysis, EPA has selected 30 small
PWSs as "Index Systems" from the 800 systems that conduct Assessment Monitoring. Index Systems
will conduct Assessment Monitoring every year during the 5-year UCMR cycle, and are required to
provide EPA with additional environmental and system operation information. To minimize the
additional burden on these systems, EPA will provide for field technicians to assist with sample
collection, and will pay for the cost of shipping and testing UCMR samples. In some cases, States
may collect the samples for the small systems, rather than the EPA-specified contractor.
Owners/operators of Index Systems are required to assist EPA in identifying appropriate sampling
locations and provide information on wells and intakes in use at the time of sampling, well casing and
screen depth (if known) for those wells, and the pumping rates of each well or intake at the time of
sampling. EPA will collect detailed observations of system operation that may affect contaminant
occurrence, such as nature of the source water (type of aquifer or surface water body), number of
wells, well depth, configuration of source water intake, treatment, entry points, and how sources are
used (seasonally, blended, etc.), as well as other environmental factors. At the time of sampling, EPA,
or its contractors, will also gather additional system information to characterize the environmental
16
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
setting affecting the system including precipitation, land and water resource use, and environmental
factors (such as soil type and geology). This information will assist EPA in more fully evaluating
small system operations, and in developing or modifying future regulations for small systems.
2.4 State and Tribal Participation
To minimize the burden of monitoring and data collection efforts on States, Tribes, and Territories,
EPA will directly implement the UCMR. However, EPA has encouraged States to become involved
in the UCMR program through PAs with EPA. The PAs facilitate State participation in the
development and implementation of State Monitoring Plans (SMPs). The States, through the
provisions of the SMPs, reviewed and modified the list of systems required to sample, and in some
cases, sampling locations. See Section 7 for a more complete description of State participation and
Section 8 for Tribal participation. Some States decided not to participate in PAs, in which case EPA
established the State Monitoring Plan (SMP) by review of State inventory or direct contact with
systems.
17
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
18
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
3. Contaminants to be Monitored
3.1 Assessment Monitoring
There are 12 unregulated chemical contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List 1. Analytical methods are
currently available for all of these contaminants and most of these methods are approved for
compliance monitoring (exceptions include EPAMethods 314.Oand 515.4). The List 1 contaminants
and their common environmental sources are listed in Table 1. Assessment Monitoring is discussed
in greater detail throughout this document as itrelates to monitoring requirements, andPWS, State, and
EPA responsibility.
3.2 Screening Surveys
There are 15 unregulated chemical contaminants on the UCMR(1999) List 2, and one microbiological
contaminant (Aeromonas). The List 2 contaminants are shown in Table 2. EPA is conducting the
Screening Surveys to analyze for contaminants where the use of newly developed, non-routine
analytical methods are required. The Screening Surveys will help EPA to identify whether a
contaminant of concern is occurring in drinking water and to estimate the range of concentrations of
that occurrence. The Screening Surveys are also intended to allow EPA to screen contaminants to see
if they occur at high enough frequencies or at concentrations that justify inclusion in future unregulated
contaminant Assessment Monitoring, or at sufficiently low frequencies thatthey do notrequire further
monitoring.
Analytical methods for RDX and alachlor ESA are currently being refined by EPA. Monitoring for
these contaminants is not scheduled for the Screening Surveys. EPA may conduct a third Screening
Survey for these contaminants in the 2001 - 2005 round of UCMR monitoring if analytical methods
can be developed and validated for use. For more information on this rule, please refer to the List 2
Rule (66 FR 2273).
Note that low level nitrobenzene was added to UCMR (1999) List 2. EPA requires monitoring for
nitrobenzene in Assessment Monitoring between 2001 and 2003, using the methods approved in 64
FR 50556. The approved analytical methods for Assessment Monitoring can accurately measure
levels of nitrobenzene at concentrations above 10 |ig/L; however, recent health effects information
indicates that nitrobenzene may be a health concern at lower concentrations. Methods reliably
detecting nitrobenzene at concentrations less than 10 jig/L were notavailable atthe time of publication
of the September 1999 final UCMR (64 FR 50556). Through additional methods research, EPA
developed and refined EPA Method 526, which enables EPA to measure several contaminants on
UCMR (1999) List 2, including nitrobenzene, below 10 |ig/L. The analytical methods used to detect
nitrobenzene under Assessment Monitoring and the Screening Survey can be used to detect several
other contaminants on Lists 1 and 2. Because of this, analysis of nitrobenzene will not impose
additional costs on systems. Screening Survey monitoring is discussed in greater detail throughout
this document as it relates to monitoring requirements, and PWS, State, and EPA responsibility.
19
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
3.3 Pre-Screen Testing
There are nine contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List 3, including seven microbiological
contaminants and two radiological contaminants. These contaminants and their common environmental
sources are listed in Table 3. EPA may conduct Pre-Screen Testing to determine the validity of
analytical methods that might be used in a broader monitoring effort (i.e., in a future round of
Assessment Monitoring). Pre-Screen Testing is discussed in greater detail throughout this document
as it relates to monitoring requirements, and PWS, State, and EPA responsibility.
3.4 Water Quality Parameters
Both large and small PWSs must analyze water quality parameters (WQPs) when monitoring UCMR
microbiological contaminants. This currently includes the List 2 Screening Survey contaminant
Aeromonas. In the future, this is also likely to include many of the List 3 Pre-Screen Testing
contaminants. WQPs must be monitored for each sampling event at each sampling point, using the
method(s) indicated in Table 5.
Table 5. Water Quality Parameters to be Monitored with UCMR Microbiological
Contaminants
Parameter
pH
Turbidity
Temperature
Free
Disinfectant
Residual
Total
Disinfectant
Residual
Contaminant
Type
Microbiological
Microbiological
Microbiological
Microbiological
Microbiological
Methodology
EPA
Method
150.12
150.22
180. 14'5
Standard
Methods1
4500-H+ B
2130 B4
2550
4500-C1 D
4500-C1 F
4500-C1 G
4500-C1 H
4500-C1O2 D
4500-C1O2E
4500-O3B
4500-C1 D
4500-C1 E4
4500-C1 F
4500-C1 G4
4500-C1 I
Other
ASTMD1293-843
ASTMD1293-953
GLI Method 24'6
ASTM D 1253-863
ASTM D 1253-863
The analytical procedures shall be conducted in accordance with the documents listed in these footnotes. Copies of
the documents may be obtained from the sources listed in these footnotes. Information regarding obtaining these
documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791. Documents may be inspected at
EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the
Office of Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC.
1 The 18th and 19th Editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 1992 and 1995.
Methods 2130 B; 2550; 4500-C1 D, E, F, G, H, I; 4500- C1O2 D, E; 4500-H+ B; and 4500-O3 B in the 20th edition
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1998, American Public Health Association, 1015
Fifteenth St. NW, Washington D.C., 20005.
20
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
2 Methods 150.1 and 150.2 are available from US EPA, NERL, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
The identical methods are also in "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," EPA-600/4-79-020, March
1983, available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port
Royal Rd., Springfield, Virginia 22161, PB84-128677. (Note: NTIS toll-free number is 800-553-6847.)
3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Editions 1994, 1996, 1998 and 1999, Volumes 11.01, American Society for
Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. Version D1293-84 is located in the
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994, Volumes 11.01. Version D1293-95 is located in the Annual Book of ASTM
Standards. 1996, 1998 and 1999, Volumes 11.01.
4 'Technical Notes on Drinking Water," EPA-600/R-94-173, October 1994, Available at NTIS, PB95-104766.
5 "Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples," EPA-600/R-93-100, August
1993. Available at NTIS, PB94-121811
6 GLI Method 2, "Turbidity," November 2, 1992, Great Lakes Instruments Inc., 8855 North 55th St., Milwaukee,
Wisconsin 53223.
21
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
22
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
4. Sample Collection and Analysis for UCMR (1999) Contaminants
4.1 Large Public Water Systems
Large PWSs are responsible for collecting all UCMR samples in accordance with the timing and
frequency requirements presented in Section 5. Large systems must follow the sampling quality
control procedures required under §141.40(a)(l)(ii) and (iv) and described in the UCMR(1999) List
1 and List 2 Chemical Analytical Methods QC Manual (EPA 815-R-01-028). Once samples are
collected, large PWSs are responsible for sending the samples to an EPA-approved laboratory for
analysis (§141.40(a)(4)(ii), (5)(ii)(G), and (7)(i)). Laboratory certification requirements are
discussed in 40 CFR §141.28, as well as the QC Manual. Systems that have laboratories approved
to perform UCMR analysis on-site may analyze their own Assessment Monitoring and Screening
Survey samples, but the laboratories must follow the required methods and quality control
requirements outlined in the gCMara/a/(§141.40(a)(4)(ii), (5)(ii), and (7)(ii)). If samples are sent
out to a laboratory, itis the responsibility of the owner/operator to use laboratories that are certified
under §141.28, and approved to conduct UCMR analyses, and that these laboratories conform to the
methods and quality control requirements approved in the UCMR. Note that for perchlorate and
Aeromonas there are special Performance Evaluation program requirements.
4.2 Small Public Water Systems
Small PWSs are responsible for collecting all UCMR samples in accordance with the timing and
frequency requirements in Section 5. However, some States will collect samples for the small
systems. Those sampling for small systems must follow the sampling quality control procedures as
directed in the instructions included in sample collection kits (§141.40(a)(4)(iii), (5)(iii), and
(7)(iii)). Once the samples are collected, small PWSs are responsible for sending the samples to the
EPA-specified laboratory for analysis (§141.40(a)(4)(iii), (5)(iii)(H), and (7)(ii)).
23
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
24
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
5. General Monitoring Requirements
5.1 Monitoring Frequency and Sampling Location
For chemical contaminants, systems will sample from all EPTDS or other sampling points specified
by the State that represent all principal sources of water used over the monitoring period. Note that
systems may sample raw water sources for UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, if this is the
compliance monitoring point required by the State. If a UCMR contaminant is detected, the system
must also then initiate monitoring at the EPTDSs for those contaminants detected. Once systems begin
monitoring at EPTDSs, they must continue to monitor at these entry points for the next 12-month
period, even if the monitoring extends beyond the end of 2003. This flexibility in the sampling
location should enable systems and States to coordinate compliance and unregulated contaminant
monitoring more extensively. However, all UCMR (1999) List 2 chemical contaminants must be
collected at entry points to the distribution system to ensure consistent sampling results nationwide
(§141.40(a)(7)).
For UCMR chemical monitoring, surface water-supplied systems will monitor at each of these points
every three months for a 12-month period and ground water-supplied systems will monitor at each of
these points two times, five to seven months apart, within a 12-month period. Table 6 lists the
monitoring frequencies based on contaminant type and source of water.
One of the monitoring events for both surface water and ground water systems must occur at the most
vulnerable time of year for the PWS. The default vulnerable time is defined as May 1 through July
31, unless otherwise specified by EPA or the State. Sampling during the most vulnerable time will
provide data representing potential variation in contaminant concentration over the course of a year.
It is essential that such variations are captured during data collection to evaluate human exposure
related to contaminant occurrence. Some systems perform their regulated chemical monitoring on a
quarterly basis and can collect UCMR samples coincident with their compliance samples to minimize
the labor burden associated with UCMR monitoring. Other systems may only conduct compliance
monitoring once every third year and will therefore have to collect additional samples under the
UCMR. These systems can collect one UCMR sample coincident with this compliance sample.
However, EPA requires that ground water systems take a second sample five to seven months earlier
or later to provide data on seasonal variation.
Systems selected to monitor for Aeromonas as part of List 2 (Screening Survey) monitoring will
collect samples once each quarter, with additional samples taken each month during the warmest
quarter of the year, July through September (i.e., six times during the year). This means that sampling
must take place in each of the six (6) months of either: January, April, July, August, September,
October; or February, May, July, August, September, November; or March, June, July, August,
September, December; unless the State or EPA informs the system otherwise. Collecting these six
samples will increase the likelihood of detecting sporadic microbial occurrence. Three samples will
be collected from each systemfor each sampling event. Sampling locations must include one midpoint
in the distribution system where the disinfectant residual will be expected to be typical for the system
(midpoint, orMD, as defined in the Rule), and two other points: one of maximum retention time (point
of maximum residence, or MR, as defined in the Rule), and one where the disinfectant residual will
have typically declined (location of lowest disinfectant residual or LD, as defined in the Rule).
25
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 6. Monitoring Frequency by Contaminant and Water Source Types
Contaminant Type
Water Source Type
Timeframe
Frequency
Chemical
Surface water
Twelve (12) months
Four (4) quarterly samples taken as
follows: Select either the first,
second, or third month of a quarter and
sample in that same month of each of
four (4) consecutive quarters3 to
ensure that one of those sampling
events occurs during the vulnerable
timeb
Ground water
Twelve (12) months
Two (2) times in a year taken as
follows: Sample during one (1) month
of the vulnerable timeb and during one
(1) month five (5) to seven (7) months
earlier or later0
Microbiological
Surface and ground
water
Twelve (12) months
Six (6) times in a year taken as
follows: Select either the first,
second, or third month of a quarter and
sample in that same month of each of
four (4) quarters, and sample an
additional two (2) months during the
warmest (vulnerable) quarter of the
year.d
a"Select either the first, second, or thirdmonth of aquarter and sample in that same month of each of four consecutive
quarters" means that the system must monitor during each of the four months of either: January, April, July, October;
or February, May, August, November; or March, June, September, December.
b "Vulnerable time" means May 1 through July 31, unless the State or EPA informs the system that it has selected a
different time period for sampling as its vulnerable time.
°" Sample during one month of the vulnerable time and during one month five to seven months earlier or later" means,
for example, that if the system selects May as its "vulnerable time" month to sample, then one month five to seven
months earlier would be either October, November, or December of the preceding year, and one month five to seven
months later would be either, October, November, or December of the same year.
d This means that the system must monitor during each of the six months of either: January, April, July, August,
September, October, or February, May, July, August, September, November, or March, June, July, August, September,
December; unless the State or EPA informs the system that a different vulnerable quarter has been selected for it.
Sites selected for Aeromonas samples may be, and should be, where possible, the same locations
identified for other drinking water contaminants which may occur under similar conditions. For
example, samples for coliform indicator bacteria, as described in 40 CFR §141.21, are taken from a
variety of locations through the distribution system. More specifically, some of these samples are
fromlocations where the disinfectant residual is representative of the distribution system and has not
significantly declined. Locations specified in the sample plan for coliform bacteria that meet this
description could be used for the Aeromonas midpoint sample. Additionally, Aeromonas samples
mustbe taken from two locations in the distribution system where the disinfectant residual is expected
to be low. This is similar to total trihalomethane (TTHM) sampling points, as described in 63 FR
69468, the Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and 40 CFR §141.30. These sample
locations are at distal parts of the distribution system (taking care to avoid disinfectant booster
26
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
stations) or dead ends, or locations previously determined to have the lowest disinfectant residual for
systems which disinfect.
5.2 General Quality Control Requirements
Sampling and laboratory quality control requirements promote proper sample collection and analyses
to ensure that the EPA obtains the most reliable monitoring data possible. This is particularly
important since UCMR data will only be collected from approximately 3,600 systems (about 2,800
large systems and 800 small systems). To ensure reliable data, EPA is specifying the use of specific
analytical methods that are currently available for monitoring (§141.40(a)(3), Table 1). While many
of these methods are routinely used by commercial and PWS laboratories (including some that are
currently used for compliance monitoring), they have not necessarily been used routinely for the
contaminants on the UCMR (1999) List. As shown in Table 7, methods other than those that EPA has
developed maybe approved for use, but quality control procedures mustalso be followed as specified
in §141.40(a)(3),(4) and (5), and §141.40 Appendix A (64 FR 50556).
Table 7 lists the approved analytical methods for UCMR (1999) List 1 contaminants, and Table 8 lists
analytical methods for List 2 contaminants. More detailed information on these analytical methods
can be found in the UCMR (1999) List 1 and List 2 Chemical Analytical Methods QC Manual (EPA
815-R-01-028). Once List 3 methods are fully developed, reviewed, and refined, EPA will provide
further guidance for the List 3 contaminants.
Table 7. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 1
1-Contaminant
2-CAS
registry
number
3-Analytical
methods
4-
Minimum
reporting
level
5-Sampling
location
6-Period during
which monitoring
to be completed
List 1 - Assessment Monitoring Chemical Contaminants
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Acetochlor
DCPA mono-acid
degradate h
DCPA di-acid
degradate h
121-14-2
606-20-2
34256-82-
1
887-54-7
2136-79-0
EPA Method 525.2a
EPA Method 525.2a
EPA Method 525.2a
EPA Method 51 5. la
EPA Method 5 15.2a
EPA Method 5 15.31J
EPA Method 5 15.4k
D5317-93b
AOAC 992.32C
EPA Method 515.1a
EPA Method 5 15.2a
EPA Method 5 15.31J
EPA Method 5 15.4k
D5317-93b
AOAC 992.32C
2ng/Le
2ng/Le
2ng/L°
lHg/Le
lHg/Le
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
27
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 7. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 1
1-Contaminant
2-CAS
registry
number
3- Analytical
methods
4-
Minimum
reporting
level
5-Sampling
location
6-Period during
which monitoring
to be completed
List 1 - Assessment Monitoring Chemical Contaminants
4,4'-DDE
EPIC
Molinate
MTBE
Nitrobenzene
Perchlorate
Terbacil
72-55-9
759-94-4
2212-67-1
1634-04-4
98-95-3
14797.73.
0
5902-51-2
EPA Method 508a
EPA Method 508. la
EPA Method 525.2a
D5812-96b
AOAC 990.06C
EPA Method 507a
EPA Method 525.2a
D5475-93b
AOAC991.07C
EPA Method 507a
EPA Method 525.2a
D5475-93b
AOAC991.07C
EPA Method 502.2a'n
SM 6200Cd'n
EPA Method 524.2a
D5790-95b
SM6210Dd
SM 6200Bd
EPA Method 524.2a
D5790-95b
SM6210Dd
SM6200Bd
EPA Method 3 14.01
EPA Method 507a
EPA Method 525.2a
D5475-93b
AOAC991.07C
0.8 ug/Le
lug/Le
0.9 ug/Le
5ug/Lg
10 ug/Lg
4ug/Lm
2ug/Le
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
EPTDSf
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
2001-2003
Column headings are:
1-Chemical or microbiological contaminant: the name of the contaminants to be analyzed.
2-CAS (Chemical Abstract Service Number) Registry Number or Identification Number: a unique number identifying
the chemical contaminants.
3-Analytical Methods: method numbers identifying the methods that must be used to test the contaminants.
4-Minimum Reporting Level: the value and unit of measure at or above which the concentration or density of the
contaminant must be measured using the Approved Analytical Methods.
5-Sampling Location: the locations within a PWS at which samples must be collected.
6-Years During Which Monitoring to Be Completed: The years during which the sampling and testing are to occur for
the indicated contaminant.
28
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed next in these footnotes. The incorporation by
reference of the following documents listed in footnotes b-d and 1 was approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFRpart 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the
following sources. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline at 800-426-4791. Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,
NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC.
a The version of the EPA methods which you must follow for this Rule are listed at § 141.24(e).
b Annual Book of ASTM Standards. 1996, 1998 and 1999 Vol. 11.02, American Society for Testing and Materials.
Method D5812-96, "Standard Test Method for Determination of Organochlorine Pesticides in Water by Capillary
Column Gas Chromatography", is located in the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1998 and 1999, \61. 11.02.
Methods D5 790-95,"StandardTest Methodfor Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary
Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry"; D5475-93, "Standard TestMethodfor Nitrogen- and Phosphorous-
Containing Pesticides in Water by Gas Chromatography with a Nitrogen-Phosphorous Detector"; and D5317-93,
"Standard Test Methodfor Determination of Chlorinated Organic Acid Compounds in Water by Gas Chromatography
with an Electron Capture Detector" are located in the Annual Book of ASTM Standards. 1996 and 1998, Vol 11.02.
Copies may be obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.
0 Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemist) International, Sixteenth
Edition, 4th Revision, 1998, Volume I, AOAC International, First Union National Bank Lockbox, PO Box 75198,
Baltimore, MD 21275-5198. 800-379-2622.
d SM 6210 D is only found in the 18th and 19th editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 1992 and 1995, American Public Health Association; either edition may be used. SM 6200 B and 6200
Care only found in the 20th edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1998. Copies
maybe obtained from the American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20005.
e Minimum Reporting Level determined by multiplying by 10 the least sensitive method's detection limit (detection
limit=standard deviation times the Student's t value for 99% confidence level withn-1 degrees of freedom), or when
available, multiplying by 5 the least sensitive method's estimated detection limit (where the estimated detection limit
equals the concentration of compound yielding approximately a 5 to 1 signal to noise ratio or the calculated detection
limit, whichever is greater).
f Entry Points to the Distribution System (EPTDS), after treatment, representing each non-emergency water source
in use over the 12-month period of monitoring: this only includes entry points for sources in operation during the
months in which sampling is to occur. Sampling must occur at the EPTDS, unless the State has specified other
sampling points that are used for compliance monitoring 40 CFR 141.24 (f)(l), (2), and (3). See 40 CFR
141.40(a)(5)(ii)(C) for a complete explanation of requirements, including the use of source (raw) water sampling
points.
g Minimum Reporting Levels (MRL) for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) determined by multiplying either the
published detection limit or 0.5 |ig/L times 10, whichever is greater. The detection limit of 0.5 |ig/L (0.0005 mg/L)
was selected to conform to VOC detection limit requirements of 40 CFR 141.24(f)(17)(E).
h The approved methods do not allow for the identification and quantitation of the individual acids. The single
analytical result obtained should be reported as total DCPA mono- and di-acid degradates.
1 Method 515.3, "Determination of Chlorinated Acids in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Extraction, Derivatization
and Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture Detection," Revision 1.0 July 1996. EPA815-R-00-014, "Methods
for the Determination of Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Drinking Water, Volume 1," August 2000. Available
from the National Technical Information Service, NTISPB2000-106981, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. The toll free number is 800-553-6847. Alternatively, the method can be
assessed and downloaded directly on-line at www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
1 Since EPA Method 515.3 does not include a solvent wash step following hydrolysis, the parent DCPA is not removed
prior to analysis, therefore, only non-detect datamay be reported using Method 515.3. All samples with results above
the MRL must be analyzed by one of the other approved methods.
k EPA Method 515.4, "Determination of Chlorinated Acids in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Microextraction,
Derivatization and Fast Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture Detection," Revision 1.0, April 2000, EPA815/B-
00/001. Available by requesting a copy from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline within the United States at 800-
426-4791 (Hours are Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time).
Alternatively, the method can be assessed and downloaded directly on-line at
www. epa. gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
29
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
1 Method 314.0, "Determination of Perchlorate in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography," Revision 1.0, EPA
815-B-99-003, November 1999. EPA 815-R-00-014, "Methods for the Determination of Organic and Inorganic
Compounds in Drinking Water, Volume 1," August 2000. Available from the National Technical Information Service,
NTISPB200q-106981,U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia22161. The toll
free number is 800-553-6847. Alternatively, the method can be assessed and downloaded directly on-line at
www. epa. gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
m MRL was established at a concentration, which is at least l/4th the lowest known adverse health concentration, at
which acceptable precision and accuracy has been demonstrated in spiked matrix samples.
n Sample preservation techniques and holding times specified in EPA Method 524.2 must be used by laboratories using
either EPA Method 502.2 or Standard Methods 6200C.
Table 8. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 2
1-Contaminant
2-CAS
Registry
Number
3- Analytical
Methods
4-
Minimum
Reporting
Level
5-Sampling
Location
6-Period During
Which Monitoring
to Be Completed
List 2 - Screening Survey - Chemical Contaminants
Tb Be Sampled After Notice of Analytical Methods Availability
1,2-
diphenylhydrazine
2-methyl-phenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2,4,6-
trichlorophenol
Alachlor ESA
Diazinon
Disulfoton
Diuron
Fonofos
Linuron
122-66-7
95-48-7
120-83-2
51-28-5
88-06-2
Reserved6
333-41-5
298-04-4
330-54-1
944-22-9
330-55-2
EPA Method
526a
EPA Method
528b
EPA Method
528b
EPA Method
528b
EPA Method
528b
Reserved"1
EPA Method
526a
EPA Method
526a
EPA Method
532C
EPA Method
526a
EPA Method
532C
0.5 ug/L
lug/Lf
lug/Lf
5ug/Lf
lug/Lf
Reserved1
0.5 ug/Lf
0.5 ug/Lf
lug/Lf
0.5 ug/Lf
lug/Lf
EPTDSe
EPTDSe
EPTDS6
EPTDSe
EPTDS6
Reserved"1
EPTDS6
EPTDS6
EPTDS6
EPTDS6
EPTDS6
2001 - Selected
Systems serving
<1 0,000 persons;
2002 - Selected
systems serving >
10,000 persons.
same as above.
same as above.
same as above.
same as above.
Reserved"1
2001 - Selected
Systems serving
<1 0,000 persons;
2002 - Selected
systems serving >
10,000 persons.
same as above.
same as above.
same as above.
same as above.
30
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 8. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (1999) List 2
1-Contaminant
2-CAS
Registry
Number
3- Analytical
Methods
4-
Minimum
Reporting
Level
5-Sampling
Location
6-Period During
Which Monitoring
to Be Completed
List 2 - Screening Survey - Chemical Contaminants
Tb Be Sampled After Notice of Analytical Methods Availability
Nitrobenzene
Prometon
RDX
Terbufos
98-95-3
1610-18-0
121-82-4
13071-79-9
EPA Method
526a
EPA Method
526a
Reserved"1
EPA Method
526a
0.5 ug/Lg
0.5 ug/Lf
Reserved1
0.5 ug/Lfk
EPTDSe
EPTDS6
Reserved1
EPTDS6
same as above.
same as above.
Reserved"1
2001 - Selected
Systems serving
<1 0,000 persons;
2002 - Selected
systems serving >
10,000 persons.
List 2 - Screening Survey - Microbiological Contaminants
Tb Be Sampled After Notice of Analytical Methods Availability
Aeromonas
NA
Reserved"1
Reserved1
Distribution
System g
2003h
Column headings are:
1 - Chemical or microbiological contaminant: the name of the contaminants to be analyzed.
2 - CAS (Chemical Abstract Service Number) Registry Number or IdentificationNumber: aunique number identify ing
the chemical contaminants.
3 - Analytical Methods: method numbers identifying the methods that must be used to test the contaminants.
4 - Minimum Reporting Level: the value and unit of measure at or above which the concentration or density of the
contaminant must be measured using the Approved Analytical Methods.
5 - Sampling Location: the locations within a PWS at which samples must be collected.
6 - Years During Which Monitoring to be Completed: the years during which the sampling and testing are to occur for
the indicated contaminant.
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed next in these footnotes. The incorporation by
reference of the following documents listed in footnotes a-c, was approved by the Director of the Federal Register
in accordance with5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFRpart 51. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the following
sources. Information regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at
800-426-4791. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the sources listed in these footnotes. Information
regarding obtaining these documents can be obtained from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 800-426-4791.
Documents may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
(Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700,
Washington, DC.
a EPAMethod526, "Determination of Selected Semivolatile Organic Compounds in Drinking Water by Solid Phase
Extraction and Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)," Revision 1.0, June 2000. EPA
815-R-00-014, "Methods for the Determination of Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Drinking Water, Wume 1,"
August 2000. Available from the National Technical Information Service, NTIS PB2000-106981, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, ¥rginia 22161. The toll free number is 800-553-6847.
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Alternatively, the method can be assessed and downloaded directly on-line at
www. epa. gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
b EPA Method 528, "Determination of Phenols in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and Capillary Column
Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)," Revision 1.0, April 2000. EPA 815-R-00-014, "Methods for
the Determination of Organic andlnorganic Compounds in Drinking Water, Volume 1," August2000. Available from
the National Technical InformationService,NTISPB2000-106981, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, Virginia22161. The toll free number is 800-553-6847. Alternatively, the method can be assessed
and downloaded directly on-line at www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
0 EPA Method 532, "Determination of Phenylurea Compounds in Drinking Water by Solid Phase Extraction and High
Performance LiquidChromatography withUVDetection," Revision 1.0, June 2000. EPA 815-R-00-014, "Methods
for the determination of Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Drinking Water, Volume 1," August 2000. Available
from the National Technical Information Service, NTIS PB2000-106981, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. The toll free number is 800-553-6847. Alternatively, the method can be
assessed and downloaded directly on-line at www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/sourcalt.html.
d To be specified at a later time.
e Entry Points to the Distribution System (EPTDS), after treatment, representing each non-emergency water source
in use over the 12-month period of monitoring: this only includes entry points for sources in operation during the
months in which sampling is to occur. Sampling must occur at the EPTDS, source water sampling points are not
permitted for List 2 contaminant monitoring.
Minimum Reporting Level represents the value of the lowest concentration precision and accuracy determination
made duringmethods development and documented in the method. If method options are permitted, the concentration
used was for the least sensitive option.
g Three samples must be taken from the distribution system, which is owned or controlled by the selected PWS. The
sample locations must include one sample from a point (MD from §141.35 (d)(3), Table 1) where the disinfectant
residual is representative of the distribution system. This sample location may be selected from sample locations
which have been previously identified for samples to be analyzed for coliform indicator bacteria. Coliform sample
locations encompass a variety of sites including midpoint samples which may contain a disinfectant residual that is
typical of the system. Coliform sample locations are described in 40 CFR 141.21. This same approach must be used
for the Aeromonas midpoint sample where the disinfectant residual wouldnothave declined and would be typical for
the distribution system. Additionally, two samples must be takenfromtwo different locations: the distal or dead-end
locatiqnin the distribution sy stem (MRfrom§ 141.35 (d)(3), Table 1), avoiding disinfectant booster stations,and from
alocationwhere previous determinations have indicated the lowest disinfectant residual in the distribution sy stem (LD
from § 141.35(d)(3), Table 1). If these two locations of distal and low disinfectant residual sites coincide, then the
second sample must be taken at location between the MD and MR sites. Locations in the distribution system where
the disinfectant residual is expected to be low are similar to TTHM sampling points. Sampling locations for TTHMs
are described in 63 FR 69468.
h This monitoring period is contingent upon promulgation of the analytical method and minimum reporting level.
5.3 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection
Procedures for sample collection under the UCMR are contaminant- and method-specific. Detailed
sample collection instructions for Assessment Monitoring contaminants can be found in the Small
Systems Guidance- Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation Guidance for Operators of
Public Water Systems Serving 10,000 or Fewer People (EPA 815 -R-01 -002) - for small PWSs, and
in the UCMR (1999) List 1 and List 2 Chemical Analytical Methods QC Manual (EPA 815-R-01-
028), for large systems and laboratories.
Both large and small PWSs must ensure that samples are collected early enough in the day to allow
time for overnight delivery to the laboratories, since some samples mustbe processed withinSO hours
of collection (§141.40(a)(5)(i)(a)). Samples may not be composited (i.e., combined, mixed, or
blended). Each sample must be collected, preserved (if applicable), and tested separately
32
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
5.3.1 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection: Additional Requirements Specific
to Large Systems
If sample collection at large systems is not performed according to the required instructions and
procedures for each contaminant and analytical method, the system owner/operator will be required
to resample following the required method instructions and procedures (§141.40(a)(5)(ii)(F) and
(iii)(C)). If laboratory or shipping problems cause the loss of a sample, then all efforts should be
made to replace that sample atlhe earliest possible time (preferably in the same month that the original
sample was collected). If resampling in the same month is not possible, then systems should collect
the samples in the same quarter, so that monitoring schedules do not need to change. The only case
where monitoring schedules may change is if all the samples for the first sampling period are lost or
damaged. In this case, the system may monitor in another month, and reschedule sampling based on
that starting month.
Large system owners/operators are responsible for arranging contaminant analysis for Assessment
Monitoring and Screening Surveys at an approved laboratory. For the Pre-Screen Testing analyses,
the EPA will provide a list of laboratories that may be used when pre-screen testing is required.
The large system owner/operator should consult with the laboratory conducting the analytical work
regarding the sampling protocol (§141.40(a)(5)(iii)(F)). Laboratories may require collection and
submission of some duplicate samples as part of their internal quality control program, or for other
practical considerations in the event that sample containers are lost, broken, or not properly sealed
or cooled.
5.3.2 Quality Control Requirements for Sample Collection: Additional Requirements Specific
to Small Systems
The State or EPA may notify small systems of their sampling requirements and schedule. If sampling
i s not performed according to the instructions or procedures for each contaminant and its method, then
the owner/operator must notify the State or EPA of the sampling deviations. The sampling deviations
shouldbe included in the sample reporting forms that are sent back to the lab oratory with the samples.
The PWS must resample as soon as instructions are received from the laboratory or the EPA
contractor (§141.40(a)(5)(iii)(C)).
The EPA contractor will send a sample collection kit to all small systems, which will include: an
insulated sample shipping container or containers; all required sampling bottles; freeze packs to keep
samples cool intransitback to the laboratory; any chemicals needed to dechlorinate and/or preserve
samples; a pre-paid return shipping docket; sample collection data forms; and any additional
instructions or materials needed for sample collection, dechlorination, and preservation. If any of the
materials listed in the kit instructions are not included or arrive damaged, the system must notify the
contractor prior to use of the sample collection kit (§141.40(a)(5)(iii)(D)). Each kit must be stored
and maintained in a secure place until used for sampling (§ 141.40(a)(5)(iii)(D)). Note that cold packs
mustbe frozen prior to sample collection so that the collected samples canbe keptcool when shipped
to the laboratory (§141.40(a)(5)(iii)(E)).
Instructions provided with the kit will describe the proper procedures for use of containers, sample
collection, dechlorination and/or preservation of the samples, and sealing and preparing the samples
and containers for shipment. EPA will use a random process to select some systems in State
Monitoring Plans (SMPs) that will be requested to collect duplicate samples for quality control.
33
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Approximately 10% of samples collected for small systems will be collected in duplicate. Systems
selected for this quality control sampling will receive two sample collection kits. The same required
sampling procedures must be used for both the original and the duplicate sample kits
(§141.40(a)(5)(iii) (D) and (F)). These systems will not incur additional costs since EPA is paying
for small system testing.
5.3.3 Quality Control Requirements for Laboratories
Systems must ensure that lab oratories providing services in support of their monitoring are currently
certified to perform compliance monitoring, as applicable to those analytical methods which are
approved for UCMR Assessment Monitoring and Screening Surveys (§141.40(a)(5)(ii)(G). They
must also ensure that the laboratory performing perchlorate and Aeromonas analyses has passed the
EPA Performance Evaluation requirements. These methods specify quality control procedures that
must be followed to ensure reliable data. Detailed monitoring quality control procedures are
discussed in the UCMR (1999) List 1 and List 2 Chemical Analytical Methods QC Manual (QC
Manual, EPA 815-R-01-028).
Quality control procedures and the frequency of quality control testing vary among the different
analytical methods used for laboratory analysis of the UCMR contaminants. Many methods specified
in the UCMR provide criteria to be used in evaluating and accepting laboratory performance based
on related quality control data. It is imperative that laboratories adhere to the specified quality control
requirements. UCMR monitoring data will not be accepted by EPA if the applicable quality control
requirements are not met. If the UCMR quality control requirements are not met, then the system will
be out of compliance with respect to the UCMR. The laboratory should ensure that PWSs resample
when quality control requirements are not met. Detailed information on all laboratory quality control
requirements are specified in Appendix A of §141.40 and the QC Manual.
5.3.4 Additional Quality Controls
Samples for which the methods specify storage at approximately 4°C must arrive at the laboratory
packed in coolers with ice or frozen cold packs. If there is no visible ice or the cold packs are
completely thawed, the laboratory should report the conditions to the water system. Samples should
not be analyzed if the shipping temperature was not maintained at 4°C (± 2°). The laboratory must
also invalidate samples that were collected in improper sampling containers (e.g., plastic bottles,
where the method requirements specify glass) or that were improperly filled (e.g., half-filled bottles
for samples that are required to be completely filled with no air or bubbles). New water samples
should be collected to replace these samples. If resampling cannot be performed, then the water
system must indicate in the report to EPA that the samples were invalidated because of a shipment,
storage, or sampling problem, etc., and no data should be reported.
In addition, the laboratory must analyze each sample within the required holding time (§141.40
Appendix A (1)). When appropriate, EPA standardized the holding times across analytical methods
for the same analyte group, except for Perchlorate, which has a holding time of approximately 40
hours. Please refer to the QC Manual (EPA 815-R-01 -028) for more detailed information on sample
holding times. If a UCMR sample is not extracted or analyzed within the specified holding time, then
the data for the sample should notbe reported. The laboratory should indicate to the water system that
the sample was invalidated because of a holding time problem, and the system should collect another
sample. This information would then be reported when the system submits its report for that sampling
period.
34
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
6. UCMR Reporting Requirements
6.1 Data Elements
Large systems are required by the UCMR to ensure that the information listed in Table 9 is reported
to the EPA within 30 days following the month in which laboratory results were received
(§ 140.3 5(d)). Laboratories will post UCMRresults for their client public water systems by uploading
or entering the data elements using EPA's electronic reporting system. Analytical results must be
approved by PWSs and then released to the EPA as officially reported UCMR data.
Small systems should check that the pre-printed information provided on the sampling forms is correct.
This information must be reported so that each sampling point used for UCMR sampling can be
associated with the facility(ies) in use at the time the sampling occurred (§141.40(a)(5)(iii)(E)).
In addition, systems must provide points of contact for: a PWS technical person who is responsible
for the technical aspects of UCMR activities, such as details concerning sampling and reporting; an
official UCMR spokesperson from the PWS; and a laboratory contact person who is able to address
questions concerning the analyses performed by the laboratory (§ 141.40(d)(l)). The laboratory will
post the monitoring data to EPA's internet-based SDWARS/UCMR (Safe Drinking Water Accession
and Review System) reporting system (§141.35(e) and (f)).
Table 9. UCMR Reporting Requirements
Data Element
Definition
1. Public Water System
Identification Number
The code used to identify each PWS. The code begins with the
standard two-character postal State abbreviation; the remaining seven
characters are unique to each PWS.
Public Water System Facility
Identification Number -
Sampling Point Identification
Number and Sampling Point Type
Identification
The Sampling point identification number and sampling point type
identification must either be static or traceable to previous numbers
and type identifications throughout the period of unregulated
contaminant monitoring. The Sampling point identification number is
a three-part alphanumeric designation, made up of:
a. The Public Water System Facility Identification Number is an
identification number established by the State, or at the State's
discretion the PWS, that is unique to the PWS for an intake for each
source of water, a treatment plant, a distribution system, or any other
facility associated with water treatment or delivery and provides for
the relationship of facilities to each other to be maintained;
b. The Sampling Point Identification Number is an identification
number established by the State, or at the State's discretion the PWS,
that is unique to each PWS facility that identifies the specific sampling
point and allows the relationship of the sampling point to other
facilities to be maintained; and
c. Sampling Point Type Identification is one of following:
SR - Untreated water collected at the source of the water system
facility.
35
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 9. UCMR Reporting Requirements
Data Element
3 . Sample Collection Date
4. Sample Identification Number
5 . Contaminant/Parameter
6. Analytical Results - Sign
7. Analytical Result - Value
8. Analytical Result - Unit of
Measure
9 . Analytical Method Number
10. Sample Analysis Type
Definition
EP - Entry point to the distribution system.
MD - midpoint in the distribution system where the disinfectant
residual would be expected to be typical for the system such as the
location for sampling coliform indicator bacteria as described in 40
CFR 141.21.
MR - point of maximum retention is the point located the furthest
from the entry point to the distribution system which is approved by
the State for trihalomethane (THM) (disinfectant byproducts (DBP))
and/or total coliform sampling.
LD - location in the distribution system where the disinfectant
residual is the lowest which is approved by the State for THM (DBP)
and/or total coliform sampling.
The date the sample is collected reported as 4-digit year, 2-digit
month, and 2-digit day.
An alphanumeric value of up to 15 characters assigned by the
laboratory to uniquely identify containers or groups of containers
containing water samples collected at the same time and sampling
point.
The unregulated contaminant or water quality parameter for which the
sample is being analyzed.
An alphanumeric value indicating whether the sample analysis result
was:
a. (<) "less than" means the contaminant was not detected or was
detected at a level "less than" the minimum reporting level (MRL).
b. (=) "equal to" means the contaminant was detected at a level "equal
to" the value reported in "Analytical Result - Value."
The actual numeric value of the analysis for chemical and
microbiological results, or the MRL if the analytical result is less than
the contaminant's MRL
The unit of measurement for the analytical results reported, [e.g.,
micrograms per liter, (ug/L); colony -forming units per 100 milliliter,
(CFU/100 mL), etc.]
The identification number of the analytical method used.
The type of sample collected. Permitted values include:
a. RFS - Raw field sample - untreated sample collected and submitted
for analysis under this rule.
b. RDS - Raw duplicate field sample - untreated field sample duplicate
36
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Table 9. UCMR Reporting Requirements
Data Element
1 1 . Sample Batch Identification
Number
12. Minimum Reporting Level
1 3 . Minimum Reporting Level Unit
of Measure
14. Analytical Precision
15. Analytical Accuracy
Definition
collected at the same time and place as the raw field sample and
submitted for analysis under this rule.
c. TFS - Treated field sample - treated sample collected and submitted
for analysis under this rule.
d. TDS - Treated duplicate field sample - treated field sample duplicate
collected at the same time and place as the treated field sample and
submitted for analysis under this rule.
The sample batch identification number consists of three parts:
a. Up to a 10-character laboratory identification code assigned by
EPA;
b. Up to a 15-character code assigned by the laboratory to uniquely
identify each extraction or analysis batch.
c. The date that the samples contained in each extraction batch
extracted or in an analysis batch were analyzed, reported as an 8-digit
number in the form 4-digit year, 2-digit month, and 2-digit day.
MRL refers to the lowest concentration of an analyte that may be
reported. Unregulated contaminant monitoring MRLs are established
in §141.40 monitoring requirements for unregulated contaminants.
The unit of measure to express the concentration, count, or other
value of a contaminant level for the Minimum Reporting Level
reported.
(e.g., ug/L, colony forming units/100 mL (CFU/100 mL), etc.).
Precision is the degree of agreement between two repeated
measurements and is monitored through the use of duplicate spiked
samples. For purposes of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation (UCMR), Analytical Precision is defined as the relative
percent difference (RPD) between spiked matrix duplicates. The RPD
for the spiked matrix duplicates analyzed in the same batch of samples
as the analytical result being reported is to be entered in this field.
Precision is calculated as the RPD of spiked matrix duplicates from
the mean using:
RPD = absolute value of [(Xj - X2) /{(X{ +X2)/2}] x 100%
where:
Xj is the concentration observed in spiked field sample minus the
concentration observed in unspiked field sample
X2 is the concentration observed in duplicate spiked field sample
minus the concentration observed in unspiked field sample
Accuracy describes how close a result is to the true value measured
37
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Table 9. UCMR Reporting Requirements
Data Element
16. Spiking Concentration
17. Presence/Absence
Definition
through the use of spiked field samples. For purposes of unregulated
contaminant monitoring, accuracy is defined as the percent recovery
of the contaminant in the spiked matrix sample analyzed in the same
analytical batch as the sample result being reported and calculated
using:
% recovery = [(ami found in spiked sample - amt. found in sample) /
amt. spiked] x 100%
The concentration of method analytes added to a sample to be analyzed
for calculating analytical precision and accuracy where the value
reported use the same unit of measure reported for Analytical Results
Reserved
6.2 Electronic Reporting and Data Review
The UCMR requires that all data be reported electronically to EPA, unless a request is received from
the PWS. Further guidance and tutorials is provided in the UCMR Reporting Guidance (EPA 815-R-
01-029) and in the forthcoming Implementation Guide for UCMR. The UCMR provides for
electronic reporting of UCMR data directly from laboratories on behalf of systems. This is intended
to facilitate "one-entry" of data, reducing reporting errors and reducing the time involved in
investigating, checking and correcting errors at all levels (laboratory, system, State, and EPA). The
reporting process will be secure. PWSs and laboratories will have to register as users of EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) before gaining access to EPA's electronic reporting Web site.
Registration began in March 2001. Systems will have to approve their data before it is available to
EPA.
In general, a PWS can fulfill its responsibilities in one of two ways: (1) it can instruct the laboratory
to post the monitoring results to SDWARS/UCMR database through the CDX, so the PWS can review
the data on line and electronically indicate its approval to make the data available to EPA; or (2) it
can elect to receive a hard copy of the monitoring results for review and then indicate its approval to
the laboratory to upload the data to EPA (however, the PWS, or its representative, will still have to
provide electronic approval within SDWARS/UCMR, to provide EPA access to the data). The PWS
must also submit the results to the State, and is responsible for ensuring compliance with any other
State reporting requirements.
EPA is developing several options for the electronic reporting by laboratories, including the
capability to upload data in electronic batches or individually using a Web interface where data can
be keyed in using "web forms". Laboratories that have good electronic reporting capabilities and
want or need to upload large batches of data have two options:
• Standard flat file format - such as tab or comma delimited files, or
• New XML or extensible mark-up language format - protocol and format are currently being
finalized, and may be available through CDX.
38
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Large systems are responsible for reviewing analytical results and reporting the results to the EPA
(with a copy to the State) within 30 days following the month in which the results are received from
the laboratory as specified in 40 CFR §141.35. However, for small systems, laboratories will report
all analytical results to EPA, and the EPA contractor will review all sampling results. For example,
if analytical results for samples that were collected during October were notreceived backfromthe
laboratory until November, the latest allowable reporting date would be December 30. All systems
are responsible for ensuring timely reporting within, or shortly following the monitoring period.
EPA has made an except on to the normal reporting schedule for the first rounds of monitoring in 2001
to allow for the readiness of the electronic reporting system. Systems which receive results prior to
January 1, 2002 will be required to report their data by April 30, 2002. EPA will then hold the data
for 60 days to allow for quality control review and for review by systems and States. EPA will then
place the data in the National Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD) at the time
of the next database update.
For small systems, EPA will send copies of monitoring results to the systems and the State once EPA
receives and validates the results from the contract laboratories. Small systems are still responsible
for enduring that their State receives a copy of the results. Participating small systems will have 30
days to review and comment on the data. Systems and States will have an additional 60 days to
review the data before results are reported to the NCOD.
Since States will have electronic access to the monitoring results for systems in their State, they may
allow systems to forgo the requirement to provide them with a copy of the results. Systems should
check with their States for any additional reporting requirements beyond the scope of the UCMR
requirements (i.e., some States may require immediate reporting of monitoring results which may pose
an imminent danger to human health). EPA encouraged States to notify PWSs of additional State-
specific reporting requirements when they notify PWSs of their responsibilities under the UCMR.
Systems that do not receive direction from their States should report results to their State Agency
concurrent with reporting results to EPA through the electronic reporting system. For small systems
in States that require immediate reporting of contaminants detected, EPA will report results to the
system and the State after EPA receives and validates the results from the laboratory. However, the
system is still responsible for enduring that the State receives a copy of the results. EPA is also not
responsible for identifying all of the States that require immediate reporting of detected contaminants.
6.3 Public Notification
CWSs must report UCMR results through the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule, published
on August 19, 1998 (63 FR 44511), as required by §141.153(d). CWSs must report UCMR results
when any of the UCMR contaminants are detected. CCRs must be sent to all billing customers each
year by July 1. A system may briefly explain in the CCR why it is monitoring for unregulated
contaminants. The explanation may read as follows:
Unregulated contaminants are those for which EPA has not established drinking water
standards. The purpose of unregulated contaminant monitoring is to assist EPA in
determining the occurrence of unregulated contaminants in drinking water and whether
future regulation is warranted.
For all PWSs that are subject to the Rule, UCMR monitoring results will be made available to the
public through the requirements of the Public Notification Rule (May 4, 2000 at 65 FR 25982). All
39
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
PWSs are required to notify the public annually of the availability of unregulated contaminant
analytical results. Failure to monitor for unregulated contaminants, as required through the UCMR,
will also be repprtable under the Public Notification Rule. Because the effective date of the revised
public notification rule differs by State, PWS owners and operators should check with their State
drinking water agency to determine the applicable public notice requirements. Detailed information
on these reporting requirements can be found in the documents Preparing Your Drinking Water
Consumer Confidence Report (EPA 816-R-99-002) and Public Notification Handbook (EPA 916-R-
00-010). Both of these documents are available on the Web at www.epa. gov/safewater.
The results that will be reported through the CCR and Public Notification Rules should be based on
the same monitoring data that the States and EPA will receive under the UCMR. Information received
by EPA will be available to the public via NCOD. Unregulated contaminants not on the UCMR List
would not be required to be reported under the CCR. However, any emerging contaminants of local
or State concern may be voluntarily reported to the NCOD to assist EPA in determining if these
contaminants should be considered for establishing health-based standards or advisories.
40
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
7. State Responsibilities
7.1 State Plan Development
States play a very important role in the UCMR program by entering into Partnership Agreement s
(PAs) with EPA to facilitate State participation and implementation, and/or by reviewing the State
Monitoring Plan (SMP). The SMP played a critical role in UCMR implementation by allowing States
to: identify which small systems will participate in Assessment Monitoring (List 1); identify which
systems will participate in the Screening Surveys (List 2); and specify various aspects of the timing
and location of system monitoring.
All States (regardless of whether or not they entered into a PA with EPA) were asked to review the
initial SMPs for their State. Review of the SMP included ensuring that small systems selected to
participate in the UCMR were active and did not purchase all of their water. States were asked to
replace ineligible systems with one of the two replacement systems that EPA identified for each
"primary" system selected to monitor for the UCMR. In the SMPs, States were also asked to review
inventory information as well as the timing and location of sampling. States were also asked to
review the large system information for those that were selected to conduct Screening Surveys to
ensure that these systems were eligible to conduct the Screening Surveys. Detailed information on
SMP review and modification may be found in the Initial and Final State Plans which EPA sent to
each participating State.
7.2 Partnership Agreements
During the UCMR rulemaking process, States suggested that EPA use a Memorandum of Agreement
(which is represented by the PA) rather than the formal adoption of rules and revisions of each State's
primary enforcement responsibility (primacy) program to allow States to participate in UCMR
implementation. PAs serve as a key implementation mechanism for the UCMR by identifying and
assigning responsibility for important activities that must be conducted to successfully implement the
UCMR. States that entered into an Agreement with EPA are generally responsible for reviewing and
updating their SMPs, and notifying small and large systems of their Assessment Monitoring and
Screening Survey responsibilities prior to scheduled sampling. In general, these States also provide
small systems with instructions (prepared by EPA) on the location, frequency, and timing of sampling.
The EPA contractor will provide small systems with instructions on the use of sampling equipment,
and handling and shipment of samples.
States that entered into a PA and who have agreed to identify vulnerable systems for Pre-Screen
Testing are responsible for notifying the PWS owners/operators of Pre-Screen Testing requirements
at least 90 days before sampling must occur. States with an Agreement may also be responsible for
specifying the latitude and longitude of PWS treatment plants by the time of the system's reporting of
Assessment Monitoring results to the NCOD.
Most States agreed to review and modify their SMPs, including modifying the vulnerable time for
sampling, reviewing monitoring dates for systems, and specifying alternate dates if appropriate, and
identifying alternate sampling points for small PWSs as needed. Note that many States which did not
enter into PAs with EPA modified and reviewed the SMPs for their State.
Other responsibilities some States agreed to accomplish through the PA process included updating
EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) based on PWS inventory changes, ensuring
that each PWS facility has an unique identification number, and providing EPA with a list of certified
41
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
laboratories in the State. Some States have also agreed to collect Assessment Monitoring and
Screening Survey samples for small systems and/or Index System(s) selected to monitor in the State.
Some States have also agreed to review UCMR data (in accordance with §141.35(b)) before EPA
places data in the NCOD. Some States agreed to assist in obtaining system compliance through
follow-up contact with systems regarding their monitoring responsibilities once informed of system
non-compliance as provided for in §141.40(a)(8) and (b)(l)(v), (vi), (vii) and (viii).
Note that not all States are responsible for performing all of the activities identified above. A State's
actual responsibilities are outlined in the PA as discussed and agreed to by the State and EPA. For
some States, EPA is responsible for performing some of the activities outlined above.
7.3 State Waivers for Contaminants Monitored at Large Systems
States may apply to EPA for a waiver from monitoring requirements for specific contaminants for
large systems. To apply for a waiver, States must submit the following to EPA (§141.40(b)(4)):
• a list of the contaminants for which waivers are requested; and
supporting documentation that demonstrates that each contaminant for which a waiver is
requested:
- has not been detected in the source waters or distribution systems in the State (and this
presumes that monitoring has been conducted) in the 15 years prior to the application date,
and
- has never been used, stored, disposed, or released in the State in the 15 years prior to the
application date.
If the State can demonstrate that any contaminant meets these criteria, EPA may grant a waiver for that
contaminant.
7.4 Governors' Petition to Add Contaminants to the Monitoring List
States may also petition EPA to add one or more contaminants to the unregulated contaminant
monitoring list. This petition must be signed by the governors of at least seven States and must clearly
identify the reason(s) for adding the contaminant to the monitoring list, including:
• the potential public health risk (particularly any information that might be available regarding
disproportionate risks to the health and safety of children);
• the expected occurrence (including any available data);
any analytical methods that are known or could be used to test for the contaminant(s); and
• any other information that could assist EPA in determining whether the addition of the
contaminant(s) would preclude the listing of another contaminant of a higher public health
concern (§141.40(b)(3)).
42
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
8. Participation of Tribal Public Water Systems
EPA Regional offices will work closely with Tribal water systems in their Region to successfully
implement the UCMR. EPA Regions were asked to work with the Tribes in reviewing the systems
selected to monitor for the UCMR as identified in the Monitoring Plan for Tribal water systems. Note
that, for the select! on of a national representative sample of small systems, all Tribes across the nation
were grouped together (i.e., treated as one State) to ensure that at least two tribal water systems were
selected to monitor for the UCMR. During the selection process, seven small tribal systems were
selected to monitor for UCMR contaminants. No large tribal systems were selected to conduct
Screening Surveys.
With respect to Tribal monitoring, the UCMR program was designed to share the responsibilities for
unregulated contaminant monitoring between the EPA Regions and the selected Tribal systems. The
EPA Regions will serve as a principal line of communication with the Tribes on UCMR issues. In
concert with the Tribal systems, the EPA Regions will coordinate the identification and assignment
of responsibilities for important activities that should be conducted to successfully implement the
UCMR during the five-year implementation cycle for Tribal water systems. Thus, cooperation and
dialogue between the EPA Regions and Tribes will be required in determining mutually agreed upon
responsibilities, suchas the review of system inventory information, sample collection, and shipment
of sample kits to an approved laboratory.
8.1 Tribal Monitoring Plan Development
EPA Regions were asked to review the table of Tribal systems that were selected to monitor for the
UCMR, and to ensure that the selected systems were active and did not purchase all of their water
from another water system. EPA Regions were also asked to review and modify, if necessary, any
inventory information provided in the Tribal system Monitoring Plan. If selected systems were not
eligible to monitor for the UCMR, EPA Headquarters selected a replacement system from the list of
alternate tribal systems. Because Tribal systems were selected on a national basis, an ineligible
Tribal water system was not necessarily replaced with another system from the same EPA Region.
After fmalization of the Monitoring Plan, the EPA Regions were responsible for notifying their
appropriate Tribal systems in the Monitoring Plan of their responsibilities under the UCMR
8.2 Sample Collection Responsibility
Some EPARegions and Tribal environmental office contacts plan to conduct the sampling atthe small
tribal PWSs to ensure the quality of the data collected under the UCMR. In the case of the Tribal
water systems, the responsibility for this activity is delegated to the EPARegions whose systems are
included in the sample of primary Tribal water systems (Regions 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9). Tribal assistance
with sample collection is an important contribution which helps provide EPA with the best data
possible for decision making.
43
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
44
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
9. EPA Responsibilities
EPA Headquarters (primarily the Technical Support Center (TSC)) will directly implement the
UCMR, with implementation and coordination assistance from EPA Regional contacts, the States,
Territories, and Tribes. EPA is responsible for providing implementation guidance documents for
systems, States, and EPA Regions. EPA will provide additional ongoing assistance as needed.
9.1 Partnership Agreements and State Monitoring Plan Development
EPA and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) drafted the Model
Partnership Agreements for use by EPA in coordinating UCMR implementation responsibilities
between the EPA Regions and the States. EPA Regions also worked closely with States in
establishing mutually-agreed-upon responsibilities in the PAs. EPA Headquarters developed initial
SMPs by selecting the national representative sample of small systems and providing detailed
instructions on review and update of the initial SMPs. EPA was responsible for incorporating State
modifications to SMPs and returning Final SMPs to States once all modifications were complete.
9.2 Sample Collection and Analysis
The TSC has contracted with a sample coordination contractor and with laboratories which will
perform all sample analyses for small systems under the UCMR. EPA is providing these contractors
with the information needed for scheduling sampling analysis. EPA will pay for the costs associated
with shipping samples from small PWSs to the contract laboratories and with sampling analysis. The
EPA contract laboratories will then report the results electronically to EPA for the small systems via
the EPA web data entry form discussed in Section 6.
EPA, its contractors, and some States will assist with collecting all of the Assessment Monitoring
samples for Index Systems in each year of the five-year monitoring cycle. However, all large systems
and all other small systems are expected to collect their own Assessment Monitoring, Screening
Survey, and Pre-Screen Testing samples. However, some States have committed to collecting
samples for the small systems in their State.
9.3 Reviewing Analytical Results and Reporting Requirements
EPA has recently unveiled a web-based reporting database where laboratories will electronically
report UCMR results. For quality assurance, EPA will review all UCMR data before the data are
uploaded to the NCOD. All UCMR data will be made available to the public through the NCOD.
EPA will maintain the UCMR database, and will assist States with compliance tracking for the
UCMR, if requested. Refer to Section 6 for a more detailed description of system reporting
requirements.
45
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
46
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
10. Contact Information
For further information on this guidance document, PWSs should contact their State drinking water
agency, the appropriate EPA Region, or the Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Small PWSs, States, or
Regions with questions on small system sampling kits should contact the UCMR Implementation
Support Contractor (listed below). Large PWSs should contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline.
State drinking water agencies with questions on this guidance should contact their appropriate EPA
Region coordinator, or the UCMR Implementation Team Leader listed below.
EPA UCMR Implementation Team Leader:
Daniel Hautman, Technical Support Center, Standards and Risk Management Division, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water (143), 26 West Martin Luther King Jr. Dr., Cincinnati, OH
45268. (513)569-7274.
EPA UCMR Implementation Support Contractor:
Robin Silva-Wilkinson, Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC), 739Hastings Street, Traverse
City, MI 49686. (231) 941-2230.
Supplementary Information:
Regional Contacts
I. Chris Ryan, 1 Congress Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA 02118.
Phone:(617)918-1567.
II. Robert Poon, 290 Broadway, Room 2432, New York, NY 10007-1866.
Phone:(212)637-3821.
HI. Michelle Hoover, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
Phone:(215)814-5258.
IV Janine Morris, Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61 Forsyth St, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303.
Phone: (404) 562-9480.
V Janet Kuefler, 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604-3507.
Phone:(312)886-0123.
VI. Andrew J. Waite, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202.
Phone: (214) 665-7332.
VH. Stan Calow, 901 N. Fifth Street, Kansas City, KS 66101.
Phone:(913)551-7410.
VUI. Rod Glebe, One Denver Place, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202.
Phone:(303)312-6627.
IX. Jill Korte, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Phone:(415)744-1853.
X. Gene Taylor, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
Phone: (206) 553-1389.
47
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
48
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
APPENDICES
1. Appendix A: Acronym List
2. Appendix B: Definitions
3. Appendix C: Number of Small Systems in Representative Sample, by
State
49
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
50
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Appendix A — Acronym List
2,4-DNT - 2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-DNT - 2,6-dinitrotoluene
4,4'-DDE - 4,4'-dichloro dichlorophenyl ethylene, a degradation product of DDT
AOAC - Association of Official Analytical Chemists
APHA - American Public Health Association
ASDWA - Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials
CAS - Chemical Abstract Service
CCL - Candidate Contaminant List
CCR - Consumer Confidence Reports
CDX - Central Data Exchange
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
CFU/100 mL - colony forming units per 100 milliliters
CWS - community water system
DBF - disinfection byproducts
DCPA - dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate, chemical name of the herbicide dacthal
DDT - dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane, a general insecticide
EP - entry point
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
EPTC - s-ethyl-dipropylthiocarbamate, an herbicide
EPTDS - Entry Point to the Distribution System
ESA - ethanesulfonic acid, a degradation product of alachlor
FR - Federal Register
GLI method - Great Lakes Instruments method
LD - lowest disinfectant residual
MD - midpoint of the distribution system
mg/L - milligrams per liter
MR - maximum residence time in the distribution system
MRL - minimum reporting level
MTBE - methyl-tert-butyl-ether, a gasoline additive
NCOD - National Drinking Water Contaminant Occurrence Database
NERL - National Environmental Research Laboratory
NTIS - National Technical Information Service
NTNCWS - non-transient non-community water system
OGWDW - Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
A-l
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
PA
PWS
QC
RDS
RDX
RFS
RPD
SDWA
SDWARS
SDWIS
SM
SMP
SR
IDS
TFS
TSC
TNCWS
TTHM
UCMR
voc
WQP
- Partnership Agreement
- Public Water System
- quality control
- raw duplicate sample
- hexahydro-l,3,5-trinitro-l,3,5-triazine
- raw field sample
- relative percent difference
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System
- Safe Drinking Water Information System
- Standard Methods
- State Monitoring Plan
- source/raw water sampling point, prior to treatment
- treated duplicate sample
- treated field sample
- Technical Support Center
- transient non-community water system
- Total Trihalomethane
- Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulations/Rule
- micrograms per liter
- volatile organic compound
- water quality parameter
A-2
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Appendix B — 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)). In addition to the reporting information required for
Assessment Monitoring, the Index Systems must also report information on PWS operating conditions (such
as water source, pumping rates, and environmental setting) (§141.40(a)(6)). These PWSs must monitor each
year of the 5-year UCMR cycle, with EPA paying for all reasonable monitoring costs (§141.40(a)(4)(i)(A)).
Listed contaminant means a contaminant identified as an analyte in Table 1, 141.40(a)(3) of the 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 parentheses 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.
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.
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 PWSs of all
monitored PWSs 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, PWS operation, and environmental conditions (soils, geology and land
use).
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 PWSs (up to 200). 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 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 PWSs in the representative sample are selected using a stratified random sampling
process that ensures that this small subset of PWSs will be representative of all small PWSs nationally.
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.
B- 1
-------
UCMR Reference Guide October 2001
Sampling Point means a unique location where samples are to be collected.
Screening Survey means sampling, testing, and reporting of the List 2 contaminants. These contaminants have
analyticalmethods which have been recently developed, and have uncertain potential for occurrence in drinking
water.
State means, 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, and American Samoa are each treated as an individual State. All Tribal water systems in the
U.S. that 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 PWSs.
State Monitoring Plan for State Plan) means a State's portion of the national representative sample of CWSs
andNTNCWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people which must monitor for unregulated contaminants (Assessment
Monitoring, Screening Survey(s) and Index Systems) and all large PWSs (PWSs serving greater than 10,000
people) which are required to monitor for Screening Survey contaminants. A State Plan will also include the
PWSs required to conduct Pre-Screen Testing, selected from the State's designation of vulnerable PWSs.
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 pppulation 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 PWSs randomly selected as nationally representative sample PWSs 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).
Vulnerable time (or vulnerable period) means the time 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.
B-2
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
Appendix C — Number of Small Systems in Representative Sample, by State
State/Tribe/Territory
Number of Small Systems Selected for Assessment Monitoring
Number ofCWS
Number ofNTNCWS
Total Number of
Systems
EPA Region 1
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region 1 Total
4
3
11
5
2
4
29
2
3
1
1
0
0
7
6
6
12
6
2
4
36
EPA Region 2
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region 2 Total
14
22
8
1
45
2
7
1
1
11
16
29
9
2
56
EPA Region 3
Delaware
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region 3 Total
2
6
26
12
9
55
0
2
11
4
1
18
2
8
37
16
10
73
EPA Region 4
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
15
28
20
9
28
20
9
0
4
2
0
2
2
2
15
32
22
9
30
22
11
C-l
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
State/Tribe/Territory
Number of Small Systems Selected for Assessment Monitoring
Number ofCWS
Tennessee
Region 4 Total
13
142
Number ofNTNCWS
Total Number of
Systems
I
13
14
155
EPA Region 5
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region 5 Total
27
18
20
14
23
19
121
1
2
4
2
5
2
16
28
20
24
16
28
21
137
EPA Region 6
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Region 6 Total
13
26
6
15
66
126
0
1
2
0
5
8
13
27
8
15
71
134
EPA Region 7
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Region 7 Total
16
12
18
7
53
0
0
2
1
3
16
12
20
8
56
EPA Region 8
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
9
5
4
4
7
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
10
6
4
4
7
3
C-2
-------
UCMR Reference Guide
October 2001
State/Tribe/Territory
Number of Small Systems Selected for Assessment Monitoring
Number ofCWS
Number ofNTNCWS
Total Number of
Systems
Region 8 Total
31
3
34
EPA Region 9
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Mariana Islands
Nevada
Region 9 Total
2
12
43
1
3
2
3
66
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
6
2
12
48
1
3
2
4
72
EPA Region 10
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Region 10 Total
4
8
9
15
36
0
0
2
2
4
4
8
11
17
40
Tribal Systems
Total for Tribes
National Total
6
710
1
90
7
800
C-3
------- |