EPA815-Z-07-002
17902
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
Dated: April 2, 2007.
Susan Parker Bodine,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. E7-6616 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0958; FRL-8297-2]
Expedited Approval of Test
Procedures for the Analysis of
Contaminants Under the Safe Drinking
Water Act; Analysis and Sampling
Procedures
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This action announces the
Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA's) intent to implement an
expedited process for approving
alternative testing methods for existing
regulations for drinking water
contaminants. The Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA) authorizes EPA to approve
the use of alternative testing methods
through publication of a notice in the
Federal Register instead of through
rulemaking procedures. EPA plans to
use this streamlined authority to make
additional methods available for
analyzing drinking water compliance
and unregulated contaminant
monitoring samples. This expedited
approach will provide public water
systems, laboratories, and primacy
agencies with more timely access to new
measurement techniques and greater
flexibility in the selection of analytical
methods, thereby reducing monitoring
costs while maintaining public health
protection.
This notice requests comments on
implementation aspects of the expedited
method approval process.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 11, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OW-2006-0958, by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: OW-Docket@epa.gov.
• Fax:(202)566-1749.
• Mail: Water Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4101T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-
0958. All comments received will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at wivw.regu7ations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov at e-mail. The
www.regu7atfons.gov Web site is an
"anonymous access" system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regu7atjons.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA's public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at http://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I.B
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regu7atjous.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will he publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regu7atjons.gov or in hard copy at
the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334,1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone
number for the Water Docket is (202)
566-2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia Snyder Fair, Technical Support
Center, Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water (MS 140),
Environmental Protection Agency, 26
West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268; telephone
number: 513-569-7937; e-mail address:
/aj'r.paf@epo.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This action itself does not impose any
requirements on anyone. Instead, it
notifies interested parties of EPA's
intent to implement an expedited
approval process for alternative testing
procedures used to measure
contaminants in drinking water and
seeks comments on options for
implementing the process.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
I. Submitting CBI. Do not submit
confidential business information to
EPA through www.regu7atjons.gov or e-
mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI.
For CBI information in a disk or CD
ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI
and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
comment that includes information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
Your comments will be most helpful if
you remember to:
• Identify the action by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
17903
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
3. Timing. You must submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified above (see DATES).
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in
the Notice
ATP: Alternate Test Procedure
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level
NPDWR: National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations
NSDWR: National Secondary Drinking Water
Regulations
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
UCMR: Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulations
U.S.C.: United States Code
VCSB: Voluntary Consensus Standard Body
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My
Comments for EPA?
II. Background
A. What Is the Purpose of This Notice?
B. Statutory Background
C. How Does EPA Currently Approve
Testing Methods for Drinking Water
Contaminants?
III. Expedited Method Approval
A. What Is Expedited Method Approval?
B. Why Is EPA Implementing the
Expedited Method Approval Process?
C. Will EPA Use This Process to Approve
All New Methods?
D. Will EPA Also Use the New Expedited
Process To Approve Alternative Methods
for National Secondary Drinking Water
Regulations and Unregulated
Contaminants?
E. Will EPA Use This Process To Withdraw
Approval for Methods?
F. How Often Will Methods Be Approved
Using the Expedited Process?
G. How Will I Know When a Method Is
Approved Using the Expedited Process?
H. Will There Be a Comprehensive List of
All Methods Approved Using the
Expedited Process?
I. Will a Regulation Tell Me Where To Find
the Comprehensive List of Methods
Approved Using the Expedited Process?
J. Will Regulatory Authorities Accept the
Data Generated Using Methods
Approved hy the Expedited Approach?
K. Where Can I Find Copies of the Methods
Approved by This Process?
L. Must My Laboratory Be Certified to Use
these Methods?
M. Are Any Particular Methods Currently
Under Consideration for Approval Using
the Expedited Process?
IV. Request for Comment
V. References
II. Background
This section provides the purpose of
this action, a brief statutory background
on approval of testing methods for
drinking water contaminants, and a
description of how EPA currently
approves drinking water testing
methods.
A. What Is the Purpose of This Notice?
This action explains the expedited
process that EPA plans to implement for
the approval of testing methods for
drinking water contaminants and seeks
comments on specific aspects of the
process.
B. Statutory Background
Analytical methods are approved by
EPA to support three types of drinking
water monitoring. Under the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA), EPA
promulgates national primary drinking
water regulations (NPDWRs) that
specify maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs) or treatment techniques for
drinking water contaminants (SDWA
section 1412 (42 U.S.C. 300g-l)). The
NPDWRs apply to public water systems
pursuant to SDWA section 1401(1)(A)
(42 U.S.C. 300f(l)(A)). The NPDWRs
include analytical testing methods that
are used to measure compliance. Per
SDWA section 1401 (1)(D), NPDWRs
include "* * * criteria and procedures
to assure a supply of drinking water
which dependably complies with such
maximum contaminant levels; including
accepted methods for quality control
and testing procedures * * '*" (42
U.S.C. 300f(l)(D)). In addition, SDWA
section 1445(a)(l) authorizes the
Administrator to establish regulations
for monitoring to help determine
whether persons are acting in
compliance with the requirements of
SDWA (42 U.S.C. 300J-4). EPA's
promulgation of analytical methods for
NPDWRs is authorized under these
sections of SDWA as well as the general
rulemaking authority in SDWA section
1450(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-9(a)).
SDWA also authorizes EPA to
promulgate national secondary drinking
water regulations (NSDWRs) for
contaminants in drinking water that
primarily affect the aesthetic qualities
relating to the public acceptance of
drinking water (SDWA section 1412 (42
U.S.C. 300g-l)). These regulations are
not Federally enforceable but are
guidelines for the States (40 CFR 143.1).
The NSDWRs also include analytical
techniques for determining compliance
with the regulations (40 CFR 143.4).
EPA's promulgation of analytical
methods for NSDWRs is authorized
under general rulemaking authority in
SDWA section 1450(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j-
Section 1445(a)(2) of the Act gives
EPA discretion in setting the process for
approving analytical methods for
unregulated contaminant monitoring.
For consistency with the procedures for
NPDWRs, EPA includes analytical
methods in the unregulated
contaminant monitoring regulations
(UCMRs).
In the 1996 Amendments to SDWA,
Section 1401(1) states the following: "At
any time after promulgation of a
regulation referred to in this paragraph,
the Administrator may add equally
effective quality control and testing
procedures by guidance published in
the Federal Register. Such procedures
shall be treated as an alternative for
public water systems to the quality
control and testing procedures listed in
the regulation." By this action, EPA is
stating that it plans to use this authority
to develop an expedited process for
establishing alternative testing methods
for previously promulgated methods.
Under this approach, EPA will publish
a notice in the Federal Register rather
than using a notice-and-comment
rulemaking process to approve the use
of alternative testing methods for
existing regulations.
C. How Does EPA Currently Approve
Testing Methods for Drinking Water
Contaminants?
When EPA establishes a monitoring
requirement for a drinking water
contaminant, the Agency also specifies
at least one reference analytical method
that can be used to determine the
contaminant's concentration in drinking
water. Public water systems must
currently use a testing method listed in
the regulation when performing
analyses of samples to demonstrate
compliance or for use in unregulated
contaminant monitoring.
Methods that are incorporated into
the regulation are approved through a
rulemaking process. In general, this
means that EPA publishes a proposed
rule, citing the method along with a
discussion of how the method can be
used to analyze samples. The method is
proposed for approval in conjunction
with monitoring requirements for one or
more specific contaminants. EPA
solicits public comment. After
consideration of the comments, EPA
decides whether to approve the method.
If the method is deemed suitable, it is
included in a final rule. The method is
not approved for analysis of compliance
or UCMR samples until it is referenced
in a final rule.
EPA examines the performance
characteristics of methods prior to
proposing them in a regulation. In order
for a method to be considered for
approval, EPA generally requires that it
meet a number of criteria, including the
following:
-------
17904
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
• It must be applicable to routine
analyses of samples.
• The method must be suitable for
measuring the drinking water
contaminant in the concentration range
of interest.
• The accuracy and precision of the
method must be such that data can be
used to demonstrate compliance with
the MCL or meet UCMR monitoring
objectives in a wide variety of drinking
water matrices.
• The method should include
instructions for all aspects of the
analysis from sample collection to data
reporting.
• Appropriate quality control criteria
should be incorporated so that
acceptable method performance is
demonstrated during the analysis of
samples.
EPA attempts to approve multiple
analytical methods for each
contaminant in order to provide public
water systems with flexibility in
meeting their compliance or
unregulated contaminant monitoring
requirements. EPA also incorporates as
much flexibility as is practical into
reference methods that EPA develops
itself. Subsequent to the establishment
of monitoring requirements, EPA
continues to evaluate additional
analytical methods as they become
available. New methods may be
submitted to EPA through the Alternate
Test Procedure (ATP) program or from
Voluntary Consensus Standard Bodies
(VCSBs) such as Standard Methods or
ASTM International. Additional
methods may also be developed by EPA
or EPA may revise existing methods to
incorporate improvements in
technology, minimize use of hazardous
solvents, or reduce the cost of the
analysis. To date, when new or revised
testing methods were deemed suitable
for analyzing compliance or UCMR
samples, EPA approved them through
the rulemaking process (i.e., by
soliciting public comments through a
rule proposal and issuing a final rule
after taking those comments into
consideration). EPA periodically issues
method update rules in order to approve
additional testing methods.
III. Expedited Method Approval
A. What Is Expedited Method Approval?
Section 1401(1)(D) of SDWA, as
amended in 1996, authorizes EPA to
approve alternative testing methods
outside the normal notice-and-comment
rulemaking process. To use this
expedited process, EPA must already
have promulgated at least one analytical
testing method for the contaminant in
question through the normal rulemaking
process. Once EPA has approved one
testing method through the rulemaking
process, section 1401(1)(D) allows EPA
to approve additional (alternative)
testing methods for the same
contaminant through an expedited
process that simply involves publishing
the alternative method in the Federal
Register. To use this expedited process,
EPA must first find that the alternative
testing method is "equally effective" as
the method that was approved through
rulemaking.
EPA will examine the performance
characteristics of each new method
being considered for approval using the
expedited process in the same manner
as is currently used when promulgating
a method by regulation. The method
will be evaluated on the basis of its
selectivity, bias, precision, quantitation
range and detection characteristics. In
general, quality control procedures and
criteria must he available to provide an
on-going demonstration of method
performance during the analysis of
samples.
After a method is demonstrated to be
suitable for analyzing compliance or
unregulated contaminant monitoring
samples for a specific contaminant, and
EPA deems it to be "equally effective"
as the originally promulgated method,
EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register to announce that
determination. Because the rulemaking
process will not be used, the alternative
method will not be cited in the drinking
water regulations (which are contained
at 40 CFR Part 141). Only the originally
promulgated method will continue to be
cited in that manner. However,
alternative methods approved using the
expedited process will be fully available
to public water systems for compliance
or unregulated contaminant monitoring
and reporting to the same extent as the
methods that were approved through
the normal rulemaking process.
B. Why Is EPA Implementing the
Expedited Method Approval Process?
EPA encourages the development of
new measurement technologies and the
improvement of traditional analytical
techniques. These advances often result
in benefits such as shorter analysis
times, minimized use of solvents,
greater specificity in the analytical
results, or more robust analytical
procedures that are less prone to quality
control failures. The benefits can lead to
more cost effective monitoring.
The expedited method approval
process will improve EPA's ability to
make new technologies and improved
analytical techniques available in a
timely manner. Under the current
process, after a method is shown to be
suitable for analyzing drinking water
compliance or unregulated contaminant
monitoring samples, it cannot be used
for that purpose until the rulemaking
process is completed. The traditional
rulemaking process in some cases can
take two to three or more years to
complete. This means the method is not
available for monitoring for several
years. Under the expedited process
described in this notice, the method will
be available as soon as EPA publishes a
Federal Register notice announcing that
the method can be used for analyzing
drinking water compliance or UCMR
samples. EPA anticipates most
alternative methods will be approved in
this manner within six to eight months
after they are determined to be
applicable to the analysis of compliance
or UCMR samples.
C. Will EPA Use This Process To
Approve All New Methods?
As stated above, EPA will use the
expedited methods approval process
only to approve additional testing
methods for contaminants for which
EPA has already promulgated
regulations, including at least one
analytical method.
EPA anticipates that the expedited
process will be the primary mechanism
used to approve additional testing
methods. EPA expects to use this
process to approve new or revised
methods from sources such as:
• VCSBs, such as Standard Methods
or ASTM International;
• Vendors who have submitted new
technologies or methods to the ATP
program; and
• EPA or other governmental
organizations.
There may be instances in which EPA
will seek public comment prior to
approving a new or revised method
because additional information is
needed. In those cases, EPA will
consider whether to still approve the
new or revised method through the
expedited process described in this
notice or use the normal rulemaking
process.
D. Will EPA Also Use the New
Expedited Process To Approve
Alternative Methods for National
Secondary Drinking Water Regulations
and Unregulated Contaminants?
Yes. In addition to using the
expedited process with respect to
NPDWRs, EPA plans to use the
expedited process to approve additional
test methods for national secondary
drinking water regulations and
unregulated contaminants as well. In
both cases, there will need to be at least
one test method that EPA has already
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
17905
specified and promulgated by
regulation, and EPA will approve the
alternative methods only upon finding
that they are equally as effective as the
specified method.
National secondary drinking water
regulations, which are contained in 40
CFR Part 143, are not enforceable but
are intended as guidelines for States.
Analytical methods are specified in
these guidelines at 40 CFR 143.4. EPA
will use the expedited process to add
any alternative methods that are equally
as effective as the methods set forth in
the guidelines.
For unregulated contaminants, under
the authority of Section 1445(a)(2) of
SDWA, EPA promulgates regulations
that specify monitoring requirements,
including analytical methods. See 40
CFR 141.40. Section 1445(a) gives EPA
discretion in setting the process for
approving analytical methods for the
unregulated contaminants. For
consistency with the procedures for
NPDWRs, and given Congress's clear
intent to expedite the process for adding
analytical methods as new methods
become available, EPA intends to use
these expedited procedures to add
methods for the unregulated
contaminants as well.
E. Will EPA Use This Process To
Withdraw Approval for Methods?
Under certain conditions, it may be
necessary for EPA to withdraw approval
of a testing method. For example, if an
MCL is lowered to better protect public
health, a method that was suitable for
demonstrating compliance with the
higher MCL may no longer have the
necessary sensitivity. There may also be
instances in which an approved method
becomes obsolete because it uses
hazardous reagents or fails to meet the
performance characteristics of other
approved methods.
EPA will not use the expedited
process described in this notice to
withdraw approval of any method that
EPA originally approved through the
rulemaking process. In that case, EPA
will again use the rulemaking process to
withdraw approval for such testing
methods when necessary.
However, the new process will be
used to withdraw approval of any
method that was initially approved
using the expedited process. EPA will
withdraw approval of such a method by
publishing a Federal Register notice
describing EPA's rationale for the
withdrawal and stipulating an effective
date for the action.
F. How Often Will Methods Be
Approved Using the Expedited Process?
EPA intends to use the expedited
approval process in such a manner that
methods are approved as soon as
possible after they are determined to be
suitable for analyzing drinking water
compliance or UCMR samples.'The
frequency will depend on the number of
methods that are awaiting approval and
the urgency for that approval. For
example, EPA may approve a single
method using this process if exercising
the expedited method could
significantly benefit the public by
reducing monitoring costs while
maintaining data quality. Currently,
EPA expects that the process will be
implemented at least annually and that
it will normally involve approval of
multiple methods.
G. How Will I Know When a Method Is
Approved Using the Expedited Process?
EPA will publish a notice in the
Federal Register to announce the
expedited method approvals. At a
minimum, the notice will list the new
method(s) being approved, the
contaminant(s) for which each method
approval is granted, a reference to the
regulation that cites the reference
method(s) for each contaminant, and
information concerning where a copy of
each method can be obtained.
EPA is also considering whether
additional information should be
included in the Federal Register notice.
When EPA proposes approval of new
methods using the regulatory process,
the preamble to the proposed rule
usually contains a brief description of
the method, a summary of the method
performance characteristics, and a
discussion of the basis for the
approval(s). The information is
presented to better inform the reader so
that public comment can be obtained.
Under the expedited process, EPA does
not anticipate publishing this particular
information. However, EPA is using this
Federal Register notice to solicit
comment on the type of information that
would be useful to the public and
regulated entities when new methods
are approved using the expedited
process.
H. Will There Be a Comprehensive List
of All Methods Approved Using the
Expedited Process?
EPA plans to maintain a
comprehensive list of methods
approved through the expedited
process. The public availability of the
list is one of the subjects EPA is
soliciting comment on in this notice.
EPA anticipates that State agencies,
public water systems, and laboratories
will want access to a comprehensive list
to simplify the tracking of method
approvals listed in multiple Federal
Register notices.
EPA is requesting input on whether a
comprehensive list should be provided
and if so, the mechanism for making it
available. One option would be to list
the methods in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) as an appendix to the
drinking water regulations. A revised
hard copy edition of the CFR is printed
once per year, but it is continually
updated electronically throughout the
year and is available to the public
through the Internet at http://
ecfr.gpoaccess.gov. So, while the CFR
hard copy would generally contain an
up-to-date list of methods, it would not
show methods that have been added
since the previous published update.
A second option would be to list the
methods on an EPA Web site. EPA
would update the Web page each time
a new method is approved. Under this
option, the Federal Register notice
would list the new method approvals
and refer the public to the Web site for
a complete listing of methods approved
under the expedited process. The Web
site could either show the list or provide
a link for downloading a fact sheet with
the list in an electronic format.
A third option would be to make the
list available through the Safe Drinking
Water Hotline or through an Agency
designated contact for those who do not
have Internet access.
A fourth option would combine some
or all of the above approaches by listing
the methods in an appendix to the CFR,
on the Internet, and/or in a fact sheet
available from the Agency.
/. Will a Regulation Tell Me Where To
Find the Comprehensive List of Methods
Approved Using the Expedited Process?
The current regulations at 40 CFR
Parts 141 and 143 do not contain any
information about where methods
approved using the expedited process
would be listed. EPA does not plan to
immediately change the regulatory text
when the expedited method approval
process is implemented. If it would be
helpful to add a cross-referencing
statement in the NPDWRs, NSDWRs,
and/or UCMRs, referring to a list of the
methods approved using the expedited
process so that regulated entities and
the public could more easily find the
information, EPA may consider such a
change to the regulations in future
actions.
One option would be to add a
paragraph at 40 CFR 141.27, since this
section deals with approval of alternate
analytical techniques. The paragraph
-------
17906
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
might state, "The methods listed in
(location of list, per Section III.H,
inserted here) may be used as
alternatives to the methods listed in the
NPDWRs, NSDWRs, and UCMR."
A second option would be to add a
footnote to each table of approved
methods in the NPDWRs, NSDWRs and/
or UCMR (i.e., 40 CFR 141.21(f}(3),
141.23(k)(l), 141.24(e), 141.25(a),
141.40,141.74(a)(l), 141.131(b), (c), and
(d)and!43.3(b)).
EPA is requesting comment on
whether adding the location of the
comprehensive list to future regulatory
text is warranted, and if so, where that
information should be added.
/. Will Regulatory Authorities Accept the
Data Generated Using Methods
Approved by the Expedited Approach?
In States, territories, and tribes in
which EPA has primacy (which
includes Wyoming, the District of
Columbia, and all Indian lands except
the Navajo), when EPA approves an
alternative analytical method through
the expedited process, a facility will
generally be able to use either that new
method or the originally promulgated
method to meet its regulatory
requirements for compliance or
unregulated contaminant monitoring
and reporting (although there may be
State or local restrictions). Note that if
a laboratory chooses to use a method
approved under the expedited process,
it must adhere to the written procedures
described in the method and meet all
the quality control criteria that are
specified, just as it would for a method
approved via regulation.
Where the State, territory or tribe has
primacy (which, for States and
territories, is in most cases), it is up to
the State, territory, or tribe to decide
whether to allow the use of alternative
analytical methods that have been
approved by EPA and, if allowed, the
process for adopting those new methods
within its own program. Since these
decisions will vary from State to State,
facilities will need to be aware of their
Primacy Agency's own requirements
prior to using an alternative method that
EPA has approved under the expedited
method approval process. Primacy
Agencies are invited to provide
comment on how methods approved
under this new procedure will be
implemented in their programs and if
there are concerns that EPA can address
when implementing this new approval
process (in order to simplify or expedite
Primacy Agency acceptance of the
alternative methods).
K. Where Can I Find Copies of the
Methods Approved by This Process?
The Federal Register notice
announcing the approval of methods
under the expedited process will
include information concerning where
the complete methods can be obtained.
This information will also be included
with the comprehensive list of methods
approved under the expedited process.
A docket will be created each time
EPA announces approval of methods
under the expedited process and a copy
of each method will be placed in the
docket. All documents in the docket
will be listed in the
www.regu7atjons.gov index. Publicly
available docket materials, excluding
copyrighted materials, will be available
electronically in www.regu7aWons.gov
and in hard copy at the Water Docket.
Copyrighted materials will only be
available in hard copy at the Water
Docket.
L. Musf My Laboratory Be Certified to
Use These Methods?
If the originally promulgated
regulation requires that the laboratory
be certified to perform analyses of
compliance samples for a specific
contaminant, then EPA plans to extend
this requirement to use of methods
approved through the expedited
process. Similarly, if a "party approved
by the State" is specified in the
regulation, then EPA plans to extend
this requirement to use of the alternative
method.
M, Are Any Particular Methods
Currently Under Consideration for
Approval Using the Expedited Process?
In an effort to assist the public in
understanding the expedited approval
process, EPA is providing two examples
of methods that are being considered for
approval using this process. Approval is
not being granted in this notice, but EPA
anticipates approving them when the
process is ultimately implemented.
They are included herein so that the
public can comment on the format of
the listing and the type of information
presented on each method.
1. EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2.
Determination of Trace Elements in
Drinking Water by Axially Viewed
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic
Emission Spectrometry (USEPA, 2003)
Axially viewed inductively coupled
plasma-atomic emission spectrometry
can be used to determine concentrations
of several trace elements and water
matrix elements in drinking water. The
performance characteristics of EPA
Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 were
compared to the characteristics of the
methods listed at 40 CFR 141.23(k)(l)
for the same contaminants. Based on
this evaluation, EPA expects that it will
be able to deem this method to be
equally effective as the promulgated
methods for determining antimony,
arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, and selenium
concentrations. Therefore, EPA
anticipates approving this method when
the Expedited Approval Process is
implemented in a future Federal
Register notice (but again, EPA is not
approving this method today).
EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2, can
be accessed and downloaded directly
on-line at http://www.epa.gov/
nerlcwwwlordmeth.htm.
2. Standard Method 6610-04. High-
Performance Liquid Chromatographic
Method for Carbamate Pesticides
(APHA, 2004)
High-performance liquid
chromatography with post-column
derivatization and fluorescence
detection can be used to determine the
concentrations of carbamate pesticides
in drinking water. Standard Method
6610-04 is based on EPA Method 531.2
(USEPA, 2001), which is approved for
analyzing compliance samples for
carbofuran and oxamyl (40 CFR
141.24(e)(l)). Therefore, EPA expects
that it will be able to deem Standard
Method 6610-04 to be equally effective
as the promulgated method for
determining carbofuran and oxamyl
concentrations in compliance samples.
Thus, EPA anticipates approving this
method when the Expedited Approval
Process is implemented in a future
Federal Register notice (but again, EPA
is not approving this method today).
Standard Method 6610 B-04 is
available at http://
www.stan dardm eth ods. org.
ALTERNATIVE ANALYTICAL METHODS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL USING THE EXPEDITED APPROVAL PROCESS
Alternate method (being considered for approval)
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2 1
EPA Method 200.5. Revision 4.2
Alternate methodology
AVICP-AES2
AVICP-AES
Contaminant
Antimony
Arsenic
Citation for methods
approved by regulation
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141.2300(1)
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 68/Tuesday, April 10, 2007/Notices
17907
ALTERNATIVE ANALYTICAL METHODS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL USING THE EXPEDITED APPROVAL
PROCESS—Continued
Alternate method (being considered for approval)
EPA Method 200.5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200.5 Revision 4 2
EPA Method 200 5 Revision 4 2
Standard Method 6610-043
Standard Method 6610-04
Alternate methodology
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES .
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
AVICP-AES
HPLC"
HPLC
Contaminant
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Selenium
Silica
Sodium
Carbofuran
Oxamvl
Citation for methods
approved by regulation
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40CFR 141.23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141 23(k)(1)
40 CFR 141.2300(1)
1 EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2, "Determination of Trace Elements in Drinking Water by Axially Viewed Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic
Emission Spectrometry," USEPA, October 2003, EPA/600/R-06/115 can be accessed and downloaded directly on-line at httpS/www.epa.gov/
nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.
2 Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrqmetry (AVICP-AES).
3Carbamate Pesticides—High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method. The Standard Method Online version that is approved is indi-
cated by the last two digits in the method number which is the year of approval by the Standard Methods Committee. Standard Methods Online
is available at http://www.standardmethods.org.
4 High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in conjunction with a post-column derivatization system and a fluorescence detector.
IV. Request for Comment
EPA seeks comments on several
aspects in the implementation of the
expedited methods approval process.
The information and comments
submitted in response to this notice will
be considered in determining the final
details of the implementation process.
Specifically, EPA seeks comments on
the following:
1. EPA requests comment on whether
a comprehensive list of methods
approved under the expedited process
should be publicly maintained. If such
a list is desirable, then how should EPA
make it available?
• As an appendix in the CFR;
• On an EPA Web page;
• As a table or fact sheet available
from an EPA designated contact;
• Using a combination of these
approaches or other suggestions.
2. EPA requests comment on the type
of information that should be included
in the Federal Register notice when
new method approvals are published
using the expedited process. Is a list of
the methods being approved sufficient
or should the notice include additional
information? If additional information is
suggested, please indicate the types of
information that are desirable and why.
3. EPA requests comment concerning
the usefulness of amending future
regulatory text to describe where a list
of methods approved using the
expedited process can be obtained. If
such a change is desired, should a
reference to the list be included:
• With each methods table;
• In 40 CFR 141.27 under Alternate
Test Methods.
• Is there a better suggestion?
4. EPA requests comment on the
format of the table that lists methods
approved using the expedited approval
process. Does the example provided in
this notice provide enough information
in a usable format or are there better
suggestions for listing the information?
5. EPA invites Primacy Agencies to
comment on how methods approved
under this new procedure will be
implemented in their programs and if
there are concerns that EPA can address
when implementing this new approval
process (in order to simplify or expedite
Primacy Agency acceptance of the
alternative methods).
V. References
American Public Health Association (APHA).
2004. Standard Method 6610-04.
Carbamate Pesticides—High-
Performance Liquid Chromatographic
Method. Standard Methods Online.
(Available at http://
www.standardmethods.org.)
USEPA. 2001. EPA Method 531.2.
Measurement of N-
methylcarbamoyloximes andN-
methylcarbamates in Water by Direct
Aqueous Injection HPLC with
Postcolumn Derivatization. Revision 1.0.
EPA 815-B-01-002. (Available at http://
www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/
sourcalt.html.)
USEPA. 2003. EPA Method 200.5.
Determination of Trace Elements in
Drinking Water by Axially Viewed
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic
Emission Spectrometry. Revision 4.2.
EPA/600/R-06/115. (Available at http://
www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.)
Dated: March 30, 2007.
Benjamin H. Grumbles,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FRDoc. E7-6726 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.
DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, April 17, 2007,
9:30 a.m. Eastern Time.
PLACE: Clarence M. Mitchell, Jr.
Conference Room on the Ninth Floor of
the EEOC Office Building, 1801 "L"
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20507.
STATUS: The meeting will be open to the
public.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
OPEN SESSION:
1. Announcement of Notation Votes,
2. Perspectives ori Work/Family
Balance and the Federal Equal
Employment Opportunity Laws, and
3. Headquarters Project Management
and Relocation Sendees Contract.
Note: In accordance with the Sunshine Act,
the meeting will be open to public
observation of the Commission's
deliberations and voting. (In addition to
publishing notices on EEOC Commission
meetings in the Federal Register, the
Commission also provides a recorded
announcement a full week in advance on
future Commission sessions.)
Please telephone (202) 663-7100
(voice) and (202) 663-4074 (TTY) at any
------- |