815Z99007
Wednesday
December 1, 1999
Part V
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 141 and 143
National Primary and Secondary Drinking
Water Regulations: Analytical Methods for
Chemical and Microbiological
Contaminants and Revisions to
Laboratory Certification Requirements;
Final Rule
-------
67450 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30/Wednesday, December 1, 1999 /Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 141 and 143
PWH-FRL-6481-7]
RIN2040-AD04
National Primary and Secondary
Drinking Water Regulations: Analytical
Methods for Chemical and
Microbiological Contaminants and
Revisions to Laboratory Certification
Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This final rule contains
revisions to drinking water regulations
that were proposed for public comment
in separate documents dated July 31,
1998, September 3,1998, and January
14,1999. In this rule, EPA is approving
the use of updated versions of 25
American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM), 54 Standard Methods
for Examination of Water and
Wastewater (Standard Methods or SM)
and 13 Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) analytical methods for
compliance determinations of chemical
contaminants in drinking water. At the
same time, the Agency is withdrawing
approval of the previous versions of the
13 EPA Methods. Previous versions of
the SM and ASTM methods will
continue to be approved. EPA is also
approving use of a new medium and
two new methods for simultaneous
determination of total coliforms and E.
coll., a new method for determination of
lead, six new methods for determination
of magnesium, and two new methods
for determination of acid herbicides.
The Agency is also making several
technical corrections or clarifications to
the regulations, amending the regulation
to provide for changes in the
composition of Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples, requiring a successful PE
sample analysis each year for chemical
analyses, and requiring method specific
laboratory certification criteria for
reporting compliance data. This rule
also adds two ASTM and two SM
methods to those recommended for
secondary monitoring of sulfate and
chloride.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective
on January 3,2000. The incorporation
by reference of the publications listed in
today's rule is approved by the Director
of the Federal Register as of January 3,
2000. For Judicial Review purposes, this
final rule is promulgated as of 1 p.m.
(Eastern time) on December 15,1999, as
provided in 40 CFR 23.7.
ADDRESSES: The record for this
rulemaking has been established under
three separate docket numbers: W-97-
04 for the September 3,1998 (63 FR
47115) rule; W-97-05 for the July 31,
1998 (63 FR 41134) rule; and W-98-27
for the January 14,1999 (64 FR 2538)
rule. Supporting documents including
references and methods cited in this
document, public comments received
on the proposal and EPA's responses,
are available for review at the US
Environmental Protection Agency,
Water Docket, East Tower Basement,
401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C.
20460. For access to the docket
materials, call 202-260-3027 on
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays, between 9 a.m. and
3:30 p.m. Eastern Time for an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline.
Callers within the United States may
reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791.
The Hotline is open Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays,
from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
For technical information on
microbiology methods contact Paul S.
Berger, Ph.D., (202-260-3039). For
technical information regarding
chemistry methods, contact Jeanne
Campbell (202-260-7770). Both
individuals are in the Standards and
Risk Management Division, Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC-
4607), US Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
D.C. 20460. For a list of Regional
Contacts see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Potentially Regulated Entities
Public water systems are the regulated
entities required to conduct analyses to
measure for contaminants in water
samples. However, EPA Regions, as well
as States, local, and tribal governments
with primacy to administer the
regulatory program for public water
systems under the Safe Drinking Water
Act, sometimes conduct analyses to
measure for contaminants in water
samples. If EPA has established a
maximum contaminant level ("MCL")
for a given drinking water contaminant,
the Agency also "approves"
standardized testing procedures (i.e.,
promulgated through rulemaking) for
analysis of the contaminant. Once EPA
standardizes such test procedures,
analysis using those procedures (or
approved alternate test procedures) is
required. Public water systems required
to test water samples must use one of
the approved standardized test
procedures. Categories and entities that
may ultimately be regulated include:
Category
State, Local, and
Tribal Govern-
ments.
Industry
Municipalities —
Examples of potentially
regulated entities
States, local and tribal
governments that ana-
lyze water samples on
behalf of public water
systems required to
conduct such analysis;
States, local, and trib-
al governments that
themselves operate
public water systems
required to conduct
analytic monitoring.
Industrial operators of
public water systems.
Municipal operators of
public water systems.
SIC
9511
4941
9511
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this action. This table lists
the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by
this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be
regulated. To determine whether your
facility is regulated by this action, you
should carefully examine the
applicability language at 40 CFR 141.2
(definition of public water system). If
you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult one of the
persons listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Regional Contacts
EPA Regional Offices
I JFK Federal Bldg., One Congress
Street, llth Floor, Boston, MA 02203,
Phone: 617-918-1611, Tony DePalma
n 290 Broadway, 24th Floor, New York,
NY 10007, Phone: 212-647-3880,
Walter Andrews
DI841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia,
PA 19107, Phone: 215-814-5757,
Victoria Binetti
IV 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta,
GA 30365, Phone: 404-562-9329,
Stalling Howell
V 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
IL 60604, Phone: 312-886-6206,
Charlene Denys
VI1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, TX 75202, Phone: 214-665-
7150, Larry Wright
VH 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City,
KS 66101, Phone: 913-551-7682,
Robert Morby
Vm One Denver Place, 99918th Street,
Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202, Phone:
303-312-6812, Jack Rychecky
DC 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
CA 94105, Phone: 415-744-1858,
Corine Li
-------
FederaHRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules: and Regulations 67451
X1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA
98101, Phone: 206-553-1893, Larry
Worley
Information on Internet Access
This Federal Register document has
been placed on the Internet at the
following location: hti.p-Jlwvfw.epa.gov/
fedrgstr. Information about analytical
methods approved for compliance
monitoring can be found at the
following location: http-Jlwww.epa.gov!
OGWDW/methods/methods.htmI.
Availability and Sources for Methods
Copies of final EPA Methods are
available for a nominal cost through the
National Technical Information Service
(NTIS), US Department of Commerce,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA
22161. NTIS also may be reached at
800-553-6847. Copies of EPA Methods
515.3 and 549.2 may be obtained from
USEPA, National Exposure Research
Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati, 26 West
Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati,
OH 45268. Written requests for copies of
EPA Methods 515.3 and 549.2 may be
faxed to NERL-Cincinnati at 513-569-
7757 or sent via E-mail to:
Dwmethods.help@epa.gmr. All other
methods must be obtained from the
publisher. Publishers (with addresses)
for all approved methods are cited at 40
CFR Part 141 and in the References
section of today's rule.
Table of Contents
L Statutory Authority
n. Regulatory Background and History
m. Summary of Final Rule
IV. Response to Comments
V. Changes Between the Proposed Rules and
the Final Rule
VL Performance-based Measurement System
VIL Regulation Assessment Requirements
VuX References
I. Statutory Authority
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
as amended in 1996, requires EPA to
promulgate national primary drinking
water regulations (NPDWRs) which
specify maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs) or treatment techniques for
drinking water contaminants (SDWA
section 1412 (42 U.S.C. 300g-l)).
NPDWRs apply to public water systems
pursuant to SDWA section 1401 (42
U.S.C. 300fll)(A)). According to 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
quality control and testing procedures.
* * *" (42 U.S.C. 300f(l)(D}). In
addition, SDWA section 1445(a)
authorizes the Administrator to
establish regulations for monitoring to
assist in determining whether persons
are acting in compliance with the
requirements of the SDWA (42 U.S.C.
300J-4). EPA's promulgation of
analytical methods is authorized under
these sections of the SDWA as well as
the general rulemaking authority in
SDWA section 1450(a), (42 U.S.C. 300j-
IL Regulatory Background and History
EPA has promulgated analytical
methods for all currently regulated
drinking water contaminants for which
MCLs or monitoring requirements have
been promulgated. In most cases, the
Agency has promulgated regulations
specifying (i.e., approving) the use of
more than one standardized analytical
method for a particular contaminant.
Systems may use any one of them for
determining compliance with an MCL
or monitoring requirement. After any
regulation is published, EPA may
amend the regulations to approve
additional methods or modifications to
existing approved methods, or withdraw
approved methods that become
obsolete.
On July 31, 1998, and January 14,
1999, EPA proposed to amend the
regulations to approve the use of several
new methods and modifications to
existing methods that EPA believes are
as good as or better than the current
methods and procedures. The January
14 notice also proposed six analytical
methods for magnesium, which would
compensate for an omission in the Stage
1 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts (DBF) Rule (63 FR 69390,
December 16, 1998). The DBP Rule
allows certain surface water systems
that are unable to achieve the specified
level of total organic carbon removal
instead to meet one of several
alternative performance criteria,
including the removal of 1 0 mg/L
magnesium hardness from source water.
The DBP Rule, however, does not
include any analytical methods for
magnesium.
In addition to these two proposed
rules, EPA proposed a rule on
September 3, 1998, which was a
companion to a direct final rule
published on the same day (63 FR
47098). In the September 3, 1998 rule,
EPA proposed approving the use of
updated versions of previously
approved analytical methods, the
withdrawal of older versions of certain
EPA methods, minor technical
corrections or clarifications, and
amendments to the regulations. The
direct final rule, in the absence of
adverse public comment, would have
been final on January 4, 1999. Because
adverse comments were received, EPA
withdrew the entire September 1998
rule on December 31,1998 (63 FR
72200) and deferred final action in order
to respond to those comments.
m. Summary of Final Rule
A. This Rule Amends the Regulations at
40 CFR Part 141 To
1. Allow use of newer versions of 25
methods published by the American
Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM). The new versions are
published in the 1996 Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, Vols. 11.01 and 11.02.
2. Allow use of newer versions of 54
methods published by the Standard
Methods Committee. The new versions
are published in Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 19th edition, 1995.
3. Allow use of 13 of the 14
compliance monitoring methods
published by EPA in the document,
Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water—Supplement m, EPA/600/R-95/
131, August 1995. These 13 methods
replace the previous versions of these
methods. The compliance method
published in Supplement in that is not
approved in today's rule is EPA Method
515.1, Rev. 4.1; the previous version,
Rev. 4.0, continues to be the approved
version.
4. Approve a new method for the
determination of lead under the Lead
and Copper Rule, Palintest Method
1001.
5. Approve six new methods for the
determination of magnesium, EPA
Method 200.7, ASTM D-511-93
versions A and B, and SM 3500-Mg
versions B, C and E under the DBP Rule.
6. Approve two additional methods
for the determination acid herbicides,
EPA Method 515.3 and ASTM D5317-
93.
7. Replace EPA Method 549.1 for
determination of Diquat with EPA
Method 549.2.
8. Approve use of a new membrane
filter medium, MI (4-
Methylumbelliferyl-Beta-D-
galactopyranoside—Indoxyl-Beta-D-
glucuronide) Agar, for the simultaneous
determination of total coliforms and E.
coli. in drinking water under the Total
Colifbrm Rule (TCR) and source water
under the Surface Water Treatment Rule
(SWTR).
9. Approve two new methods for
determination of total coliforms,
E*Colite» Test and m-ColiBlue24® Test
in source water under the SWTR.
10. Require that microbiological
samples collected for the determination
of coliforms or fecal coliforms in source
water under the SWTR or for
determination of heterotrophic bacteria
-------
67452 Federat Register /Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules and Regulations
in distribution system samples be
shipped and beld below 10°C.
11. Reduce the minimum incubation
time for reading the Colisure Test, for
determination of total coliforms, from
28 hours to 24 hours in drinking water
under die TCR.
12. Require that a PE sample for
chemical contaminants be successfully
analyzed at least once each year using
each method used to report compliance
monitoring results. Additional methods
used for confirmation testing, however,
would not require PE proficiency
testing.
13. Clarify that the acceptance limits
for successfully measuring chemical
analytes in a PE sample apply only if
that analyte has been added to the PE
sample.
14. Increase the maximum holding
time from 48 hours to 14 days for
chlorinated, unaddified drinking water
samples collected for determination of
nitrate.
15. Promote safe handling of acids by
clarifying that acidification of samples
for determinations of metals can be
conducted in the laboratory rather than
in the field and allowing use of dilute
(1:1) solutions of acid to preserve
samples collected for the determination
of metals or nitrate (including total
nitrate).
16. Provide an option for field/
laboratory determinations of alkalinity,
calcium, conductivity, orthophosphate
and silica in drinking water samples by
any person acceptable to the State to
conduct these determinations.
Previously a laboratory had to be
certified to conduct these
determinations.
B. This Rule Amends the Regulations at
40 CFR Part 143 To
1. Add methods for the determination
of chloride to the table of methods
recommended for the optional
monitoring of secondary drinking water
contaminants. The new recommended
methods for chloride are ASTM D 512-
89B and SM 4500-0-8.
2. Add methods for the determination
of sulfate to the table of methods
recommended for the optional
monitoring of secondary drinking water
contaminants. The new recommended
methods for sulfate are ASTM D 516-90
and SM 4500-SO42~ E.
IV. Response to Comments
EPA received 15 comments on the
July 31,1998 (63 FR 41134) proposal, 13
comments on the September 3,1998 (63
FR 47115) rule, and 21 comments on the
January 14,1999 proposal (64 FR 2538).
Commenters represented analytical
laboratories, water utilities, instrument
manufacturers, State and local
governments, trade associations,
scientists, and private citizens. A
summary of major public comments on
the proposed rules and the Agency's
response is presented in this section.
The Agency's complete response to all
comments on these rules is available in
the public docket for this rule.
Except as noted in Part V of this
preamble, the provisions in today's rule
are the same as those proposed in the
July 31,1998, the September 3,1998
and the January 14,1999, Federal
Register notices.
A. Response to Significant Comments
Received on the July 31,1998 (63 FR
41134) Notice
I. Using the Same Method To Analyze
Compliance Monitoring Samples and
Performance Evaluation Samples
Several commenters objected to the
July 1998 proposal that would require
laboratories to use the same method to
report the results of analyses of
compliance monitoring samples and the
annual PE sample that is required to
maintain certification for drinking
water. No commenter stated that it was
unsound scientifically to require testing
laboratory proficiency with a PE sample
using the same method used for routine
compliance monitoring. Commenters
criticized the requirement, because it
was too expensive or did not conform
with the National Environmental
Laboratory Accreditation Conference
(NELAC) standard for PE sample
analysis.
The commenters did not quantify
what would be too expensive nor
provide any cost estimates of die degree
or extent that costs would increase for
drinking water compliance monitoring
under the proposed requirement. All
States currently require the proposed
practice. In addition, Chapter Three of
the EPA Manual for the Certification of
Laboratories Analyzing Drinking Water
Fourth Edition (EPA 1997) recommends
that, "If a laboratory wishes to be
certified for a contaminant by more Qian
one method, it should analyze the PE
samples by each method for which it
wishes to be certified." In this context
"to be certified" means to be permitted
to report compliance monitoring data.
Two factors mitigate the cost of
analyzing PE samples-by>method. First,
a PE sample analysis is required only for
each method used to report compliance
data. Second, if a laboratory analyzes
samples for an analyte and confirms the
result by analysis with a second
method, the laboratory is required to
pass a PE only with the method used to
report the compliance data. For labs that
elect to report compliance results using
more than one method per analyte, die
incremental cost of an extra PE sample
analysis is small, manageable and
reasonable, and justified by the need to
ensure that a laboratory is qualified to,
report data with each method.
The Agency has worked with NELAC
to maximize compatibility between
NELAC standards and the EPA
laboratory certification requirements.
The NELAC standards state that a State
or federal regulation would supersede a
NELAC standard when a conflict exists.
EPA has the ultimate responsibility to
ensure the quality and integrity of
compliance monitoring data reported
under die SDWA and other statutes.
NELAC standards can be an alternative
means to implement regulatory
requirements for drinking water
laboratory certification, but they are not
a substitute for drinking water
regulations. EPA strongly encourages
States to adopt NELAC standards, but
adoption is voluntary.
Three commenters supported die
proposed requirement, but were
concerned that the proposed change
may be misinterpreted and require one
to pass die PE sample for all analytes
even if one were only measuring a
subset of die analytes in a compliance
sample (e.g., using EPA 552.1 to
determine dalapon, but not die
haloacetic acids). EPA does not believe
the requirement will be subject to
misinterpretation. If one uses EPA 552.1
to report only dalapon data, the PE
sample results need only include
dalapon. EPA intends to provide further
guidance on tins requirement in die
laboratory certification manual when it
is revised, and provide other assistance
as specific questions arise.
2. Withdrawal of EPA Method 549.1 for
Diquat
Four commenters stated they have not
had any regular precipitation problems
using EPA Mediod 549.1. Some of diese
commenters believe that withdrawal of
EPA Method 549.1 is unnecessary and
a hardship because it would require use
of the new EPA Method 549.2. One of
the commenters noted to die contrary
that elimination of the pH adjustment
simplifies the method and should not
have a negative effect.
EPA agrees that not all matrices
exhibit the precipitation problem at the
pH adjustment step, which may be why
commenters did not report significant
precipitation problems with EPA
Mediod 549.1. However, die Agency has
received complaints that precipitation
occurs in hard water matrices. EPA has
verified this problem in simulated hard
water matrices containing high
-------
Federal-Register/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules^and Regulations 67453
concentrations of magnesium. After
carefully reviewing all of the procedural
steps of EPA Method 549.1, EPA
experimentally retested the pH
adjustment step. The test demonstrated
that the pH adjustment to pH 10.5 did
not improve extraction efficiency as had
been reported in literature. Increasing
pH to 10.5 actually had a negative effect
on recovery because of the degradation
of Diquat at strongly alkaline pH.
Therefore, the pH adjustment step was
removed and the method was reissued
and proposed as EPA Method 549.2.
The pH retest step and other data are in
the administrative record of the July 31,
1998 (63 PR 41134) rule.
Use of EPA Method 549.2 does not
require re-certification or learning the
use of a new method. EPA Method 549.2
is EPA Method 549.1 without the pH
adjustment step. Requiring a step (pH
adjustment) to be omitted from the
current method does not impose a
hardship on analytical laboratories or
the regulated community. As no
positive effect is associated with the pH
adjustment to 10.5, and there is the
possibility of a negative effect, the
Agency is withdrawing EPA Method
549.1.
3. MI-Agar Medium for Coliform
Determinations
In the July 31,1998 rule, EPA
proposed to approve the use of MI Agar
for use with the Total Coliform Rule and
Surface Water Treatment Rule. The
Agency had proposed that the results
from MI Agar can be read following
incubation of media for 16-24 hours.
Two commenters suggested that the MI
Agar procedure should be approved as
a 24 hour procedure since results in the
comparison study were read at 24 hours.
EPA data demonstrates that blue E. coli
and fluorescent total colifonn colonies
appear in as few as 9 hours, which
would be detected by the laboratory in
16-24 hours, depending upon the time
of day the sample was filtered.
However, because the appearance time
for the blue E. coli colonies exceeded
the standard 8-hour working day and
because EPA planned to compare the MI
Agar procedure with one using M-Endo
medium, a 24-hour method, EPA used
the 24-hour incubation time for the
studies. Thus, the Agency is approving
the method as a 24-hour test (although
the test may be recorded as positive if
this result shows up earlier than 24
hours). The test is approved for
detecting total coliforms and E. coli
under the Total Coliform Rule and for
enumerating total coliforms under the
Surface Water Treatment Rule.
B. Responses to Significant Comments
Received on the September 3,1998 (63
FR 47115) Notice
1. Quality Control Improvements for
EPA Methods
Four commenters on the September
1998 rule noted that, although many
Supplement m methods contain
tightened analyte recovery control limits
of ±30%, the data presented in some of
these methods do not support the
change. Commenters provided data or
other information to support their
argument for the following analytes: 2,4-
DB, Aciflurofen, DCPA, Dinoseb,
pentachlorophenol and Picloram in EPA
Method 515.1, Rev. 4.1;
hexachlorocyclopentadiene (HCP) in
EPA Method 508.1, Rev. 2.0; and DDT
in EPA Method 508, Rev.3.1. The
commenters recommended either (1)
retaining the current limits of ± 3
standard deviations or method limits,
whichever are narrower for these three
methods or (2) setting the recovery
control limits on an analyte-by-analyte
basis.
EPA revised the quality control
requirements to set a limit on the range
of acceptable recoveries of analytes.
Previously the allowed variability had
no limit because it was based on relative
standard deviation (RSD) of previous
recoveries and could increase to
unacceptable limits if the RSD
continued to increase during routine use
of the method. The proposed revised
criteria would allow the recoveries to
vary by as much as three times the RSD
provided this value does not exceed a
fixed numerical limit. The fixed
(usually ±30%) limit is specified in the
initial demonstration of capability
section of each EPA method. After
reviewing public comment, EPA agrees
that the fixed criteria may be too
restrictive for some analytes.
Specifically, because the recovery limits
of ±30% for some of the regulated acid
herbicides in EPA Method 515.1, Rev.
4.1 are not fully supported by the
available data, the Agency will not
approve this revision of EPA Method
515.1. The current revision, 4.0, will
remain approved with the current
recovery control limits of ±3 standard
deviations. EPA may evaluate the
available data to determine if a better
recovery control strategy can be
developed for a future proposal.
Because of this change, EPA will not
impose the ±30% criterion on the ASTM
version of EPA Method 515.1, D5137-
93, that is approved in today's rule.
The Agency is keeping the ±30%
recovery criterion for other Supplement
m methods, including EPA Methods
508 and 508.1, because the data
published in these methods supports
the tighter control limits. The control
limits of DDT from reagent water listed
in Table 2 of EPA Method 508 range
from 82% to 142%, i.e. 14.2% ±30%.
The mean recoveries observed for the
two synthetic waters (Table 2) and
another reagent water (Table 3) are 98%,
84% and 87%, all of which fall within
the allowed 82-142% recovery control
limits. Although EPA agrees that data
published for HCP in EPA Method
508.1, Rev. 2.0 does not support the
±30% limits for HCP, the failure is due
to the extremely low spiking levels of
HCP used, .i.e., four to six times the
method MDL of 0.004 ug/L. In Section
9.3 of most Supplement IH methods the
specified minimum spiking level is ten
times the MDL, which for HCP would be
0.04 ug/L, or at some midpoint of the
calibration curve between the MDL and
the MCL, which for HCP would be 25
ug/L. Data in the Supplement m version
of EPA Method 525.2 was obtained with
HCP spiked at higher concentrations
and supports the ±30% recovery control
limits. EPA Method 525.2 data supports
the HCP control limits in EPA Method
508.1 because the procedure for the
recovery of HCP from a drinking water
sample is identical in both methods.
The main difference between the
methods is the detection system, which
would not affect recovery of HCP from
drinking water in any way.
2. Nitrate and Nitrite Determinations
Nitrate 48-Hour Holding Time: Two
commenters believe the 48-hour limit
specified in the September 1998 rule for
unacidified samples is not justified
when the drinking water has been
disinfected. The commenters provided
data and cited a reference [Williams
1979] to demonstrate the stability of
nitrate in chlorinated drinking water
samples that have not been acidified.
One commenter recommended a
holding time of 14 to 28 days. The
proposed 48 hour limit was based on
the recommended preservation
conditions in the approved methods
published by EPA, ASTM and Standard
Methods. Data submitted by the
commenters and in an EPA study [EPA
1987] support a longer holding time.
The JAWWA report showed no
difference between the two types
(acidified and unacidified) of samples
over a period of 14 days; the EPA report
recommended a holding time of 16
days. EPA accepts the commenters' data
and is increasing the holding time to 14
days at 4° C for chlorinated, unacidified
samples but is keeping the current
requirement of 48 hours for unacidified,
unchlorinated drinking water samples.
-------
67454 FederaPRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December \, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Nitrite Determinations in Some
Disinfected Drinking Water Samples:
The September 1998 notice included a
footnote 2 in the preservation table at
§ 141.23(k)(2) which explained that
analysis of samples disinfected with a
strong oxidant (such as free chlorine,
chlorine dioxide or ozone) can only
provide a total nitrate (nitrate plus
nitrite) result because all nitrite will be
oxidized to nitrate. One commenter
suggested that EPA drop the new
footnote because it was incorrect. The
commenter provided data to show that
nitrite can occur in supplies disinfected
with chlorine if a sufficiently high level
of ammonia is present. EPA proposed
the footnote to remove a burden from
PWSs that conduct unnecessary
measurements of nitrite that has been
oxidized to nitrate in a chlorinated
water sample. These measurements are
a burden when samples must be
shipped, because the maximum holding
time for nitrite samples is 48 hours.
Although chlorine and other strong
oxidant disinfectants will usually
oxidize nitrite to nitrate in a water
sample, EPA agrees that this may not
occur in all chlorinated water supplies.
Thus, the footnote has not been added
to the preservation table. EPA may use
other means to reduce the burden of
nitrite analysis at a PWS when use of a
strong oxidant disinfectant clearly
makes a nitrite determination
unnecessary.
3. Approval of 20th Edition of Standard
Methods
Several commenters applauded EPA's
decision to approve 19th edition of
Standards Methods but urged EPA to
consider approval of 20th edition as it
will be published before this final rule
takes effect. The timing of promulgation
of this rule and publication of the 20th
edition did not allow sufficient time for
review of the 20th edition by the
Agency. The Agency has begun this
review and once a review is complete
intends to propose to incorporate the
latest edition of Standard Methods and
other voluntary consensus standards,
seek comments and finalize these
changes.
4. EPA's Decision Against Withdrawal
of Older Editions of Consensus Methods
Three commenters expressed concern
that EPA has chosen to cite not only the
most recent edition of Standard
Methods but also older editions which
are no longer available from the
publisher. The Agency believes that the
differences between the methods in
earlier and newer editions are not
significant to warrant the removal of
older editions or impose any possible
additional economic burden (especially
on small laboratories) to require the
purchase of new editions.
C. Response to Significant Comments
Received on the January 14,1999 (64 FR
2538) Notice
1. False-Positive Rates for m-
ColiBlue24® Test and E'Colite® Test
Several commenters contended that
the false-positive rates for the E*Colite®
Test and m-ColiBlue24® Test were too
high and consequently opposed
approval of these tests without an
additional analytical procedure to
ensure that those positives were actually
coliforms. According to data submitted
by the manufacturers that developed the
two proposed tests, the false positive
rates were: 16.0% for total coliforms and
7.2% fatE. coli (E*Colite Test®), and
26.8% for total coliforms and 2.5% for
E. coli (m-ColiBlue24® Test).
As part of its process for evaluating
new methods for regulated drinking
water contaminants, EPA recommends
that applicants follow the testing
protocols developed by EPA for use
under the Alternative Test Procedure
(ATP) and provide EPA with the
resulting data. The two existing
protocols for total colifonns/£. coli
direct the applicant to provide the false-
positive rate, false-negative rate,
comparison data with an EPA-specified
reference method, and other
information. The current protocols,
however, do not set an upper limit for
the false-positive and false-negative
rates. Because the two applicants met all
the conditions of the protocol, and the
protocols do not set an upper limit for
the false-positive rate, EPA next decided
whether the false-positive results were
sufficiently great so as to require a
verification step.
The Agency decided that the rates are
not so high to require a verification step.
First, the definition of "total coliforms"
is not tightly defined. The definition is
not strictly based upon taxonomy, but
rather on the basis of gas production
from the fermentation of lactose. EPA
has approved some coliform tests (e.g.,
Colilert test) that are based not upon
this process, but rather on some other
means of determining whether the
organism uses lactose. Therefore, the
different methods may not be testing for
exactly the same set of organisms, and
this situation clouds the meaning of the
term "false-positive." Second, the
Agency believes that public health
would not be jeopardized with the
higher false-positive rates because any
false-positive result would err on the
side of safety. Third, the Agency notes
that a single total coliform-positive
sample does not result in an MCL
violation. Thus the adverse consequence
of a "false-positive" for the system is
mitigated. Finally, water systems have a
choice among several methods currently
approved for coliform. The user should
take the false-positive rate (and, more
importantly, the false-negative rate) into
account in choosing which analytical
methods to use for compliance
sampling. Therefore, the Agency is not
requiring a verification step for these
two methods although systems/
laboratories may elect to verify a total
coliform-positive test at their discretion.
The Agency notes that the Manual for
the Certification of Laboratories
Analyzing Drinking Water (4th ed., EPA
815-B-97-001, March 1997), at
paragraph 5.1.8, encourages laboratories
to perform parallel testing between a
newly approved test and another EPA-
approved procedure for enumerating
total coliforms for at least several
months and/or over several seasons to
assess the effectiveness of the new test
for the wide variety of water types
submitted for analysis.
To emphasize the point that systems
and laboratories should carefully choose
which coliform method to use, the
Agency has added a footnote to the table
on approved methods for total coliforms
in 141.21(f) that states:
EPA strongly recommends that laboratories
evaluate the false-positive and negative rates
for the metbod(s) they use for monitoring
total coliforms. EPA also encourages
laboratories to establish false-positive and
false-negative rates within their own
laboratory and sample matrix (drinking water
or source water) -with the intent that if the
method they choose has an unacceptable
false-positive or negative rate, another
method can be used. The Agency suggests
that laboratories perform these studies on a
minimum of 5% of all total colifonn-positive
samples, except for those methods where
verification/confirmation is already required,
e.g.. the M-Endo and LES Endo Membrane
Filter Tests, Standard Total Coliform
Fermentation Technique, and Presence-
Absence Coliform Test Methods for
establishing false-positive and negative rates
may be based on lactose fermentation, the
rapid test for p-galactosidase and cytochrome
oxidase, multi-test identification systems, or
equivalent confirmation tests. False-positive
and false-negative information is often
available in published studies and/or from
the manufacturers).
In addition to this footnote, to assist
systems and laboratories in choosing a
method, EPA is planning two future
actions. First, EPA intends to prepare
and widely distribute a list of the
Agency-approved coliform methods,
along with published false-positive and
false-negative rates for each. Second,
EPA intends to re-evaluate whether the
alternate test procedure protocol for
-------
FederaPRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rule? and Regulations 67455
colifonns should include specific limits
for the false-positive and false-negative
rates, whether to specify more precisely
how these rates are to be determined,
and whether to revise the comparison
study to correct for the false-positive
rates.
As a result of these measures, the
Agency might undertake rulemaking
that would requite laboratories to use
another test to verify the results from
one or more of the colifonn methods
that the Agency has previously
approved for drinking water analyses or
are being approved in today's rule.
Alternatively, the Agency may issue
guidance rather than regulations on this
issue. EPA is approving the three
proposed colifonn methods in today's
rule rather than delay approval until the
conclusion of this re-evaluation,
because (1) The issue is not whether the
test should be approved, but rather
whether a verification step is needed,
(2) Any future verification requirement
may cover not only the three proposed
colifonn methods, but also previously
EPA-approved methods, and (3) The
Agency may issue guidance to die
States, laboratories, and water systems
on this issue rather than regulations. In
the interim, EPA is recommending that
each laboratory establish false-negative
and false-positive rates for the water
matrices to be tested, if it uses a
method(s) for which EPA does not
currently require a confirmation/
verification step.
2. m-ColiBlue24® Test and E*Colite®
Test: Presence-Absence vs. Density
Measurements
Commenters requested clarification
whether the m-ColiBlue24® Test and
E'Colite*9 Test were being proposed as
presence-absence type tests or density
tests. EPA proposed, and is approving,
these two tests only as presence-absence
type tests, i.e., to determine the
presence or absence of total colifonns
and E. coli in a 100-mL water sample
under the Total Colifonn Rule (TCR).
The two methods have not been
approved for use under the SWTR by
unaltered systems to enumerate
densities of total colifonns in the source
water.
3. m-ColiBlue24® Test: Incubation Time
Commenters requested clarification of
the incubation time for m-ColiBlue24
-------
67456 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30/Wednesday, December 1, 1999 /Rules and Regulations
B. Changes to September 3,1998
Proposed Rule
1. Acid Herbicide Methods: EPA 515.1
(Rev. 4.1) and ASTM D 5317-93
EPA will not withdraw EPA Method
515.1 (Rev. 4.0) as proposed in the
September rule and replace it with EPA
Method 515.1 (Rev. 4.1) for the
determination of acid herbicides the
data in Rev. 4.1 does not support the
upper limit of ± 30% for the recovery of
some method analytes. Because of this
change, EPA will not require that the ±
30% criterion be applied to
determinations of acid herbicides using
ASTM D 5317-93. EPA Method 515.1
Rev. 4.1 is published in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplemental
(Supplement m), EPA/600/R-95/131,
August 1995. EPA Method 515.1 Rev.
4.0 is published in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water, EPA/600/4-88/039,
December 1988, Revised, July 1991. The
other 13 compliance methods in
Supplement in are approved in today's
rule and replace the previously
approved versions of these methods.
EPA is withdrawing approval of the
previous versions of the 13 EPA
methods effective on June 1, 2001.
2. Nitrate and Nitrite Determinations
EPA is changing two of the
amendments that were proposed at
141.23(k)(2) for determinations of
nitrate or nitrite. The proposed
amendments would have eliminated the
requirement to determine nitrite in
some drinking waters that are
disinfected and require unacidined,
chlorinated samples to be analyzed
within 48 hours of collection. Under
certain conditions nitrite is not
completely oxidized to nitrate in
disinfected water supplies, EPA will not
eliminate the requirement to determine
nitrite in disinfected water supplies.
Therefore, EPA is increasing the
proposed holding time for unacidined
samples of chlorinated drinking water
from 48 hours to 14 days.
3. Acidification of Samples
The footnotes to the table of
preservation requirements at
§ 141.23(k)(2) are revised to allow use of
dilute rather than concentrated acids
and to clarify that current regulations do
not require that samples for
determination of metals be acidified in
the field at the time of collection. This
information was previously omitted
from the table, because most approved
methods specify use of dilute acid or
that metals (not nitrate) samples may be
analyzed 16 hours after they have been
acidified at the laboratory.
4. Methods for Monitoring Unregulated
Contaminants
The methods for unregulated
monitoring at 40 CFR 141.40 will not be
updated, because other regulatory
actions (the Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule, UCMR) will supersede
the currently specified methods. These
changes were published as a final rule
on September 17,1999 (64 FR 50556).
C. Changes to January 14,1999
Proposed Rule
There were no changes to the actions
or methods proposed in this rule.
VI. Performance-Based Measurement
System
EPA plans to implement in the future
a performance-based measurement
system (PBMS) that would allow the
option of using either performance
criteria or reference methods in its
drinking water regulatory programs. The
Agency is currently determining the
specific steps necessary to implement
PBMS in its programs and preparing an
implementation plan. Final decisions
have not yet been made concerning the
implementation of PBMS in water
programs. However, EPA is currently
evaluating what relevant performance
characteristics should be specified for
monitoring methods used in the water
programs under a PBMS approach to
ensure adequate data quality. EPA
would then specify performance
requirements in its regulations to ensure
that any method used for determination
of a regulated analyte is at least
equivalent to the performance achieved
by other currently approved methods.
Once EPA has made its final
determinations regarding
implementation of PBMS in programs
under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA
would incorporate specific provisions of
PBMS into its regulations, which may
include specification of the performance
characteristics for measurement of
regulated contaminants in the drinking
water program regulations.
VII. Regulation Assessment
Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735; October 4,1993), the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action is "significant" and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, die
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule
is not a "significant regulatory action"
under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and is therefore not subject to
OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as
Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), 5 USC 601 et. seq.
The RFA generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
The RFA provides default definitions
for each type of small entity. It also
authorizes an agency to use alternative
definitions for each category of small
entity, "which are appropriate to the
activities of the agency" after proposing
the alternative definition(s) in the
Federal Register and taking comment. 5
U.S.C. 601 (3H5). hi addition to the
above, to establish an alternative small
business definition, agencies must
consult with SBA's Chief Counsel for
Advocacy.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of today's rule on small entities, EPA
considered small entities to be those
public water systems serving 10,000 or
fewer customers. Public water systems
includes both publicly and privately
owned water systems. In accordance
with the RFA requirements, EPA
proposed using this alternative
definition for governmental
jurisdictions, small businesses and
small not-for-profit enterprises in the
Federal Register (63 FR 7620-7621
(February 13,1998)), requested public
comment, consulted with the Small
-------
Federal-Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules and Regulations 67457
Business Administration (SBA) on the
alternative definition as it relates to
small businesses, and finalized the
alternative definition in the final
Consumer Confidence Report regulation
on, 63 FR 44524-44525 (August 19,
1998). As stated in that Final Rule, the
alternative definition would be applied
to all future drinking water regulations.
After considering the economic
impact of today's final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Although this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the
impact of this rule on small entities.
Today's rule approves new and revised
versions of currently approved EPA
Methods, ASTM Methods and Standard
Methods for compliance with drinking
water standards and monitoring
requirements. Previous versions of these
ASTM and Standard Methods will not
be withdrawn. Public water systems and
laboratories performing analyses on
behalf of these systems may continue to
use them after the promulgation of
today's rule. Previous versions of 13
EPA Methods, however, will be
withdrawn after 18 months. The
delayed effective date for withdrawal
should provide ample time for the
changeover. The incremental change in
cost associated with the use of the new
versions of EPA methods will be very
minor because the new versions contain
only technical enhancements and
editorial improvements. This rule also
provides public water systems
additional options for detecting total
coliforms and E. coli in drinking water
under the Total Coliform Rule and
source water under the Surface Water
Treatment Rule, for measuring
magnesium under the DBP Rule, and for
measuring lead under the Lead and
Copper rule.
This rule also made minor technical
corrections, amendments, or
clarifications to the regulations and
laboratory certification requirements.
Laboratories conducting analysis for
contaminants in drinking water are
required to be certified for proficiency
in the analytical method they actually
use for drinking water compliance
monitoring. Thus, in the case of
laboratories that choose to be certified
for an analyte using more than one
approved method, the regulation will
require such laboratories to analyze a PE
sample for each method for which
certification is requested. Currently
most laboratories elect to be certified for
only one method and there is no reason
to believe this situation will change.
Even if some small laboratories elect to
seek certification for more than one
method for some analytes, EPA has
concluded that less than 24 small
laboratories (1% of the total) will elect
to do so. The consequent economic
impact on small government
laboratories would only be the annual
cost of an additional PE analysis for the
additional method of their choosing
which could run as much as $100 or as
little as $10 per laboratory. The cost per
laboratory depends on the complexity of
the additional method for which the
laboratory chooses to be certified.
The requirement to hold samples at
10 °C during transit/storage under the
Surface Water Treatment Rule is not
expected to cause any significant
increase in monitoring cost for small
water systems. The requirement will
affect only a selected number of small
systems. The requirement to hold total
and fecal colifonn samples at 10 °C
during transit/storage will affect only
systems which use surface water and do
not filter. Distribution system samples
collected for the analysis of
heterotrophic bacteria [measured as
heterotrophic plate count (HPC)] are
also required to be held at 10 °C during
transit/storage. However, the analysis of
heterotrophic bacteria is an optional
substitute for maintaining a detectable
disinfection residual. The requirement
to hold samples below 10 °C can be
easily met by shipping samples in
reusable ice packs. EPA estimates a one
time cost of less than $5 per sample for
the ice packs; over a period of time this
represents only a slight increase in
sample shipping cost under current
requirements.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title n of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205
of the UMRA generally requires EPA to
identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments,
including tribal governments, it must
have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan.
The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments,
enabling officials of affected small
governments to have meaningful and
timely input in the development of EPA
regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates,
and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year. Thus,
today's rule is not subject to die
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
The rule approves use of additional
analytical methods by systems
conducting analysis for contaminants in
drinking water and thus provides
operational flexibility to the system.
Any mandate to use a standardized
testing procedure for a particular
contaminant was established by EPA in
an earlier rulemaking. Today's rule
merely allows additional standardized
procedures. Although, the rule
withdraws earlier outdated versions of
some methods, EPA anticipates no
increase in expenditure or burden on
the testing laboratories because newer
methods are easier and more efficient to
use. Thus, no increase in expenditure or
burden on the laboratories' client public
water systems is expected.
The rule also approves six methods
for magnesium for use under the Stage
1 DBP Rule. Currently there are no EPA
approved methods for magnesium,
though earlier rulemaking established
the need for standardized testing (in
order to avoid other requirements). The
methods will allow certain systems
using softening that are unable to meet
the specified level of total organic
carbon removal to analyze for
magnesium as one of several alternative
performance criteria. EPA estimates that
the cost of a magnesium analysis should
not exceed $20 per sample; systems
analyzing magnesium under the DBP
Rule will be required to collect 24
-------
67458 FederaKRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules: and Regulations
samples per year, which will cost no
more than $20 x 24 = $480 per year.
EPA believes that less than 1% of the
1,395 surface water systems covered by
the DBF Rule will choose to monitor for
magnesium as one of several criteria. As
noted earlier, however, today's rule did
not establish a new requirement for
standardized testing of magnesium. That
requirement was established in earlier
mlemakmg (though EPA neglected to
specify acceptable standardized
procedures at that time).
Today's rule affects laboratory testing
requirements in ways other than
approval of additional standardized test
procedures. Some of these changes
impose Federal mandates, but the effect
of the new mandate will be well below
$100 millions dollars in any one year.
Today's rule authorizes changes to the
composition of Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples, requires yearly analysis of
PE samples, establishes a requirement
that laboratories be certified based on
the proficiency with the method they
actually use, and establishes a
temperature requirement for certain
samples prior to testing. The cost of PE
program should decrease because the
testing laboratories have to analyze for
fewer analytes. The authorized changes
to PE sample composition may actually
decrease the burden associated with
existing mandates.
Requiring PE sample analysis once a
year will not adversely affect the
systems because all States that conduct
laboratory certification programs
currently require yearly PE sample
analysis. Today's rulemaking merely
formalizes this national consistency
among the States.
The amendment requiring that
laboratories be certified based on the
proficiency on the method they actually
use to report the compliance data will
impose a minor requirement for
laboratories that choose to be certified
for an analyte by more than one method.
Previously, laboratories could satisfy PE
testing requirement using any approved
method regardless of the method
actually used. Today's action merely
codifies the common sense intention
that laboratories establish proficiency
with the methods they actually use.
Though the requirement to establish
proficiency now mandates use of the
method actually used for compliance
testing, EPA believes the potential
incremental cost of an extra PE sample
analysis is small, manageable and
reasonable, and justified by the need to
ensure that a laboratory is qualified to
report data with each method. Currently
most laboratories elect to be certified by
the one method that they routinely use.
There is no reason to believe
laboratories will be compelled to incur
the cost of an additional PE sample in
the future.
The requirement to hold source water
samples below 10 °C during transit/
storage under the Surface Water
Treatment Rule will affect only a small
fraction (1-9%) of the water utilities.
The effect on monitoring cost will be
very minor, and attributable to a slight
increase in sample shipping cost.
Therefore, the mandate associated with
the sample holding temperature should
be insignificant.
EPA has determined that this rule
contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The requirements
will not be significant according to the
information presented in the previous
discussion of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. The requirements will not be
unique because large and small
governments would be affected the same
way. Thus today's rule is not subject to
the requirements of section 203 of the
UMRA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq., EPA must submit an information
collection request covering information
collection requirements in a rule to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This
rule does not contain any information
collection requirements, and therefore is
not subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
E. Science Advisory Board and National
Drinking Water Advisory Council, and
Secretary of Health and Human Services
In accordance with Section 1412 (d)
and (e) of the SDWA, the Agency
submitted all three rules in the proposal
phase to the Science Advisory Board,
the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council, and the Secretary of Health and
Human Services for their review. They
had no comments.
F. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule,
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 ("NTTAA"), Public Law No.
104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when die Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This rulemaking involves technical
standards. EPA is approving new
versions of ASTM and Standard
Methods for many regulated drinking
water contaminants. ASTM and SM are
both voluntary consensus standard
bodies responsible for promoting
adoption of uniform and efficient
methods for analysis. In addition, EPA
conducted a search to identify
applicable consensus standards that
would be acceptable for compliance
determinations under the SDWA for the
measurement of Diquat, six acid
herbicides, magnesium, and lead and is
approving consensus methods whenever
possible. EPA identified two methods
(ASTM D 5317-93 and SM 6640 B) for
the acid herbicides. EPA is approving
ASTM Method D 5317-93 for acid
herbicides but decided not to use SM
6640 B in this rulemaking. The use of
this voluntary consensus standard
would have been impractical with
applicable law because of significant
shortcomings in the sample preparation
and quality control sections of the
method instructions. The Stage 1DBP
disinfection by-products final rule
allows systems to demonstrate
compliance with a total organic carbon
removal requirement by demonstrating
the removal of magnesium from the
water supply. In today's rule, EPA has
approved five voluntary consensus
standards, SM 3500-Mg versions B, C,
and E; ASTM D 511-93 versions A and
B, for determination of magnesium.
These methods have the sensitivity and
precision necessary to determine
magnesium removal at the levels
specified in the Stage 1 DBP rule.
EPA identified no voluntary
consensus standards for Diquat, and
none were brought to the Agency's
attention in comments. Therefore, EPA
has decided to use EPA Method 549.2.
A commenter recommended that EPA
include thallium as an approved analyte
in SM 3113 B. While SM 3113 B lists
thallium in the potential analytical
scope, the method does not contain
accuracy and precision statistical data
for determinations of thallium. The
Agency does not have and the
commenter did not provide the
sensitivity, accuracy and precision
statistical data the Agency would need
to approve this technique for
compliance determinations of thallium.
Therefore, EPA decided not to include
thallium in this rulemaking. A
commenter recommended that the
-------
Federal-Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules: and Regulations 67459
Agency approve a voluntary consensus
standard (SM 3130 B) for lead, because
the commenter believes it is equivalent
to the Palintest Method 1001 that is
approved in today's rule. EPA reviewed
SM 3130 B and concluded that is it not
equivalent to the technique used in
Method 1001, and the performance data
in the method are not complete enough
for the Agency to determine whether
SM 3130 B would produce results
equivalent to Method 1001 or to other
methods approved for determinations of
lead.
G. Executive Order 13045—Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23,1997)
Executive Order 13045 applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be
"economically significant" as defined
under E.0.12866, and (2) Concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children, and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency. This rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not an "economically
significant" rule as defined under E.O.
12866.
H. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled
"Federalism" (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
"meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications." "Policies that have
federalism implications" is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have "substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government." Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not
issue a regulation that has federalism
implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not
required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local
governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation. EPA also may not issue a
regulation that has federalism
implications and that preempts State
law unless the Agency consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
If EPA complies by consulting,
Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
provide to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the
rule, a federalism summary impact
statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include
a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with State and local
officials, a summary of the nature of
their concerns and the agency's position
supporting the need to issue the
regulation, and a statement of the extent
to which the concerns of State and local
officials have been met. Also, when EPA
transmits a draft final rule with
federalism implications to OMB for
review pursuant to Executive Order
12866, EPA must include a certification
from the agency's Federalism Official
stating that EPA has met the
requirements of Executive Order 13132
in a meaningful and timely manner.
Today's final rule will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. Today's rule
approves new and revised versions of
currently approved EPA Methods,
ASTM Methods and Standard Methods
for measurement of compliance with
drinking water standards. This rule also
provides public water systems, many of
which are owned or operated by
political subdivisions of States, with
additional options for detection of total
coliforms and E. coli in drinking water
under the Total Colifonn Rule and
source water under the Surface Water
Treatment Rule, as well as for
measurement of magnesium under the
DBP Rule, and for measurement of lead
under the Lead and Copper rule.
Though public water systems may be
owned or operated by political
subdivisions of States, the additional
measurement flexibility afforded by
today's rule will in no way affect the
allocation of responsibilities among
various levels of government.
This rule also made minor technical
corrections, amendments, or
clarifications to the regulations and
laboratory certification requirements.
Laboratories conducting analysis for
contaminants in drinking water are
required to be certified for proficiency
in the analytical method they actually
use for drinking water compliance
monitoring. Thus, in the case of
laboratories that choose to be certified
for an analyte using more than one
approved method, the regulation will
require such laboratories to analyze a PE
sample for each method for which
certification is requested. Today's rule
also requires that source water samples
be held at 10°C during transit/storage
under the Surface Water Treatment
Rule. For government laboratories that
will be affected by this rule, the affect
will not have federalism implications
because the rule will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs, nor
will it affect existing relationships
between the national government and
the States, nor will it affect the
distribution of powers and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.
/. Executive Order 13084—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA
may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly or
uniquely affects the communities of
Indian tribal governments, and that
imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal
governments, or EPA consults with
those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of
Management and Budget, in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the
rule, a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with representatives
of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns,
and a statement supporting the need to
issue the regulation. In addition,
Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to
develop an effective process permitting
elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal
governments "to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of
regulatory policies on matters that
significantly or uniquely affect their
communities."
Today's rule does not significantly or
uniquely affect the communities of
Indian tribal governments. EPA's
promulgation of analytical methods is
authorized under section 1401(1)(D) and
1445(a) of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
This rule approves new and updated
analytical methods for drinking water
compliance monitoring and makes
method related corrections and
amendments in the regulations. The
-------
67460 Federaf Register/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules and Regulations
choice of new and updated analytical
methods will actually save compliance
cost as newer methods are more
efficient and easier to use. Methods
related corrections and amendments
may cause a small increase in
compliance cost but the increase will be
very minor as discussed in the
preamble. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of
Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
this rule.
/. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a "major rule" as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective January 3, 2000.
Vm. References
APHA 1992. Eighteenth edition of
Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 1992,
American Public Health Association,
1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington,
D.C. 20005.
APHA 1995. Nineteenth edition of
Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 1995,
American Public Health Association,
1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington,
D.C. 20005.
ASTM1994. Annual Book ofASTM
Standards, 1994, Vol. 11.01 and 11.02,
American Society for Testing and
Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.
ASTM 1996. Annual Book ofASTM
Standards, 1996, Vol. 11.01 and 11.02,
American Society for Testing and
Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.
AWWA 1996. "Standard Methods—A
Closer Look", Posavec, Steve, in Opflow,
Vol. 22, No. 2, February 1996, American
Water Works Association, 6666 West
Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235.
Brenner 1993. Brenner, K.P., et al.,
"New medium for the simultaneous
detection of total colifbrm and
Escherichia coli in water", Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 59:3534-3544.
Brenner 1996a. Brenner, K.P., et al.,
"Comparison of the recoveries of
Escherichia coli and total coliform from
drinking water by the MI Agar method",
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62:203-208.
Brenner 1996b. Brenner, K.P., et aL,
"Intel-laboratory evaluation of MI Agar
and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency—approved membrane filter
method for the recovery of total coliform
and Escherichia coli from drinking
water", J. Microbiol. Methods 27:111-
119.
EPA 1987. "Development of
Preservation Techniques and
Establishment of Maximum Holding
Times: Inorganic Constituents of the
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System and Safe Drinking
Water Act", EPA/600/S4-«6/043, March
1987.
EPA 1990a. "Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplement I", July
1990, NTIS PB91-146027.
EPA 1991. "Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water", December 1988,
revised July 1991, NTIS PB91-231480.
EPA 1992. "Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplement n,"
August 1992, NTIS PB92-207703.
EPA 1993. "Methods for the
Determination of Inorganic Substances
in Environmental Samples", August
1993, NTIS PB94-120821.
EPA 1994. "Methods for the
Determination of Metals in
Environmental Samples—Supplement
I", May 1994, NTIS PB95-125472.
EPA 1994b. Technical Notes on
Drinking Water Methods, EPA/600/R-
94/173, October 1994, NTIS PB95-
104766.
EPA 1995. "Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplement DL"
EPA/600/R-95/131, August 1995, NTIS
PB95-261616.
EPA 1996. EPA Methods 515.3,
"Determination of Chlorinated Acids in
Drinking Water by Liquid-liquid
Extraction, Derivatization And Gas
Chromatography With Electron Capture
Detection," Revision 1.0, EPA/815/B-
99/001, July 1996. Available from U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
National Exposure Research Laboratory
(NERL)-Cincmnati, 26 West Martin
Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268.
EPA 1997a. EPA Methods 549.2
"Determination of Diquat And Paraquat
in Drinking Water by Liquid-solid
Extraction And High Performance
Liquid Chromatography With
Ultraviolet Detection", Revision 1.0,
EPA/815/B-99/002, June 1997.
Available from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, National Exposure
Research Laboratory (NERL)-Cincinnati,
26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268. -
EPA 1997b. Manual for the
Certification of Laboratories Analyzing
Drinking Water, Fourth Edition, Office
of Water Resource Center (RC-4100),
401 M. Street SW, Washington, D.C.
20460, EPA/81/B-97/001, March 1997.
NY 1996. Suffolk County Water
Authority 1996. Data Package pertaining
to EPA Method 508.1 and the use of a
NP detector. Suffolk County Water
Authority Laboratory, 260 Motor
Parkway, P.O. Box 18043, Hauppauge,
New York 11788-8843.
Palmiest 1999. Method 1001: Lead in
Drinking Water by Differential Pulse
Anodic Stripping Voltammetry, August
1999. Palintest, LTD, 21 Kenton Lands
Road, P.O. Box 18395, Erlanger, KY
41018.
USGS 1989. Methods I-372O-85,I-
3300-85,1-1030-85,1-1601-85,1-
2598-85,1-1700-85 and 1-2700-85 in
Techniques of Water Resources
Investigations of the U.S. Geological
Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-l, 3rd ed.,
1989, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Information Services, Box 25286,
Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
USGS 1993. Method 1-2601-90 in
Methods of Analysis by the U.S.
Geological Survey National Water
Quality Laboratory—Determination of
Inorganic and Organic Constituents in
Water and Fluvial Sediments, Open File
Report 93-125,1993, U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Information Services,
Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO
80225-0425.
Williams 1979. Williams, T. J, etal,
"An Evaluation of the Need for
Preserving Potable Water Samples for
Nitrate Testing", JAWWA, March 1979,
pp. 157-160.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 141
Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Incorporation by reference, Indian-
lands, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water supply.
40 CFR Part 143
Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Incorporation by reference, Indian-
lands, Water supply.
Dated: November 22,1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of Code of
Federal Regulations, are amended as
follows:
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30 /Wednesday, December 1, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 67461
PART 141— NATIONAL PRIMARY
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 141
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2
300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-1,
300J-9, and 300J-11.
2. Section 141.21 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (f)(3);
b. Revising the next to last sentence
of paragraph (f)(5);
c. Revising the second sentence of
paragraph (f)(6)(i);
d. Revising the second sentence of
paragraph (f)(6){ii);
e. Adding paragraphs (f)(6)(v),
(f)(6)(vi) and (f)(6)(vii); and
f. Revising the second sentence of
paragraph (f)(8).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§141.21 Collfonn sampling.
(3) Public water systems must
conduct total coliform analyses in
accordance with one of the analytical
methods in the following table.
Organism
Total Con-
forms 2.
Methodology"
Total Cohfoim Fer-
mentation Tech-
nique 'A3.
Total CoBform
Membrane Filter
Technique6
(P-A) Coliform Test"
ONPG-MUG Test8 —
Colisure Test*
E*Colite» Test«
m-ColiBlue24« Test11
Citation1
9221 A, B
9222
A.B.C
9221
9223
The procedures shall be done in accordance with
the documents listed below. The incorporation by ref-
erence of the following documents listed in footnotes
1,6, 8, 9,10 and 11 was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the documents
may be obtained from the sources listed below. Infor-
mation 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, D.C. 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-
3027); or at the Office of FEDERAL REGISTER, 800
North Capitol Street NW, Suite 700, Washington,
D.C. 20408.
1 Methods 9221 A, B; 9222 A, B, C; 9221 D and
9223 are contained in Standard Methods for the Ex-
2The time from sample collection to initiation of
analysis may not exceed 30 hours. Systems are en-
couraged but not required to hold samples below 10
•C during transit
3 Lactose broth, as commercially available, may be
used in lieu of lauryl tryptose broth, if the system
conducts at least 25 parallel tests between this me-
dium and lauryl tryptose broth using the water nor-
mally tested, and this comparison demonstrates that
the false-positive rate and false-negative rate for total
coliform, using lactose broth, is less than 10 percent
4lf inverted tubes are used to detect gas produc-
tion, the media should cover these tubes at least
one-half to two-thirds after the sample is added.
5 No requirement exists to run the completed
phase on 10 percent of all total coliform-positive con-
firmed tubes.
•Ml agar also may be used. Preparation and use
of Ml agar is set forth in the article, "New medium for
the simultaneous detection of total coliform and
Escherichia coli in water" by Brenner, K.P., et al.,
1993, Appl. Environ. Mkmbiol. 59:3534-3544. Also
available from the Office of Water Resource Center
(RC-4100), 401 M. Street SW, Washington, D.C.
20460, EPA/600/J-99/225.
7 Six-times formulation strength may be used if the
medium is filter-sterilized rather than autodaved.
•The ONPG-MUG Test is also known as the
Autoanalysis Colilert System.
•A description of the Colisure Test Fob 28,1994,
may be obtained from IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., One
IDEXX Drive, Westbrook, Maine 04092. The Colisure
Test may be read after an incubation time of 24
hours.
"A description of the E*Colite» Test "Presence/
Absence for Conforms and E. Cot in Water," Dec 21,
1997, is available from Charm Sciences, Inc., 36
Franklin Street Maiden, MA 02148-4120.
11A description of the m-ColiBlue24» Test Aug.
17, 1999, is available from the Hach Company, 100
Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA 50010.
12 EPA strongly recommends that laboratories
evaluate the false-positive and negative rates for the
method(s) they use for monitoring total conforms.
EPA also encourages laboratories to establish false-
positive and false-negative rates within their own lab-
oratory and sample matrix (drinking water or source
water) with the intent that if the method they choose
has an unacceptable false-positive or negative rate,
another method can be used. The Agency suggests
that laboratories perform these studies on a minimum
of 5% of all total coliform-posftive samples, except for
those methods where verification/confirmation is al-
ready required, e.g., the M-Endo and LES Endo
Membrane Filter Tests, Standard Total Coliform Fer-
mentation Technique, and Presence-Absence Coli-
form Test Methods for establishing false-positive and
negative-rates may be based on lactose fermenta-
tion, the rapid test for fHjalactosidase and
cytochrome oxidase, multi-test identification systems,
or equivalent confirmation tests. False-positive and
false-negative information is often available in pub-
lished studies and/or from the manufacturers).
(5) * * * The preparation of EC
medium is described in Method 9221E
(paragraph la) in Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 18th edition, 1992 and in
the 19th edition, 1995; either edition
may be used. * * *
(6) * * *
(ii) * * * Nutrient Agar is described
in Method 9221B (paragraph 3) in
Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 18th edition,
1992 and in the 19th edition, 1995;
either edition may be used. * * *
(v) The membrane filter method with
MI agar, a description of which is cited
in footnote 6 to the table in paragraph
(f)(3) of this section.
(vi) E*Colite® Test, a description of
which is cited in footnote 10 to the table
at paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
(vii) m-ColiBlue24® Test, a
description of which is cited in footnote
11 to the table in paragraph (f)(3) of this
section.
(8) * * * Copies of the analytical
methods cited in Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and
Wastewater (18th and 19th editions)
may be obtained from the American
Public Health Association et al.; 1015
Fifteenth Street NW., Washington, DC
20005. * * *
3. Section 141.23 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4)(iii);
b. Revising the table and footnotes in
paragraph (k)(l);
c. Revising paragrah (k)(2) including
the table;
d. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(i); and
e. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(ii)
introductory text
The revisions read as follows:
§ 141.23 Inorganic chemical sampling and
analytical requirements.
(a) * * *
(iii) If duplicates of the original
sample taken from each sampling point
used in the composite sample are
available, the system may use these
instead of resampling. The duplicates
must be analyzed and the results
reported to the State within 14 days
after completing analysis of the
composite sample, provided the holding
time of the sample is not exceeded.
urination of Water and Wastewatar, 18th edition
(1992) and 19th edition (1995) American Public
Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20005; either edition may be used.
Method 9221 E as referenced in (k) * * *
paragraph (f)(5) of this section. * * * (1) * * *
Contaminant and methodology13
Alkalinity:
Titrimetric
Electrometric tftration
Antimony:
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Hydride-Atomic Absorption
Atomic Absorption' Platform
Atomic Absorption' Furnace
Arsenic14:
EPA
2 200.8
2200.9
ASTM 3
D1067-92B
D-3697-92
SM«
2320 B
3113 B
Other
M030-85S
-------
67462 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Contaminant and methodology13
Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Atomic Absorption; Platform
Atomic Absorption; Furnace
Hydride Atomic Absorption
Asbestos:
Transmission Electron Microscopy
Transmission Electron Microscopy
Barium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP-Mass Spectrome try
Atomic Absorption' Direct . ......
Atomic Absorption! Furnace . .. . ....
Beryllium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Atomic Absorption; Platform
Atomic Absorption; Furnace
Cadmium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP-Mass SDectrometrv
Atomic Absorption; Platform
Atomic Absorption; Furnace
Calcium:
EDTA atrimetric ... . ....
Atomic absorption; direct aspiration
Inductively-coupled plasma
Chromium:
Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Atomic Absorption; Platform
Atomic Absorption* Furnace .... ..
Copper
Atomic absorption' direct aspiration
ICP
ICP — Mass SDectrometrv
Atomic absorption; platform
Conductivity Conductance
Cyanide:
Manual Distillation followed by
Spectrophotometric, Amenable
Spectrophotometric.
Manual .
Selective Electrode
Fluoride:
loo Chronwtography ..
Manual Distill • Color SPADNS ...
Manual Electrode
Automated Electrode . ....
Automated Alizarin ....
Lead:
ICP-Mass Spectrometry •
Atomic absorption' platfoim .
Differential Pulse Anodic Stripping Vottammetry
Magnesium:
ICP ..
Mercury:
Manual Cold Vapor
Automated. Cold Vapor
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Nickel:
Inductivoly Coupkxi Plasma .. .
ICP-Mass Spoctrometiy
Nitrate:
Automated Cadmium Reduction
EPA
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
» 100.1
"100.2
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
6 335.4
8 300.0
2 200.8
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 245.1
1 245.2
2 200.8
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
8 300.0
« 353.2
ASTM3
D-2972-93C
D-2972-93B
D3645-93B
D511-93A
D511-93B
D1688-95C
D1688-95A
D1125-95A
D2036-91A
D2036-91B
D2036-91A
D4327-91
D1179-93B
D3559-95D
D 511-93 B
D 51 1-93 A
D3223-91
D4327-91
D3867-90A
SM«
3120 B
3113 B
3114 B
3120 B
3111 D
3113 B
3120 B
3113 B
3113 B
3500-CaD
3111 B
3120 B
3120 B
3113 B
3113 B
3111 B
3120 B
2510 B
4500-CN- C
4500-CN- G
4500-CN- E
4500-CN- F
4110B
4500-F- B, D
4500-F- C
4500-F - E
3113 B
3111 B
3120 B
3500-Mg E
31 128
3120 B
3111 B
3113 B
4110B
4500-NO3_ F
Other
1-3300-85 s
380-75WE11
129-71 W11
Method 1001 «
B-1011*
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 230 /Wednesday, December 1, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 67463
Contaminant and methodology13
Ion Selective Electrode
Manual Cadmium Reduction
Nitrite:
Ion Chromatography
Automated Cadmium Reduction
Manual Cadmium Reduction
Spectrophotometric
Orthophosphate: 12
Colorimetric, automated, ascorbic acid
Colorimetric, ascorbic acid, single reagent
Colorimetric, phosphomolybdate' ... .
automated-segmented flow;
pH: Electrometric
Selenium:
Hydride-Atomic Absorption
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Atomic Absorption; Platform
Atomic Absorption; Furance
Silica:
Colorimetric, molybdate blue;
automated-segmented flow
Colorimetric
Molybdosilicate
Heteropoly blue
Automated method for molybdate-reactive silica
Inductively-coupled plasma
Sodium:
Inductively-coupled plasma
Atomic Absorption; direct aspiration ...
Temperature: Thermometric
Thallium:
ICP-Mass Spectrometry
Atomic Absorption; Platform
EPA
8 300.0
6 353.2
6 365.1
•3000
1 150.1
1 150.2
2 200.8
2 200.9
3 200.7
2 200.7
2 200.8
2200.9
ASTM3
D3867-90B
D4327-91
D3867-90A
D3867-90B
D515-88A
D4327-91
01293-95
D3859-93A
D3859-938
D859-95
SM«
4500-NO3 D
4500-NO3_ E
4110B
4500-NO3 F
4500-NOj- E
4500-NOz B
4500-PF
4500-PE
4110 B
4500-H+ B
3114 B
3113 B
4500-Si D
4500-SiE
4500-Si F
3120 B
3111 B
2550
Other
601 7
B-1011»
M602-855
1-2601-90 5
1-2598-85 5
M700-855
1-2700-85 s
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of the following documents listed
in footnotes 1-11 and 15 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies
of the documents may be obtained from the sources listed below. 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 "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes", EPA/600/4-79/020, March 1983. Available at NTIS, PB84-128677.
2 "Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples—Supplement I", EPA/600/R-94/111, May 1994. Available at NTIS.
PB95-125472.
3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1994 and 1996, Vote. 11.01 and 11.02. American Society for Testing and Materials. The previous versions
of D1688-95A, D1688-95C (copper). D3559-95D (lead), D1293-95 (pH). D1125-91A (conductivity) and D859-94 (silica) are also approved.
These previous versions D1688-90A, C; D3559-90D, D1293-84, D1125-91A and D859-88, respectively are located in the Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, 1994, Vote. 11.01. Copies may be obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive. West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.
418th and 19th editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1992 and 1995. respectively. American Public
Health Association; either edition may be used. Copies may be obtained from the American Public Health Association. 1015 Fifteenth Street NW.
Washington, DC 20005.
5 Method 1-2601-90, Methods for Analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of Inorganic and
Organic Constituents in Water and Fluvial Sediments, Open File Report 93-125, 1993; For Methods 1-1030-85; 1-1601-85; M700-85; I-2598-
85; 1-2700-85; and 1-3300-85 See Techniques of Water Resources Investigation of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5. Chapter A-1, 3rd ed.,
1989; Available from Information Services, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
6 "Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples", EPA/600/R-93/100, August 1993. Available at NTIS.
PB94-120821.
7 The procedure shall be done in accordance with the Technical Bulletin 601 "Standard Method of Test for Nitrate in Drinking Water", July
1994, PN 221890-001, Analytical Technology, Inc. Copies may be obtained from ATI Orion, 529 Main Street, Boston, MA 02129.
8 Method B-1011, "Waters Test Method for Determination of Nitrite/Nitrate in Water Using Single Column Ion Chromatography," August 1987.
Copies may be obtained from Waters Corporation, Technical Services Division, 34 Maple Street, Mitford. MA 01757.
9 Method 100.1, "Analytical Method For Determination of Asbestos Fibers in Water". EPA/600/4-83/043. EPA. September 1983. Available at
NTIS, PB83-260471.
1010 Method 1002. "Determination of Asbestos Structure Over 10-um In Length In Drinking Water", EPA/600/R-94/134, June 1994. Available
at NTIS. PB94-201902.
11 Industrial Method No. 129-71W, "Fluoride in Water and Wastewater". December 1972, and Method No. 380-75WE, "Fluoride in Water and
Wastewater", February 1976, Technicon Industrial Systems. Copies may be obtained from Bran & Luebbe. 1025 Busch Parkway, Buffalo Grove,
"Unfiitered, no digestion or hydrolysis.
"Because MDLs reported in EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.9 were determined using a 2X preconcentration step during sample digestion,
MDLs determined when samples are analyzed by direct analysis (i.e., no sample digestion) will be higher. For direct analysis of cadmium and ar-
senic by Method 200.7, and arsenic by Method 3120 B sample preconcentration using pneumatic nebtdization may be required to achieve lower
detection limits. Preconcentration may also be required for direct analysis of antimony, lead, and thallium by Method 200.9; antimony and lead by
Method 3113 B; and lead by Method D3559-90D unless multiple in-fumace depositions are made.
-------
67464 FederaPRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rule* and Regulations
Contaminant and methodology13
EPA
ASTM3
SM«
Other
14 If ultrasonic nebulization is used in the determination of arsenic by Methods 200.7, 200.8. or SM 3120 B, the arsenic must be in the penta-
valent state to provide uniform signal response. For methods 200.7 and 3120 B, both samples and standards must be diluted in the same mixed
acid matrix concentration of nitric and hydrochloric acid with the addition of 100 uL of 30% hydrogen peroxide per 100ml of solution. For direct
analysis of arsenic with method 200.8 using ultrasonic nebulization, samples and standards must contain one mg/L of sodium hypochlorite.
15The description for Method Number 1001 for lead is available from PaCntest, LTD. 21 Kenton Lands Road, P.O. Box 18395. Ertanger, KY
41018. Or from the Hach Company, P.O. Box 389, Loveland, CO 8053.
(2) Sample collection for antimony,
asbestos, barium, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium, cyanide, fluoride, mercury,
nickel, nitrate, nitrite, selenium, and
thallium under this section shall be
conducted using the sample
preservation, container, and maximum
holding time procedures specified in the
following table:
Contain nsnt
Antimony
Asbestos
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Ctvomiuffl .«.«_
Cyanide
Fluoride „ ..
Mercury
Nickel
Nitrate
Nitrate-Nitrite'
Nitrite
Selenium
ThaBum
Preservative'
HMO,
4°C
HNOj
HNO,
HNO,
HNQ,
4-C. NaOH —
None
HNOj
HNO]
4°C
HzSQ.
4"C
HNQj
HNO]
Con-
tainer2
p or G
Pore
PorE
Pore —
p or G
p or 6
Pore...
PorG._
PorO
PorG —
Pore —
PorG
PorG
PorG —
p or G
Time5
6 months
48 hours"
6 months
o months
6 months
6 months
14 days
1 Month
28 days
6 months
48 hours'
28 days
48 hours
6 months
6 months
1 When indicated, samples must be addffied at the time of
collection to pH < 2 with concentrated acid or adjusted with
sodium hydroxide to pH > 12. When chilling is indicated the
sample must be shipped and stored at 4°C or less.
1 P-plastic, hard or soft G-gtess, hard or soft.
'In al cases samples shountae analyzed as soon after col-
lection as possible. Follow additional (if any) information on
presofvBtion, containflis or hottnfl tmos trot is spscited in
* Instructions for cont3in6fs, pfBSOtvston procsdurss snd
holding times as specified in Method 1002 must be adhered
to for al compliance analyses including those conducted with
Method 100.lT
slf the sample is chlorinated, the holding time for an
unacidified sample Kept at 4°C is extended to 14 days.
'Nitrate-Nitrite refers to a measurement of total nitrate.
(3) * * *
(i) Analyze Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples provided by EPA, the State
or by a third party (with the approval of
the State or EPA) at least once a year.
(ii) For each contaminant that has
been included in the PE sample and for
each, method for which the laboratory
desires certification achieve quantitative
results on the analyses that are within
the following acceptance limits:
*****
4. Section 141.24 is amended by:
a. Revising the section heading
b. Revising paragraph (e);
c. Revising paragraphs (f)(14)(ii);
d. Revising paragraphs (f)(17)(i)(A),
(f)(17)(i)(B), (f)(17)(ii) introductory
text; and paragraph (f)(17)(ii)(A);
e. Revising paragraph (h)(10)(ii);
f. Revising paragraph (h)(13)
introductory text, (h)(13)(i); and
g. Revising paragraph (h)(19)(i)(A)and
(h)(19)(i)(B) introductory text to
read as follows:
§ 141.24 Organic chemicals, sampling and
analytical requirements.
*****
(e) Analyses for the contaminants in
this section shall be conducted using
the following EPA methods or their
equivalent as approved by EPA.
(1) The following documents are
incorporated by reference. This
incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552 (a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies may
be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water
Docket, 401M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
Suite 700, Washington, DC. Method
508A and 515.1 are in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water, EPA/600/4-88-039,
December 1988, Revised, July 1991.
Methods 547,550 and 550.1 are in
Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water—Supplement I, EPA/600-4-90-
020, July 1990. Methods 548.1,549.1,
552.1 and 555 are in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplement II,
EPA/600/R-92-129, August 1992.
Methods 502.2, 504.1, 505, 506, 507,
508, 508.1, 515.2, 524.2 525.2, 531.1,
551.1 and 552.2 are in Methods for the
Determination of Organic Compounds
in Drinking Water—Supplemental,
EPA/600/R-95-131, August 1995.
Method 1613 is titled "Tetra-through
Octa-Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans by
Isotope-Dilution HRGC/HRMS", EPA/
821-B-94-005, October 1994. These
documents are available from the
National Technical Information Service,
NTIS PB91-231480, PB91-146027,
PB92-207703, PB95-261616 and PB95-
104774, U.S. Department of Commerce,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161. The toll-free number is
800-553-6847. Method 6651 shall be
followed in accordance with Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 18th edition, 1992 and
19th edition, 1995, American Public
Health Association (APHA); either
edition may be used. Method 6610 shall
be followed in accordance with the
Supplement to the 18th edition of
Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 1994 or with
the 19th edition of Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 1995, APHA; either
publication may be used. The APHA
documents are available from APHA,
1015 Fifteenth Street NW., Washington,
D.C. 20005. Other required analytical
test procedures germane to the conduct
of these analyses are contained in
Technical Notes on Drinking Water
Methods, EPA/600/R-94-173, October
1994, NTIS PB95-104766. EPA Methods
515.3 and 549.2 are available from U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
National Exposure Research Laboratory
(NERLJ-Cincinnati, 26 West Martin
Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268. ASTM Method D 5317-93 is
available in the Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, 1996, Vol. 11.02, American
Society for Testing and Materials, 100
Ban Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken,
PA 19428, or in any edition published
after 1993.
Contaminant
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
ChlorobenzBDe
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichtorobenzene
1,2-OichloroBthane
cis-Dicriloroethylene
trans-Oichloraethylene ....
Dichloromethane ...
1,2-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
Styrene .».«.»«.«.«...«.»..
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1,1-Tricfiloroethane —
Trichloroethylene
Toluene ._.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ..
1,1-Dichloroethyiene —
1,12-Trichlorcethane —
Vinyl chloride .......
Xylenes (total)
2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin)
2,4-0* (as acid, salts and
esters).
2.4,5-TP* (Silvex)
Alachlor2 _.
Atrazine2 ........
Benzo(a)pyrene
Carbofuran
Chlordans .......................
Dalapon ..........................
Di(2-ethy1hexyl)adipate ...
Di(2-emylhexyl)phthalate
Dibromochlofopropane
(DBCP).
Dinoseb* ._
Oiquat
Endothall
Endrin
Ethylene dibromide
Method '
5022, 524.2
5022, 524.2. 551.1
5022, 5242
5022, 524.2
5022, 524.2
5022, 5242
5022, 524.2
5022. 524.2
5022, 5242
5022, 5242
5022, 524.2
5022, 5242
5022, 5242, 551.1
5022, 5242, 551.1
5022, 524.2, 551.1
5022, 5242
5022, 5242
5022, 5242
5022,524.2,551.1
5022, 5242
5022, 5242
1613
5152,555,515.1,515.3,
D5317-93
515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3,
D5317-93
507, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
507, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
5252, 550, 550.1
531.1,6610
508, 525.2, 508.1, 505
552.1, 515.1, 5522,
515.3
506, 525.2
506, 525.2
504.1,551.1
515.2, 555, 515.1, 515.3
5492
548.1
508,525.2,508.1,505,
551.1
504.1,551.1
(EDB).
Glyphosate -....
547,6651
-------
FederatRegister/Vol. 64, No. 230/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules; and Regulations 67465
Contaminant
Heptachlor —
Heptachtor Epoxide
Hexaehlorobenzene
Hexachlorocydopenta-
diene.
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Oxatnyl. .
PCBs* (as
decachlorabiphenyl).
(asArodors) .... .
Pentachlorophenol
Pidoram4 ........................
Simazine3 ..... .......
Toxaphene —
Total Trihalomethanes ....
Method1
508,525.2,508.1,505,
551.1
508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
508,525.2,508.1,505,
551 1
508,525.2,508.1,505,
551.1
508, 525.2, 508.1, 505,
551.1
508,525.2,508.1,505,
551.1
531.1,6610
508A
508.1,508,5252,505
515.2,525.2,555,515.1,
515.3, D5317-93
5152, 555, 515.1,515.3,
D5317-93
507, 5252, 508.1, 505,
551 1
508, 508.1, 5252,505
5022,524.2,551.1
1 For previously approved EPA methods which re-
main available for compliance monitoring until June
1,2001, see paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
'Substitution of the detector specified in Method
505, 507, 508 or 508.1 for the purpose of achieving
lower detection limits is allowed as follows. Either an
electron capture or nitrogen phosphorous detector
may be used provided all regulatory requirements
and quality control criteria are met
3PCBs are qualitatively identified as Areclors and
measured for compliance purposes as decachlorobt-
phenyl. Users of Method 505 may have more dif-
ficulty in achieving the required detection limits than
users of Methods 508.1, 5252 or 508.
4 Accurate determination of the chlorinated esters
requires hydrolysis of the sample as described in
EPA Methods 515.1, 515.2, 515.3 and 555, and
ASTM Method D 5317-83.
(2) The following EPA methods will
remain available for compliance
monitoring until June 1,2001. The
following documents are incorporated
by reference. This incorporation by
reference was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51.
Copies may be inspected at EPA's
Drinking Water Docket, 401M Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20460; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC. EPA methods 502.2
Rev. 2.0, 505 Rev. 2.0, 507 Rev. 2.0, 508
Rev. 3.0, 531.1 Rev. 3.0 are in "Methods
for the Determination of Organic
Compounds in Drinking Water",
December 1988, revised July 1991;
methods 506 and 551 are in "Methods
for the Determination of Organic
Compounds in Drinking Water—
Supplement I", July 1990; methods
515.2 Rev. 1.0 and 524.2 Rev. 4.0 are in
"Methods for the Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water—Supplement II," August 1992;
and methods 504.1 Rev. 1.0, 508.1 Rev.
1.0, 525.2 Rev.1.0 are available from US
(14) • * *
(ii) If duplicates of the original sample
taken from each sampling point used in
the composite sample are available, the
system may use these instead of
resampling. The duplicates must be
analyzed and the results reported to the
State within 14 days after completing
analysis of the composite sample,
provided the holding time of die sample
is not exceeded.
(17)* * *
(i)* * •
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples provided by EPA, the
State, or by a third party (with the
approval of the State or EPA) at least
once a year by each method for which
the laboratory desires certification.
(B) Achieve the quantitative
acceptance limits under paragraphs
(f)(17)(i)(C) and (D) of this section for at
least 80 percent of the regulated organic
contaminants included in the PE
sample.
*****
(ii) To receive certification to conduct
analyses for vinyl chloride, the
laboratory must:
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples provided by EPA, the
State, or by a third party (with the
approval of the State or EPA) at least
once a year by each method for which
the laboratory desires certification.
(h) * * *
(10)* * *
(ii) If duplicates of the original sample
taken from each sampling point used in
the composite sample are available, the
system may use these instead of
resampling. The duplicates must be
analyzed and the results reported to the
State within 14 days after completion of
the composite analysis or before the
holding time for the initial sample is
exceeded whichever is sooner.
(13) Analysis for PCBs shall be
conducted as follows using the methods
in paragraph (e) of this section:
(i) Each system which monitors for
PCBs shall analyze each sample using
either Method 508.1, 525.2, 508 or 505.
Users of Method 505 may have more
difficulty in achieving the required
Aroclor detection limits than users of
Methods 508.1, 525.2 or 508.
(i)* * *
(A) Analyze Performance Evaluation
(PE) samples provided by EPA, the
State, or by a third party (with the
approval of the State or EPA) at least
once a year by each method for which
the laboratory desires certification.
(B) For each contaminant that has
been included in the PE sample achieve
quantitative results on. the analyses that
are within the following acceptance
limits:
5. Section 141.28 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§141.28 Certified laboratories.
(a) For the purpose of determining
compliance with §§ 141.21 through
141.27,141.30,141.40,141.74 and
141.89, samples may be considered only
if they have been analyzed by a
laboratory certified by the State except
that measurements for alkalinity,
calcium, conductivity, disinfectant
residual, orthophosphate, pH, silica,
temperature and turbidity may be
performed by any person acceptable to
the State.
6. Section 141.74 is amended by
revising the first five sentences in
paragraph (a) introductory text, the table
and footnotes in paragraph (a)(l), and
the first and second sentences in
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
§141.74 Analytical and monitoring
requirements.
(a) Analytical requirements. Only the
analytical method(s) specified in this
paragraph, or otherwise approved by
EPA, may be used to demonstrate
compliance with §§ 141.71,141.72 and
141.73. Measurements for pH, turbidity,
temperature and residual disinfectant
concentrations must be conducted by a
person approved by the State.
Measurement for total coliforms, fecal
coliforms and HPC must be conducted
by a laboratory certified by the State or
EPA to do such analysis. Until
laboratory certification criteria are
developed for the analysis of fecal
coliforms and HPC, any laboratory
certified for total coliforms analysis by
the State or EPA is deemed certified for
fecal coliforms and HPC analysis. The
following procedures shall be
conducted in accordance with the
publications listed in the following
EPA NERL, Cincinnati, OH 45268
(f)* * *
Organism
Total Coliform2 ..
(19)* * *
Methodology
Total Coliform Fermentation Technique '^
Total Coliform Membrane Filter Techniaue6
section. * * *
(1) * * *
Citation1
9221 A, B, C
9222 A, B. C
-------
67466 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 2 30/Wednesday, December 1, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Organism
Fecal Conforms2
Heterotrophic bacteria2
Turbidity
Methodology
ONPG-MUG Test7
Fecal Conform Procedure8
Fecal Conform Filer Procedure
Pour Plate Method
Nephekxnetric Method
Nephetometric Method
Great Lakes Instalments
Citation1
9223
9221 E
9222D
9215 B
2130 B
180.1 B
Method 2"
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of the following documents list-
ed in footnotes 1. 6. 7, 9 and 10 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51.
Copies of the documents may be obtained from the sources listed below. 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, Wash-
ington, D.C. 20460 (Telephone: 202-260-3027); or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington,
D.C. 20408.
1 Except where noted, all methods refer to Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 18th edition. 1992 and 19th edi-
tion, 1995, American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20005; either edition may be used.
2 The time from sample collection to initiation of analysis may not exceed 8 hours. Systems must hold samples below 10°C during transit
3 Lactose broth, as commercially available, may be used in lieu of lauryl tryptose broth, if the system conducts at least 25 parallel tests be-
tween this medium and lauryl tryptose broth using the water normally tested, and this comparison demonstrates that the false-positive rate and
false-negative rate for total conform, using lactose broth, is less than 10 percent.
* Media should cover inverted tubes at least one-half to two-thirds after the sample is added.
5 No requirement exists to run the completed phase on 10 percent of all total colifprm-positive confirmed tubes.
6 Ml agar also may be used. Preparation and use of Ml agar is set forth in the article, 'New medium for the simultaneous detection of total con-
form and Escherichia coli in water" by Brenner, K.P., et al.. 1993. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:3534-3544. Also available from the Office of
Water Resource Center (RC-4100). 401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460, EPA 600/J-99/225.
7 The ONPG-MUG Test is also known as the Autoanalysis Colitert System.
8A-1 Broth may be held up to three months in a tightly closed screw cap tube at 4°C.
9 "Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples". EPA/600/R-93/100, August 1993. Available at NTIS,
PB94-121811.
"GLI Method 2. "Turbidity", November 2.1992, Great Lakes Instruments, Inc., 8855 North 55th Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53223.
(2) Public water systems must
measure residual disinfectant
concentrations with one of the
analytical methods in the following
table. The methods are contained in
both the 18th and 19th editions of
Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 1992 and
1995; either edition may be used. * * *
7. Section 141.89 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(l) introductory
text, (a)(l)(i) to read as follows and by
removing the semicolon at the end of
paragraph (a)(l)(ii)(B) and adding a
period in it's place.
§141.89 Analytical methods.
(a) • * *
(1) Analyses for alkalinity, calcium,
conductivity, orthophosphate, pH,
silica, and temperature may be
performed by any person acceptable to
the State. Analyses under this section
for lead and copper shall only be
conducted by laboratories that have
been certified by EPA or the State. To
obtain certification to conduct analyses
for lead and copper, laboratories must:
(i) Analyze Performance Evaluation
samples, which include lead and
copper, provided by or acceptable to
EPA or the State at least once a year by
each method for which the laboratory
desires certification; and
PART 143—NATIONAL SECONDARY
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 143
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C 300f et seq.
2. Section 143.4 is amended by
revising the table and footnotes in
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§143.4 Monitoring.
(b}« * *
Contaminant
Aluminum . .... .. . . .
Chloride
Color
Manganese
Odor
Silver .
Sulfate
EPA
* 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
1 300.0
2 200.7
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
2 200.7
2 200.8
2 200.9
1 300.0
1 375.2
ASTM3
D4327-91
D512-89B
D4327-91
D516-90
SM«
3120 B
3113B
3111 D
4110B
4500-CI- D
4500-CI- B
2120 B
5540 C
3120 B
3111 B
3113 B
3120 B
3111 B
3113B
2150 B
3120 B
3111 B
3113B
4110B
4500-SO4Z- F
4500-SO42- C, D
4500-SO42- E
Other
s 1-3720-85
-------
FederaE Register/Vol. 64, No. 230 /Wednesday, December 1, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 67467
Contaminant
TDS
Zinc
EPA
2 200.7
2 200.8
ASTM3
SM«
2540 C
3120 B
3111 B
Other
The procedures shall be done in accordance with the documents listed below. The incorporation by reference of the following documents was
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the documents may be ob-
tained from the sources listed below. 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 20408.
'"Methods for the Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples", EPA/600/R-93-100. August 1993. Available at NTIS,
PB94-120821.
2 "Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples—Supplement I", EPA/600/R-94-111, May 1994. Available at NTIS, PB
95-125472.
3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. 1994 and 1996, Vote. 11.01 and 11.02, American Society for Testing and Materials. Copies may be ob-
tained from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive. West Conshohocken, PA 19428.
418th and 19th editions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste/water, 1992 and 1995, American Public Health Associa-
tion; either edition may be used. Copies may be obtained from the American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street NW, Washington,
DC 20005.
5 Method I-3720-85, Techniques of Water Resources Investigation of the U.S. Geological Survey, Book 5, Chapter A-1, 3rd ed., 1989; Avail-
able from Information Services, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center. Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225-0425.
[FR Doc. 99-30901 Filed 11-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-SO-P
------- |