foy,
y
DRAFT FIKAL
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phase II Implementation Guidance
V
Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS) Reporting
csl
22
00
OJ
November 25, 1991
HEADQUARTERS LIBRARY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 .
-------
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Table of Contents
gage No.
Introduction 1
Fart 1: Definitions and Significant FRDS Reporting Issues 1-1
A. Definitions 1-1
1. Compliance Period 1-1
2. Compliance Cycle 1-1
3. Maximum Contaminant Level (HCL) Violation .1-2
a. Single Sample HCL Violation 1-2
b. Average MCL Violation 1-3
4. Monitoring and Reporting (M&R) violation . . i - 4
a. Major M&R Violation 1-4
b. Minor M&R Violation 1-4
c. Regular Sampling M&R Violation .... l - 5
d. confirmation Sampling M&R Violation . .1-5
5. Treatment Technique Violation 1-5
6. Federal Violation 1-5
a. Federal MCL Violation 1-5
b. Federal M&R Violation 1-6
c. Federal Treatment Technique Violation .1-6
7. State Violation 1-6
a. State MCL Violation 1-7
b. State M&R Violation 1-7
c. State Treatment Technique Violation . . l - 8
8. Group Contaminant code 1-8
B. significant FRDS Reporting Issues 1-8
1. Reporting Federal versus State Violations .1-8
2. Reporting Federal and State Enforcement
Actions 1-9
3. Reporting Violations by Sampling Point versus
by system ...1-9
a. Reporting Violations by Sampling Point 1-10
b. Reporting Violations by System ... l - il
4. Utilization of Group Contaminant Codes . . 1-12
5. Multiple MCL and/or M&R Violations for the
same Contaminant and Monitoring Period . . 1-14
a. Multiple MCL Violations . l - 15
b. Multiple M&R Violations 1-16
c. MCL and M&R Violation Combinations . 1-17
i. Scenario #1 - One MCL and One M&R 1-17
ii. Scenario #2 - Two MCL and One M&R 1-18
iii. scenario #3 - One MCL and Two M&R 1-20
Part 2: Reporting to FRDS 2-1
A. Data that must be Reported for ALL Violations . . 2 - 1
1. Data Elements and Descriptions 2-1
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page No.
2,
3,
4,
Violation Types 2 -
Monitoring Period Begin Date and Months
Source/Entity 10 and Designating Sampling
Point versus System specific Reporting
l
2-2
2-3
5. Format of Violations Reported . . . . . . .2-4
B. Additional Data that must be Reported for M&R
violations . . . 2-4
l. Data Elements and Descriptions .2-4
- 2. Major versus Minor ..2-4
3. Major M&R Violation Reporting . . . . . . .2-6
4. Manor Confirmation Sampling M&R Violation
Example 2-7
5. Minor M&R Violation Reporting 2-9
6. Minor Regular Sampling M&R Violation Example2 - 10
C. Additional Data that must be Reported for MCL
Violations 2-12
1. Data Elements and Descriptions 2-12
2. MCL Violation Reporting 2-13
3. Average MCL Violation Reporting Example . 2-14
D. Additional Data that must be Reported for
Treatment Technique violations 2-16
l. Data Elements and Descriptions 2-16
2. Treatment Technique Violation Reporting . 2-17
3. Treatment Technique Violation Reporting
Example ,. 2-18
Appendix A: Phase II Contaminants
A. Inorganic Contaminants (IOCS) A - 1
B. Phase II Unregulated inorganic Contaminants . . . A - 1
C. Synthetic Organic Contaminants (socs) A - 2
D. Volatile organic Contaminants (VOCs) . A - 3
E. Water Treatment Chemicals . A - 4
F. Phase II Unregulated Organic contaminants . . . . A - 4
Appendix B: Group Contaminant code Utilization
Timetable B-l
Rules for Use B-2
Inorganic Contaminant GCCs
1*** B-2
Volatile Organic Contaminant GCCs
• 2V07 B-2
2V08 B-2
2V10 B-2
2V17 B-2
2V18 .B-2
Synthetic Organic contaminant GCCs
ii
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page No.
2*** B-3
2S13 B-3
2818 B-3
Unregulated Contaminant GCCs
2U15 B-3
2D34 B-3
2U36 B-3
1U06 B-3
2U24 B-3
Appendix C: Phase II Compliance Determination Flowcharts
Introduction . . . C - 1
MCL Compliance Determination
Nitrate & Nitrite C-2
IOC (other than Nitrate 6 Nitrite), 8OCr and VOC C - 3
M&R Compliance Determination
iocs
Asbestos - Groundwater & surface water
systems C-4
Fluoride - Groundwater systems C - 5
Fluoride - Surface Water systems C - 6
Nitrate - Groundwater systems C - 7
Nitrate - Surface Water systems C - 8
Nitrite - Groundwater & surface Water
systems C-9
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate,
Nitrite) - Groundwater systems . . . . c - 10
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate,
Nitrite) - Surface Water systems . . . c - 11
SOCS
Serving > 3,300 Persons
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 12
Serving < 3,300 Persons
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 13
VOCs
Groundwater systems C - 14
Surface Water systems C - 15
Unregulated Contaminants
Inorganic Contaminants - Groundwater &
surface Water systems c - 16
Organic Contaminants - Groundwater &
Surface water systems c - 17
Treatment Technique Compliance Determination .... c - 18
Appendix D: standardized Monitoring Framework
iii
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page No.
Appendix E: summary of Phase II Regulations
iv
-------
DRAFT FINAL
List of Figures
Figure Description Page No.
1 Group contaminant code Utilization '
Timetable 1-13
Major Confirmation Sampling M&R Violation —
FRDS-II Data Capture Form 2-8
Manor confirmation Sampling MSR violation -
FRDS-II DTF Transactions 2-8
Minor Regular Sampling M6R Violation -
FRDS-II Data Capture Form 2-11
Miner Regular Sampling M&R Violation -
FRDS-II DTF Transactions 2-11
Average MCL Violation - FRDS-II Data Capture
Form 2-15
Average MCL Violation - FRDS-II DTF
Transactions 2-15
8 Treatment Technique Violation - FRDS-II
Data capture Form 2-19
9 Treatment Technique Violation - FRDS-II
DTF Transactions 2-19
-------
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Introduction .
This document is a supplement to the Phase II Implementation
Guidance manual and addresses reporting to the Federal Reporting
Data System (FRDS). It describes in detail the technical aspects
and data requirements for reporting violations of the Phase II
regulations to FRDS and incorporates revisions made as a result
of EPA and State comments received on the draft version of the
document. For complete understanding, this document should be
utilized in conjunction with the Phase II regulations, the Phase
II Implementation Guidance manual, and the FRDS-II Data Element
Dictionary and Data Entry Instructions documentation.
The effective date for this FRDS reporting guidance will
coincide with the effective date of the Standardized Monitoring
Framework (SMF), January 1, 1993. Prior to that date, existing
reporting guidance, methodology, and procedure apply. Upon its
effective date, this document will supersede all previous
reporting guidance which relates to the inorganic contaminants
(IOCs), synthetic organic contaminants (SOC), volatile organic
(SOC) contaminants, and unregulated contaminants specifically
addressed herein.
The remainder of this document is divided into two parts and
five appendices.
Part 1 contains various definitions (including definitions
of the violations to be reported to FRDS), and addresses several
significant FRDS reporting issues. Part 2 specifically
identifies what to report to FRDS for Monitoring and Reporting
(M&R) violations, Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) violations, and
Treatment Technique violations.
Appendix A contains a list of the contaminants (and their
FRDS contaminant identification codes1) which are covered by
this FRDS reporting guidance. Appendix B contains a list of FRDS
Group Contaminant Codes (GCCs) that may be used in reporting
certain types of regular sampling M&R violations to FRDS.
Appendix c contains compliance determination flowcharts which
portray MCL, M&R, and Treatment Technique compliance
determination for the IOCs, SOCs, VOCs, water treatment
chemicals, and unregulated contaminants. Appendices D and E
contain copies of the Standardized Monitoring Framework
Refer to the FRDS-II Data Element Dictionary, Section VI.C, table ID06, for 8 list of ALL FRDS
contaminant identification codes.
-------
DRAFT FINAL
(Illustrated by Little Tiny Squares) , and a Summary of Phase II
Regulations2.
Appendices D and E are of special significance. Therein,
the Standardized Monitoring Framework and the Phase II regulation
are summarized. These appendices have been added to this final
FRDS reporting guidance as replacements for numerous sections
contained in the draft version of this document which addressed
the same issues. These summaries include, but are not
necessarily limited to, the following for the Phase II IOCS,
SOCs, VOCs, and unregulated contaminants:
systems affected
sampling points
initial and repeat base sampling requirements
grandfathering of previously collected analytical data
triggers for increased/decreased sampling
confirmation sampling requirements
compositing procedures and requirements
MCL compliance determination
public notification requirements
waiver procedures
graphic representations of monitoring under the
standard monitoring framework, by contaminant
flowcharts depicting an overview of the monitoring
requirements, by contaminant
"Summary of Phase II Regulations, National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for 38 Inorganic and
Synthetic Organic Chemicals," Office of Ground Water and Drinking Uater, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, July, 1991.
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Fart 1: Definitions and significant PRDS Reporting Issues
A. Definitions
1. Compliance Period
Compliance period can have two distinct definitions,
one definition when we refer to the Standardized Monitoring
Framework (SMF), and a completely separate definition when
we refer to FRDS.
Under the SMF, a compliance period means a three-year
period of time (calendar year based) within a nine-year
compliance cycle. The first compliance period of the first
cgmp 1i anee cvc1e begins 01/01/93 and ends 12/31/95, the
second compliance period of the first compliance cvcle
begins 01/01/96 and ends 12/31/98, and the third compliance
period of the first compliance cycle begins 01/01/99 and
ends 12/31/2001. Refer to Appendix E, Fact Sheet 1, for
additional information.
In FRDS, a compliance period means the period of time
during which monitoring was to have been performed, such as
a quarter, a year, etc. For example, assume a public water
system (PWS) is required to monitor for contaminant X each
calendar quarter. If this PWS fails to conduct the required
monitoring for contaminant X for the first calendar quarter
of 1993, a regular sampling M&R violation is incurred. When
this M&R violation is reported to FRDS, the State must
supply the beginning date of the compliance period, and
either the ending date of the compliance period or the
duration of the compliance period. The beginning date of
the compliance period in this example would be 01/01/93, the
ending date of the compliance period would be 03/31/93, and
the duration of the compliance period would be 3 months.
In an effort to eliminate the confusion between the SMF
compliance period and the FRDS compliance period in this
document, the FRDS compliance period will be hereafter
referred to as a monitoring period.
2. Compliance cycle
A nine-year period of time (calendar year based) which
consists of three three-year compliance periods. The first
compliance cycle begins 01/01/93 and ends 12/31/2001. Refer
to Appendix E, Fact Sheet 1, for additional information.
1-1
-------
DRAFT FINAL
3. Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) violation
Determination of MCL violations is fully defined in the
regulations (i.e., the analytical result of a single sample
exceeding the MCL, the average analytical result of an
initial and a confirmation sample exceeding the MCL, or a
running annual average analytical result exceeding the MCL).
Refer to §§141.23(i)(1) and 141.23(i)(2) for asbestos,
barium, cadmium, chromium, fluoride, mercury, and selenium
MCL compliance determination; §141.23(i)(3) for nitrate and
nitrite; §§141.24(f)(15)(i) and 141.24(f)(15)(ii) for the
VOCs; and §§141.24(h)(11)(i) and 141.24(h)(11)(ii) for the
SOCs. In addition, Fact Sheets 2 through 8 in Appendix E
summarize the MCL compliance determination process, by
contaminant, under the heading compliance Determination.
a. Single sample MCL Violation
When a maximum contaminant level violation is
based on the result of a single sample, it is known as
a single sample MCL violation (FRDS violation type 01).
A single sample MCL violation may be incurred in
four ways:
1. When a confirmation sample is NOT required3
and the PWS is monitoring on an annual or
less frequent basis4 (e.g., every three
years);
2. When a confirmation sample is required, but
NOT taken at all;
3. When a confirmation sample is required and
taken, but NOT taken within the required
period of time5; or
The NPDURs require confirmation samples for nitrate and nitrite only. For IOCS other than nitrate and
nitrite, the SOCs, and the VOCs, the State may require confirmation samples.
4 See §U1.23
-------
DRAFT FINAL
4. When a confirmation sample is required and
taken, but NOT analyzed and/or reported
within the required period of time6.
If a confirmation sample is required,
determination of MCL compliance is to be based on the
average of the initial and confirmation sample
results7. However, if a confirmation sample result is
not available, it cannot be averaged with the initial
sample result. Therefore, by default, determination of
MCL compliance would be based on a single sample result
(the initial samples' result itself).
b. Average MCL Violation
When a maximum contaminant level violation is
based on the average of more than one sample result, it
is known as an average MCL violation (FRDS violation
type 02).
An average MCL violation may be incurred in four
ways:
1. When the average of an initial and
confirmation sample result for nitrate exceed
the nitrate MCL;
2. When the average of an initial and
confirmation sample result for nitrite exceed
the nitrite MCL;
3. When the PWS is monitoring more frequently
than annual (e.g., quarterly) for any
contaminant other than nitrate and nitrite;
and the running annual average of all samples
taken for the subject contaminant exceeds
that contaminant's MCL8; or
Here, "required period of time" means as specified by the State.
7 See §§141.23. and 141.23<3> for nitrate and nitrite; §§141.23 and
141.23(2) for the lOCs other than nitrate and nitrite; §U1.24(15)(i> for the VOCs; and
§141.24(h>{11)(i> for the SOCs.
1-3
-------
. DRAFT FIKAL
4. When the PWS is monitoring on an annual or
less frequent basis9 (e.g., every three
years); a confirmation sample is required10
by the State for any contaminant other than
nitrate.and nitrite; and the average of an
initial and confirmation sample for the
subject contaminant exceed that contaminant's
MCL.
4. Monitoring and Reporting (M&R) Violation
An M&R violation is a failure to:
Complete the initial round of sampling;
• Conduct any repeat sampling;
Conduct confirmation sampling, when required; or
• Accurately report the analytical result of a
regular or confirmation sample to the State.
The Standardized Monitoring Framework Illustrations in
Appendix D and Fact Sheets 2 through 8 in Appendix E
summarize the individual monitoring requirements by
contaminant.
a. Major M&R violation
A major M&R violation is defined as, "a monitoring
or reporting violation in which no samples were*
collected and/or reported."
b. Minor M&R Violation
A minor M&R violation is defined as, "a monitoring
or reporting violation in which some, but not all, of
the samples required to be collected and reported were
actually collected and/or reported."
w See §141.23 for the ICCs other than nitrate and nitrite; §141.24(f)(15XH> for the VOCs; and
f141.24(hXl1>(ii) for the SOCs.
The NPDWRs require confirmation samples for nitrate and nitrite only. For IOCS other than nitrate and
nitrite, the SOCs, and the VOCs, the State may require confirmation samples.
1-4
-------
DRAFT FIH&L
o. Regular Sampling M&R Violation
Failure to complete the initial round of sampling,
failure to conduct any repeat sampling, and failure to
accurately report the analytical result of a regular
sample from either the initial or any repeat sampling
round, is known as a regular sampling M&R violation
(FRDS violation type 03).
d. Confirmation Sampling HSR Violation
Failure to conduct any required confirmation
sampling and failure to accurately report the
analytical result of a confirmation sample is known as
a confirmation sampling M&R violation (FRDS violation
type 04).
5. Treatment Technique Violation
Public water systems which use acrylamide or
epichlorohydrin as a means of drinking water treatment are
required to certify annually to the State that these
chemicals are being used as directed by the manufacturer or
distributor.
A Treatment Technique violation is a failure to certify
annually that acrylamide and/or epichlorohydrin have been
properly used (FRDS violation type 07).
6. Federal Violation
-v
A Federal violation is a violation incurred as a result I
of the application of any National Primary Drinking Water )
Regulation (NPDWR).
a. Federal MCL Violation
Federal MCL violations are those incurred
utilizing:
1. The MCL determination procedures defined in
§§14l.23(i)(1) and 141.23(i)(2) for asbestos,
barium, cadmium, chromium, fluoride, mercury,
and selenium; §141.23(i)(3) for nitrate and
nitrite; §§141.24(f)(15)(i) and
141.24(f)(15)(ii) for the VOCs; and
1-5
-------
DRAFT FINAL
§§141.24(h)(11)(i) and 141.24(h)(11)(ii) for
the SOCs?
- and -
2. The MCLs defined in §§141.11 or 141.62(b) (as
appropriate) for the iocs; §141.61(a) for the
VOCs; and §141.61(c) for the SOCs.
b. Federal H&R violation
Federal M&R violations are those incurred
utilizing the sampling and analytical requirements
defined in §141.23 for the iocs; §141.24 for the VOCs
and SOCs; and §141.40 for the unregulated contaminants.
c. Federal Treatment Technique Violation
Federal Treatment Technique violations are those
incurred utilizing the requirements defined in §141.111
for acrylamide and epichlorohydrin.
7. State violation
A violation which is solely a State violation is:
1. A violation incurred as a result of the
application of any State Drinking Water
Regulation, if said State Drinking Water
Regulation is similar to, but more stringent
than, a National Primary Drinking Water
Regulation (NPDWR);
- and -
2. A violation incurred as a result of the
application of any State Drinking Water
Regulation that represents a requirement for
.which no equivalent NPDWR exists.
\
If a State Drinking Water Regulation is identical to a
NPDWR, a violation incurred as a result of the application
of said State Drinking Water Regulation is both a Federal
violation and a State violation.
1-6
-------
DRAFT FINAL
a. State MCL violation
MCL violations which are solely State MCL
violations are generally those incurred as a result of
an MCL which is more stringent than the equivalent
NPDWR MCL, those incurred as a result of an MCL being
established for a type of system for which no Federal
MCL exists (e.g., the MCL for fluoride is applicable to
CWSs and NTNCWSs in the State)11, or those incurred
for contaminants which are not Federally regulated.
For example, the NPDWR MCL for cadmium is 0.005
mg/1. Assume a State sets their cadmium MCL at 0.003
mg/1 and they do not require confirmation samples when
ajj_initial, result exceeds the MCL. Therefore, receipt
of asample result of 0.004 nig/1 would cause a single
sample MCL violation to be incurred. This is solely a
State MCL violation since the sample result is below
the Federal MCL.
b. State MSR violation
M&R violations which are solely State M&R
violations are generally those incurred as a result of
more frequent monitoring schedules than established in
the NPDWRs, those incurred due to required confirmation
sampling for other than nitrate and nitrite, or those
incurred for contaminants which are not Federally
regulated.
For example, the NPDWRs provide that, "Each public
water system shall monitor at the time designated by
the State within each compliance period.12" Assume
that a State has determined that a certain community
PWS is required to sample for asbestos between 01/01/93
and 12/31/93 (i.e., the first year of the first
compliance period). The PWS fails to do so, and, as a
result, an M&R violation is incurred. This is solely a
State M&R violation since the. NPDWR gives the PWS until
12/31/95 to collect the required asbestos sample. A
Federal M&R violation would be incurred only if the CWS
fails to collect the asbestos sample by 12/31/95 (i.e.,
during the first compliance period of each compliance
cycle).
11 The NPDUR for fluoride is applicable to CUSs only.
12 See 5141.23 for the VOCs, and §U1.24(h><17> for the SOCs.
1-7
-------
DRAFT FINAL
c. State Treatment Technique violation
Treatment Technique violations which are solely
State Treatment Technique violations are generally
those incurred as a result of requiring more frequent
certification for acrylamide or epichlorohydrin usage
than is established in the NPDWRs, or those incurred
for contaminants which are not Federally regulated.
For example, assume a state requires monthly
certification of fluoride usage. A PWS required to
provide this monthly fluoride certification fails to do
so, and, as a result, a Treatment Technique violation
is incurred. This is a solely a State Treatment
Technique violation since no NPDWR exists that requires
certification of fluoride usage.
8. Group contaminant Code
A Group Contaminant Code (GCC) is a special contaminant
identification code which is used when reporting a group of
related regular sampling M&R violations to FRDS. A GCC may
be reported to FRDS when no monitoring for any contaminant
from the related group (e.g., VOCs) has been performed.
For example, GCC 1U06 represents the unregulated
inorganic contaminants — antimony, beryllium, cyanide,
nickel, sulfate, and thallium. If a PWS required to monitor
for these unregulated contaminants fails to do so, a regular
sampling M&R violation has been incurred for each of the six
contaminants. Rather than reporting six separate regular
sampling M&R violations to FRDS with identical information
except for the contaminant ID, one regular sampling M&R
violation may be reported with 1U06 specified as the
contaminant ID. FRDS recognizes 1U06 as a GCC and generates
six individual regular sampling M&R violations for insertion
into the Data Base, one for each of the contaminants;
represented by 1U06.
B. significant FRDS Reporting Issues
1. Reporting Federal versus State violations
States must report ONLY Federal violations to FRDS.
Violations that are the result of more stringent State MCLs,
more stringent State sampling frequencies, or for
1-8
-------
DRAFT FINAL
contaminants not regulated at the Federal level, etc. should
NOT be reported to FRDS. ,-The previous section of this
document contains, the definition of a Federal violation on
page 1-5 and a State violation on page 1-6.
It is important to note that it is not always possible
for EPA to identify whether a violation reported represents
a violation of a State rule only or both State and Federal
rules. Thus, it is incumbent upon the State to report
Federal violations only. Failure to comply with this
requirement will translate into more PWSs being identified
as violators in FRDS than are actually in violation of the
Federal requirements, and, in the worst case, may result in
PWSs being incorrectly classified as a Significant Non-
Complier (SNC).
2. Reporting Federal and State Enforcement Actions
States are required to report to FRDS all formal
enforcement actions taken in response to Federal violations.
Reporting of informal enforcement actions taken in
response to Federal violations is encouraged, but NOT
required.
Formal or informal enforcement actions taken in
response to violations which are solely State violations may
be reported to FRDS, if desired. Such enforcement actions,
when reported, will be stored in the FRDS Data Base as
"orphan" enforcements (i.e., they are not linked to any
violation stored in the FRDS Data Base).
3. Reporting Violations by sampling Point versus by System
States have the option of reporting violations to FRDS
by sampling point, by system, or with a mixture of the two.
EPA recommends, however, that the States report violations
to FRDS by sampling point.
Since three methods of reporting will be permitted, it
is necessary for each violation reported to FRDS to be
identified as either sampling point or system specific.
This will be accomplished by requiring that the FRDS
source/entity ID13 be supplied for each violation reported.
13 See the FRDS-!! Data Element Dictionary docunentation, Section 1!, data element CIH3, VIO-SE-ID.
1-9
-------
DRAFT FINAL
If the source/entity ID reported to FRDS for a
violation is greater than zero, the violation will be
assumed to be a samplingpoint specific violation.
If the source/entity ID reported to FRDS for a
violation is equal to zero, the violation will be assumed to
be a system specific violation.
Regardless of the option a State chooses for reporting
violations to FRDS, EPA currently plans on viewing
violations on a system. NOT sampling point, specific basis.
For our purposes, each system can be in violation only one
time, for each type of violation, for each contaminant, for
each compliance period — even though the PWS may have had
multiple violations of the same type and for the same
contaminant and monitoring period, at multiple sampling
points.
a. Reporting Violations by sampling Point
States choosing to report on a sampling point
specific basis for a PWS must report each and every
violation which that system incurs, even if it has
incurred multiple violations of the same type (e.g.,
single sample MCL), for the same contaminant and
monitoring period, at multiple sampling points. Each
must be reported to FRDS.
It must be noted, for the record, that States
choosing to report on a sampling point specific basis
for PWSs with multiple sampling points will likely
incur more major M&R violations than States choosing to
report on a system specific basis. As an illustration
of this fact, consider the following example:
PWS has two sources
Monitoring for benzene is required at both sources
A benzene sample is taken for source #1, as
required, but no sampling is performed for source
#2 (a regular sampling M&R violation)
• A State choosing to report on a system specific
basis for this PWS would report one minor regular
sampling M&R violation for benzene for the subject
monitoring period (i.e., some samples were taken,
but not all)
1-10
-------
DRAFT FINAL
* A State choosing to report on a a»mpHner point
specific basis for this PWS, on the other hand,
would report one major regular sampling M&R
violation for benzene for the subject monitoring
period (i.e., no sample was taken for source #2)
Manor M&R violations are defined on page 1-4,
and minor M&R violations are defined on page 1-4.
b. Reporting Violations by System
States choosing to report on a system specific
basis for a PWS would only report one violation of the
same type (e.g., regular sampling M&R), per
contaminant, per compliance period, even if that system
violated the same requirement for the compliance period
at more than one sampling point.
It must be noted, for the record, that states
choosing to report on a system specific basis for PWSs
with multiple sampling points will likely incur fewer
major M&R violations than States choosing to report on
a sampling point specific basis. As an illustration of
this fact, consider the following example:
* PWS has three sources
Monitoring for EDB is required at all three
sources
• An EDB sample is taken for source #1, as required,
but no sampling is performed for source $2 (a
regular sampling M&R violation) and no sampling is
performed for source #3 (a regular sampling M&R
violation)
• A State choosing to report on a system specific
basis for this PWS would report one minor regular
sampling M&R violation for EDB for the subject
monitoring period (i.e., some samples were taken,
but not all)
A State choosing to report on a sampling point
specific basis for this PWS, on the other hand,
would report two major regular sampling M&R
violations for EDB for the subject monitoring
period (i.e., no sample was taken for source #2
.and no sample was taken for source #3)
1-11
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Maior M&R violations are defined on page 1 - 4,
and minor M&R violations are defined on page 1-4.
4. utilization of Group contaminant Codes
In response to numerous requests for continued
acceptance of Group Contaminant Codes (GCCs), new GCCs have
been assigned for the Phase II rule.
GCCs are defined on page 1-8, and Appendix B contains
a complete list of GCCs, rules for their use, and the
individual contaminants belonging to each GCC.
A majority, but not all, of the original inorganic and
organic NPDWRs were re-promulgated under the Phase II rule.
Additionally, a Phase II provision permits the use of
analytical data obtained prior to the Phase II effective
date to satisfy initial monitoring requirements. As a
result of these two factors, it became necessary to assign
new GCCs which sometimes represent contaminants that overlap
with contaminants represented by other GCCs. It was also
necessary to define acceptable periods of time in which a
given GCC can be reported to FRDS. Refer to Figure 1 on
page 1-13, or the information below for the GCC
utilization timetable.
By way of summary, the following describes each GCC
(old and new) and the dates during which they may be used.
GCC New Description
l*** NO 10 Original NPDWR iocs
2V07 No 7 Phase I VOCs
(Excl. vinyl chloride)
2V08 No 8 Phase I VOCS
(Incl. vinyl chloride)
2V10 Yes 10 new Phase II VOCs
2V17 Yes 17 Phase I and II VOCs
(Excl. vinyl chloride)
2VI8 Yes 18 Phase I and II VOCs
(Incl. vinyl chloride)
2*** No 6 Original NPDWR SOCs
2S13 Yes 13 new Phase II SOCs
2S18 Yes 5 Original NPDWR SOCs
and 13 new Phase II
SOCs
Continued on page l - 14
Mav be Reported
Until 12/31/93
Until 12/31/93
Until 12/31/93
1/1/93-12/31/96
I/1/93-?
1/1/93-?
Until 12/31/93
1/1/93-12/31/96
1/1/93-?
1-12
-------
0)
i
§
N
•H
0)
•O
O
c
a
•H
3
(Q
O
U
CM
1
<0
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Continued from page 1-12
GCC New Description
Mav be Reported
2U15 No 15 Phase I Unregulated 12/31/92
Contaminants
2U34 No 34 Phase I Unregulated 12/31/92
Contaminants (Excl.
DBCP and EDB)
2U36 No 36 Phase I Unregulated 12/31/92
Contaminants (Incl.
DBCP and EDB)
1U06 Yes 6 Phase II Unregulated 1/1/93-12/31/96
Inorganic contaminants
2U24 Yes 24 Phase II Unregulated 1/1/93-12/31/96
Organic contaminants
When a GCC is input to FRDS, the GCC itself will not be
inserted into the Data Base as was previously done with
2V07, 2V08, 2U15, 2U34, and 2U3614. Instead, the GCC will
spawn multiple violations for insertion into the Data Base
(one for each contaminant belonging to the GCC) . The
spawning of multiple violations for insertion into the Data
Base is the procedure currently employed when a l*** or 2***
GCC is input to FRDS.
5. Multiple MCL and/or H&R violations for the same
Contaminant and Monitoring Period
If a PWS has more than one sampling point, it is
possible for it to incur multiple MCL and/or M&R violations
for the same contaminant and monitoring period since
compliance determination is sampling point specific,.
Whether or not multiple violations of the same type
(e.g., average MCL) are reported to FRDS is dependant upon
the violation reporting method being utilized by the state
for the PWS. aantpi -tna point specific violation reporting is
discussed on page 1-10, and system specific violation
reporting is discussed on page 1-11.
On the other hand, if multiple violations of different
types (e.g., an average MCL violation and a regular sampling
M&R violation) are incurred for the same contaminant and
14 Any 2V07, 2V08, 2U15, 2U34, and 2U36 GCCs presently in the FRDS Data Base wilt be replaced with the
individual violations belonging to those GCCs.
1-14
-------
DRAFT FINAL
monitoring period, both violation types must be reported to
FRDS.
Since this is a difficult concept, the following
sections present a variety of hypothetical scenarios in
which multiple MCL and/or M&R violations are incurred by the
same PWS, for the same contaminant and for the same
monitoring period.
a. Multiple MCL Violations
In this scenario, a PWS incurs two single sample
MCL violations at different sampling points for the
same contaminant and for the same monitoring period.
PWS is a NTNCWS
PWS has two sources, both surface water
Since surface water is used, PWS is a surface
water system
• Monitoring for fluoride is required at each
of the two sources annually
No waivers are in effect for fluoride
State does not require confirmation samples
for fluoride
• Fluoride MCL is 3.0 mg/1
PWS takes sample for fluoride analysis at
source #1 during 1994 ... Analytical result
is 4.2 mg/1 which exceeds the MCL ... thus, a
singlesample MCL violation has been incurred
PWS takes sample for fluoride analysis at
source #2 during 1994 ... Analytical result
is 3.7 mg/1 which exceeds the MCL ... thus, a
second single sample MCL violation has been
incurred
Since two single sample MCL violations have
been incurred for this system (source #1 and
source #2), it would seem that the source #1
single sample MCL violation, the source 12 single
sample MCL violation, or both violations would be
reported to FRDS. However, in reality, neither
violation would be reported to FRDS for two
distinct reasons, as follows:
1-15
_
-------
DBAFT FINAL
1. The NPDWR for fluoride applies only to
CWSs, and this PWS is a NTNCWS;
- and -
2. The NPDWR MCL for fluoride is 4.0 mg/1,
but in this State, the fluoride MCL is
3.0 mg/1.
In other words, both of the single sample MCL
violations incurred are solely State violations.
Violations which are solely state violations MUST
NOT be reported to FRDS.
Federal violations are defined on page 1-5,
and State violations are defined on page 1-6.
b. Multiple M&R Violations
In this scenario, a PWS incurs two regular
sampling M&R violations at different sampling
points for the same contaminant and for the same
monitoring period.
PWS is a TNCWS
PWS has three sources, all groundwater
• Monitoring for nitrate is required at all of
the sources annually
Nitrate MCL is 10 mg/1
• PWS takes sample for nitrate analysis at
source #1 during 1995 ... Analytical result
is 4.2 mg/1 which is below the MCL
• PWS does not sample for nitrate at source #2
during 1995 ... thus, a regular sampling M&R
violation has been incurred
PWS does not sample for nitrate at source #3
during 1995 ... thus, a second regular
sampling M&R violation has been incurred
Since two regular sampling M&R violations
have been incurred for this system (source #2 and
source |3), the source #2 regular sampling M&R
violation, the source #3 regular sampling M&R
1-16
-------
DRAFT FINAL
violation, or both violations must be reported to
FRDS.
Whether or not each of the regular sampling
M&R violations is reported to FRDS is dependant
upon the method of violation reporting being
utilized for this PWS, sampling point specific or
system specific.
If the State is utilizing sampling point
specific reporting for this PWS, both of the
regular sampling M&R violations incurred must be
reported to FRDS.
If the State is utilizing system specific
reporting for this PWS, either the regular
sampling M&R violation incurred for source #2, or
the regular sampling M&R violation incurred for
source #3 must be reported to FRDS, but not both.
sampling point specific violation reporting
is discussed on page 1-10, and system specific
violation reporting is discussed on page 1 - 11.
c. MCL and M&R violation combinations
i. scenario #1 - One MCL and One M&R
In this scenario, a PWS incurs one single
sample MCL violation and one reou1ar sampling M&R
violation at different sampling points for the
same contaminant and for the same monitoring
period.
PWS is a CWS
• PWS is serving 2,500 persons
PWS has two sources
Monitoring for lindane has been reduced to 1
sample per compliance period (every three
years) since there were no detects for either
of the two sources in the initial round of
sampling performed in 1995
• No waivers are in effect for lindane
• State does not require confirmation samples
for lindane
1-17
-------
DRAFT FINAL
• Lindane MCL is 0.0002 mg/1
Lindane detection level is 0.00002 rag/1
• PWS takes sample for lindane analysis at
source #1 during December, 1998 ...
Analytical result is 0.0003 mg/1 which
exceeds the MCL ... thus, a ainqla sample MCL
violation has been incurred
• PWS does not take sample for lindane analysis
at source #2 during the 1996-1998 compliance
period ... thus, a regular sampling M&R
violation has been incurred
Since two separate types of violations have
been incurred for this PWS (one single sample MCL
[source #1] and one regular sampling M&R [source
#2]}, both the single sample MCL violation and the
regular sampling M&R violation must be reported to
FRDS, regardless of whether sampling point or
system specific reporting is being used for this
PWS.
ii. Scenario #2 - Two MCL and One M&R
In this scenario, a PWS incurs two single
sample MCL violations and one regular sampling M&R
violation at different sampling points for the
same contaminant and for the same monitoring
period.
PWS is a NTNCWS
• PWS has three sources, one surface water and
two groundwater
Since surface water is used, PWS is a surface
water system
Monitoring for styrene has been reduced to 1
sample per year since there were no detects
for any of the three sources in the initial
round of sampling performed in 1995
No waivers are in effect for styrene
State does not require confirmation samples
for styrene
Styrene MCL is 0.01 mg/1
Styrene detection level is 0.0005 mg/1
1-18
-------
DRAFT FINAL
• PWS takes sample for styrene analysis at
source #1 during December, 1996 ...
Analytical result is 0.02 mg/1 which exceeds
the MCL . . . thus , a single sample MCL
violation has been incurred
PWS does not take sample for styrene analysis
at source #2 during 1996 ... thus, a regular
sampling M&R violation has been incurred
PWS takes sample for styrene analysis at
source #3 during December, 1996 . . .
Analytical result is 0.04 mg/1 which exceeds
the MCL . . . thus , a second single sample MCL
violation has been incurred
Since two separate types of violations have
been incurred for this PWS (two single sample MCL
[source #1 and source #3] and one regular sampling
M&R [source #2]), both violation types must be
reported to FRDS (i.e., at least one of the two
single sample MCL violations must be reported and
the regular sampling M&R violation must be
reported) .
Whether or not each of the single sample MCL
violations is reported to FRDS is dependant upon
the method of violation reporting being utilized
for this PWS, sampling point specific or system
specific.
If the State is utilizing sampling point
specific reporting for the PWS, the single sample
MCL violation incurred for source #1 and the
single sample MCL violation incurred for source #3
must be reported to FRDS.
If the State is utilizing system specific
reporting for the PWS, only one of the two single
sample MCL violations must be reported. In
choosing which of the two to report, always report
the more severe violation. Thus, the single
sample MCL incurred for source #3 should be
reported to FRDS since it is more severe than the
single sample MCL violation incurred for source
Sampling point specific violation reporting
is discussed on page 1-10, and system specific
violation reporting is discussed on page 1-11.
1-19
-------
DRAFT FINAL
iii. Scenario 13 - One MCL and Two M&R
In this scenario, a PWS incurs one average
MCL violation, one regular a»«ipi-t*"y M&R violation,
and one confirmation sampling M&R violation at
different sampling points for the same contaminant
and for the same monitoring period. The average
MCL violation is incurred at the same sampling
point as the conffirnmfcian sampling M&R violation,
but is for the same contaminant and for the same
monitoring period.
PWS is a cws
• PWS has three sources, two surface water and
one groundwater
Since surface water is used, PWS is a surface
water system
• PWS is conducting its initial round of
monitoring for ethylbenzene in 1993 (1 sample
each quarter at each of its three sources)
• No waivers are in effect ethylbenzene
State requires confirmation samples for
ethylbenzene results exceeding the MCL
Ethylbenzene MCL is 0.7 mg/1
Ethylbenzene detection level is 0.0005 mg/1
• PWS takes samples for ethylbenzene analysis
at source #1 during each of the four quarters
in 1993
Qtr 1:
Qtr 2:
Qtr 3;
Qtr 4;
Analytical results are:
0.3 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.4 mg/1
2.5 mg/1
PWS does not take the State required
confirmation sample at source #1 in response
to the 4th Qtr. result exceeding the MCL ...
thus, a confirmation sampling M&R violation
has been incurred
Running annual average of the 4 quarterly
sample results for source #1 is:
(0.3 + 0.1 + 0.4 + 2.5) ** 3.3
3.3 -f 4 - 0.825 (0.8 after rounding) ...
thus, an average MCL violation has been
incurred
1-20
-------
DRAFT FINAL
• PWS takes samples for ethylbenzene analysis
at source #2 during each of the four quarters
in 1993 ... Analytical results are:
Qtr 1: 0.4 mg/1
Qtr 2: 0.3 mg/1
Qtr 3: 0.4 mg/1
Qtr 4: 0.3 mg/1
• All samples were taken as required for source
#2 ... thus, NO M&R violation exists
• Running annual average of the 4 quarterly
sample results for source #2 is:
(0.4 •»• 0.3 + 0.4 + 0.3) - 1.4
1.4 7 4 - 0.35 (0.4 after rounding) ... thus,
NO MCL violation exists
PWS takes samples for ethylbenzene analysis
at source #3 during each of the first three
quarters in 1993, but fails to take the
required 4th quarter sample ... thus, a
regular sampling M&R violation has been
incurred. Analytical results for the first
three quarters are:
Qtr l: .0.3 mg/1
Qtr 2: 0.2 Bg/1
Qtr 3: 0.4 mg/1
• Running annual average of the 3 quarterly
sample results for source #3 is:
(0.3 + 0.2 + 0.4) = 0.9
0.9 -s- 3 = 0.3 ... thus, NO MCL violation
exists
Three separate types of violations have been
incurred for this system (one confirmation
sampling M&R [source #1], one average MCL [source
#1], and one regular sampling M&R [source #3]).
From the three total violations which were
incurred by this system, the average MCL violation
incurred by source #1 and the regular sampling M&R
violation incurred by source #3 must be reported
to FRDS. The confirmation sampling M&R violation
incurred by source #1 is solely a State violation
since the NPDWRs do not require confirmation
samples for ethylbenzene. Violations which are
solely State violations MUST NOT be reported to
FRDS.
Federal violations are defined on page 1-5,
and State violations are defined on page 1-6.
1-21
-------
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Part 2i Reporting to FRDS
A. Data that must be Reported for ALL Violations
1. Data Elements and Descriptions
The following data must be supplied by the State for
EVERY Federal M&R, MCL, and Treatment Technique violation
reported to FRDS:
FRDS Data Element
No.
C101
CHOI
C1103
C1105
C1107
Cllll
C1143
Name
PWS-ID
VIO-ID
VIO-CONTAMINANT
VIO-TYPE
VIO-COMP-PERIOD-BEGIN-DATE
VIO-COMP- PERIOD-MONTHS
VIO-SE-ID
Description
The public water
system identification
number
An identification
number for the
violation
An identification
number for the
contaminant for which
the violation was
incurred
The type of violation
incurred
The beginning date of
the monitoring period
The duration of the
monitoring period in
months
The Source/Entity ID
at which the
violation was
incurred
2. Violation Types
Under the Phase II rule, five (5) types of Federal
violations may be incurred. Of these five types of
violations, two (2) types are M&R violations, two (2) types
2-1
-------
DRAFT FINAL
are MCL violations, and one (1) type is a Treatment
Technique violation. They are as follows:
Single gampfle MCL violation (violation type 01) -
Refer to the definition on page 1-2.
Average MCL violation (violation type 02} - Refer
to the definition on page 1-3.
Regular
M&R violation (violation type 03)
- Refer to the definition on page 1-5.
- ' 4. Confirmation sampling M&R violation (violation
type 04) - Refer to the definition on page 1-5.
- and -
5. Treatment Technique violation (violation type
07) - Refer to the definition on page 1-5.
3* Monitoring Period Begin Date and Months
The monitoring period reported to FRDS does NOT define
the period of time a PWS is in violation. Rather, it
reflects the period of time during which monitoring was to
have been performed.
Monitoring frequencies (e.g., quarterly, annual, every
3 years) differ dependant upon a variety of facts. The
contaminant in question, whether or not a PWS is monitoring
during the first compliance period of a compliance cycle,
whether or not the system has "triggered" increased
monitoring or has qualified for decreased monitoring based
upon its analytical history, and whether or not a waiver is
in effect all contribute to establishment of the current
monitoring frequency.
It is the monitoring frequency in effect at any point
in time that determines the monitoring period begin date and
months reported to FRDS for all Federal M&R, MCL, and
Treatment Technique violations.
Since the Standardized Monitoring Framework is calendar
year based and States are required to report ONLY violations
of the Federal rule, the monitoring period begin date and
months reported should coincide with the calendar quarters
and calendar years as follows:
2-2
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Monitoring
Frequency
Confirmation
sampling for
nitrate &
nitrite
Quarterly
Annually
Every 3 years
Every 6 years
Every 9 years
Monitoring
Begin Date
to report
01/01/yy
*
• •
12/01/yy
01/01/yy
04/01/yy
07/01/yy
10/01/yy
01/01/yy
01/01/yy
01/01/yy
01/01/yy
Monitoring
period Months
to report
01
•
*
01
03
03
03
03
12
36
72
108
If a violation incurred does not possess any of the
monitoring frequencies listed above, it CANNOT be a Federal
violation and must NOT be reported to FRDS.
A Federal violation is defined on page 1-5 and a
State violation is defined on page 1-6.
4.
Source/Entity ID and Designating Sampling Point versus
System specific Reporting
The source/entity ID must be reported to FRDS so that
EPA can 'distinguish a sampling point from a system specific
violation.
If the source/entity ID reported to FRDS for a
violation is greater than zero, the violation will be
assumed to be a «*mpi;8ncr point specific violation.
If the source/entity ID reported to FRDS for a
violation is equal to zero, the violation will be assumed to
be a system specific violation.
2-3
-------
DRAFT FIM&I.
5. Format of Violations Reported
All Federal M&R, MCL, and Treatment Technique
violations must be reported to FRDS in the PRDS-II Data
Transfer Format (DTF).
B. Additional Data that must be Reported for M&R violations
1. Data Elements and Descriptions
The following data must be supplied by the State for
EVERY Federal M&R violation reported to FRDS. This data is
in addition to the data that must be reported for ALL
violations described on page 2-1:
FRDS Data Element
No.
C1131
Name
VIO-MAJOR-VIOLATION-FIAG
Description
A code designating
whether the violation
is a major or minor
M&R violation
2. Major versus Minor
All M&R violations reported to FRDS must be classified
as either a maior or minor violation. This classification
is not applicable to MCL or Treatment Technique violations.
A major M&R violation is defined on page 1-4, and a
minor M&R violation is defined on page 1-4.
When reporting by aampi < nqr point and one or more maior
M&R violations have been incurred for the same contaminant,
the State must report a separate maior M&R violation to FRDS
for each sampling point at which a maior M&R violation was
incurred .
When reporting by system and one or more maior M&R
violations have been incurred for the same contaminant, the
State must report a single major M&R violation to FRDS.
See section 3 below on page 2-6 for the data element
values which must be reported and the data element values
which may be reported for a major M&R violation. See
2-4
-------
DRAFT FINAL
section 4 below, beginning on page 2-7, for an
illustration of a hypothetical ma^or confirmation sampling
M&R violation, a completed FRDS-II data capture form, and an
image of the DTF transactions which correspond to the
completed data capture form for the violation.
When reporting by «*mpi-tncr point and one or more minor
M&R violations have been incurred for the same contaminant,
the state must report a separate minor M&R violation to FRDS
for each sampling point at which a minor M&R violation was
incurred. Please note that it is not possible for a PWS to
incur a minor confirmation sampling M&R violation when the
State is reporting by sampling point for the PWS15.
When reporting by system and one or more minor K&R
violations have been incurred for the same contaminant, the
State must report a single minor M&R violation to FRDS.
See section 5 below on page 2-9 for the data element
values which must be reported and the data element values
which may be reported for a minor M&R violation. See
section 6 below, beginning on page 2-10, for an
illustration of a hypothetical minor regular sampling M&R
violation, a completed FRDS-II data capture form, and an
image of the DTF transactions which correspond to the
completed data capture fora for the violation.
This is because the NPDWRs only require a sfngle confirmation sample for nitrate and nitrite. Thus,
it is impossible to take some, but not all, of the confirmation samples required. The PWS either takes the
single confirmation sample or not.
2-5
-------
DRAFT FIKAL
3. Major M&R Violation Reporting
The primacy agency must report the following data:
Data Elanant
ciet PWS-ID
CHOI V1O-ID
C11&5 VIO-TWE
£1187 VIO- COUP -
CLltl VTO-OOMP -PERIOD- MOUTHS
C1L91 VIO-IOJQK-VI4UTIOH-FLM
C114J VIO-SE-ID
Iffs ID nanbaz
An ID fox tb« violation
flontanlnant ID fox
violation
violation
data tha nonitoxin?
pox lad
•The duxatlon of tii*
in
Majox violation da Biff.
fli* Bouz
> fi if X«tPOXtl&j7
bar
- fl if xapoxtlnir
bsr
data:
The primacy agency may optionally report the following
Data El«n«nt
SfH 1 Btl AH
Connant /
Vllill*
Instead of reporting Cllll, VIO-COMP-PERIOD-MONTHS, report:
VIO-COMP-PEEIOD-EMD-CATE Th« data tba nonltozlntf
paziod andad BVtddyy
Instead of reporting C1131, VIO-MAJOR-VIOLATION-FLAG,
report:
C1129 VIO-SAMPLES-TAKEN The number of samples
actually taken
0 (zero)
2-6
-------
DRAFT FINAL
4. Manor Confirmation Sampling M&R Violation Example
Scenario:
PWS is AZ1298347
• PWS has two sources of water, both groundwater
• PWS is required to monitor for nitrate
(contaminant ID 1040) during the 2nd calendar
quarter of 1993 (04/01 - 06/30) for each source
Nitrate MCL is 10 mg/1
State is reporting violations for this PWS on a
sampling point specific basis
• PWS takes nitrate sample for source #1
(source/entity ID 001) on 5/15/93. Analytical
result was 5.3 mg/1 ... thus, NO MCL violation was
incurred
• PWS takes nitrate sample for source #2
(source/entity ID 002) on 06/15/93. Analytical
result was 10.7 mg/1. Since this result exceeds.
the MCL, the PWS is required to collect a
confirmation sample, but fails to do so ... thus,
both a single sample MCL violation (violation type
01) and a confirmation sampling M&R violation
(violation type 04) have been incurred
The confirmation sampling violation is classified
as a manor M&R violation by definition
• Since the monitoring frequency assumed for
confirmation sampling is l month, and the required
confirmation sample was to have been collected
within 24 hours of the 06/15/93 initial sample
analysis, the monitoring period begin date is
06/01/93
Figure 2 illustrates a completed FRDS-II data capture
form wherein all required data element values for this
hypothetical nitrate malor confirmation sampling M&R
violation have been coded. Data element values that may be
optionally reported are intentionally omitted from the
illustration. The single sample MCL violation is not shown.
Figure 3 illustrates the FRDS-II DTF transactions which
correspond to the Figure 2 data capture form.
Refer to the FRDS-II Data Entry Instructions for
additional details.
2-7
-------
Public Water System
Data Capture Form D
AcnoMcooe
/.
•4HCWM7C
r5l"| VIOLATION DATA
VDUTCN OOMPLMNCEPEMaOWOM
„ """"KUB, •«•«••« T« ^ wr „
Mrffcl* 1* 1*1/1 I'tfH-lA tfl4| MlttfUPlBl
(ciioy «ciiojj (Citas) iciiai)
-
tt
AWWCNE5S DATE MJH SAMPLES
-oT;^ 77
Ill4|z| || > i 1 i 1 INI
(C1143) JC1MS) fl511*"
OR
UAXMUM OONTAUIUKT LEVEL VKXATONS
ANALYSIS
UETHOO ANALYSIS RESULT
1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 l!.| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
-------
DRAFT FINAL
5. Minor H&R Violation Reporting
The primacy agency must report the following data:
Data Element
Comment /
CL01 PWS-ID
C110 1 VIO-ID
C1L03
C1105
TVS IS nontax
An 1C fox th* violation
ao&taninant ID fox
Co* violation
Tfe* violation cyp*
Clio? vio-COUP-PER lOD-HBaia-DATE The date the monitor Inn
Cllll 7T0- COUP -PERIOD- MOUTHS
C1O1
Cl.14,3 7ZO-SE-ID
p«zlod
duxation of
noniboxinfl p«xiod
is months
Hajox violation
Appendix
mddyy
fit, CJ, U, 3€,
73, OX Ififl
> fi if x«poxtinff
by •»-r>*««f
- c if x«poxtinir
by-
data:
The primacy agency may optionally report the following
Mo. Mama
Data Element ---
DA nor
comment /
value
Instead of reporting Cllll, VIO-COMP-PERIOD-MONTHS, report:
C1105 VTO-eOMP-FEJUOD-EHD-DATE The date the monitoxini;
period ended mddyy
Instead of reporting C1131, VIO-MAJOR-VIOLATIOK-FLAG,
report:
C1L23
numbez of
actually taken
> fi
2-9
-------
DRAFT FINAL
6. Minor Regular Sampling M&R Violation Example
Scenario:
PWS is FL9812763
PWS is a CWS
• PWS has three sources of water, two groundwater
and one surface water
• Since surface water is utilized, PWS is a surface
water system
, • PWS is .required to monitor for styrene
(contaminant ID 2996) annually beginning in 1996
(01/01 - 12/31) for each source
• State is reporting violations for this PWS on a
system specific basis
PWS takes styrene sample for source #1
(source/entity ID 001) on 2/20/96. Analytical
result was below the MCL
PWS fails to take styrene samples for source #2
(source/entity ID 002) and source #3
(source/entity ID 003) during 1996 ... thus two
regular sampling M&R violations (violation type
03) have been incurred
Since the state is reporting violations for this
PWS on a system specific basis, only one of the
two violations must be reported. The single
regular samp liner violation to be reported is
classified as a minor M&R violation by definition
• Since the current monitoring frequency for styrene
is annual, the monitoring period has a length of
12 months with a begin date of 01/01/96
Figure 4 illustrates a completed FRDS-II data capture
form wherein all required data element values for this
hypothetical styrene minor regular sampling M&R violation
have been coded. Data element values that may be optionally
reported are intentionally omitted from the illustration.
Figure 5 illustrates the FRDS-II DTF transactions which
correspond to the Figure 4 data capture form.
Refer to the FRDS-II Data Entry Instructions for
additional details.
2-10
-------
Public Water System
Data Capture Form D
pws a
ACTION COX
•47CMW7E
- 04f _ '
|"pT[ VIOLATION DATA
VDLATGN OOyRLWCEJfRCOiBWI
ICttOl) 101103} (CIMS) 4
fBJB AWAflEMSS 0»TE^
i
-------
DRAFT FINAL
C. Additional Data that must be Reported for MCL Violations
1. Data Elements and Descriptions
The following data must be supplied by the State for
EVERY Federal MCL violation reported to FRDS. This data is
in addition to the data that must be reported for ALL
violations described on page 2-1:
FRDS Data Element
No.
Name
Description
C1115
VIO-AWARE-DATE
The date on which the
State became aware of
the existence of the
MCL violation
C1123
VIO-ANALYSIS-RESULT
For a sincrle sample
MCL violation, the
regular sample result
causing the
violation.
Nitrate and nitrite
For an average MCL
violation, the
average result of the
initial and
confirmation samples
causing the
violation.
Other than nitrate
and nitrite
For an average MCL
violation, the
running annual
causing the
violation, average
See section 2 below on page 2-13 for the data element
values which must be reported and the data element values
which may be reported for a MCL violation. See section 3
below, beginning on page 2-14, for an illustration of a
hypothetical average MCL violation, a completed FRDS-II data
capture form, and an image of the DTF transactions which
correspond to the completed data capture form for the
violation.
2-12
-------
DRAFT FINAL
2. MCL Violation Reporting
The primacy agency must report the following data:
Data Elenent
Content /
cio i res- ID
CLLGI V1O-ID
C110J
CLLfiS
IWS ID XUWlboz
An ID fox th/6 violation
•Hi A oontanlnant ID foz
violation
Hi* violation type
C1107 VIO-OOMP-PERIOD-BBHH-DATE The data tha nonltoxinff
CLL11 VIO-COMP -PERIOD- MOUTHS
C1L1S VI O- AW4EE- DATE
CLL2J VIO-UUZ.TSIS-BBSHLT
CLU3 VIO-SE-ID
Appendix A
MCL
02-JjSMQUM MCL
duzation of
monitozinfl p«ziod
in
statA
Of thA UCL
violation
zaault canal na
violation
ID
•nddyy
03, 12, JC,
7J, ox LOB
mddyy
> 0 If zepoztinfl
by msMBUaa—
• o if
by
The primacy agency may optionally report the following data:
Data Bl*aiAnt
Content /
C1L2S VTO-MCL-VIOLATED ThA MCL «hldl was violated
Instead of reporting Cllll, VIO-COMP-PERIOD-MONTHS, report:
VTO-COMP-PERIOD-EHD-DATE The date the nonitozinfl
pAzlod «nded
2-13
-------
DRAFT FINAL
3. average MCL Violation Reporting Example
Scenario:
PWS is M05467328
• PWS is a CWS serving 2,500 persons
• PWS has two sources of water, both groundwater
• PWS is required to monitor for 2,4,5-TP
(contaminant ID 2110) quarterly during 1994 for
each source
MCL for 2,4,5-TP is 0.05 mg/1
• It is August 8, 1994 and the 3rd quarter results
for this PWS have recently arrived ,.. MCL
compliance determination will be conducted for
this PWS today
• State is reporting violations for this PWS on a
samoling point specific basis
PWS takes 2,4,5-TP samples for source #1
(source/entity ID 001) on 2/20/94 (Qtr 1),
04/12/94 (Qtr 2), and 07/17/94 (Qtr 3). Analytical
results were as follows:
Qtr 1: 0.03 mg/1
Qtr 2: 0.04 rog/1
Qtr 3: 0.20 mg/1
The running annual average is:
(0.03 + 0.04 + 0.20) = 0.27 •'
0.27 -5- 3 = 0.09 which exceeds the MCL ... thus, an
average MCL violation has been: incurred (violation
type 02)
PWS takes 2,4,5-TP samples for source #2
(source/entity ID 002) during each of the 3
quarters of 1994 ... all results are below the MCL
Since the State is reporting violations for this
PWS on a sampling point specific basis, each
violation incurred must be reported to FRDS
Since the current monitoring frequency for 2,4,5-
TP is quarterly, the monitoring period has a
length of 3 months with a begin date of 07/01/94
Figure 6 illustrates a completed FRDS-II data capture
form wherein all required data element values for this
hypothetical 2,4,5-TP average MCL violation have been coded.
Data element values that may be optionally reported are
intentionally omitted from the illustration.
Figure 7 illustrates the FRDS-II DTF transactions which
correspond to the Figure 6 data capture form.
Refer to the FRDS-II Data Entry Instructions for
additional details.
2-14
-------
Public Water System
Data Capture Form D
fWS D
ONuitor
111
J.
PM"| VIOLATION DATA
WOMTONO CONTAWMANT WE ya n»v VR
FV DMMBiR . *°
ft l&l&t ^ 101*^ t^l |2-l ' 1 ' 1 r| |Q 1 2.| ICrl^lvM 1 ' i*l
(C1101) IC110D (C11PS) (C1107)
MO DAY VR
(CltM)
OR
1^31°
4C1111J
HONITORNS AND NEPORTWa VOLATDNS
KD wT^S1^ "zs™*
|^|4?|t | I^I6|^I0HKI Mil
P««) (C"tS) P1'271
NUWSAUPLES
TAKB4
1 1 1 1 OR
(Citasi
• 1 Y.YES
«C1Wt)
OR
MAXMtN CONTAUMAKT LEVEL VOLATKMS
ANALYSIS
UCTHOO ANA1YM RESULT UCLVKXAT8)
1 1 1 1 1 III 141.1*141 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.I 1 1
1 1 I II
(CtlZI) (C1123) (CltZS)
Figure 6: Average MCL Violation - FRDS-II Data Capture Form
. . .05. . .LG . . .15. . .20.
• • * •
ClM054C7Ja 8*546075
D1MOS4 €733 B&S9H 07S
B1H054 «7 J^ 8*5
-------
DRAFT FINAL
D. Additional Data that must be Reported for Treatment
Technique Violations
1. Data Elements and Descriptions
No additional data must be supplied by the State for
EVERY Treatment Technique violation reported to FRDS. The
data that must be reported is that which must be reported
for ALL violations described on page 2-1.
See section 2 below on page 2-17 for the data element
vaiues which must be reported and the data element values
which may be reported for a Treatment Technique violation.
See section 3 below, beginning on page 2-18, for an
illustration of a hypothetical epichlorohydrin Treatment
Technique violation, a completed FRDS-II data capture form,
and an image of the DTF transactions which correspond to the
completed data capture form for the violation.
2-16
-------
DRAFT FINAL
2. Treatment Technique Violation Reporting
The primacy agency must report the following data:
Data Elanan
t
Da
nt /
Clfil PWS-ID
Cltfll
citoj
CLtOS VIO-TZFE
C11Q7
CL1L1
C1L43 V1O-SE-ID
Th« PWS ID miHbax
An IB fox Hi* violation
oo&taninaiit 1C
tn« violation
violation
Tha dab& tha
paziod
duzation of th*
moaitozinir p«ziod
in month. B
ID
fox
Epi
-------
DRAFT FINAL
3. Treatment Technique Violation Reporting Example
Scenario:
PWS is AK9871235
PWS has four sources of water, three groundwater
and one surface water
• Source #4 (Source/Entity ID 004) is the surface
source
• Epichlorohydrin (contaminant ID 2257} is used in
treating source #4. It is not used in treating
sources #1 - #3
• State is reporting violations for this PWS on a
sampling point specific basis
PWS fails to certify that the epichlorohydrin is
being used according to the manufacturer's
directions for 1993 ... thus, a Treatment
Technique violation has been incurred
• Since the State is reporting violations for this
PWS on a sampling point specific basis, each
violation incurred must be reported to FRDS
• Since certification is to be provided annually,
the monitoring period has a length of 12 months
with a begin date of 01/01/93
Figure 8 illustrates a completed FRDS-II data capture
form wherein all required data element values for this
hypothetical epichlorohydrin Treatment Technique violation
have been coded. Data element values that may be optionally
reported are intentionally omitted from the illustration.
Figure 9 illustrates the FRDS-II DTF transactions which
correspond to the Figure 8 data capture form.
Refer to the FRDS-II Data Entry Instructions for
additional details.
2-18
-------
Public Water System
Data Capture Form D
fWS
ACTON COM
fATCHOATI
["pj"| VIOLATION DATA
VDUVTCN OOUP^UMCC ^EMOO BGCMN
tnOLATONO CONTMMUNT TYPE .« o»y «
W O NUMBER "° °*T *"
H |5(^[||J 1 ^ 1* 1 / 1 |2|2.|^|?| !vl?i Ml' 1^1' Hl^l
iciwi) mm) tctwa) i
AWARENESS DATE
HO MY YH
Ml^HI 1 I 1 I 1 I 1
P1W7)
MO DAY YD
i 1 1 1 1 1 1
mm>
OR
oouPUANccremoo
OURATON
UM l?l
(Blllt)
«OMTORMQ AND REPORTMQ VKXATONS
NUUCAWPl£S
INI
pllZT)
| | | | OR LJ ""•"
4S112BJ
tb.i»i|
OR
MAXMUM OOaAMMAMT LEVEL VDUTDNS
ANALYSIS
METMOO ANALYSB RESULT
1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LI 1 1 I
MCX VIOLATED
II II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.I 1 1
1 1 I II
(C1121) (CH23) (C11ZS)
Figure 8: Treatment Technique Violation - FRDS-II Data Capture
Form
..,tS...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...CO...€5. . .70 . ..75...80
»•••••• «•
IC110332S7 BUOS4
IC110507
IC110701fil93
101111013
IC1143004 ciaea4
Figure 9: Treatment Technique Violation - FRDS-II DTF
Transactions
DIUCd i 7 L33 S354 0 0 Q1
2-19
-------
-------
Appendix A: Phase II Contaminants
Contaminant ID Codes by Contaminant Name
-------
-------
, -
*.'»!
w
I
|
fll
3!
a
S
<
K
S
s
i
1
in
3i
\
u
o
M
1
*rf
OJ 5
**•:-. .
1*3
€-'g
V "-
NS
A «"> •».
»>»»»*
?jK*p:SSS:K*
•Untreguta
SrjrarpSsM!
«S_
"* i s
is!
«*e
V
V O
v o
V CO
* far
V §
V *
?' u
5J 2
~
4> U
s §
0 >
S:
|«
'5>Q
ITz
O
A
A
5:
A '
A
IV
A
A
A H
*>
,£„
*J*'
V E
^*
V ^
v <
V 1
32!
V :
I
!
I
f
^
! i
•^
i»
1
4-»
c
1 "
E ~*
'. 0)
* u
\ "*x xxxxxxxac
^
1
x x x x x x x
^%
M
IB
v^
V
^^ *J *^
3! "^ Z
u
in tj tfi
+* Z w
| - | i o 3 2'2r S
VI 40 flJ JS — •
>»omominoco>-in
ssrEWKcjaMaa
oooooooooo
«
*rf
1
§ x x x x x x
_«*
1
^
5
1
1
V
i
(
CD
| 3 . .8
1 ^ -s « 3 E
^ a* >L -H "3 ^
<- CD U £ V> »-
•^ wY -^ O m m
o o o o o o
-------
s
a
,A
A
>
^ 81
-K*S. —j
A *<
>n»,i, !
••Txs
'« '
i
U
I
O
u
i
A
A '
v*'->
i
•b*
i ->
I;
v S
V
M
V 71
1.
o
1
<
in
£
c\T
o
«•*
(V
-------
-J
XXX
XXX
o
xxxxxxxx
a
I
XXX
XXX
A.
A >
A
A v
S,
•**
i
1,
lr
U
V 1
V ™
V
? '
V,3
u
T3
k
O
S
U
eg
u
4^
O
c c
o o
g is
CO O
& *°
CM CM
irobenzene
a
u
O
6
2
CM
robenzene
o
u
o
a
S
r\j
loroethane
.c
(J
o
(M
' —"
§
Ri
toroethytene
.c
o
•^
«-".
fc
R!
g
41
Dichloroethy
CM
•™
w
'u
1
I
£
2-Dichloroetl
«
C
£
R
CM
loropropane
u
0
CM
*•*
i
u
I
JZ
UJ
(M
tv
robenzene
o
jr
8
c
g
a
c?
£
X
U)
§
(M
oroethylene
-C 01
u c
(0 01
£ 3
0) O
H- t-
r- <-
CM CM
ich loroethane
i.
V-
r?
^-"
5
CM
111
U
^
^
01
">.
JC
4rf
01
o
fe
.c
."
)b
eS
a
o
u
_*
£
>
•o
CM
O
""
c
—
X
IA
CM
-------
A ' •
Sa!
x x x x
X X X X X X X
a s
I
£
u
Q
ris
u
w x x
Or
V
v
phth
s !
E O
CO —•
01
c
41
** « — -e JC e —
_-Qtlvhi.
rvj
S £
1
a — —
a o o
S
CO
I
I I S
CM f\t CVI
-------
;i
-Is
in
I
Is
no
S*
A
A.
!'
r
adiene
rvi
s
1
o a
2 £
2 g
,e u
X *
1-85-
o _ — >,
c I ~
Q
„ T
c to
rg 1/1
CM ^r
CJ CM
1
(XJ
-------
-------
\
Appendix B: Group Contaminant code Utilization
-------
-------
H
fe
C
o
•H
4J
(0
N
•H
a»
tj
o
o
C
(0
c
-u
0
g
a
3
O
l-i
O
CQ
X
•H
T3
C
at
H
O
>
u
«H
>
CO
rH
>
CM
C
o
o
o
'c
M
O
O
V
O
4J
ts
>
CO
1
s
*
*
*
CM
n
r-^
CO
CM
00
!— {
CA
CM
-------
-------
3
C
-H
•P
q
o
u
c
o
•H
« -rl
.H
X -H
•H .p
T3 O
0) 0)
a-o
a o
< u
g
(0
4J
C
o
u
a
3
O
^
O
a
'o
'>
a >:
o w
o a
4*» ^
C O
* *.
1> in u
SSg-S S.
jz ••- in
t> "• -J- C T> U o
<0 — O 0) (A 41 O •— *>|
C *•> J* U L. ^ ». C
0) CO — O •
' S*' I".-
~ c I 5
s.
— o > a — *>
« > — a ai
c o f w £ t)
O '^ •— O CO
— ee> <_ a>
1 -iiJSf?
Q .„ 0) • —
Of i.Of>«IOI
u. o M •- • c
W X ox— O
o •*- xx .«»
en—,
.2 «.
8.
U
I*
?
.„ • — —
i.Of>«IOIE« DO
o M •- • c to L. i_ a.
W X ox— O IB HI
01
e
IB
^
O
' — O L. O C .
: t> v- o >•- o
x: — * x: c
*a >Q.
IB
xc
U t-UUUUU
£OUUUUU
5-<- IO
O O O
aminant G
Arsenic
Fluoride
Selenium
[I S
" o
KJS
o e
S
Contami
6
41
•••
w
19
I
t
!
o
o 5 "5
* • 5 ?
r s ~
T -2g Tg
f- a v MOI _. .. _
» >N C3 — « u X
•» CMC ra — OT-^f
> .01 i- o T.O)*;
: o M
i— •>
!-g£.
o'Zf «
ferfg o-|£
s-r-ii s-l^
v* ca ** *•»
!8: &8:
I CM CMCM
»» N. ftl
GO CO
f C JC i ..- JS
00 o •- r- o —
••- Jj «*• % i i X
Ok o.-
a.3 o.<-* 'u
cis
1,2
Ethy
cis-1,2
1,1-Dic
Carbon
Honochl
Styrene
"»r «. o
I t*l*
:^s;
• o> o> i
I CM CM I
S2
l°l
•^ ** £ N
— «l U C
IB O (B 0?
*- I. (. ^
o o v o
u —i ftl t.
v f *> o
69
X «- «J
* I t
m f» CM o> •
SN. co oo i
o c* c>> i
CM CM CM CM I
|
J: IB 4>
« JT C
tl V 41
: x
i *>
: «
oe
roe
hy I
eis-1,2-Dichlo
Vinyl chloride
1,1. 1 -Trichlo
let rach I oroet
Ethylbenzene
O CM O* i—
§§ §§
§
CM
CM CM CM
*o •— K. iv
is. a co o>
I o BC <* 6>
o
R
CM CM <
CO
-------
•o
d)
3
C
•H
4->
C
o
u
c
o
-H
4J
(0
N
CQ-H
rH
X-H
•H +J
*D
0) 0)
a-o
a o
< u
•P
c
m
c
•H
g
(0
4->
C
o
u
a
3
O
o
u
o ^>
CM CM
in in
CM CM
- »-.
CM CM N
arbofuran
eptachlor
CM CM v
*
x c, »
$ s -s
—* >•> «J
••• —• o
u» 3 C
_ « .—
c. (U
Q. 43 i. O C
>t> L. O —• 10
. » CO —• 4Z "O
i in u 4= u t.
i > — u x o
: >r_ 2 .2 -5 -*
i CM" < < a. 5
de
Aldicarb
Atrazine
2.4-0
Chlordan
CM ; C
in
t
C
4,^-"
•O oo |S
g^'i
a. .M s_
» S.-2
Toxaph
Aldica
Heptac
Polych
Ethyte
r>» rs. m 1> C u c. O — OOC
~ O E J2 (0 O O — O . 1.41
?._.__ jr — .
P- >— O. 4>U4UQUr^4ZOC
o i i o e •— •- e o • O434>
—• •# a*'4=X
.— . . IA L. « .— t 1. 01 •* >
o«~^*"^ m*—CMOO.«^»-UJO
CMCMCMCMCMC
hane
§~' ^fl7 fOJCJZO^t-4-'
X4ICk 4= M U —• O O 41
CLC4JO 4^0I**4S4^^»—
w O O 43 — 4>Ek,UO4=i
f §.«x€ IIV5 fe.i!~Sg
.§ 85SI c52KlIs?'-.S2i
J— CL.OO O — 43CMO(->«-^— >.
i nit. jc*>* »i-i ««ov
O-z c to oo--cno»-^t-«
Su
in
ic
ha
M
ate)
rbofuran
enzene (
.t£
^jsgJSS
slst»»
g-filSi:
•oS5^££
CM CM fg CM rg CM
a £
•f I
exy
ethy
ram
,8-T
hlo
c> o» E ""» 043
ITA5M1
—' "^ O •*> O O
"•
Da
Di
Pic
2,3
r
fO f^
O O
*M (M
s
+*
CO
i
*M
4
^H
.h
s viflj.
i o o C
4= « 5r « s 2
>- x (9 a £ BB <
JJJ
CM
«- •- CM I
>m >p »•«__
4! CM CM.CM CM CM CM - — • — • ui O C> (
CV CM CM CM CM CM CM I
•o
I 1
s - 2 I
«l HIIIS
ex JSSSSg
x S « ^ I 8 .£ g
U CO UIUMXOCB
o o o i
•— T- CM 4
I
CM
L
-------
Appendix C: Phase II Compliance Determination Flowcharts
-------
-------
Appendix C
Phase II Compliance Determination Flowcharts
Table of Contents
Introduction C- 1
MCL Compliance Determination
Nitrate & Nitrite C- 2
IOC (other than Nitrate & Nitrite), SOC, and VOC . . C - 3
M&R Compliance Determination
lOCs
Asbestos - Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 4
Fluoride - Groundwater systems ...C- 5
Fluoride - Surface Water systems c - 6
Nitrate - Groundwater systems C- 7
Nitrate - Surface Water systems ... c - 8
Nitrite - Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 9
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite)
- Groundwater systems C - 10
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite)
- Surface Water systems C - 11
SOCs
Serving > 3,300 Persons
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 12
Serving < 3,300 Persons
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 13
VOCs
Groundwater systems C - 14
Surface Water systems C - 15
Unregulated Contaminants
Inorganic Contaminants
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . C - 16
Organic Contaminants
- Groundwater & Surface Water systems . c - 17
Treatment Technique Compliance Determination . . c - 18
-------
-------
Appendix C
Phase II Compliance Determination Flowcharts
Introduction
The flowcharts in this Appendix were developed to provide an
overview of the compliance determination process and to show the
points at which violations, reportable to FRDS, are incurred.
Several notes are in order with respect to these flowcharts.
They are:
Only the major procedural steps in MCL, M&R, and
Treatment Technique violation determination are shown
• - The flowcharts depict reporting to FRDS by sampling
point. This was not meant to imply that reporting to
FRDS by sampling point is the only acceptable method.
Although reporting to FRDS by sampling point is the
method preferred by EPA, reporting to FRDS by system is
acceptable.
Sample compositing procedures were intentionally
omitted
Public notification procedures were intentionally
omitted
C - 1
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Nitrate and Nitrite MCL Compliance Determination
Report MAR
violation to
FRDS
4-No
Take confirmation
sample within 24
hoots
Compute average of
initial and
confirmation samples
No
Report MCL violation to
FRDS
Yes-
Yes
Processing
complete for
source
Yes-
Processing complete
for system
C-2
-------
DRAFT FINAL
IOC (other than Nitrate and Nitrite), SOC, and VOC MCL Compliance Determination
This process must be repeated for
each IOC, SOC, and VOC contaminant
I Start J-
Yes-
Take
as soon as possible (within
2 weeks)
Violation of State
rule has occurred,
do NOT report to
FRDS
-No
Compute average of initial
and confirmation samples
¥••
I Processing complete |
__! for system I
Compute annual
running average
result for source
monitored annually
Processing
complete for source
average > MCL
Annual running
avenge > MCL
Report MCL
violation to FRDS
C-3
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Asbestos M & R Compliance Determination (Groundwater and Surface Water Systems)
of each compliance
cycle at the entry point
representative of the
source after treatment
Take 1 sample each
quarter at cite
incurring MCL
violation
Report M&R
violation to
FRDS
Take 1 sample during 1st
compliant*, period of each
compliance cycle at tap
served by A-C pipe and
^lyy^gr conditions where
contamination is most
likely to occur
No
•ForGioundwater
systems, a
2 quarterly
samples must
betaken
For Surface Water
systems, a
4 quarterly
samples must
be taken
Sampling
perfonned as
Report MAR
violation to FRDS
Continue to
monitor quarterly at
site
ts reliably
and consistently
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Fluoride M & R Compliance Determination (Groundwater Systems)
Take at least 1
tatnplff while
waiver is effective
Yes
Yes
Take 1 samp
quarter at site
incurring MCL
violation
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Report M&R
violation lo FRDS
Yes
•Minimum of
2 quarterly
samples must
betaken
,/Resultt rettablyS.
Continue to
No ^ monitor quarterly at
site
Stale may decrease
monitoring to 1
sample during each
compliance period
(PWS applied"
for waiver for
^^ aource? ^r
Yes
Take 1 sample during
each compliance period
at the entry point
representative of the
source after treatment
Processing complete
for system
Yes
C-5
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Fluoride M & R Compliance Determination (Surface Water Systems)
Take 1 sample annually
at the entry point
alive of the
Take 1 sample each
quarter at site
incuRing MCL
violation
Report MAR
violation to FRDS
of
4 quarterly
samples must
be taken
Sampling
perforated a*
Yes
Yes
State may ^cffriifff*
monitoring to 1
sample annually
No-
reliably
and consistently
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Nitrate M&R Compliance Determination (Groundwater Systems)
.
" "\
,
r
Take 1 sample annually
at the entry point
Roreseotative of the
source after treatment
>50%
MCL?(5.3mg/l
and above)
*Minimumof
4 quarterly
camples must
betaken
Yes
k ^V required? ^S
Take 1 sample each
quarter at site
inclining mult >
SOfcofMOL
No
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Continue to
Mo •"••' ^ monitor quarterly at
site
Yes
State may decrease
monitoring to 1 sample
annually, must sample in
die quarter previously
yielding highest result
r ^*±
Processing complete 1
for system I
Yes
G-7
-------
DRAFT FINAL
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite) M & R Compliance Determination
x-^ (Groundwater Systems)^
(A)
This process must be
repeated for Banum,
Chromium, Mercury, and Selenium
+
No monitoring
repjumu
waiver IB effective
t ake 1 sample
at toe entry point
representative of the
source after treatment
Take 1 sample each
quarter at site
incurring MCL
violation
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
*Mmimumof
2 quarterly
samples must
betaken
Yes
Ftocessing complete
for system
Stale may decrease
monitoring to 1
sample dining each
compliance period
Yes
C-10
-------
DRAFT FINAL
IOC (other than Asbestos, Fluoride, Nitrate, Nitrite) M & R Compliance Determination
(Surface Water Systems)
( A )
This process must be
repealed for Barium, Cadmium,
Chromium, Mercury, and Selenium
No
iPWS applied
for waiver Cor
^V source? ^r
Yes
Yet
Take at least 1
sample while
waiver is effective
-Yes
Yes
Take 1 sample each
quarter at site
incurring MCL
violation
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Sampling
performed as
required?
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Yes
•Minimum of
4 quarterly
samples must
betaken
y\
./Results reliably x
i reliably"
and consistently
-------
DRAFT FINAL
SOC M&R Compliance Determination (Groundwater and Surface Water Systems
Serving > 3,300 Persons)
This process must be
repeated for each SOC contaminant
Mofuloniig of
source not nsontma
No
No
1
Yes
T
Take 1 namnlft *nrh
quarter at site where
detectable
contamination
found
Yes
T
Tflk* 1 1 iifnpl* tMwh
quarter at site
incuningMCL
violation
•k.1
X
Take 4 consecutive
quarterly camples daring
each compliance period at
die cutty point
representative of the source
after treatment
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Slate may reduce
sampling to 2 quarterly
samples in 1 year
during each repeat
compliance period
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Yes
*For Groundwater systems.
ft Qunimuni of 2
quarterly samples
must be taken
For Surface Water systems,
& minimum of 4
quarterly samples
must be taken
N.
-------
DRAFT FINAL
SOC M&R Compliance Determination (Groundwater and Surface Water Systems
Serving < 3,300 Persons)
This process must be
repealed for each SOC contaminant
i PWS applied"
for waiver for
No monitorim
required
^
i «•
1
>w source? ^
Yei
Yes
Yea
*•
Take 1 sample each
quarter at site where
detectable
contamination
found
Take 1 sample each
quarter at tile
mcnaimg MClj
violation
^l
X
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Take 4 consecutive
quarterly • samples during
each compliance period at
the entry point
representative of the source
after treatment
State may reduce
monitoring to 1 sample
during each repeat
compliance period
•For Groundwater systems,
a minimum of 2
quarterly samples
must be taken
For Surface Water systems,
a minimum of 4
quarterly samples
must be taken
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
monitor quarterly at
Processing complete
for system _ '
Stale may decrease monitoring
to 1 sample annually; must be
performed in quarter previously
yielding highest result
Yes
C-13
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Unregulated Inorganic Contaminants M & R Compliance Determination (Groundwater and
Surface Water Systems)
This process most be repealed
for each unregulated
Inorganic* contaminant
0
Monitoring at
State discretion
-No
OK
source notrajttifed
Take 1 sample at the
entry point
representative of (he
8OUTCQ 9fUS-t (XCfiitDieQt
Report MAR
violation to FRDS
Eolation of State
rule has oocumdt
do NOT report to
FRDS
Yes
Processing complete
for system
•See section 141.40 (n)(12)
for a list of all unrcigulated
Inorganic Contaminants
C- 16
-------
DRAFT FINAL
Unregulated Organic Contaminants M & R Compliance Determination (Groundwater and
Surface Water Systems)
This process must be repealed
for each unregulated
organic* contaminant
>WS have < 150V
•>< **vice )
Take 4 coniecutive
<|uailcrly samples at die
entry point
representative of the
source after treatment
Report M&R
violation to FRDS
Processing complete
for system
•See section 14140
for a list of all unregulated
Organic Contaminants
C- 17
-------
-------
MONITORING^ '" ; ^:!;••:.- J&&?.: J:-;
ILLUSTRATED BY LITTLE TINY SQUARES
-------
-------
ASBESTOS
( CWSS & NTNCWSS )
3661
Initial Sampling; All CUSs and NTNCUSs must take one sample during the initial compliance period of the
first compliance cycle C!U1.23(b)(1>].
Grandfathered Data; Sampling results must be from between 1/1/90 and 12/31/92 (inclusive) [§K1.Z3(b>(10>].
Repeat Sampling M/O a Waiver; If the result of the initial sample is below the MCI, the system must take
one sample every nine years during the first compliance period of each compliance cycle [§141.23(b)(1)J.
Exceeding the Trigger Level; Any CWS or NTNCUS exceeding the MCI oust take one sample every calendar
quarter [§H1.23(b)(8>]. if the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the MCL, the State
may reduce the system's sampling frequency for that sampling point to one sample every nine years; taken
during the first compliance period of each compliance cycle C|141.23(b)(9>].
Monitoring waivers; Systems granted a monitoring waiver are not required to monitor [§141.23(b)(D].
waiver is effective for one three-year compliance period. The waiver must be renewed in the first
compliance period of each compliance cycle [§141.23(b)<4)].
Th«
-------
JDXDBjxt llQII3RQK9M;f VMVimXK
NITRATE
( CWSS, NTNCWSs, & TNCWSs )
> % MSI
199S
±994
199S
1994
199ft
1999
2666
a ooa.
• • • •
• • • •
Initial Sampling; All Surface water systems (CUSs & NTHCWSs) must take one sample every calendar quarter,
beginning in 1993. AU Groundmter systems (CUSs * NTNCWSs) and all THCUSs must take one sample every
calendar year, beginning in 1993 tS5H1.23(d>(1> & U1.23(d>(4>].
Grandfathered Data: There are no provisions for grandfathered data.
Repeat Sampling; Surface water systens (CUSs t MTNCUSs) may reduce their sampling frequency to one sample
every calendar year, if the results of the initial four quarterly samples are all below ft the HCL
[§U1.23(d)<3)]. Groundwater systems (CUSs I MTNCUSs) and TNCWSs may continue to sample once every calendar
year, if the result of the initial sample is below ft the HCL [i§K1.23(d)O>, 141.23].
Exceeding the Trigger Level; Any CVS or NTHCUS having a sample result exceeding ft the HCL must take one
sample every calendar quarter. If the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the HCL, the
State may reduce a system's sampling frequency for that sanplirvg point to one sample every calendar year
CSSU1.23(d)(2) & 141.23(4X3)].
Monitoring Waivers; Waivers are not authorized for Nitrate.
-------
NITRITE
( CWSs, NTNCWSs, & TNCWSs )
199»
1994
199*
±99*
1997
199*
1999
36O1
Initial Sanding; All system must Cake one sample during the initial compliance period [§141.23(e){1>].
Grandfathered Date; There are no provisions for grandfatherecf data.
RepeatSanoling; if the result of the initial sample is below ft the MCL, the system shall sample at a
frequency specified by the State KK1.23{eK2)J.
ExceedingtheTrigger Level; Any system having a sample result exceeding 16 the MCL must take one sample
every calendar quarter. If the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the MCL, the State may
reduce the system's sampling frequency for that sampling point to one sample every calendar year
[|U1.H33.
Monitoring Waivers; Waivers are not authorised for Nitrite.
-------
INORGANIC CHEMICALS
( CWSs & NTNCWSs )
< KCL
> MSI
!»*»
aooa
ao&t
mm mm
• • • •
Initial Sampling; All Surface water syste
beginning in 1993. All Groundwater systen
period beginning in 1993 [$U1.23(c)(1)J.
required to be taken by MTHCWSs.
ns (CVSs i HTHCUSs) muse take one sample every calendar year
i (CUSs t NTNCUSs) must take one sample during each compliance
Note: Fluoride samples must be taken by CUSs only; they are not
Grandfathered Data: At least one of three samples must have been taken between 1/1/90 and 12/31/92
(inclusive). The other samples may have been taken before 1990 [|U1.23(c)(4)J.
Repeat Sampling H/O a Waiver: If the result of the initial sample is below the HCL, Surface water system
may continue to sample annually, and Grounduater system may continue to sample triennially t§141.23(c}(1>].
Exceeding the Trigger Level; Any system exceeding the HCL must take one sample every calendar quarter. If
the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the HCL, the State may reduce the system's
sanpling frequency for that sampling point to annual (Surface water systems) or triennial <7> & H1.23(c)(8>].
Monitoring Waivers:
(§U1.Z3(c)(3)].
Contaminants;
» Barium
» Cadmium
» Chromium
Systems granted a monitoring waiver must monitor once every nine calendar years
» Fluoride
» Mercury
» Selenium
-------
SYNTHETIC ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
( CWSs & NTNCWSs )
ui,
19*1
1994
199S
••••
1999
26O6
Initial Sampling; Alt CWSs and MTMCUSs must take four consecutive quarterly samples each compliance period,
beginning in 1993 t§141.24chX4)].
Grandfathered Data; Sampling conducted between 1/1/90 and 12/31/92 (inclusive) may be substituted
(grandfathered) for the initial four quarterly samples. This means that one sample collected during that
time period may be substituted for the four samples required between 1/1/93 and 12/31/95 (inclusive)
[§141.24(h)] must take
one sample every calendar quarter. If the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the MCL,
the State may reduce the system's sampling frequency for that sampling point to one sample every calendar
year C$141.24(h)(7)].
Monitoring Waivers; Systems granted a monitoring waiver are not required to monitor.
assessment must be updated every three years C5141.24(h)(5)].
The vulnerability
Contaminants;
» Alachlor
» Aldicarb
» Aldicarb sulfone
» Aldicarb sulfoxide
» Atrazine
» Carbofuran
» Chlordane
» Dibromochloropropane (DBCP)
» 2,4-0
Ethylene dibromide (EDS)
Keptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Lindane
Hethoxychlor
Pentachlorophenol
Pol/chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Toxaphene • •
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)
-------
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
( CWSS & NTNCWSs }
nur-
±*M
±99*
±99*
±99*
±997
±99*
±999
3666
3661
< I0L 0» 6.666A Kfl/X > 6.666A Kfl/1
- ; •»'., - " * " ** j »**-
1 i • • • •
•••• • • H • ••••
i I • • • •
..„ _! .,: ....._......„„„
• i • i • • • •
• i i • • • •
'• ,. t ..™™
• I j •• ••
• • ••• •
• ••••
v — vj
{
i
i
!
!
i
i
Initial Satpt ing: All CUSs and NTMCWSs (Surface Hater £ Grounduater) must take four consecutive quarterly
samples each compliance period, beginning in 1993 [§141.24(f)(4)].
Grandfathered Data: Sampling conducted between 1/1/88 and 12/31/92 (inclusive) may be substituted
(grandfathered) for the initial four quarterly samples, so long as the sampling was conducted in accordance
with §i!41.24(f)(5) and 141.24(f)(18). This means that one sample collected during that time period may be
substituted for the four samples required between 1/1/93 and 12/31/95 (inclusive) I§141.24(f)(5)l .
Repeat SaaoHng u/o a Waiver; Any CVS or HTHCUS which has no detects in its initial round of sampling may
reduce its sampling frequency to one sample every calendar year [§141.24(f)(5>] . Grounduater systems, which
have performed three years of sampling with no detects, may be allowed to reduce their sampling frequency to
one sample each compliance period (i141.24(f)(6)}.
Exceeding the Trigger Level ; Any COS or NTNCUS exceeding the detection limit of 0.0005 mg/l must take one
sample every calendar quarter. If the sampling results fall reliably and consistently below the HCL, the
State may reduce the system's sampling frequency for that sampling point to one sample every calendar year
Monitoring Uaivers; Grounduater systems granted a monitoring waiver oust monitor once every six calendar
years. The vulnerability assessment must be updated every six years. During the first waiver period, the
vulnerability assessment must be updated within the first three years of that six year period
C$141. 24(f ){?}]. Surface water system granted a monitoring waiver must sample at a frequency specified by
the State. The vulnerability assessment must be updated every three years [{141. 24(f)(10)J.
Contaminants;
» Benzene
» Carbon tetrachloride
» o-Dichlorobenzene
» p-0 i chIorobenzene
» 1,2-Dichloroethane
» 1,1-Oichloroethylene
cis-1,2-0ichloroethylene
trans-1,2-0 ichloroethylene
1,2-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
HonochIorobenzene
Styrene
Tetrachloroethylene •
Toluene
1,1,1 -TricMoroethane
Trichloroethylene (TCE)
Vinyl, chloride
Xylene (total)
-------
UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS
( CWSs & NTNCWSs )
±99*
199*
3666
Initial Sampling; AIL CWSs and NTWCUSs must take one sample for each of the unregulated Inorganic
contaminants and four consecutive quarterly samples for each of the unregulated Organic contaminants during
the initial compliance period C§§141.40(n>{1) & 141.40(n)<2)]. However, if a system is serving fewer than
150 service connections, it may send a letter to the State (by no later than 1/1/94) indicating that it is
available for sampling instead of performing the monitoring indicated above. Such systems monitor at the
discretion of the State.
Repeat Sampling u/o 8 waiver: None
Monitoring Waivers; Systems granted a monitoring waiver are not required to monitor [§141.40(12) for a list of the unregulated Inorganic contaminants and §141.40
-------
-------
Appendix E: summary of Phase II Regulations
-------
-------
Summary of Phase II
Regulations
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations for 38 Inorganic and
Synthetic Organic Chemicals
July 1991
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC
-------
-------
Preface
Hie U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for 38 inorganic and
synthetic organic chemicals on January 30,1991 and July 1,1991.
Collectively, these two rulemakings are referred to as the Phase n Rule.
The following packet of materials summarizes this rule and is intended
for use by EPA regional officials, state and water system personnel The
first section of the package consists of a regulatory overview, while the
second section consists of a series of 14 fact sheets which describe specific
aspects of the rule (Le., monitoring and analytical requirements, state
primacy conditions, public notification, best available technology, vari-
ances and exemptions, etc.). The various components of the package have
been designed to be used individually or as part of the larger package.
-------
Table of Contents
Phase II Summary
Summary
Key Implementation Dates
Regulatory Impact
Phase n National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Tables)
Compliance Monitoring Requirements (Table)
Regulatory Development Information
Phase II Fact Sheet Series
1. Standardized Monitoring Framework
2. Asbestos
3. Nitrate
4. Nitrite
5. Inorganics
6. Volatile Organic Chemicals
7. Pesticides
8. Unregulated Contaminants
9. Analytical Requirements
10. State Primacy Requirements
11. Public Notification
12. Best Available Technology (BAT) and Variances and Exemptions
13. Cost and Regulatory Impact
14. Secondary Standards
-------
Phase II Summary
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for
38 Inorganic and Synthetic Organic Chemicals
July 1991
Summary
Hie January and July 1991 rulemakings:
• The January rulemaking promulgates Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
(MCLGs) and Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) or treatment techniqu
requirements for 33 contaminants;
• The July rulemaldng promulgates MCLGs and MCLs for aldicarb, aldicarb
sulfoxide, aldicarb sulfone, pentachlorophenol, and barium; and
• The January rulemaking becomes effective in July 1992, and the July
rulemaking becomes effective in January 1993.
When both rulemakingB became effective:
• The addition of the 38 contaminants regulated under Phase Ilwill raise the
number of regulated contaminants to 64. Of the 38 Phase D contaminants,
27 are newly regulated. The remaining 11 contaminants were previously
regulated and were revised.
• Phase H:
• establishes 17 new pesticide MCLs (12 new and five revised MCLs);
• establishes eight inorganic MCLs (two new and six revised MCLs);
• establishes 10 new volatile organic MCLs;
• establishes a new MCL for PCBs;
• establishes treatment technique requirements for two contaminants;
• deletes the MCL for silver.
These rules also include additional provisions for:
• Analytical methods and laboratory performance requirements;
• Best Available Technologies (BATs) for compliance with the MCLs and for
the purpose of issuing variances;
• Secondary standards for silver (0. 1 mg/L) and aluminum (0.05 to 0.2 mefL) t<
address aesthetic considerations;
• Mandatory health effects language to be used by systems when notifying the
public of violations; and
State reporting, recordkeeping and primacy requirements.
Phase II Summary—.
-------
Key Implementation Dates
1991 StflT^oflrtHs tor 33 conirffi.inn iif^ftn^y
Standards for 5 contaminanta reproposed
July 1991
Standards for 5 contaminants promulgated
July 1992
Standards for 33 contaminants effective
January 1993 Standards for 5 contaminants effective
Monitoring fat 38 contaminants begins
Regulatory Impact
These regulations will reduce the exposure of three million consumers to the
regulated contaminants and result in an estimated reduction of 75 cancer cases
per year.
Pesticides are expected to result in the most violations and the greatest costs ant
benefits.
Total costs to all public water systems will be approximately $88 million per yea:
($64 million to treat and $24 million to monitor).
Total state implementation costs will be $21 million initially and $17 million in
future years.
Additional monitoring will be required for 200,000 systems.
• 80,000 community and nontransient, noncommunity systems must
monitor for all contaminants.
• 120,000 transient, noncommunity systems must monitor for nitrate and
nitrite.
• Monitoring requirements will be standardized to 3/6/9 year cycles.
• Monitoring will generally cost less than $10 per household per year.
Approximately 3300 or three percent of all public water systems will be required
to provide treatment or find an alternate source of water.
• Exemptions will be allowed for small systems based on costs.
• Treatment will cost $10 to $800 per household depending upon system
size, degree of contamination, and other factors.
Phase II Summary—;
-------
£?. «S 3 iu
u.
-------
II
Phase U Summary—4
-------
OQ
o
Z s:
nut
J £
OX
I
n
S
Q.
a
-
o o
8
.
S*~ n o
in in
O
O
n
in
O
> m
8
n
28
is
§
S
CO
i
8
§
•S3
Is
S = * S*
s
s
=
8g
§2
2-s
•«i
§S
O M
5 §
& f*
e j.«
w O i •= C
I II 11
il
~ CO
8 a
Wjs.
§§
S _c
II
2 flJ
s i
in
u>
M
I
2
|
I
€
2
€
5
s
p
o
§
o
o o o
8 §
o o
o
c§
^J <**^l
10 T- "* «•
in in in in
li 15 2 a.
a^
«,
.575
o o
p o
o o
8
s
a
S
f
X
o
i
N
5
li
=?
Q.=
il
-------
Phase H Summary—6
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Requirements
Contaminant
Asbestos
. i. ' . '~ •
Nitrate
Nitrite
, _,
5 Inorganics
ISVOCs
• 17 Pesticides
andPCBs
Unregulated
. -eiocs
- 24SOCs
Base Requirement
Ground water Surface water
1 Sample every 9 years
- Annual . T Quarterly
After 1 year < 50% of MCL, SWS
may reduce to an annual sample-, .
1 Sample: If < 5096 of MCL, M
state discretion
1 Sample every Annual sample
3 years
4 Quarterly samples every 3 years
Annual after 1 year of no detects
T
4 Quarterly samples every 3 years
After 1 round of no detects: systems
>3300 reduce to 2 samples per year,
every 3 years; systems £ 3300
reduce to 1 sample every 3 years
1 Sample
4 Consecutive quarterly samples
• i
Trigger that
. Increases
Sampling
>MCL
'•
">50%MCL
\
* 50% MCL
> MCL
> 0.0005 mg/L
Method
•Detection
. Limit
(MDL)
1
N.A.
t
Waivers
for Base
Requirements
YES
Based on VA1
NO
NO
YES
Based on analytical
results of 3 rounds
YES
Based on VA1
YES
Based on VA1
YES
Based on VA1
VA = Vulnerability Assessment
Phase II Summary—7
-------
-------
Standardized Monitoring
Framework
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (1 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Stan-
dardized Monitoring Framework as promulgated under the Agency's Phase II Rule.
Monitoring in accordance with the framework begins in January 1993.
Standardized
Monitoring
Framework
Compliance Cycle 1
• Period 1
(1993.1994, 1995)
• Period 2
(1996,1997, 1998)
• Period 3
(1999, 2000, 2001)
Compliance Cycle 2
• Period 1
(2002, 2003, 2004)
4 to 2010
Purpose
The primary objective of the Standardized Monitoring Framework is to reduce
the variability and complexity of drinking water monitoring requirements. Th<
objective is achieved through the standardization of monitoring requirements
and the synchronization of monitoring schedules across "rules" and
nant groups.
Applicability
The Standardized Monitoring Framework currently applies to the 38 contami-
nants contained in EPA's Phase n Rule. However, the framework was de-
signed to eventually apply to most source-related contaminants including
volatile organic fh*nnir'a]a_ pesticides, inorganic t*Vipmip^1a_ and radionuclides.
Subsequent regulations issued by EPA for such contaminants will, in general,
contain monitoring requirements that "fit" or fall within the Standardized
Monitoring Framework. In general, the Standardized Monitoring Framework
applies to all community water systems and all nontransient, noncommunity
water systems. For some contaminants (Le., nitrate and nitrite), the Standard-
ized Monitoring Framework also applies to transient, noncommunity water
systems.
The Framework
To standardize monitoring requirements across rules and contaminant groups,
EPA has established a nine-year (based on a calendar year) compliance
"cycle," with the first cycle beginning on January 1,1993. The nine year
compliance cycle «*mtainp three threeyear compliance "periods." The first
three-year compliance period extends from 1993 to 1995, the second period
from 1996 to 1998, and the third from 1999 to 2001. The second nine-year
compliance cycle begins in 2002 and extends through 2010.
The Standardized Monitoring Framework encompasses both sampling and
vulnerability assessment activities. The framework provides states the flexibil-
ity to determine at which point in a compliance period systems must conduct
sampling activities. EPA is requiring states to schedule one-third of their
systems for sampling in 1993, anntn»r one-third in 1994, and the final one-
third in 1995. States may wish to prioritize sampling based on system size,
'vulnerability, lab Capacity, and rnmTniinity/^<>nTpmiiniiy criteria. Once a
Standardized Monitoring Framework—1
-------
system is scheduled to sample within & particular three-year compliance
period (e.g,, the second year in the compliance period), the system must then
sample in the same year in subsequent compliance periods (e.g., the second
year).
Tpfffnl sampling for contaminants iwHg1' EPA's Phase n Rule begins in the
three-year compliance period starting January 1,1993. Repeat sampling for
applicable systems is to take place during the compliance periods 1996 to 199<
and 1999 to 2001. In subsequent EPA regulations, th«t inifia) sampling period
for contaminants will be during the first full three-year compliance period
following the effective date of the ruling (Le., 18 months after the date of
promulgation). For example, if Phase V (covering additional inorganic and
synthetic organic chemicals) is promulgated in March 1992, the effective date
of the ruling would be September 1993 (the middle of a compliance period).
The initial round of sampling for Phase V contaminants would thgn t^lm place
during the 1996 to 1998 compliance period.
Specific Standardized Monitoring Requirements
(To learn how these requirements an applied to the 38 contaminants cov-
ered under the Phase U Rule, consult Fact Sheets 2 through 8 of EPA's
Phase II Fact Sheet Series.)
• All systems must sample at a base (or minimum) sampling frequency
which is specified by EPA for each contaminant or group of contaminants
unless a waiver has been granted by the state (see waiver section below).
• Initial base sampling requirements are the same for all systems regardles.
of system size or water source, except for the Phase n inorganic contami-
nants.
* Repeat base sampling requirements are generally the same for all systems
regardless of system size and water source, with the exception of pesti-
cides. Generally, repeat base sampling requirements can be reduced if
initial sampling results in no detects of a contaminant.
• AU systems which "detect" a contaminant must conduct quarterly sam-
pling until the state determines that the analytical results tire "reliably
and consistently" below the mn^iimim contaminant level (MCL). Detection
is defined separately for each contaminant or group of contaminants at
either the MCL, 50 percent of the MCL, or at the analytical method detec-
tion limit (MDL). After detection, groundwater systems must take a mini-
mum of two quarterly samples and surface water systems must take a
minimum of four quarterly samples before the state can determine that
the analytical results are "reliably and consistently" below the MCL
• "Reliably and consistently" below the MCL means that though a system
detects contaminants in its water supply, it has sufficient knowledge of the
source or extent of the contamination to predict that the MCL would not be
exceeded in the future. Wide variations in the analytical results or an
analytical result which is close to the MCL are examples of situations
where systems would not meet the "reliably and consistently" test
Grandfathering of Data '
• Sampling data collected three years prior to the beginning of an initial
three-year compliance period may be used to satisfy a system's initial
Standardized Monitoring Framework—2
-------
sampling requirements. Such "grandfathering of data* would enable a:
eligible system to sample at repeat frequencies which are generally
lower than initial frequencies.
Vulnerability assessments may not be grandfathered.
Waivers
Waivers of sampling requirements are available to all systems and are
based upon a vulnerability assessment and/or the analytical results of
previous sampling.
Waiver determinations are to be made by the state on a contaminant-
specific basis.
Vulnerability assessments may be conducted by the state, a system, or
a third-party organization. States are to approve all assessments.
Systems which do not receive waivers must sample at required base
frequencies.
There are two basic types of waivers:
1) Waiver by Rule: Systems meet EPA-specified criteria (i.e., three
analytical results less than the MCL).
2) Waiver by Vulnerability Assessment (two-step process):
Step 1—Use Waiver: A determination is made whether a given
contaminant was used, manufactured, and/or stored in a system
area. If the answer to the inquiry is yes or unknown, the system is
"susceptible" to contamination and a "use waiver* cannot be
granted.
Step 2—Susceptibility Waiver: If a "use waiver* cannot be
granted, a system may conduct a thorough vulnerability assessmen-
of the water source to determine the system's "susceptibility" to
contamination. Susceptibility is to be based on: a) prior analytical
and/or vulnerability assessment results, b) environmental persis-
tence and transport of the contaminant, c) how well the source is
protected, d) wellhead protection program reports, and e) elevated
nitrate levels.
Systems with no known "susceptibility" to contamination (based
upon an assessment of the above factors), may be granted a "suscep-
tibility waiver." If "susceptibility" cannot be determined, a system is
not eligible for a waiver and must sample at the regulatory mini-
mum or base sampling frequency.
Standardised Monitoring Framework—3
-------
-------
Asbestos
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (2 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements far asbestos as promul-
gated under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase II Rule.
Monitoring for asbestos begins in January 2993.
Regulated
Contaminant
Contaminant
Asbestos
MCL
7 Million Fibers/Liter
(MFL>—(longer than
lO micrometers)
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity watei
systems (NTWS) must comply with the monitoring requirements for asbestos
Sampling Points
1) If asbestos occurs in the source water, sampling must be conducted at each
entry point to the distribution system which is representative of the well or
source water after treatment.
2) Systems that are vulnerable to asbestos contamination, either due to
asbestos-cement pipe and/or the corrosivity of the water and source water
conditions, shall take one sample at a tap served by asbestos-cement pipe am
undgr conditions where gsbepfag contamination is most likely to occur.
Initial Base Sampling
Between 1993 and 1995, all systems must take one sample at each sampling
point unless a waiver has been granted by the state (see below for summary o
waiver requirements). The state will designate the year in which each system
samples within this compliance period.
Grandfathering
States may allow previous sampling data to satisfy the initial base sampling
requirements, provided the sampling data was collected after January 1,
1990.
Repeat Base Sampling
If results of the initial sample do not exceed the nm*mmTn contaminant level
(MCL) for asbestos, then the system would not be required to take repeat
samples until the start of the next nine-year compliance cycle (2002 to 2005),
Trigger for Increased/Decreased Sampling
The MCL for asbestos is the trigger for increased/decreased sampling (see
sidebar for the MCL).
Aibcttot—1
-------
Increased Sampling (if MCL Is exceeded)
1) Any system exceeding the MCL for asbestos must take quarterly samples (i
the quarter immediately following the violation). A system must continue
quarterly sampling until a baselfr"* is established (minimum of two quarter
for groundtoater system* and four quarters for surface water systems).
2) If the state deter"1"1*** that foft baseline is "reliably and consistently" below
the MCL, the sampling frequency may be reduced to the base requirements.
Confirmation Samples
States may require a confirmation sample for any sample that exceeds the
MCL. These confirmation samples must be fa*k»Ti within two weeks from the
same sampling point and as soon as possible after the initial .sample. If a
confirmation sample is used, compliance is based on the average of the resul
of both the confirmation and initial samples.
Compliance Determination
1 ) If a system samples more frequently than
wl (Le. , quarterly), the systec
would be in violation if the running annual average at any SE unpling point
exceeds the MCL.
2) If a system samples on an annual or less frequent basis (ie., every three
years), the system would be in violation if one sample (or the average of the
and confirmation samples) at any point exceeds the MCL.
Public Notice
A system in violation of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (it
MCL, monitoring and reporting requirements, etc.) for asbestos must give
public notice. For a MCL violation, systems must issue a public notice that
includes the specific mandatory health effects language contained in the Ph&
n Rule. Systems must publish the notice in the newspaper within 14 days an
deliver the notice to consumers within 45 days. For monitoring violations,
systems must notify consumers through major newspapers within three
months.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than (>) 3300 persons, compositing is only allowe
at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (£) 3300 persons, compositing among different
systems is permitted.
Waivers
States may grant a waiver if, on the basis of a vulnerability assessment, the
system determines it is not. vulnerable to asbestos contamination. The state
may grant a waiver based on consideration of the following factors:
A»be»tot—2
-------
1) potential Pg^v>gt/)fl
of the WfltCT SOUTC8 find
2) the use of asbestos-cement pipe for fifti-chad water distribution and the
corrosive nature of the water.
If the state grants a waiver, base sampling requirements are eliminated.
Waivers are effective for one three-year compliance period. A new waiver is
required in the first compliance period of each nine-year compliance cycle. If
waivers are not renewed, systems must sample according to base require-
ments (i.e., one sample at each sampling point every nine years).
Aabestot—3
-------
Standardized Monitoring Framework:
Asbestos (CWS and NTWS)
CALENDAR
YEAR
WAIVERS
(Ail SYSTEMS)
BASE REQUIREMENTS
Yes: Walveis Based on
Vulnerability
Assessment
(No Samples Required)
I sample at
each sampling
No Requirements
Not Applicable
No Requirements
Not Applicable
Yes: Waivers Based on
Vulnerability
Assessment
1 sample at
each sampling
point
*«««,X'
N01K
• States wD designate the year during each compliance period In which each system must sample.
EPA Is requiring states to schedule one-third of their systems for sampling In 1993. another one-third In
1994, and the final one-third In 1995.
Atbesto*—4
-------
Asbestos Monitoring Flow Chart
Initial Frequency
1993-1995
-
All CWS and NTWS
(beginning 1993)
YESf Waiver?
(effective 1 period)
No
sampling
while waiver
in effect
Waiver?
(effective 1 period)
^-f^^s
1 sample
2002-2004
J^&tf « ™5"*"\ "*>~ '
No
sampling
(while waiver
in effect
^
Repeat Frequency
1996-1998,1999-2001, etc.
^H^W^ ^^^^^^%&f^} ^\,^P!^^M^"i?I
>..'>''. *, \, ' "H5* !«
v--^-?c^o::,1^ ^'&sfe;-* ^ -;^ ^ t
;,',, t'1 —T" *-r> - <' ^^; " ^ ' •* •*•. ^'->-;
: ^^ft^pssl AtHeiGifefoif incVea^c^
'"- U^ ^. *» M&V . "" * . -J
^ .
'.<^<<, h \^>^\^\4 s
Aibettot—5
-------
-------
o
Nitrate
O
Regulated
Contaminant
MCL
10 mg/L (as Nitrogen)
Trigger
5 mg/L (as Nitrogen)
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (3 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements for nitrate as promul-
gated under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase II Rule.
Monitoring for nitrate begins in January 1993.
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS), transient and nontransient,
noncommunity water systems (TWS and NTWS) must comply with the moni-
toring requirements for nitrate.
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment* ~
Initial Base Sampling
Sampling for nitrate is to be conducted by all water systems beginning
January 1,1993. The frequency of initial sampling is as follows:
CITS and NTW& Groundwater systems must sample annually while
surface water systems must sample quarterly.
TWS: All systems regardless of the water source must sample annually.
Grandfathering
Not-allowed.
Trigger for Increased/Decreased Sampling
Any sample greater than (2) 50 percent of the MCL triggers the need for
sampling. Analytical results less than (<) 50 percent of the MCL for
increa
a minimum of one round of sampling can trigger decreased sampling require-
ments. The trigger is not applicable to transient, noncommunity water
systems. (See side bar for MCL and trigger level.)
Repeat Base Sampling (<50% MCL)
CWS andNTW& Groundwater systems must continue sampling on an
annual basis as during the initial sampling phase. States may reduce the
sampling frequency to annual for surface water systems provided the
analytical results from four consecutive quarters is less than {<) 50 percent of
the MCL (Le., 5 mg/L). For systems sampling annually, repeat samples must
be taken during the quarters) which yielded the highest analytical results.
TWS: Same as initial sampling requirements (Le., annual).
Nitrate—1
-------
o
-------
Nitrite
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (4 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements for nitrite as promul-
gated under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase ttRule.
Monitoring for nitrite begins in January 1993.
Regulated
Contaminant
MCL
1 mg/L (as Nitrogen)
Trigger
' 0.5 mg/L (as Nitrogen)
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS), transient and nontransient,
noncommunity water systems (TWS and NTWS) must comply with the moni-
toring requirements for nitrite.
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment
Initial Base Sampling
Between 1993 and 1995, each system must take one sample. The state will
designate the year in which each system samples within this compliance
period.
Grandfathering
Not allowed.
Trigger for Increased/Decreased Sampling
The trigger for increased/decreased sampling for nitrite is 50 percent of the
MCL (Le., 0.5 mg/L). (See side bar for MCL and trigger level)
Repeat Base Sampling (<50% MCL)
If the results of initial sampling are less than (<) 50 percent of the MCL,
repeat sampling requirements (if any) will be at state discretion.
Increased Sampling (>50% MCL or 2>MCL)
1) Systems collecting any sample(s) greater than (>) 50 percent of the MCL
must sample quarterly for at least one year.
2) States may decrease the sampling frequency to annual provided the
results of four consecutive quarterly samples are "reliably and consis-
tently" below the MCL.
Nitrite—1
-------
3) Systems sampling annually must take subsequent samples during the
quarters) which previously yielded the highest analytical results).
Confirmation Samples
Systems must take a confirmation sample within 24 hours after the results
the initial sample are found to be greater than (£) the MCL. Systems unable
meet the 24-hour confirmation sampling requirement must issue a public
notice to consumers of the system and must then analyze a confirmation
sample within two weeks of receiving the results of the initial sample.
Compliance Determination
If any sample exceeds the MCL for nitrite, systems must take a confirmation
sample. The compliance determination is based on the average of the result1
the initial and confirmation samples.
Public Notice
Any system violating the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (i.e..
MCL, monitoring and reporting requirements, etc.) for nitrite must give pub
notice. For a violation of the MCL, a system must 1) give notice by electronic
media (e.g., TV, radio), 2) publish a notice in the newspaper, and 3) deliver a
notice to each consumer within 45 days. The notice must include the specific
mandatory health effects language contained in the Phase II Rule. The publ:
notice requirements also apply to systems unable to take confirmation samp
within a 24-hour tima period (see confirmation sample section above). For
monitoring violations a system must notify consumers via newspaper within
three months.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than (>) 3300 persons, compositing is only
allowed at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (£) 3300 persons, compositing among differ
- ent systems is permitted.
Waivers
Not allowed.
Nitrit,
-------
Nitrite Monitoring Flow Chart
IiTitial Frequency
All CWS, TWS and
NTWS
Results
MCL?
Quarterly
sampling
Sample
at state
discretion
consecutive
^quarterly samples
, -T.^ x reliably and
X consistently
1 annual
sample during
quarter which
previously yielded
highest analytical
result
(ongoing)
Repeat Frequency
1996-1998,1999-2001, etc.
Nitrite—Z
-------
-------
Inorganics
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (5 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements for five inorganic chemi-
cals (barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, and selenium) as promulgated
under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase n Rule. Monitor-
ing for these contaminants begins in January 1993.
Regulated
Contaminants
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity water
systems (NTWS) must comply with the monitoring requirements for barium,
cadmium, chromium, mercury, and selenium.
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment.
Initial Base Sampling
Groundwater systems must take one sample during the compliance period
1993 to 1995. The state will designate the year in which each system must
sample within this compliance period. Surface water systems must sample
annually beginning in 1993. Waivers from sampling may be granted by the
state (see below for a summary of waiver requirements).
Grandfathering
States may allow previous sampling data to satisfy the initial base sampling
requirements, provided at least one sample was taken after January 1,1990.
Repeat Base Sampling
Repeat base sampling requirements are the same as those for the initial base
phase unless a waiver has been granted by the state (Le., one sample per
Contaminant
T3
Banum
Cadium
Chromium
.Mercury
Selenium
MCL
(mg/L)
0.005
0.1
0.002
0.05
surface water systems).
Trigger for Increased Sampling
The maximum contaminant level (MCL) for each
the requirement for increased sampling (see side
nants and their corresponding MCLs).
inorganic chemical triggers
bar text for list of contain!-
Inorganics—1
-------
Increased Sampling
1) Any system exceeding the MCL for a given contaminant must take quar-
terly samples (in the quarter immediately following the violation) until a
baseline is established (Tnif\imtii^ of two quarters for groundwater sys-
tems and four quarters for surface water systems).
2) If the state determines that the baseline is "reliably and consistently*
below the MCL, the sampling frequency may be reduced to the base re-
quirements.
Confirmation Samples
States may require a confirmation sample for any sample that exceeds the
MCL. These confirmation samples must be taken within two weeks from the
same sampling point and as soon as possible after the i«it"Q sample. If a
confirmation sample is used, compliance is based on the average of the resul
of the initial and confirmation samples.
Compliance Determination
1) If a system samples more frequently than annual (i.e., quarterly), the
system would be in violation if the running annual average at any sam-
pling point exceeds the MCL.
2} If a system conducts sampling on an annual or less frequent basis, the
system would be in violation if one sample (or the average of the initial a:
confirmation samples) at any point exceeds the MCL.
Public Notice
Any system violating the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (i.e.,
MCL, monitoring and reporting requirements, etc.) for one or more of the five
inorganic chemicals must give public notice. For a MCL violation, systems
must issue a public notice that includes the specific mandatory health effects
language contained in the Phase II Rule. Systems must publish the notice in
the newspaper within 14 days and deliver the notice to consumers within 45
days. For monitoring violations, systems must notify consumers through maji
newspapers within three months.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than (>) 3300 persons, compositing is only
allowed at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (£) 3300 persons, compositing among differ-
ent systems is permitted.
Waivers
States may grant "waivers by rule* to systems that are effective up to nine
years (or one compliance cycle) for each of the five inorganic contaminants. In
order to qualify for a waiver, a system must have three previous compliance
Inorganics—2
-------
samples (including one taken after January 1,1990), and all previous analyti
cal results must be below the MCL (see grendfathering section above). The
waiver must be granted at the beginning of the year in which the system is
scheduled to sample, otherwise the system is subject to base sampling re-
quirements. As a condition of the waiver, systems must take at least one
sample during the nine-year waiver period.
The state must consider a variety of issues in making the "waiver by rule"
determination, such as:
1) reported concentrations from all previous monitoring,
2) degree of variation in reported concentrations, and
3) other factors which may affect contaminant concentrations (Le., ground-
water pumping rates, changes in the system's configuration, changes in
the system's operating procedures, or changes in stream flows or charac-
teristics).
Inorganics—3
-------
Standardized Monitoring Framework:
Inorganics (CWS and NTWS)
CALENDAR
YEAR
BASE REQUIREMENTS
WAIVERS
(All SYSTEMS)
State may waive ihe base
sanpflngrequttemenls
provided 3 previous samples
are te« than the MCI
I sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
i sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
ootnt
1 sample at
each sampling
ooint
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
I sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
ooint
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
State may waive the base
sampling reqUreimenJs
provided 3 previous samples
are less than the MCL
sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
1 sample at
each sampling
point
t
NOTES
States wll designate the year during each complance period In which each system must sample.
f P?JLfeq!^ *?**t0 •***"•• one-third of the* systems for samplng h 1993. another one-third
in 1994. and the final one-third h 1995.
Inorganic*—4
-------
Inorganics Monitoring Flow Chart
initial Frequency
993-1995:
:*. .., .-„:->•
>::---:?:f f*Sfili^;'-:^'v . ..' •'
AIICWS and NTWS
(beginning 1993)
Waiver?
(effective up to 9 years
or one compliance
cycle)
:1 sample
per period
1 sample
(1993-2001)
SW: 1 sample
per year
Waiver?
(effective through
next compliance cycle;
must have 3 previous
compliance
samples
MCL?
1 sample
while waiver
in effect or at
discre-
tion
and consistently>lpl
-------
-------
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (6 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements far 10 volatile organic chemicals
(VOCs) as promulgated under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase U
Rub. These requirements also apply to the eight VOCs contained under EPA's Phase I Rule.
Monitoring for the 18 VOCs in accordance with the Standardized Monitoring Framework
encompassed in the Phase II Rule begins in January 1993.
Regulated
Contaminants
MCL
Bghl Original VOCs (mg'L)
Benzene 0.005
Carbon tetrachloride 0.005
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005
1,1-DichJoroethylene 0.007
para-Dichlorobeniene 0.075
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.20
Trichloroethylene 0.005
Vinyl chloride 0.002
Ten New VOCs MCL (mg/L)
cis-M-Dichlnroethylen* 0.07
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005
Ethylbenzene 0.7. •
Monoehlorobenzene 0.1
o-Dichlorobenzene 0.6
Styrene 0.1
Tetrachloroethylene 0.005
Toluene 1
Trans-U-
Dichloroethylene 0.1
Xyleaes (total) 10
NOTE: The method detection
limit (MDL) for ail 13 volatile
orgaoin it 0.0005 mg/L
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity water
systems (NTWS) must comply with the monitoring requirements for volatile
organic chemicals.
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment.
Initial Base Sampling
Between 1993 and 1995, all systems must take four consecutive quarterly
samples for each of the new contaminants unless Da waiver has been
granted by the state (see waiver requirements below) or 2) the system has
previous sampling data enabling it to qualify for reduced sampling (see
grandfathering section below). The state will designate the year in which eacl
system samples within this compliance period
Grandfathering
States may allow sampling data collected after January 1,19S8 to satisfy the
initial requirementa. If the initial samples for the new organics are completed
by December 31,1992 and the system did not detect any of the organics, then
the system need only take one sample annually beginning January 1,1993
Trigger for Increased/Decreased Sampling
The method detection limit (MDL) is the trigger for increased/decreased
sampling.for each of the volatile organics. [See side bar for a list of contami-
nants and their corresponding maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and
MDLsJ.
Volatile Organic ChemicaU—1
-------
Repeat Base Sampling (no detects)
Systems would continue taking four consecutive quarterly samples during
subsequent three-year compliance periods. However, if contaminants are not
detected during the initial round of sampling, states may allow systems to
decrease their sampling frequency beginning in the 1996 compliance period £
follows:
1) Groundwater systems must take at least one sample annually. After
three years of annual sampling and no previous detection, groundwater
systems can further reduce their sampling frequency to one sample per
compliance period.
2) Surface water systems must sample annually.
Increased Sampling (if detected or MCI exceeded)
If contaminants are detected at or above the MDL or if the MCL is exceeded,
then systems must sample quarterly beginning in the next quarter.
1)
2)
3)
4)
Systems remain on quarterly sampling until a baseline is established
of two quarters for groundwater systems and four quarters i
surface water systems).
If the baseline indicates a system is "reliably and consistently" below the
MCL, the state may reduce the system's sampling frequency to annual
(Annual sampling must be conducted during the quarter which previous!
yielded the highest analytical result)
Systems which have three consecutive annual samples with no detection
may apply to the state for a waiver (see waiver requirements below).
If any detection exceeds the MCL, both groundwater and surface wate.
systems must take four consecutive quarterly samples until a reliable
baseline is established.
Confirmation Samples
States may require a confirmation sample for positive or negative results. If
taken, the compliance determination must be based on the average of the
results of the initial and confirmation samples.
Compliance Determination
1) If a system samples more frequently than annually (quarterly or sexni-
annually), the system is in violation if the running annual average at any
sampling point exceeds the MCL.
2) If a system samples on an annual or less frequent basis (i.e,, one sample
per compliance period), the system is in violation if one sample (or the
average of the original and confirmation samples) at any point exceeds th<
MCL.
Public Notice
Any system violating any National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (MCL
monitoring and reporting requirements, etc.) for one or more of the VOCs mm
give public notice. For a MCL violation, systems must issue a public notice
that includes the specific mandatory health effects language contained in the
Phase II Rule. Systems must publish the notice in the newspaper within 14
Volatile Organic Chemicalt—2
-------
it,
days and deliver the notice to consumers within 45 days. For monitoring
violations, systems must notify consumers through major newspapers withir.
three months.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than {>) 3300 persons, compositing is only
allowed at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (*) 3300 persons, compositing among differ
ent systems is permitted.
Waivers
Systems can apply to the state for a waiver from initial and repeat base
sampling frequencies. Systems are eligible for both "use" and "susceptibil-
ity" waivers provided the system has conducted a vulnerability assessment.
Systems are eligible for waivers beginning in the compliance period 1993 to
1995. Waivers are effective for one compliance period; they must be renewed
in subsequent compliance periods or the system must conduct sampling that
is commensurate with base requirements.
Use Waivers
When a system, on the basis of a vulnerability assessment, can demonstrate
that volatile organics were not used previously in the water supply area (i.e.,
the contaminant was not used, manufactured, stored or disposed), the system
can apply to the state for a "use* waiver. Systems ineligible for a "use* waiver
can apply for a waiver based on "susceptibility.*
Susceptibility Waivers
"Susceptibility" waivers are contingent on the conduct of a thorough vulner-
ability assessment which considers prior analytical and/or vulnerability
assessment results (including those of surrounding systems), environmental
persistence and transport, how well the source is protected, Wellhead Protec-
tion Assessments, and proximity to sources of contamination. If a waiver is
granted based on susceptibility, sampling requirements are eliminated for th<
compliance period in which the waiver was granted.
Sampling Frequency with Waivers
Groundwater systems that have been granted a waiver are required to
sample once every six years and must update the vulnerability assessment at
the midpoint or three year mark of the six-year period. Surface water
systems with a waiver are required to sample only at the discretion of the
state.
Volatile Organic Chemica.lt—-6
-------
Standardized Monitoring Framework:
Volatile Organic Chemicals (CWS and NTW
BASE REQUIREMENTS I REDUCED MONITORING'
All SYSTEMS I All SYSTEMS « GW SYSTEMS
CALENDAR
YEAR
(Based on VA)
SW
-------
Volatile Organic Chemicals Monitoring
Row Chart
C
All CWS and NTWS
(beginning 1993)
Initial Frequency
Previous
data collected
1988-1992 with
no detections?
in
annual
sampling
in 1993
consecutive
quarterly
samples
Continue with 4
consecutive qtrty
samples per period
Detect
>MDL?
Quarterly
sampling
SW: Annual
GW: Annual; 3 consec.
samples with no
detects eligible to
sample once per
compliance period
GW: 1 sample/6
yean update
VA at midpoint
of 6-year period
SW: State discretion
Reliably
d consistent
-------
-------
Pesticides
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (7 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the monitoring requirements for 27pesticides (12 neu
and five revised) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) as promulgated under tht
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase tt Rule. Monitoring for the
pesticides and PCBs begins in January 1993.
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity wate:
systems (NTWS) must comply with the monitoring requirements for pesti-
cides and PCBs.
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment
Initial Base Sampling
Between 1993 and 1995, all systems must take an initial round of four con-
secutive quarterly samples unless a waiver has been granted by the state (se-
below for summary of waiver requirements). The state will designate the yea:
in which each system samples within this compliance period.
Grandfathering
States may allow sampling data collected after January 1,1990 to satisfy the
initial base sampling requirements.
Trigger for Increased/Decreased Sampling
The method detection limit (MDL) is the trigger for increased/decreased
sampling for each pesticide or PCB [see table on following page for a list of
contaminants and their corresponding maTinmm contaminant levels (MCLs)
and MDLs].
Repeat Base Sampling (no detects)
Systems would continue taking four consecutive quarterly samples during
subsequent three-year compliance periods. However, if contaminants are not
detected during the initial round of sampling, states may allow systems to
decrease their sampling frequency beginning in the 1996 compliance period as
follows:
1) Systems that serve greater than (>) 3300 persons may reduce their sam-
pling frequencies to two samples in one year per compliance period.
Pesticide*—I
-------
2) Systems that serve less than (£) 3300 persons may reduce their sampling
frequencies to one sample in each compliance period.
Contaminant
Regulated Contaminants
MCL1 (m/L)
MDLz(mg/L)
Alachlor
Aldicarb
Aldicarb •ulfoxida
Aldicarb ralfone
Atrazine
Carhofuran
Chlordane
Dibromochloropropane (DPCP)
2,4-D
Ethylene dibromide (EDB)
Heptaehlor
Heptacbior epozide
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Polychlorinated biphenyl* (FCBi)
Pentachlorophenol
Tozaphene
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)
0.002
0.003*
0.003*
0.003*
0.003
0.04
0.002
0.0002
0.07
0.00005
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.04
0.0005
0.001*
0.003
0.05
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0008
0.0001
0.0009
0.0002
0.00002
0.0001
0.00001
0.00004
0.00002
0.00002
0.0001
0.0001
0.00004
0.001
0.0002
'MCL°Marimiini Contaminant Level
•MDLaMethod Detection Limit
MCLs far aldicarb, aldicarb sulftutide, aldicarb aulfone and pentachloropbetiol were promul-
gated July 1.1991 and win take effect January 1,1993. Tbe MCLa for the other contami-
nants were revised or promulgated January 30, 1991 and will take effect July 30,1992.
Increased Sampling (if detected or MCL exceeded)
If contaminants are detected or if the MCL is exceeded in any sample, then
systems must sample quarterly beginning in the next quarter. Systems are to
sample quarterly until a baseline is established (minimum of two quarters for
groundwater systems and four quarters for surface water systems).
1) If the baseline indicates a system is "reliably and consistently" below the
MCL, the state may reduce the system's sampling frequency to annual.
(Annual sampling must be conducted during the quarter which previously
yielded the highest analytical result)
2) Systems which have three consecutive annual samples with no detection
can apply to the state for a waiver.
Confirmation Samples
States may require a confirmation sample for positive or negative results. If a
confirmation sample is used, the compliance determination is based on the
average of the results of the initial and confirmation samples.
Compliance Determination
1) If a system samples more frequently than annual (i.e., quarterly or semi-
annuaily), the system is in violation if the running annual average at any
sampling point exceeds the MCL.
Petticidea—2
-------
2) If a system conducts sampling on an annual or less frequent basis (Le.,
one sample per compliance period), the system is in violation if one sampi
(or the average of the initial and confirmation samples) at any point
exceeds the MCL.
Public Notice
Any system violating a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (i.e.,
MCL, monitoring and reporting requirements, etc) for one or more of the 17
pesticides and PCBs must give public notice. For a MCL violation, systems
must issue a public notice that includes the specific mandatory health effects
language contained in the Phase II Rule. Systems must publish the notice in
the newspaper within 14 days and deliver the notice to consumers within 45
days. For monitoring violations, systems must notify consumers through
major newspapers within three months.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than (>) 3300 persons, compositing is only
allowed at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (£) 3300 persons, compositing among differ-
ent systems is permitted.
Waivers
Systems can apply to the state for a waiver from initial and repeat base
sampling frequencies. Systems are eligible for both "use" and "susceptibil-
ity" waivers provided the system has conducted a vulnerability assessment
Systems are eligible for waivers beginning in the initial compliance period,
1993 to 1995. Waivers are effective for one compliance period; they must be
renewed in subsequent compliance periods or the system must conduct sam-
pling that is commensurate with base requirements. Systems receiving a
waiver are not required to sample.
Use Waivers
When a system, on the basis of a vulnerability assessment, demonstrates that
the regulated pesticide/PCB has not been used in the water supply area (i.e.,
the contaminant was not used, manufactured, stored or disposed of in the
area), the system can apply to the state for a "use" waiver. Systems not
eligible for "use" waivers may still qualify for a waiver by evaluating suscepti-
bility (see below).
Susceptibility Waivers
"Susceptibility" waivers are contingent on the conduct of a thorough vulner-
ability assessment Such a vulnerability assessment must consider prior
analytical and/or vulnerability assessment results (including those of sur-
rounding systems), environmental persistence and transport, how well the
source is protected, Wellhead Protection Assessments, and proximity of the
supply to sources.of contamination.
Pesticides—3
-------
§£
|u
a ®
"o^
go
I
2002
2003
2004
Repeot Monft orlng
Round
BASE REQUIREMENTS:
ALL SYSTEMS
4 quarterly
samples at each
sampling point
4 quarterly
samples at each
sampling point
4 quarterly
samples at each
sampling point
4 quarterly
samples at each
sampling point
REDUCED MONITORING:
SYSTEMS WTTHNO
PREVIOUS DETECTION
Not Applicable
Systems Serving:
> 3,300 -2 samples at
each sampling point
* 3,300 -1 sample at
each sampling point
Systems Serving:
> 3.300-2 samples at
each sampling point
< 3,300-1 sample at
each sampling point
Systems Serving:
> 3,300-2 samples at
each sampling point
* 3.300 -1 sample at
each sampling point
WAIVERS *
Waiver
Waiver
Waiver
Waiver
EPA is reaiiring states to schedule one-third of their systems for samrtina
1W another one-mird h 1994. qnd the final one-thM h199& *****
•f Based on 'use' and/or
'susceptibility assessment
(No Samples Required)
-------
Pesticides Monitoring Row Chart
All CWS and NTWS
(beginning 1993)
initial Frequency
1993-1995
Waiver?
(effective 1 period)
consecutive
quarterly
samples
Continue with 4
consecutive quarterly
samples per period
Detect?
(> MDL)
Quarterly
sampling
>3300: 2 samples
per period
£3300: 1 sample per
period
No
sampling
while waiver
in effect
Reliably
and consistently
-------
-------
Unregulated
Contaminants
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (8 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the one-time monitoring requirements for 24 organic
and six inorganic chemicals as promulgated under the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase E Rule. Monitoring for these contaminants
begins in January 1993,
Unregulated
Contaminants
Aldrin
Benzo(a)pyrene
Butachlor
Carbaryl
Dalapon
Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate
Di(2ethylhexyl)phthalates
Dicatnba
Dieldrin
Dinoseb
Diquat
Endothall
Glyphosate
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachloroeyclopentadiene
3-Hydroxycarbofuran
Methomyi
Metolachlor
Metribuzin
Oxamyl (vydate)
Pidoram
Propachlor
Sinjazine
2,3,7,8-TCDD (Diorin)
Inorganics
Antimony
Beryllium
Nickel
Sulfate
Thallium
Cyanide
Systems Affected
All community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity water
systems (NTWS) must conduct monitoring for the 24 organic and six inor-
ganic fhomipolg (see side bar for lists of contaminants).
Sampling Points
Sampling must be conducted at each entry point to the distribution system.
Sampling points must be representative of the well or source water after
treatment
Sampling Requirements
All systems must conduct a one-time round of sampling, unless a waiver has
been granted by the state (see below for summary of waiver requirements).
The specific sampling requirements are:
1) For the 24 organic chemicals, systems must take four consecutive quar-
terly samples and report the results to the state.
2) For the six inorganic chemicals, systems must take one sample and report
the results to the state.
3) Sampling must be completed no later than December 31,1995.
Confirmation Samples
The state may require a confirmation sample for positive or negative results.
Compositing
Composite samples are allowed at state discretion from no more than five
sampling points. Compositing of samples must be completed in a certified
drinking water laboratory.
1) For systems serving greater than (>) 3300 persons, compositing is only
allowed at sampling points within a single system.
2) For systems serving less than (S) 3300 persons, compositing among differ-
ent systems is permitted.
Unregulated Contaminant*—I
-------
Waivers
Systems may apply to the state for a waiver from the sampling requirements
Such waivers may be granted for either the organics or inorganics, or both, a
follows:
1)
Waiver for Organics: When a system can rule out previous use of the
chemical in the water supply area (Le., the contaminant was not used,
manufactured, stored or disposed of in the area), the system can apply to
the state for a "use* waiver. If previous use is unknown, then systems me
still qualify for a waiver by evaluating susceptibility. "Susceptibility"
waivers are contingent on the conduct of a thorough vulnerability assess-
ment The state may grant a "susceptibility* waiver based on an evaluati
of prior analytical and/or vulnerability assessment results (including thoi
of surrounding systems), environmental persistence fln^ transport, how
well the source is protected, Wellhead Protection Assessments, and prox-
spr
ofc
unity to sources of contamination
2) Waiver for Inorganics: The state may grant a waiver if previous analyt
cal results indicate contamination would not occur, provided this data wa
collected after January 1,1990.
3) Waiver for Very Small Systems: Systems serving fewer than 150 seryi
connections may obtain a waiver by sending a letter to the state indicatm
that the system is available for sampling. This letter must be sent to the
state by January 1,1994.
Unregulated Contaminant*—2
-------
Standardized Monitoring Framework:
Unregulated Contaminants (CWS and NTV\
BASE REQUIREMENTS:
ALL SYSTEMS
CALENDAR
YEAR
WAIVERS *
4 quarterly
samples at each
sampling point
1 sample at each
sampling point
XV«««1
NOTES • States vvil designate the yea dutia each corrpllance period h which
each system must sample.
" ?£i fequiflnO stafes to schedUe one-lhlrd of Ihelr systems tor sanp*ng
!n 1993. another one-thWin 1994. and the final one-third h 1995.
i Based on 'use' and/or
•susceptibility assessment
(No Samples Required)
^•^•^^i^^ML,
Unregulated Contaminant*—3
-------
-------
Analytical Methods
EPA Phase II Fact Sheet Series (9 of 14)
July 1991
This fact sheet summarizes the analytical requirements for 38 synthetic
organic and inorganic chemicals as promulgated under the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase II Rule.
Laboratory Certification
Analyses of monitoring samples for compliance purposes may only be con-
ducted by laboratories which have been certified by the state or EPA.
To receive approval for inorganic chemical (IOC) analyses, a laboratory must:
• Analyze a set of IOC performance evaluation (PE) samples supplied by
EPA or the state using the methods listed in Table 1;
• Achieve acceptance limits (ALs) established for each inorganic contain;
nant as listed in Table 1; and
• Pass an on-site inspection.
To receive certification for volatile organic chemical (VOC) analyses, a labora-
tory must:
• Analyze a set of VOC PE samples supplied by EPA or the state using
the methods listed in Table 2;
• Achieve a ±20 percent AL on 80 percent of all Phase I and Phase n
VOCs, except vinyl chloride, when the actual amount is 20.010 mg/L;
• Achieve a ±40 percent AL on SO percent of all Phase I and Phase II
VOCs, except vinyl chloride, when the actual amount is <0.010 mg/L;
• Achieve a method detection limit (MDL) of 0.0005 mg/L;
• Be currently approved by EPA or the state for the analyses of
trihalomethanes; and
• Pass an on-site inspection.
To receive certification for synthetic organic chemicals (SOC) analyses [i.e.,
pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)], a laboratory must
• Analyze a set of SOC performance samples supplied by EPA or the
state using the methods listed in Table 3;
• Achieve ALs as listed in Table 3 for each substance;
• Achieve MDLs for each substance as listed in Table 3; and
• Pass an on-site inspection.
Analytical Method*—1
-------
State Laboratory Program Requirements
As part of their primary ^frHTPnipM responsibilities, states must:
• assure the availability of sufficient qualified lab facilities to meet the
state's analytical needs;
• establish and maintain a certification program for laboratories, except
where all analyses are conducted by state laboratories; and
• designate offidal(s) to be responsible for this program.
Cost-Effective Analytical Strategies
To minimi«»analytical costs, labs may select an approved analytical method
which measures the greatest number of contaminants for which a system is
vulnerable. For example, EPA Method 505 can be used to measure alachlor,
atrazine, chlordane, heptachlor, heptachlor epoodde, lindane, methoxydiior,
and toxaphene. Method 505 can also be used as a screen for PCBs.
(Note: Additional information on VOC analysis is available in How to Convert
From THM to VOC Purge and Trap Gas Chromatographic Analysis. EPA 57G
9-88-011. Available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, 1-800-426-4791.)
Sample Compositing
Composite samples from a maximum of five sampling points are allowed, but
compositing must be conducted in a certified laboratory. VOC and SOC com-
posite samples must be analyzed within 14 days of collection.
Sample Preservation
Preservation requirements for inorganic and organic samples are specified in
the following two tables:
Inorganic Sample Preservation
Contaminant
Preservative
Container*
Time
Asbestos
Barium
OaHmtnrq
d/nronuum
Fluoride
Mercury
Nitrate:
Chlorinated
Non-chlorinated
Nitrite
Selenium
Cool,4eC
Conc.HNO,topH<2
Cone. HN03 to pH<2
Conc.HN03topH<2
None
Conc.HNOstopH<2
Cool, 4° C
Cone. HjSO, to pH<2
Cool, 4° C
Conc.HNOjtopH<2
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
PorG
6 Months
6 Months
6 Months
I Month
28 Days
28 Days
14 Days
48 Hours
6 Months
' P = Plastic; G - Glaw
Analytical Method*—2
-------
• ••••••
Chemical ~
* VOCs . .
Alachlor
f
Aldicarb
Aldicarb
sulfone
Aldicarb
sulfoxide
Atrarine
_Carbofuran
Chlordahe
i • .
Dibromochloro-
propane
^|, Ethylene :
^P dibromide
Heptachlor
*
Heptachlor
eporide
Lindane
u.
Methoxychlor
^ *• "
Pentachloro-
phenol
PCB (screen) . "
1 PCB (aroclors)
Toxaphene
2,4-D
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)
1 %
* If sample contains
......
Organic Sample Preservation ^^^|
Method
A11VOC
: Methods
505
507
525.1
531.1
531.1
531.1
.I. j
505
507
525.1
531.1
505
508
525.1
504
504
505
508
525.1
505
508
525.1
505 ,
- - 508
525.1
505
508 "
52511
515.1
525.1
- 505 '
. 508: i.
508A
505 ''
508
525.1 . .
515.1
515.1 •
. Preservative*
: Ascorbic Acid or Sodium
'- Thiosulfate, acidify with HCL
Thiosulfete
Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite
; Thiosulfate & pH 3
Thiosulfate & pH 3
Thiosulfate &pH 3'
Thiosulfate
Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite
Thiosulfate & pH 3
Thiosulfate
Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite '
Thiosulfate & HCI
Thiosulfate & HCI
Thiosulfate ,,
Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite "
Thiosulfate '
Thiosulfate and HgCl ^
HCI and Sodium Sulfite
Thiosulfate _ '{;-,»
Thiosulfate and HgCl '
HCI and Sodium Sulfite .
Thiosulfate
' Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite J . i
Thiosulfate and HgCl > ••'-
HCl.and Sodium Sulfite.- ' /
Thiosulfate ; ;"• . t~ j
. - Thiosulfate and HgCl' '";' ' v
No Chemicals
Thiosulfate
Thiosulfate and HgCl
HCI and Sodium Sulfite
<•*--••
' Thiosulfate and HgCl '-
Thiosulfate and HgCl
^^^^^•^^^^^^^^^•^••i^iiiiiiiiiH
Container Size
(all are glass)
40 to 120 mL vials
with PFTE septa
40 mL bottle
1L bottle
1 Lor Iqt bottle
60 mL vial/PFTE
60 mL vial/PFTE
60 mL vial/PFTE
40 mL bottle
1L bottle
1 Lor Iqt bottle
. 60 mL vial/PFTE
40 mL bottle
l.L bottle '
1 L or 1 qt bottle
40 mL bottles
40 mL bottles
40 mL bottle
1 L bottle
1 L or 1 qt. bottle
40 mL bottle
1 L bottle
.1 Lor Iqt. bottle
-MO mL bottle '
1L bottle
1 Lor iqt. bottle t
40 mL bottle >v
1L bottle
,1 Lor Iqt bottle '--•
1L bottle',""."
1 L of 1 qt. bottle
-40 mL bottle
1L bottle . -,-
lL.bottle '.-••
! 40 mL bottle
1 L bottle . . -,'
:- ILor'lqt. bottle ,"•
1L bottle :"•
1 ILbottle,- '• ' . .
* i
Sample
Hold Time
144,4*C
144.4*0
144,4«C,dark
74,4*0
28 4, -10*0
28 4, -10°C
28 4, -10*0
144,4-0
14 4, 4*0, dark
7 4; 4*0
284,40*0
144,4*0
74,4*0
74,4*0
284,4°C
284,4*0
7 4, 4*0
74,4*0
74,4*0
14 4, 4*0
7 4, 4*0
-. . -74,4*0
"144,4°C
74,4"C
••* 74,4°C
'-* .J 144,4*0
7d.,4*C
- 74,4*0
, r,f:,7.4,4"C
, . 74,4*C
• '•'' 144,4*C
7 4, 4-C
'•'"* 144,4°C
..- 144,4aC
7 4, 4°C
.,.l7d.,4°C
, 144,4«C
144,4°C
residual chlorine, reduce with thiosulfate. • . -
*
Analytical Method*— 3
-------
Special Primacy Requirements (§142.16)
1. A plan for the initial monitoring period which schedules systems for
monitoring according to the availability of certified laboratories in eac.
of the three yean. This plan most be enforceable under state law.
2. IF a state chooses to issue monitoring waivers for regulated and
unregulated contaminants (see Optional Provisions below), the state
must describe:
a. Procedures for making waiver decisions, specifically:
• Process for determining "use* flnt^ "susceptibility* waivers.
• Factors to be considered in granting or denying warren.
b. Monitoring
------- |