•7A
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Implementation
Guidance
for Radionuclides
-------
Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water (4606M)
EPA816-F-00-002
www .epa.gov/safewater
March 2002
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Table of Contents
Regional Contacts iii
Abbreviations and Acronyms v
Introduction vii
Section I. Rule Requirements 1-1
I-A. Executive Summary - Radionuclides Rule 1-3
I-B. Key Dates of the Rule 1-7
I-C. Rule Summary - Radionuclides Rule 1-9
I-C.l Background 1-9
I-C.2 Record Keeping 1-9
I-C.3 Reporting and Public Notification 1-11
I-C.4 Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium-226, Radium-228, and Uranium 1-13
I-C.5 Grandfathered Data 1-20
I-C.6 Monitoring Waivers 1-21
I-C.7 Requirements for New Systems/Sources 1-21
I-C.8 Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity 1-22
I-C.9 Laboratory Methods 1-25
I-C. 10 Treatment Technologies and Cost Estimates 1-27
I-C. 11 Variances and Exemptions 1-31
Section II. SDWIS Reporting, Violation Determination, and SNC Definitions II-1
II-A. SDWIS Reporting II-3
II-B. Violation Determination II-4
II-B.l Violation/Compliance Determination for Gross Alpha, Radium-226/228,
and Uranium II-4
II-B.2 Violation/Compliance Determination for Gross Beta and Photon Emitters . . II-5
II-C. SNC Definitions II-7
Section III. Primacy Revision Applications III-l
III-A. State Primacy Program Revision III-3
III-A.l The Revision Process III-4
III-A.2 The Final Review Process III-6
III-B. State Primacy Program Revision Extensions III-7
III-B.l The Extension Process III-7
III-B.2 Extension Request Criteria III-7
III-B.3 Conditions of the Extension III-7
III-C. State Primacy Package 111-10
III-C.l The State Primacy Revision Checklist (40 CFR 142.10) 111-10
III-C.2 Text of the State's Regulation III-l 1
III-C.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk III-l 1
III-C.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping (40 CFR 142.14 and 142.15) III-l 1
III-C.5 Special Primacy Requirements (40 CFR 142.16) III-l 1
III-C.6 Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability III-l 1
III-D. Guidance for Special Primacy Requirements 111-14
III-D.l Special Primacy Requirements 111-14
Section IV. Other Resources and Guidance IV-1
IV-A. Fact Sheet IV-3
IV-B. Question and Answers FV-6
-------
List of Tables
1-13
1-19
1-24
Table 1-1: MCLs and MCLGs for Regulated Radionuclides 1-4
Table 1-2: Public Water System Timetable for the Radionuclides Requirements 1-7
Table 1-3: Standard Health Effects Language for CCR and Public Notification
Table 1-4: Summary of Monitoring Frequencies for Gross Alpha, Uranium, and Radium-226/228
Table 1-5: Monitoring Frequencies for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
Table 1-6: Required Regulatory Detection Limits for the Various Radionuclide Emitters
(40 CFR 141.25) 1-26
Table 1-7: BATs for Radionuclides in Drinking Water 1-27
Table 1-8: List of Small Systems Compliance Technologies for Radionuclides and
Limitations of Use 1-29
Table 1-9: Compliance Technologies by System Size Category for Radionuclide NPDWRs
(Affordability Not Considered, Except for Uranium, Due to Statutory Limitations) 1-30
Table 1-10: Summary of Cost Estimates 1-31
Table II-1: Revised Radionuclides Final Rule Federal Reporting Violations II-3
Table III-l: State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for Radionuclides Rule III-3
Table III-2: Extension Request Checklist III-9
Table III-3: State Primacy Revision Checklist 111-10
Table III-4: Example of Attorney General Statement 111-12
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Applicability of the Standardized Monitoring Framework to Radionuclides
Figure III-l: Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of Program Revisions
. 1-8
III-5
Appendices
Appendix A Monitoring Scenario Figures Appendix A-l
Appendix B Violation Tables for Data Management and Enforcement Purposes Appendix B-l
Appendix C Sample Extension Agreement Appendix C-l
Appendix D Primacy Revision Crosswalks Appendix D-l
Appendix E SDWIS/FED DTP Reporting Requirements Guidance Appendix E-l
Appendix F Statement of Principles— Guidance on Audit Law Issues Appendix F-l
Appendix G Rule Presentations Appendix G-l
Appendix H Rule Language Appendix H-l
Appendix I Comparison of Derived Values of Beta and Photon Emitters Appendix 1-1
Appendix J References Appendix J-l
-------
Regional Contacts
Region I
Stan Rydell
617-918-1637
Region II
Robert Poon
212-637-3821
Region III
Barbara Smith
215-814-5786
Region IV
Thomas DeGaetano
404-562-9479
Region V
Miguel Del Toral
312-886-5253
Region VI
Kim Ngo
214-665-7158
Region VII
Stan Calow
913-551-7410
Region VIII
David Robbins
303-312-6274
Region IX
Bruce Macler
415-744-1884
Region X
Gene Taylor
206-553-1389
EPA
in
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
IV
-------
Abbreviations and Acronyms
< - Less than
< - Less than or equal to
> - Greater than
>- Greater than or equal to
(ig - Microgram, one-millionth of a gram (3.5 x 10~8 of an ounce)
BAT - Best available technology
CCR - Consumer confidence report
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
Cs - Cesium
CWS - Community water system
DL- Detection limit
DTP - Data transfer format
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPTDS - Entry point to the distribution system
FR - Federal Register
I - Iodine
ICP-MS - Ion chromatography mass spectroscopy
IE - Ion exchange
L - Liter
MCL - Maximum contaminant level
MCLG - Maximum contaminant level goal
mrem - Millirem
NBS - National Bureau of Standards
NIST - National Institute of Standards and Technology
NOD A - Notice of Data Availability
NPDWRs- National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NRC - National Research Council
NTNCWS - Nontransient noncommunity water system
OECA - Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OGC - Office of General Counsel
OGWDW - Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
ORC - Office of Regional Counsel
pCi - Picocurie
PE - Performance evaluation
pH - Negative logarithm of hydrogen ion concentration
PN - Public notification
POE - Point-of-entry
POU - Point-of-use
PQL - Practical quantification level
PT - Proficiency testing
PWS - Public water system
PWSS - Public Water Systems Supervision
RO - Reverse osmosis
SDWA - Safe Drinking Water Act
SDWIS/FED - Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal
SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
SNC - Significant noncomplier
Sr - Strontium
SSCT - Small system compliance technology
-------
SWA - Source water assessment
U.S. - United States
yr - Year
VI
-------
Introduction
The purpose of this guidance manual is to provide assistance to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency ( EPA), States,1 and community water systems (CWSs) during the implementation of The
Radionuclides Rule published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2000 (65 FR 76708).2 EPA and
State decision-makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from
this guidance where appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular facility will be based on the
applicable statutes and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to raise questions and
objections about the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a particular situation, and EPA
will consider whether the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance are appropriate in that
situation. EPA may change this guidance in the future.
This document does not substitute for EPA's regulation nor is this document regulation itself. Thus, it
cannot impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated community, and may not
apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances.
Developed through a workgroup process involving EPA Regions, States, and stakeholders, the manual is
organized as follows:
• Section I summarizes The Radionuclides Rule and presents a timeline of important dates.
• Section II addresses violation determination and associated reporting requirements and includes a
violation table to assist States with compliance activities.
• Section III covers State Primacy Revision Requirements including a timeframe for application
review and approval. This section also contains guidance and references to help States adopt new
special primacy requirements included in The Rule.
• Section IV contains a series of "stand alone" guidance materials that will help States and CWSs
comply with the new requirements.
The Appendices of this document provide information that will be useful to States and EPA Regions
throughout the primacy revision application process and implementation of the Radionuclides Rule.
• Appendix A contains a series of diagrams which illustrate initial and reduced monitoring
scenarios.
• Appendix B contains a violation table arranged for data management and enforcement purposes.
• Appendix C contains the sample Extension Agreement between EPA and the States that will
enable States and EPA to document how they will share rule implementation responsibilities if
the State does not submit a primacy application by the deadline.
• Appendix D contains the primacy revision crosswalks for The Rule.
'"State" is used in this guide to refer to the Primacy Agency.
2Throughout this document, the December 7, 2000, Final Radionuclides Rule is referred to as the Radionuclides Rule,
the revised Radionuclides Rule, the Rule, or the new Rule. The Proposed Radionuclides Rule published in 1991 is referred to as
the 1991 proposal or the 1991 proposed rule. The Radionuclides Rule published in 1976 is referred to as the 1976 Rule or the
1976 standard.
vii
-------
Appendix E contains the State reporting guidance.
Appendix F is EPA's Statement of Principles on the effect of State audit immunity/privilege laws
on enforcement authority for federal programs.
Appendix G contains training presentation materials for The Radionuclides Rule.
Appendix H is a copy of The Radionuclides Rule.
Appendix I provides copies of beta and photon emitter conversion tables.
Appendix J lists references used to develop this guidance.
To help explain the provisions of The Radionuclides Rule, this guidance also includes a series of
illustrations based on hypothetical CWSs of all sizes. The illustrations appear in boxes throughout the
document and are for illustrative purposes only.
Vlll
-------
Section I.
Rule Requirements
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
1-2
-------
I-A. Executive Summary - Radionuclides Rule
Purpose
The purpose of this summary is to acquaint State decision-makers and other public health officials with
the final rule for (non-radon) radionuclides in drinking water. The Radionuclides Rule was published in
the Federal Register on December 7, 2000 (65 FR 76708). The Rule is applicable to community water
systems (CWSs), establishes a new maximum contaminant level (MCL) for uranium, which was not
previously regulated, and revises the monitoring requirements for combined radium-226/228, gross alpha
particle radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity. The Rule retains the existing MCLs for
combined radium-226/228, gross alpha particle radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity.
Background
Regulations for radionuclides in drinking water were first promulgated in 1976 as interim regulations
under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974. Standards were set for three groups
of radionuclides: beta and photon emitters, radium (radium-226 and radium-228), and gross alpha
radiation. These standards became effective in 1977. The 1986 SDWA Amendments added radon and
uranium to the list of regulated radionuclides and set deadlines for issuing the regulations. EPA failed to
meet the deadlines and was subject to consent decrees to issue the rules.
In 1991, EPA proposed new regulations for uranium and radon and revisions to the existing radionuclides
regulations. This proposal was not promulgated as a final rule. The 1996 amendments extended statutory
deadlines or otherwise relieved EPA of the duty to issue regulations for most pending rules, although not
for the radionuclides. All the cases were dismissed and EPA and the plaintiffs entered into a stipulation
whereby EPA would promulgate the radionuclides in November 2000. EPA published the rule in
December 2000.
Benefits of the Radionuclides Rule
The Radionuclides Rule requires monitoring at each entry point to a CWS's distribution system to ensure
that every customer's water meets the MCLs for radionuclides. (This requirement is consistent with the
monitoring requirements for other, comparable drinking water contaminants.) By contrast, the 1976 Rule
protected "the average customer" by requiring the collection of monitoring samples from a "free flowing
tap."
The new uranium MCL will reduce the exposure of 620,000 persons to this contaminant, will protect
CWS customers from exposure to uranium at levels that may cause kidney damage, and will reduce the
risk of cancer caused by exposure to uranium. An estimated 0.8 cancer cases are expected to be avoided
annually due to the MCL, resulting in estimated benefits of $3 million per year. (The monetary benefits
from reduced kidney damage cannot be quantified because of limitation in existing health effects models
at levels near the MCL.) Reducing the presence of uranium in drinking water will also remove other
contaminants, providing additional benefits to CWS customers.
In addition, the new Rule sets separate monitoring requirements for radium-228, which are expected to
reduce the exposure of 420,000 persons and result in the avoidance of 0.4 cancer cases per year, with
estimated monetized health effects benefits of $2 million annually. Water mitigation for radium also
tends to reduce iron and manganese levels and hardness, which also has significant associated benefits.
1-3
-------
Applicability and Compliance Dates
The Radionuclides Rule applies to all CWSs (40 CFR 141.26). The regulations do not apply to
noncommunity water systems.
The effective date of The Rule is December 8, 2003 (40 CFR 141.66(f)). Systems must monitor, in
accordance with a State-specified plan, between the effective date and December 31, 2007, unless the
State allows the use of grandfathered data (40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)).
Maximum Contaminant Levels and Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
The revised Radionuclides Rule promulgates an MCL for uranium and retains the existing MCLs for
combined radium-226/228, gross alpha particle, and beta particle and photon radioactivity. The Rule also
finalizes maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs), which are shown in Table 1-1 (40 CFR 141.55).
Table 1-1: MCLs and MCLGs for Regulated Radionuclides
Regulated Radionuclide
Beta/photon emitters
Gross alpha particle
Combined radium-226/228
Uranium
MCL
4 mrem/year
15 pCi/L
5 pCi/L
30^ig/L
MCLG
Zero
Zero
Zero
Zero
Requirements of the Rule
Record Keeping and Reporting
The standard record keeping and reporting requirements for public water system (PWS) monitoring
programs apply to the Radionuclides Rule (see 40 CFR 141.31 and 141.33 for PWS requirements and
40 CFR 142.14 and 142.15 for State requirements) and are discussed in detail in Sections I-C.2 and I-C.3
of this document.
Monitoring
Under the 1976 Rule, a water system with multiple entry points to its distribution system was not
required to test at every entry point, but rather to monitor at each source as well as "water from a free
flowing tap" (40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(iii)). Under the new Rule, each entry point will be tested.
The standardized monitoring framework for radionuclides is complex, in part, because of the inter-
relationship of the analytes; the alpha emitters, including radium-226 and uranium, contribute to gross
alpha activity. A detailed discussion of the monitoring requirements is included in Sections I-C.4 and I-
C.8 of this document.
1-4
-------
Grandfathered Data and Monitoring Waivers
Systems may not use grandfathered data to satisfy the monitoring requirements for beta and photon
emitters (40 CFR 141.26(b)). However, under certain circumstances, States may allow data collected
between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, to be used to comply with the initial monitoring requirements
for gross alpha, radium-226/228, and uranium (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(ii)). A detailed discussion about the
grandfathering of data can be found in the Section I-C.5 of this document.
States cannot issue waivers for the radionuclide monitoring requirements. However, States may waive the
final two quarters of initial monitoring for gross alpha, uranium, radium-226, and radium-228, if the
sampling results from the previous two quarters are below the detection limit3 (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(iii)).
See Section I-C.6 of this document for more detail on monitoring waivers.
Requirements for New Systems/Sources
New systems, and systems that begin using a new source of supply, must conduct initial monitoring for
gross alpha, radium-226/228, and uranium during the calendar quarter that follows the quarter in which
they begin using the new source of supply (40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)(ii)). A detailed discussion and
annotated example are provided in Section I-C.7 of this document.
Laboratory Methods
Many testing procedures for regulated radionuclides were approved in 1976 and many additions or
changes to analytical methods were included in the 1991 proposed Rule. EPA approved 66
radiochemical methods in the March 5, 1997, Radionuclides Methods Rule (40 CFR 141.25). As of this
manual's publication, approximately 90 radiochemical methods are approved for compliance monitoring
of radionuclides in drinking water. These methods and various quality control requirements are detailed
in Section I-C.9 of this document. EPA is continuing to evaluate additional analytical methods for
approval.
Treatment Technologies and Costs
EPA has evaluated several technologies for removing radionuclides from drinking water. Details on
EPA's review of the 1999 draft of Technologies and Costs, the EPA 1998 Radium Compliance Cost
Study, the 1998 Federal Register announcement of Small System Compliance Technology Lists for
Existing National Primary Drinking Water Regulations Concerning Variance Technologies (63 FR
42032), and the November 2000 Radionuclides Economic Analysis are included in Section I-C. 10 of this
document.
Cost information is available in an Appendix to the 1999 Technologies and Costs document and in the
1998 Radium Compliance Cost Study. The cost study gathered data from 29 systems in eight States to
compare costs of different technologies. Reverse osmosis was the most expensive technology identified,
and ion exchange was one of the least expensive. Additional information on costs of compliance are
included in Section I-C. 10 of this document and in the preamble to The Radionuclides Rule.
3Regulatory detection limits, for the regulated radionuclides except uranium, are defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c). EPA
will propose a detection limit for uranium in a future rulemaking before the compliance date of The Radionuclides Rule. The
detection limit will be consistent with the sensitivity measures used for other radionuclides.
1-5
-------
Variance and Exemptions
All systems are eligible for a variance from the MCLs for gross alpha, combined radium-226/228,
uranium, and beta particle and photon emitters. However, to qualify for a variance a system must meet
the requirements of SDWA Section 1415(a). Small system variances are not available, however, for any
contaminant regulated under the Radionuclide Rule because EPA has identified affordable small system
compliance technologies (SSCTs). See Section I-C. 10 for a summary of SSCTs including a table that
summarizes the compliance technologies by system size category. Additional information on variances
appears in Section I-C.ll.a.
The maximum exemption period is nine years from the effective date of an MCL. EPA retained the
MCLs promulgated in 1976 for gross alpha, radium-226/228, total beta particle and photon emitters, so
the exemption period has expired. Since the Agency has promulgated a new MCL for uranium, a State
may issue a uranium exemption to a CWS if the system meets the criteria of SDWA Section 1416. See
Section I-C.l l.b for more information on exemptions.
1-6
-------
I-B. Key Dates of the Rule
The effective date for the Radionuclides Rule is December 8, 2003. The 1976 Rule remains in effect
then. Under the new Rule, all CWSs are required to complete the initial monitoring requirements by
December 31, 2007 (40 CFR 141.26). A system that collects samples for gross alpha, radium-226/228,
and uranium between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, may be able to grandfather this data under
certain circumstances, and therefore may not have to conduct initial monitoring (40 CFR
141.26(a)(2)(n)).
Unless the State allows a system to grandfather data, the system must monitor, in accordance with a
State-specified plan, between December 8, 2003, and December 31, 2007. Monitoring during this time
period will synchronize radionuclides monitoring with the standardized monitoring framework
(specifically Phase II/V organic and inorganic monitoring) and help to alleviate potential laboratory
capacity problems. Systems will be able to collect radionuclide samples in conjunction with the
inorganic, synthetic organic, and volatile organic contaminant samples, which must be collected by
December 31,2007.
A timetable of key dates and a time line illustrating the radionuclides monitoring requirements within the
standardized monitoring framework are presented in Table 1-2 and Figure 1-1, respectively.
Table 1-2: Public Water System Timetable for the Radionuclides Requirements
Date
July 9, 1976
July 18, 1991
April 2000
June 2000
December 7, 2000
September 8, 2002
December 8, 2002
December 8, 2003
December 8, 2003
December 8, 2004
December 3 1,2007
Radionuclides Requirements
1976 Radionuclides Drinking Water Regulation.
1991 Proposed Radionuclides Rule.
Revised Radionuclides NODA.
Under certain circumstances, data collected between June 2000 and
December 8, 2003, may be eligible for use as grandfathered data to satisfy
the initial monitoring requirements for gross alpha, radium-226/228 and
uranium. (Note: The use of grandfathered data is at the State's discretion.)
The Final Radionuclides Rule.
EPA's suggested deadline for States' submission of complete and final
primacy revision application packages.
Regulatory deadline for States to submit primacy revision application
packages.
Systems must begin initial monitoring under a State specified monitoring
plan unless the State permits the grandfathering of data collected between
June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
Rule effective date.
State primacy revision application package due for States requesting two-
year extensions.
All systems must complete initial monitoring.
1-7
-------
Figure 1-1: Applicability of the Standardized Monitoring Framework to Radionuclides
(Excluding the Beta Particle and Photon Emitters)
Standardized
Monitoring
Framework
Compliance
Period
Compliance
Period
Compliance
Period
Compliance
Period
Compliance
Period
Radionuclides
Monitoring
Grandfathered Data
Collected between
06/00
12/08/03
Initial Compliance
Monitoring
Radionuclides
2004 2005 2006 2007
Initial Monitoring
Results
First Compliance Cycle
Radionuclides
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
< Detection Limit
>Detection Limit
but < 1/2 the
MCL
> 1/2 the MCL
but < the MCL
> MCL
Initial Monitoring Completed
12/31/07
Initial Monitoring Begins unless
State Permits the Use of
Grandfathered Data
*EPA extented the intial compliance monitoring period for Radionuclides
until 2007 in the Final Radionuclides Rule so that the first compliance cycle
is consistent with the Standardized Monitoring Framework.
KEY
One sampling event.
4 consecutive quarterly samples. Systems with MCL
violations must continue to take quarterly samples until
4 consecutive samples are at or below the MCL.
When allowed by the State, data collected between
6/00 and 12/08/03 may be used as grandfathered data
to satisfy the initial monitoring requirements.
-------
I-C. Rule Summary - Radionuclides Rule
I-C.l Background
Regulations for radionuclides in drinking water were first promulgated in 1976 as interim regulations
under the authority of the 1974 SDWA. The standards were set for three groups of radionuclides: beta
and photon emitters, radium (radium-226 and radium-228), and gross alpha radiation. These standards
became effective in 1977.
The 1986 SDWA Amendments identified 83 contaminants for EPA to regulate, including the already
regulated radionuclides, which lacked MCLGs, and two additional radionuclides, uranium and radon.
The 1986 Amendments also declared the 1976 interim standards to be final National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NPDWRs) and provided a statutory deadline of June 1989 for EPA to promulgate a
revised radionuclide rule.
In 1991, EPA proposed new regulations for uranium and radon and revisions to the existing radionuclides
regulations. This proposal was not promulgated as a final rule. The 1996 amendments extended statutory
deadlines or otherwise relieved EPA of the duty to issue regulations for most pending rules, although not
for the radionuclides. All the cases were dismissed and EPA and the plaintiffs entered into a stipulation
whereby EPA would promulgate the radionuclides in November 2000. EPA published the rule in
December 2000.
I-C.2 Record Keeping
I-C.2. a State Record Keeping Requirements
The standard record keeping requirements for States under the SDWA apply to The Radionuclides Rule
(40 CFR 142.14). Each State that has primary enforcement responsibility shall maintain records of tests,
measurements, analyses, decisions, and determinations performed on each PWS to determine compliance
with applicable provisions of State primary drinking water regulations. States must keep the following
records for the stated period of time:
• Certifications of compliance with the public notification (PN) requirements received from PWSs,
copies of the public notices received from PWSs, and records of any State determinations
establishing alternative PN requirements for three years (40 CFR 142.14(f)).
• Records pertaining to each radionuclide variance and exemption determination for five years
following the expiration of the variance or exemption (40 CFR 142.14(e)).
• Current inventory information for every PWS in the State for 12 years (40 CFR 142.14(c)).
• Records of any State approvals for 12 years (40 CFR 142.14(d)(2)).
• Records of any radionuclide enforcement action for 12 years (40 CFR 142.14(d)(3)).
• All current radionuclide monitoring requirements and the most recent monitoring frequency
decision pertaining to each contaminant, including the monitoring results and other data
supporting the decision, the State's findings based on the supporting data and any additional
bases for such decision. This information shall be kept in perpetuity or until a more recent
monitoring frequency decision has been issued (40 CFR 142.14(d)(5)).
1-9
-------
Records of determinations of a system's vulnerability to contamination from beta and photon
emitters, including the monitoring results and other data supporting the determination, the State's
findings based on the supporting data, and any additional bases for such decisions. This
information must be kept in perpetuity or until a more recent vulnerability assessment has been
issued (40 CFR 142.14(d)(4)).
ILLUSTRATION 1-1
Reporting Analytical Results
A system samples for gross alpha at its one entry point
to the distribution system (EPTDS) during 2005. The
laboratory report sent to the system indicates that the
gross alpha measurement for the sampling point is 18
± 2 pCi/L.
The system reports the entire result ( 18 ± 2 pCi/L) to
the State. The State reports to EPA that the system has
violated the MCL because compliance, reduced
monitoring, and reporting is calculated using a value
I-C.2. b PWS Record Keeping Requirements
The standard record keeping requirements for
PWSs under the SDWA apply to The
Radionuclides Rule (40 CFR 141.33).
Owners and operators must keep the following
records for the stated period of time:
• Records of action taken by the system to
correct violations of the radionuclide
regulation for at least three years after
the last action taken with respect to the
particular violation involved (40 CFR
141.33(b)).
• Copies of radionuclide public notices and certifications made to the primacy agency must be kept
for at least three years after their issuance (40 CFR 141.33 (e)).
• Records concerning a radionuclide variance or exemption granted to the system for at least five
years following the expiration of such variance or exemption (40 CFR 141.33(d)).
• Records of analyses for at least 10 years. Data may be kept as laboratory reports or can be
transferred to tabular summaries. The summaries should include the date, place, and time of
sampling; the name of the person who collected the sample; identification of the sample as a
routine distribution system sample, check sample, raw or process water sample, or other special
purpose sample; date of analysis; laboratory and person responsible for performing analysis; the
analytical technology/method used; and the results of the analysis (40 CFR 141.33(a)).
I-C.3 Reporting and Public Notification
I-C.3. a State Reporting Requirements
The standard reporting requirements for States under the SDWA apply to The Radionuclides Rule
(40 CFR 142.15). States must submit, among other things, quarterly reports to EPA that detail:
All violations of The Radionuclide Rule committed by PWSs during the previous quarter
(40 CFR 142.15(a)(l)). The Agency recognizes that States have interpreted analytical results in
a variety of ways. However, compliance and reduced monitoring frequencies should be
calculated based solely on the analytical result not including (i.e. not adding or subtracting) the
standard deviation. Therefore, the State should report MCL violations to EPA only if the
analytical result (not taking the standard deviation into account) exceeds the MCL. See
Illustration 1-1.
1-10
-------
Enforcement actions taken by the State during the previous quarter to enforce State radionuclide
regulations (40 CFR 142.15(a)(2)).
The variances or exemptions granted during the previous quarter. The State must provide a
statement of the reasons for granting the variance or exemption, including documentation of the
need for the variance or exemption and the finding that the granting of the variance or exemption
will not result in an unreasonable risk to health (40 CFR 142.15(a)(3)).
States must also submit an annual report that identifies any changes (additions, deletions, or corrections)
to the State's PWS inventory and includes a summary of the status of each variance and exemption
currently in effect (40 CFR 142.15(b)).
I-C.3. b PWS Reporting Requirements
The standard reporting requirements for PWS monitoring programs under the SDWA apply to The
Radionuclides Rule (40 CFR 141.31).
• The laboratory or system must report analytical results to the State. Systems cannot round a
result. In accordance with State regulations, the system must report results within either the first
10 days following the month in which the results are received, or the first 10 days following the
end of the required monitoring period, whichever of these is shortest (40 CFR 141.31(a) & (c)).
• The laboratory or system must report to the State within 48 hours the failure to comply with any
radionuclide MCL or monitoring requirement (40 CFR 141.31(b) & (c)).
• The water system must provide copies of each radionuclide public notice and a letter certifying
that the system has met all the PN requirements. The copies and letter are required within 10
days of the completion of each public notice (40 CFR 141.31).
I-C.3.C PWS Public Notification Requirements
Systems must provide public notice for violations and in certain other circumstances. The revised PN
Rule (40 CFR Part 141, Subpart Q) groups the public notice requirements into three tiers based on the
seriousness of the violation or situation.4 "Tier 1" applies to violations and situations with significant
potential to have serious adverse effects on human health as a result of short-term exposure. Notice is
required within 24 hours of the violation. "Tier 2" applies to other violations and situations with the
potential to have serious adverse effects on human health. Notice is required within 30 days. Primacy
agencies may grant extensions of up to three months from the time of the violation under certain
conditions. "Tier 3" applies to all other violations and situations requiring a public notice not included in
Tier 1 or Tier 2. Notices for Tier 3 violations can be combined into one annual notice, including the
consumer confidence report (CCR), if timing and delivery requirements can be met.
The Radionuclides Rule requires CWSs to provide a Tier 2 public notice for MCL violations and a Tier 3
public notice for violations of the monitoring and testing procedure requirements (40 CFR Part 141,
Appendix A to Subpart Q).
I-C.3. d PWS Consumer Confidence Report Requirements
4For Direct Implementation programs, the revised PN Rule went into effect October 31, 2000. Primacy States may set
new compliance dates that shall be no later than May 6, 2002.
1-11
-------
All CWSs must deliver a CCR to their customers by July 1 of each year (40 CFR 141.152(a)). The CCR
provides a snapshot of water quality over the preceding year. CCRs must include water quality data,
monitoring results and an explanation of their significance, and health effects language and "likely
source" information for MCL and treatment technique violations.
The Radionuclides Rule updates the specific health effects language and likely source information for the
regulated radionuclides (40 CFR Part 141, Appendix B to Subpart Q). The health effects language and
likely sources for radionuclides are shown in Table 1-3.
Table 1-3: Standard Health Effects Language for CCR and Public Notification
Contaminant
Major Sources
in Drinking
Water
Standard Health Effects Language for CCR and
PN
Beta/photon emitters
Decay of natural
and man-made
deposits.
Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit forms of
radiation known as photons and beta radiation. Some people
who drink water containing beta and photon emitters in
excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased
risk of getting cancer.
Alpha Emitters
Erosion of natural
deposits.
Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit a form of
radiation known as alpha radiation. Some people who drink
water containing alpha emitters in excess of the MCL over
many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Combined Radium-226/228
Erosion of natural
deposits.
Some people who drink water containing radium 226 or 228
in excess of the MCL over many years may have an
increased risk of getting cancer.
Uranium
Erosion of natural
deposits.
Some people who drink water containing uranium in excess
of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of
getting cancer and kidney toxicity.
I-C.4 Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium-226, Radium-228, and Uranium
This section presents the initial, reduced, and increased monitoring requirements for gross alpha, radium-
226, radium-228, and uranium. The Radionuclides Rule makes the radionuclides monitoring
requirements consistent with monitoring for other inorganic contaminants regulated under the Phase II/V
Rule's standard monitoring framework. For monitoring purposes, The Rule changes the point of
compliance from a representative point in the distribution system to each entry point to the distribution
system (EPTDS) (40 CFR 141.23(a)(l) and (2)). Systems that use an intermittent source of supply (i.e. a
supply affected by seasonal variation) or that use more than one source and the sources are combined
before distribution, must sample at an EPTDS during periods of normal operating conditions (i.e. when
water is representative of all the sources being used) (40 CFR 141.23(a)(3)).
Systems do not have to sample at each EPTDS to satisfy the monitoring requirements if:
• The State has determined that conditions make another sampling point more representative of
each source (40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)(i)).
1-12
-------
The State has modified the monitoring requirements of a PWS that supplies water to one or more
other PWSs and the interconnection of the systems justifies treating them as a single system for
monitoring purposes (i.e., consecutive PWSs) (40 CFR 141.29).
To satisfy the INITIAL monitoring requirements, systems do not have to sample at each EPTDS if:
• The State has determined, through examination of appropriate historical data and of monitoring
data taken between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, that each EPTDS is expected to be in
compliance (i.e., the State has allowed the system to grandfather data) (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(ii)).
However, the system must take samples from each EPTDS in all future monitoring. The use of
grandfathered data is further described below in the Section I-C.5.
Included in this Section are tables which summarize the monitoring framework for radionuclides (see
Table 1-4) and illustrations that help explain the initial and reduced monitoring requirements. Diagrams
which illustrate initial and reduced monitoring scenarios are also included in Appendix A. While the
figures and the examples help to illustrate many of the potential scenarios, States may encounter many
additional situations because of the unique characteristics of individual systems. The tables, the
illustrations, and the figures in Appendix A are only guides to help determine monitoring frequencies for
some systems.
I-C.4.a. Radium-224
Recent studies have shown that there is a positive correlation (1:1) between radium-228 and radium-224.
Since systems with high radium-224 levels will likely also have high radium-228 levels, EPA expects
that the enforcement of a combined radium-226/228 MCL will mitigate the effects of high radium-224
levels. Although monitoring for radium-224 is
not a requirement in this Rule, a State, at its own
discretion, may require water systems to analyze
for radium-224.
I-C.4.b Initial Monitoring for Gross Alpha,
Radium-226/228, and Uranium
Systems are required to conduct initial monitoring
at each EPTDS by December 31, 2007, for gross
alpha, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium
(40 CFR 141.26). The gross alpha particle
activity measurement may be substituted for the
required radium-226 measurement if the gross
alpha particle activity does not exceed 5 pCi/L,
and the gross alpha particle activity measurement
may be substituted for the required uranium
measurement if the gross alpha particle activity
does not exceed 15 pCi/L (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
For additional information on substitution see
Section I-C.4.e and Section I-C.4.f below.
Ideally, a system would establish initial
compliance by collecting four consecutive
quarterly samples at each EPTDS during the
ILLUSTRATION 1-2
Consecutive Quarters
A groundwater system serving 5,000 people conducts
all required monitoring for radionuclides at its one
EPTDS during April, July, and November of 2005.
The system did not monitor during the first quarter of
2005.
All sample results were between the detection limit
and one-half the MCL.
The State:
Determines that the system is in compliance since
the running annual average at the EPTDS (based
on the three samples) is below the MCL for each
radionuclide.
Requires the system to take the fourth sample in
the first quarter of 2006 in order to satisfy the
initial monitoring requirements of the
Radionuclides Rule.
The system reports that the 2006 samples were all
above the detection limit but less than one-half the
MCL for each radionuclide. The State requires the
system to sample once during the next six years.
1-13
-------
initial round of monitoring.5 The reason is to provide contaminant information during each of the four
seasons. Strict adherence to this goal, however, could create a situation where systems that take a
number of non-consecutive quarterly samples (all of which show no detects) still never satisfy the initial
monitoring requirements. It is not EPA's intent to require this of systems.
EPA suggests that the State require the system
to either collect the fourth quarterly sample as
soon as possible, or collect the sample the
following year in the quarter that was missed.
Compliance must be based on the running
annual average of the collected samples
(40 CFR 141.26 (c)(3)(i)). Once the system
satisfies the initial monitoring requirements, the
State can determine the reduced monitoring
schedule at that entry point. See Illustration 1-2.
ILLUSTRATION 1-3
A System Without Previous Sampling Results
A ground water system serving 500 people has never
collected gross alpha, radium-226, and radium-228
samples. As a result of an enforcement action, the
system monitors during the first two quarters of the
initial monitoring period.
All of the samples are less than the regulatory
detection limits.
The State waives the last two quarterly samples and
sets up a reduced monitoring schedule of once every
nine years for gross alpha, radium-226/228, and
uranium.
Systems that do not have previous radionuclide
sampling data should sample for gross alpha,
radium-226, and radium-228. Data collected
during the first quarter may serve as a baseline
indicator of what will need to be collected at
each EPTDS in the following quarters. These
systems will then collect subsequent quarterly
samples concurrently with all other quarterly
sampling events to determine compliance with the MCLs.6 See Illustration 1-3.
I-C.4.C Reduced Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Combined Radium-226/228, and Uranium
Standard trigger levels (the method detection level, one-half the MCL, and the MCL) are used to guide
the determination of a system's reduced monitoring frequency at each EPTDS. If an entry point's annual
average from the initial four quarters of monitoring for gross alpha, uranium, and combined radium-
226/228 is below the detection limit, the system would be allowed to reduce monitoring to one sample
every nine years at that entry point (40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(i)).7 If an entry point's annual average for
gross alpha, uranium, and combined radium-226/228 is at or above the detection limit but at or below
one-half the MCL, the system could reduce monitoring to one sample every six years at that entry point
(40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(ii)). If an entry point's annual average for gross alpha, uranium, and combined
radium-226/228 is above one-half the MCL but at or below the MCL, the system could reduce
monitoring to one sample every three years at that entry point (40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(iii)). Table 1-4 and
flow diagrams in Appendix A, in conjunction with the results from the initial sampling, can help
determine a schedule for reduced monitoring.
5States may waive the final two quarters of initial monitoring if the entry point's results of the first two quarters are
below the detection limit. The system is then required, under the reduced monitoring requirements, to sample once every nine
years at that entry point (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(iii)).
6For additional illustrations and examples see Appendix E: SDWIS/FED DTP Reporting Requirements Guidance.
7Since uranium was not previously regulated a detection limit is not listed in the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA
will propose a detection limit for uranium in future rulemaking and before the compliance date of the Radionuclides Rule. The
detection limit will be consistent with the sensitivity measures used for other radionuclides.
1-14
-------
A system with an entry point sampling result that exceeds the MCL while on a reduced monitoring
schedule must return to quarterly sampling (40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(v)). A system's entry point is eligible
for a reduced monitoring schedule only if the running annual average of the initial monitoring results are
below the MCL, or grandfathered data supports the reduction. The State can also specify a different
schedule as part of a formal enforcement action, variance, or exemption.
I-C. 4. d In creased Mon itoringfor Gross Alph a,
Radium-226/228, and Uranium
Systems with EPTDSs on a reduced monitoring
schedule (i.e., collecting one sample every three,
six, or nine years) may remain on that reduced
schedule as long as the most recent sample results
support that monitoring schedule. An increase in a
contaminant concentration may increase the
monitoring frequency for that contaminant. See
Illustration 1-4.
Any system that has an entry point monitoring result
above the MCL while on reduced monitoring must
increase the frequency of monitoring at that entry
point to quarterly sampling. Quarterly sampling
must continue until four consecutive quarterly
samples are below the MCL (40 CFR
141.26(a)(3)(v)). As with the initial monitoring
requirements, States may require a system that fails
to take a quarterly sample to either collect the fourth sample as soon as possible, or collect the sample the
following year in the quarter that was missed.
I-C.4.e Use of Gross Alpha Measurements for Radium-226
ILLUSTRATION 1-4
Gross Alpha = 7 pCi/L (initial monitoring
running annual average)
Gross Alpha = 8 pCi/L (reduced monitoring
result)
A system collects four quarterly samples for gross
alpha during the initial monitoring period. The
annual average is 7 pCi/L (i.e., above the detection
limit but at or below one-half the MCL). The state
may allow the system to reduce sampling to one
sample every six years for gross alpha (one sample
between 2008 - 2013). The system collects its six-
year sample and the results show an increase in the
gross alpha concentration to 8 pCi/L. The system is
required to increase the monitoring frequency to
once every three years (one sample between 2014 -
2016) because the result was above one-half the
MCL but at or below the MCL.
The standard monitoring framework for
radionuclides is complex, in part, because of the
inter-relationship of the analytes (i.e., the alpha
emitters, radium-226 and uranium, contribute to
gross alpha activity). Due to this relationship,
gross alpha particle activity analytical results can
be used to determine the reduced monitoring
frequency for gross alpha, radium-226, and
uranium. If the gross alpha particle activity result
is less than the detection limit, one-half the
detection limit (i.e., 1.5 pCi/L) is used for radium-
226 and is added to the radium-228 activity. The
combined radium-226/228 value must be used to
determine compliance and future monitoring
frequency. If the gross alpha particle activity result
is above the detection limit, compliance and future
monitoring frequency are determined using the whole
ILLUSTRATION 1-5
Use of Gross Alpha for Radium-226
The regulatory detection limit for gross alpha is
3 pCi/L. The Rule specifies that a system must use
1.5 pCi/L (one-half the detection limit for gross alpha)
as the value to determine future monitoring frequency
if the gross alpha result is less than the detection limit
and the system substitutes this measurement for
radium-226 (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
Since 1.5 pCi/L is greater than the regulatory detection
limit for radium-226 (1 pCi/L), the system would not
be allowed to move to the reduced monitoring
frequency of once every nine years for radium-226.
gross alpha result (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
Systems that submit only gross alpha particle activity analytical results and do not sample for radium-226
may be required, under the reduced monitoring requirements, to sample once every three or six years
rather than once every nine years. This is due to the fact that the detection limit for gross alpha will not
1-15
-------
allow confirmation that radium-226 is below the respective detection limit as measured individually. See
Illustration 1-5.
EPA is recommending that systems substitute gross alpha for radium-226 only if previous gross alpha
results are less than the gross alpha detection limit (i.e., 3 pCi/L). With a gross alpha result at or above
3 pCi/L, the system is at risk for violating the combined radium-226/228 MCL of 5 pCi/L and therefore
should monitor individually for radium-226/228.
I-C. 4.f Use of Gross Alpha Measurements for Uranium
A gross alpha particle activity measurement may be substituted for the required uranium measurement if
the gross alpha particle activity is less than or equal to 15 pCi/L. States should assume all of the gross
alpha activity is due to uranium. If the gross alpha particle activity is greater than 15 pCi/L, then samples
must be collected for uranium (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
Uranium analysis will serve a dual purpose for
systems with EPTDSs that have high levels of
gross alpha activity. First, the uranium activity
can be subtracted from gross alpha to determine
compliance with an EPTDS's gross alpha MCL.
Second, the results can be used to determine an
entry point's future monitoring frequency for
uranium.
I-C. 4.g. Uranium Mass to Activity Ratios and
Determining Compliance with the
Gross Alpha MCL
States may subtract the uranium activity from the
gross alpha particle activity to determine
compliance with the gross alpha MCL, which is
referred to in this section as "net alpha" (i.e.
gross alpha particle activity minus the uranium
activity). Unless an activity measurement has
been analyzed and reported to the State by the
laboratory, the State must convert the uranium
mass measurement to activity using a conversion
factor of 0.67 pCi/(ig. States may also convert
uranium activity values to mass by multiplying
the uranium activity by 1.49 (ig/pCi (40 CFR
141.25 Footnote 12). See Illustration 1-6.
At this time, conversion factors that have been
calculated by assessing the uranium mass to
activity ratios for individual systems may not be
used (40 CFR 141.25 Footnote 12). However, if
the uranium analysis is reported in mass and
activity, the laboratory-analyzed uranium activity
level may be used for determining compliance
with the "net alpha" MCL.
ILLUSTRATION 1-6
Uranium Conversion and Calculation of "Net
Alpha"
A system collects samples for gross alpha and
uranium. The laboratory reports the following
analytical results to the State.
Gross alpha: 24 ± 3 pCi/L (EPA method 900.0)
Uranium: 21 ng/L (EPA method 900.8)
Based on the above results, the State determines:
The uranium mass was converted by multiplying
the measured value by 0.67 pCi/ng (i.e. 21 ng/L
x 0.67 pCi/ng = 14 pCi/L). The converted
uranium activity (14 pCi/L) was subtracted from
the measured gross alpha (24 pCi/L) yielding
10 pCi/L "net alpha". The "net alpha" value was
used to determine compliance with the gross
alpha MCL (15 pCi/L).
The system is in compliance with the uranium
MCL and is required to collect a uranium sample
in the next three-year compliance period (i.e.,
one sample every three years for results >!/2 the
MCL but < MCL).
The system is in compliance with the gross
alpha MCL and is required to collect another
gross alpha sample in the next three-year
compliance period (i.e., the calculated "net
alpha" value of 10 pCi/L is >'/2 the MCL but
< MCL).
1-16
-------
Systems and laboratories must report the gross alpha particle activity and the uranium analytical results
to the State. EPA recommends that the State subtract the uranium activity from the gross alpha particle
activity to determine compliance with the "net alpha" MCL.
I-C.4.h Compositing
States may allow systems to collect up to four consecutive quarterly samples from a single EPTDS and
have the laboratory composite them temporally (i.e., samples that are collected from a single entry point
during different quarters). Temporal compositing is allowed for uranium, gross alpha, radium-226
(provided a detection limit of 1 pCi/L is met) and radium-228 (provided a detection limit of 1 pCi/L is
met) for up to four consecutive quarterly samples if analysis is done within one year of the first sample.
1-17
-------
Table 1-4: Summary of Monitoring Frequencies for Gross Alpha, Uranium, and
Radium-226/228
Initial
40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)
Reduced
40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)
GROSS ALPHA AND URANIUM
Four consecutive quarters of monitoring at each entry
point.*
* Systems may substitute the gross alpha results that
are less than or equal to 15 pCi/L for uranium to
determine compliance and the reduced monitoring
frequency. Systems with a gross alpha result greater
than 15 pCi/L must collect uranium sample(s) to
determine compliance and reduced monitoring
(40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
One
sample
every:
Nine years if the average of the initial
monitoring for each contaminant is below
the detection limit listed in 40 CFR
141.25(c).
Six years if the average of the initial
monitoring results for each contaminant is
at or above the detection limit but at or
below one-half the MCL.
Three years if the average of the initial
monitoring results for each contaminant is
above one-half the MCL but at or below
the MCL.
Systems may composite up to four consecutive
quarterly samples from a single entry point if analysis
is done within a year of the first sample (40 CFR
141.26(a)(4)).
If the result from the composited samples is less than
or equal to one-half the MCL, reduce in accordance
with the above schedule. A State may require a system
to take additional quarterly samples before allowing
the system to reduce the frequency of monitoring if the
result from the composited samples is greater than
one-half the MCL (40 CFR 141.26(a)(4)).
COMBINED RADIUM-226 AND RADIUM-228
Four consecutive quarters of monitoring at each entry
point.*
* Systems may substitute the gross alpha results that
are less than or equal to 5 pCi/L for radium-226 to
determine compliance and the reduced monitoring
frequency. Systems with a gross alpha result greater
than 5 pCi/L must collect radium-226 samples to
determine compliance and reduced monitoring
(40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)).
One
sample
every:
Nine years if the average of the initial
monitoring for combined radium-226/228
is below the detection limit listed in
40 CFR 141.25(c).
Six years if the average of the combined
initial monitoring results for combined
radium-226/228 is at or above the
detection limit but at or below one-half the
MCL.
Three years if the average of the initial
monitoring results for combined radium-
226/228 is above one-half the MCL but at
or below the MCL.
Systems may composite up to four consecutive
quarterly samples from a single entry point if analysis
is done within a year of the first sample (40 CFR
141.26(a)(4)).
If the result from the composited samples is less than
or equal to one-half the MCL, reduce in accordance
with the above schedule. A State may require a
system to take additional quarterly samples before
allowing the system to reduce the frequency of
monitoring if the result from the composited samples
is greater than one-half the MCL (40 CFR
141.26(a)(4)).
1-18
-------
I-C.5 Grandfathered Data
The Radionuclides Rule balances the need
to ensure that the concentrations of
regulated radionuclides are at or below the
MCL at each EPTDS with the recognition
that some systems have been monitoring for
certain radionuclides for almost 25 years.
The Rule also provides States the flexibility
to decide, on a case-by-case analysis of a
system's historical data or individual
circumstances, whether to approve the use
of grandfathered data and the number of
samples required to provide a sufficient
indication that the radionuclide activity will
remain below the observed levels. A State
must describe in its Primacy Application
the procedures and criteria that it will use
to determine the acceptability of
grandfathered data (40 CFR 142.16(1)(1)).
States may allow systems to use
grandfathered data to comply with the
initial monitoring requirements for gross
alpha, radium-226/228, and uranium under
some circumstances, including the
following:
• Systems with one EPTDS collect
monitoring data between June 2000
and December 8, 2003 (see
Illustration 1-7);
• Systems with multiple EPTDS
collect samples for each entry point
between June 2000 and December
8, 2003; or,
• Systems collect data from a representative point in the distribution system between June 2000
and December 8, 2003. The State must make a written finding that the data are representative of
each entry point based on the variability of historical contaminant monitoring results and other
factors listed in the special primacy section of the State Primacy Program application (40 CFR
141.26(a)(2)(n)).
EPA is encouraging States to have systems monitor for uranium before the effective date of The
Radionuclides Rule. A system that samples for uranium before December 8, 2003, and has a sampling
result:
Less than the 30 (ig/L MCL, can grandfather the data if the State permits it.
Greater than or equal 30 (ig/L, must, when directed by the State, take four consecutive quarterly
samples during the initial monitoring period. Even though the system has sampling results above
ILLUSTRATION 1-7
Use of Grandfathered Data to Satisfy the Initial
Monitoring Requirements
A system with one EPTDS has collected gross alpha
samples for the two previous compliance periods (1992-
1996 and 1996-2000). The State tells the system that if it
collects samples at the EPTDS for gross alpha, radium-226,
radium-228, and uranium between June 2000 and
December 8, 2003, it may be able to grandfather this data
and will therefore not be subject to the initial quarterly
monitoring requirements when the new Rule goes into
effect. The system collects the samples during 2002 and
finds concentrations of: 5 pCi/L for gross alpha, 2 pCi/L for
radium-226, 3 pCi/L for radium-228, and does not detect
uranium.
The State uses these data to set a compliance schedule of:
One sample every six years for gross alpha since the
result was greater than the detection level but less
than one-half the MCL. The system would have to
take the next sample between 2008 and 2013.
One sample every three years for combined radium-
226/228 since the combined result (2 pCi/L +
3 pCi/L) is greater than one-half the MCL but less
than or equal to the MCL. The system must take the
next sample between 2008 and 2010.
One sample every nine years for uranium since the
sample was less than the regulatory detection limit.
The system must take the next sample between 2008
and 2016.
1-19
-------
the MCL, the system will not be in violation of the uranium standard on the effective date of the
Rule (December 8, 2003). However, EPA is encouraging systems that have high levels of
uranium to initiate plans to resolve the public health risk.
Systems are prohibited from using grandfathered data to satisfy the monitoring requirements for beta
particle and photon radioactivity. This prohibition was established in the 1976 Radionuclides Rule and
the revised Radionuclides Rule does not deviate from this standard (40 CFR 141.26(b)).
I-C.6 Monitoring Waivers
A State cannot allow a system to forego initial or reduced monitoring (40 CFR 141.26). A State has the
authority to waive the final two quarters of initial monitoring for a sampling point if the results of the
samples from the two previous quarters are below the detection limit (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(iii)).
The State cannot allow a system to forego monitoring of beta and photon emitters if the system has been
designated as "vulnerable" or "contaminated" (40 CFR 141.26(b)).
I-C.7 Requirements for New Systems/Sources
New CWSs and systems that begin using a new source
of supply must conduct initial monitoring for gross
alpha, radium-226/228, and uranium. [Systems have to
collect sample(s) for uranium only if the gross alpha
level is greater than 15 pCi/L.] In accordance with the
initial monitoring requirements, this monitoring must
begin within the first quarter after initiating use of the
new source (40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)(ii)). New systems
or systems using a new source of supply may also
have to sample for beta particle and photon
radioactivity if required by the State. See Appendix A
for a flowchart that summarizes the monitoring
requirements for new systems and sources.
States may require new PWSs, systems that bring on
new water sources, or systems that have no prior
history of radionuclide monitoring to develop an
occurrence profile (i.e. collect one sample of gross
alpha, radium-226, and radium-228) to determine if it
is necessary to monitor for uranium. States can also
use the profile to determine for which radionuclides
the system must monitor during the initial monitoring
period. All new systems must collect samples in
accordance with the monitoring requirements outlined
in Section I-C.4 of this document. See
Illustration 1-8.8
ILLUSTRATION 1-8
New System Monitoring
A water system that commences operation in
2004 collects its first quarterly sample for gross
alpha, radium-226, and radium-228. The results
are:
Gross alpha = 1 pCi/L
Radium-226 = 0.5 pCi/L
Radium-228 = no detect
The system decides to collect only radium-228
and gross alpha in the remaining quarterly
samples and substitute the gross alpha results for
radium-226 and uranium.
The results for the next three quarters are all
below the detection limit for gross alpha and
radium-228. The State allows the system to
reduce the monitoring frequency for gross alpha
and uranium to one sample every nine years and
one sample every six years for combined radium-
226/228.
Guidance.
8For additional illustrations and examples, please see Appendix E: SDWIS/FED DTP Reporting Requirements
1-20
-------
I-C.8 Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
This section presents the initial, reduced, and increased monitoring requirements for the beta particle and
photon radioactivity. Only CWSs designated by the State as "vulnerable" or "contaminated" need to
monitor for beta particle and photon radioactivity. EPA believes that the State is in the best position to
determine which systems are vulnerable to, or contaminated by, beta and photon emitters. States should
use existing vulnerability assessments (required under the 1976 Radionuclides Rule) to notify systems of
their status (i.e., vulnerable or contaminated) and of the monitoring requirements. The beta particle and
photon radioactivity monitoring requirements are summarized in Appendix A.
EPA is encouraging States to re-evaluate a system's vulnerability to beta particle and photon emitting
sources when conducting a system's source water assessment (SWA) and to immediately notify systems
that have been deemed vulnerable or contaminated. When using a SWA as a tool for identifying
vulnerable systems, the time of travel for radioactive emitters that may be identified in the source area
should be a minimum of three years. The Agency recommends that States use all available resources to
determine a system's vulnerability to beta particle and photon emitters, including the following:
• Evaluation of the quality and completeness of any historical beta particle and photon emitter
monitoring results and the proximity of the results to the MCL. Systems with wide variations in
the analytical results, or analytical results close to the MCL, should be considered to be
contaminated by a radioactive source.
• The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's list of licensees and locations in the State and
surrounding States. (The State may want to eliminate facilities that only handle sealed sources of
radioactive material.)
• Geology of the aquifer and/or hydrology of the watershed.
• The location and proximity of the drinking water facility to (list is not all inclusive):
— Nuclear power facilities;
— Department of Energy facilities;
— Military bases (Department of Defense facilities);
— National priority list facilities that have been identified as radiation-contaminated sites
through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act;
and,
— Leaking landfills.
I-C. 8. a Initial Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
The Radionuclides Rule requires systems to monitor for beta particle and photon radioactivity under the
following circumstances:
• The system is designated by the State as vulnerable. Vulnerable systems must collect quarterly
samples for beta emitters and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each EPTDS
(40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)). Sampling must begin the quarter after the system is notified by the State.
1-21
-------
The system is designated by the State as utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear
facilities. These systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and iodine-131, and
annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each EPTDS (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)). More
frequent monitoring is required if iodine-131 is found in finished water (40 CFR
141.26(b)(2)(ii)). Sampling must begin the quarter after the system is notified by the State.
For the quarterly monitoring requirements for gross beta particle activity, samples must be
collected and analyzed monthly or the composite of three monthly samples must be collected and
analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(i)). For the quarterly monitoring requirements for iodine-131,
samples must be collected for five consecutive days, composited, and analyzed (40 CFR
141.26(b)(2)(n)).
For the annual monitoring requirements for tritium and strontium-90, samples must be collected
quarterly and analyzed or composited and analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(iii)). In all cases,
laboratories should be responsible for compositing the samples prior to analysis.
The State, at its own discretion, requires the system to collect samples (40 CFR 141.26(b)).
I-C. 8. b Reduced Mon itoringfor Beta Particle an d Ph oton Radioactivity
A State may allow a system to reduce the frequency of monitoring to once every three years if:
• In a vulnerable system, the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-
40 beta particle activity has a running annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to
50 pCi/L (40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)(i)).
• In a system designated by the State as utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear
facilities, the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle
activity has a running annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 15 pCi/L
(40CFR141.26(b)(2)(iv)).
1-C.S.c Increased Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
A system that exceeds the gross beta particle activity screening level, excluding the naturally occurring
potassium-40, must further analyze the sample for the major radioactive constituents9 (40 CFR
141.26(b)(5)). The beta particle screening levels are 50 pCi/L for systems determined by the State to be
vulnerable to contamination (40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)(i)) and 15 pCi/L for systems utilizing waters
contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(iv)). The system must determine
compliance with the MCLs for beta particle and photon radioactivity by using the calculation described
in 40 CFR 141.66(d)(2). See also Section II-B.2.
If the results show an MCL violation for any of the constituents, the system must conduct monthly
monitoring at any sampling point that exceeds the MCL beginning the month after the exceedance
occurs. A system can resume quarterly monitoring if the rolling average of three months of samples is at
or below the MCL (40 CFR 141.26(b)(6)).
9A State should require a system to speciate the sample for the most likely emitters associated with the nearby source.
1-22
-------
I-C. 8. d Use of Environmental Surveillance Data for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
Measurements
States that allow systems to use environmental surveillance data collected by a nuclear facility in lieu of
the water system's required beta particle and photon radioactivity monitoring should review the data to
determine if they are applicable to the water system. If the surveillance data indicate that there has been
a release, systems must begin collecting quarterly samples for beta particle and photon radioactivity at
each EPTDS (40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)(ii) and 141.26(b)(2)(v)).
Table 1-5: Monitoring Frequencies for Beta Particle and Photon Radioactivity
Initial
40 CFR 141.26(b)(l) & (b)(2)
Reduced
40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)(i) & (b)(2)(iv)
BETA PARTICLE AND PHOTON RADIOACTIVITY
Vulnerable CWSs (as designated by the State):
Quarterly samples for beta emitters and annual samples
for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point, within
one quarter after being notified by the State. Already
designated systems must continue to sample in
accordance with the compliance schedule (40 CFR
CWSs utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from
nuclear facilities (as designated by the State): Quarterly
samples for beta emitters and iodine-131 and annual
samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry
point, within one quarter of being notified by the State.
Already designated systems must continue to sample in
accordance with the compliance schedule (40 CFR
141.26(b)(2)).
One
sample
every:
Three years if the gross beta particle
activity minus the naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity has a
running annual average less than or equal
to the screening level of 50 pCi/L (40 CFR
Three years if the gross beta particle
activity minus the naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity has a
running annual average less than or equal
to the screening level of 15 pCi/L (40 CFR
1-23
-------
I-C.9 Laboratory Methods
This section summarizes the testing procedures that have been approved by EPA to provide reliable
compliance monitoring of radionuclides in drinking water.
I-C.9.a Radionuclides Methods
In 1976, EPA published interim standards for radionuclides in drinking water and approved
radiochemical methods to analyze for gross alpha-particle activity, radium-226, total gross radium alpha,
gross beta-particle activity, strontium-89 and strontium-90, cesium-134, and NPDWRs Primary Drinking
Water Regulations in the 1986 SDWA Amendments.
On July 18, 1991, EPA proposed to approve 56 additional methods to measure radionuclides (excluding
radon) in drinking water (56 FR 33050). EPA approved 54 of the 56 methods in the March 5, 1997, final
methods rule (62 FR 10168). In response to public comments on the 1991 proposed rule, EPA evaluated
and approved an additional 12 techniques. In total, EPA approved 66 radiochemical methods on
March 5, 1997 (62 FR 10168). Currently, approximately 90 radiochemical methods are approved for
compliance monitoring of radionuclides in drinking water.
The approved radionuclide methods are listed in 40 CFR 141.25. EPA's laboratory certification manual
describes each method's quality control requirements for sample handling, preservation, holding times,
and instrumentation (Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing Drinking Water, EPA 815-
B-97-001).
I-C. 9. b Updates Regarding Analytical Techniques
EPA is currently reviewing :
The use of an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) method for uranium
analysis.
The feasibility of using gamma spectrometry for radium-228 analysis.
I-C.9.C Externalization of the Performance Evaluation Program
On July 18, 1996, EPA proposed options for the externalization of the Performance Evaluation (PE)
studies program (now referred to as the Proficiency Testing or PT program) (61 FR 37464). EPA issued
a final notice on June 12, 1997, after evaluating public comment. The Agency
"...decided on a program where EPA would issue standards for the operation of the program, the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) would develop standards for private
sector PE (PT) suppliers and would evaluate and accredit PE suppliers, and the private sector
would develop and manufacture PE (PT) materials and conduct PE (PT) studies. In addition, as
part of the program, the PE (PT) providers would report the results of the studies to the study
participants and to those organizations that have responsibility for administering programs
supported by the studies" (62 FR 32112).
The PT externalization may affect the implementation of the Radionuclides Rule by causing a short-term
disruption in laboratory accreditation, laboratory capacity, cost of analysis, and workloads of
laboratories. To alleviate concerns about the costs of PT samples, States have the option of approving
their own PT sample providers that can be used instead of the independent third-party provider who will
1-24
-------
be accredited by NIST. EPA anticipates that radionuclide PT samples will be available in time to allow
for laboratory certification before compliance monitoring is required.
To alleviate concerns about potential laboratory capacity problems, EPA extended the initial monitoring
period from three to four years so that it would end on December 31, 2007. Also, EPA is allowing
systems to grandfather and composite data under certain circumstances. In addition, EPA is not
requiring nontransient noncommunity water systems (NTNCWSs) to monitor for radionuclides and is not
requiring a 48-to-72 hour turn-around for gross alpha particle activity.
I-C. 9.d The Detection Limits as the Required Measures of Sensitivity
In 1976, the NPDWRs defined the detection limit (DL) as "the concentration which can be counted with
a precision of plus or minus 100 percent at the 95 percent confidence level (1.96 o, where o is the
standard deviation of the net counting rate of the sample)" (40 CFR 141.25(c)).
EPA maintained the DLs from the 1976 Rule. Table 1-6 cites the DLs or the required sensitivity for the
specific radioanalyses that were listed in the 1976 Rule and are also cited in 40 CFR 141.25.
Table 1-6: Required Regulatory Detection Limits for the Various Radionuclide
Emitters (40 CFR 141.25)
Contaminant
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Radium-226
Radium-228
Uranium
Cesium- 134
Strontium-89
Strontium-90
Iodine-131
Tritium
Other Radionuclides
Detection Limit (pCi/L)
3
4
1
1
To be determined10
10
10
2
1
1,000
l/10th of the applicable limit
10ADL for uranium is not listed in 40 CFR 141.25 and none was proposed in the 1991 proposal. EPA did propose a
practical quantification level (PQL) and an acceptance limit but in order to be consistent with other regulated radionuclides, is
not adopting the PQL. The Agency will propose a detection limit for uranium in future rulemaking and will set the limit before
December 8, 2003 (the compliance date for the Rule).
1-25
-------
I-C.10 Treatment Technologies and Cost Estimates
When promulgating an MCL, EPA must list:
Best Available Technologies (BATs). The technologies, treatments, and techniques listed in the
Radionuclides Rule (40 CFR 141.66(g)) were determined by EPA to be the BATs for the
removal of radionuclides in drinking water based on a demonstration of efficacy under field
condition taking cost into consideration. Table 1-7, below, lists the BATs identified by EPA.
EPA evaluated technologies and costs for radionuclides in drinking water in 1992. The
evaluations were updated in a Technologies and Costs draft (1999) and a radium compliance cost
study (1998).
Table 1-7: BATs for Radionuclides in Drinking Water
Contaminant
Combined radium-226 and radium-228
Gross alpha (excluding radon and uranium)
Beta particle and photon radioactivity
Uranium
BAT
Ion Exchange, Lime Softening, Reverse Osmosis
Reverse Osmosis
Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis
Ion Exchange, Lime Softening; Reverse Osmosis,
Enhanced Coagulation/Filtration*
: This assumes that a system already has coagulation/filtration in place.
Systems are not required to use BATs to achieve compliance with the MCL. Any technology
that is accepted by the State primacy agency and achieves compliance with the MCL is allowed.
However, if a system is unable to meet the MCL with its chosen technology, the system is not
eligible for a variance unless it has installed a BAT and still cannot achieve compliance (40 CFR
142.65(a)(2)). For more information on variances and exemptions, see Section I-C.ll below.
Small System Compliance Technologies. The technologies examined for BAT determinations
were also evaluated as SSCTs. EPA must list SSCTs for three sizes of small systems: systems
serving between 25 and 500 persons, systems serving between 501 and 3,300 persons, and
systems serving between 3,301 and 10,000 persons. The listed SSCTs are affordable for small
systems and will achieve compliance with the MCL.
Because EPA has listed SSCTs, small systems:
— Will have the latitude to choose the type of treatment technology that is most cost-
effective and appropriate (from an operation and maintenance standpoint).
— Are not eligible for small system variances since there are affordable technologies that
will achieve compliance with the MCLs.
— May be eligible for a variance if it has installed or agreed to install the BAT or SSCT,
but, due to source water quality, the system will not be in compliance with the MCL.
(See Section I-A. 11 .c below.)
EPA evaluated the BATs, other technologies, and point-of-use (POU) and point-of-entry (POE)
devices to determine the SSCTs. POE units treat all of the water entering a household or other
1-26
-------
building, so that treated water comes from any tap. POU treatment units treat water only at a
particular tap or faucet. The result is treated water at that one tap and untreated water at the other
taps. POE and POU treatment units often use the same technological concepts employed in the
analogous central treatment processes, the main difference being the much smaller scale of the
device itself and the flows being treated. However, POE technologies are not listed as small
systems compliance technologies for radionuclides since they are considered emerging
technologies and due to concerns regarding waste disposal and costs. (Small System Compliance
Technology Lists for Non-microbial Contaminants Regulated Before 1996).
EPA believes that it is feasible for a small system to own, control, and maintain POU devices for
radionuclide MCL compliance. To ensure that POU devices are as protective of public health as
central treatment, SDWA requires that (SDWA §1412(b)(4)(E)(ii)):
POU units be owned, controlled, and maintained by the PWS or by a contractor hired by
the PWS to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the devices and compliance with
the MCLs.
POU units have mechanical warnings to automatically notify customers of operational
problems.
The successful implementation of a POU treatment strategy will require a system to address
several issues:
As with any treatment technology, not all treatment devices are compatible with all
sources of water. Pilot testing on the local source water is necessary prior to the
implementation of a POU strategy.
The system must be able to obtain regular access to POU units to perform necessary
maintenance and monitoring. Some systems have successfully passed local ordinances
requiring access to be granted as a condition of water delivery. Public education is also
crucial to the success of a POU strategy.
Implementing a POU treatment strategy will require a rigorous preventative maintenance
program. Devices may also require frequent sampling. Systems should ensure, prior to
implementation, that they have available staff to perform the necessary maintenance,
monitoring, and record keeping, or they can make arrangements to contract out their
maintenance and monitoring duties.
EPA is currently developing a Centrally Managed Point-of-Entry and Point-of-Use Compliance
Strategy to further analyze some of the implementation issues surrounding the use of these
devices. For additional information see the Draft Implementation Guidance for the Arsenic Rule
Appendix G at www.epa.gov/safewater/ars/dimpappx.pdf
Table 1-8 lists the small system compliance technologies for radionuclides and the limitations of
their use. Table 1-9 lists the Small Systems Compliance Technologies for the currently regulated
radionuclides that are appropriate for the three system size categories designated in the SDWA.
The technology numbers in Table 1-9 refer to the technologies listed in Table 1-8.
1-27
-------
Table 1-8: List of Small Systems Compliance Technologies for Radionuclides and Limitations of Use
Unit Technologies
1 . Ion Exchange (IE)
2. Point of Use (POU2) IE
3. Reverse Osmosis (RO)
4. POU2 RO
5. Lime Softening
6. Green Sand Filtration
7. Co-precipitation with Barium Sulfate
8. Electrodialysis/Electrodialysis Reversal
9. Pre-formed Hydrous Manganese Oxide
Filtration
10. Activated alumina
11. Enhanced Coagulation/filtration
Limitations
(see footnotes)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(b)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(a), (h)
(i)
Operator Skill Level
Required1
Intermediate
Basic
Advanced
Basic
Advanced
Basic
Intermediate to Advanced
Basic to Intermediate
Intermediate
Advanced
Advanced
Raw Water Quality Range & Considerations1
All ground waters
All ground waters
Surface waters usually require pre-filtration
Surface waters usually require pre-filtration
All waters
Ground waters with suitable water quality
All ground waters
All ground waters
All ground waters; competing anion concentrations may
affect regeneration frequency
Can treat a wide range of water qualities
National Research Council (NRC). Safe Water from Every Tap: Improving Water Service to Small Communities. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 1997.
2 A POU, or "point-of-use," technology is a treatment device installed at a single tap used for the purpose of reducing contaminants in drinking water at that one tap. POU devices are typically
installed at the kitchen tap. See the April 21, 2000, NODA for more details.
Limitations Footnotes: Technologies for Radionuclides
a The regeneration solution contains high concentrations of the contaminant ions. Disposal options should be carefully considered before choosing this technology.
b When POU devices are used for compliance, programs for long-term operation, maintenance, and monitoring must be provided by water utility to ensure proper performance.
0 Reject water disposal options should be carefully considered before choosing this technology. See other RO limitations described in the SWTR Compliance Technologies Table.
d The combination of variable source water quality and the complexity of the water chemistry involved may make this technology too complex for small surface water systems.
' Removal efficiencies can vary depending on water quality.
f This technology may be very limited in application to small systems. Since the process requires static mixing, detention basins, and filtration, it is most applicable to systems with sufficiently high
sulfate levels that already have a suitable filtration treatment train in place
' This technology is most applicable to small systems that already have filtration in place.
h Handling of chemicals required during regeneration and pH adjustment may be too difficult for small systems without an adequately trained operator.
1 Assumes modification to a coagulation/filtration process already in place.
1-28
-------
Table 1-9: Compliance Technologies by System Size Category for Radionuclide
NPDWRs (Affordability Not Considered, Except for Uranium, Due to Statutory
Limitations)
Contaminant
Combined radium-226 and
radium-228
Gross alpha particle activity
Beta particle activity and photon
activity
Uranium
Compliance Technologies1 for System Size Categories
(Population Served)
25 - 500
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
3,4
1, 2, 3, 4
1,2,4, 10, 11
501 - 3,300
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
3,4
1, 2, 3, 4
1,2,3,4,5, 10, 11
3,301 - 10,000
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
3,4
1, 2, 3, 4
1,2,3,4,5, 10, 11
1 Numbers correspond to those technologies found listed in the Table 1-8
1-C.lO.a Waste Treatment, Handling and Disposal Guidance
EPA has developed guidance for system managers, engineers, and State agencies responsible for the safe
handling and disposal of treatment wastes that, in many cases, are not specifically addressed by any
statute ("Suggested Guidelines for Disposal of Drinking Water Treatment Wastes Containing Naturally-
Occurring Radionuclides," EPA 1994, Updated November 2000. The guidelines will be posted on
http://www.epa.gov). The guidance provides information on the following:
• Background on water treatment processes and characteristics of wastes generated;
• Rationale for radiation protection, including citation of programs and regulations affecting other
sources of such waste;
• Guidelines for several methods of disposal of solid and liquid type wastes containing the subject
radionuclides; and,
• The specification of practical guidance to protect workers and others who may handle or be
exposed to water-treatment wastes containing radiation above background levels.
I-C.10.b Technology Cost Estimates
In accordance with federal rulemaking process, EPA estimated the costs and benefits of the changes to
the 1976 Radionuclides Rule by preparing an Economic Analysis of the Radionuclides National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations (November 2000). The Economic Analysis was an update to the Health
Risk Reduction and Cost Analysis announced in the NODA.
States and systems are expected to incur costs for two requirements under the Radionuclides Rule:
compliance with the uranium MCL and individually monitoring for radium-228. EPA estimates that
these requirements will result in annual compliance costs of $81 million and State implementation costs
of $0.6 million.11 Table 1-10 shows a breakdown of expected compliance costs.
All cost estimates are in 1999 dollars.
1-29
-------
Table 1-10: Summary of Cost Estimates
Numbers of systems impacted
( population exposed above MCL)1
Best-estimate of annual compliance
costs
(in millions of $/year)
Systems impacted by corrections to the monitoring deficiencies for combined radium-226 and -228
Eliminate combined radium
monitoring
295 systems (420,000 persons)
$25
Systems predicted to be out of compliance with proposed options for uranium MCL
Uranium at 30 ug/L
500 systems (620,000 persons)
$51
Notes: Compliance costs do not include monitoring and reporting costs, which comprise an additional $5 million annually. Ranges based on
directly proportional versus lognormal distribution approach.
1 Compared to the initial baseline (i.e., occurrence data are adjusted to eliminate existing MCL violations) for combined radium. Occurrence data
is unadjusted for uranium options.
I-C.ll Variances and Exemptions
I-C. 11. a Varian ces
If a system cannot meet MCLs because of the characteristics of its raw water sources, it may be eligible
for a variance under SDWA Section 1415(a) on condition that:
The system install a BAT (all system sizes), an SSCT (systems serving fewer than 10,001
persons), or other means as determined by EPA; and,
A State evaluation indicates that alternative sources of water are not reasonably available.
While a variance may allow a system to provide water that exceeds the MCL, it will only be granted if
the quality of the water delivered under the variance will not result in an unreasonable risk to health.
Eligibility for a variance from the MCLs for gross alpha, combined radium-226/228, uranium, and beta
particle and photon emitters requires that the system install, operate, and maintain a technology specified
in the final Radionuclides Rule and enter into a compliance schedule with the State (40 CFR 142.65).
I-C.ll.b Exemptions
While the primacy agency may grant exemptions from MCLs and/or treatment technique requirements in
NPDWRs as provided for under SDWA Section 1416, these exemptions may only extend the applicable
compliance date three years.12 Since the MCLs for gross alpha, radium 226/228, and total beta particle
and photon emitters were promulgated in 1976, no more exemptions may be granted.
However, exemptions may be granted from the MCL for uranium if:
Due to compelling factors the PWS is unable to comply with the MCL or implement measures to
develop an alterative source of water supply;
12In the case of a system that serves 3,300 persons or fewer, or needs financial assistance for improvements, additional
exemptions totaling no more than six years may be granted.
1-30
-------
The PWS was in operation on December 2003 or, if the system was not operating by this date, no
reasonable alternative source of drinking water is available;
The exemption will not result in an unreasonable risk to public health; and,
Management and restructuring changes can not reasonably be made to lead to MCL compliance
or improve the quality of water.
Exemptions from the uranium MCL may be granted to systems of all sizes. When granting an
exemption, the State must issue a schedule requiring compliance as expeditiously as practicable but no
laterthan December 8, 2016.
EPA is currently developing guidance on the implementation of the exemptions provisions for the
Arsenic Rule. For additional information, and to review the draft guidance, see the Draft Implementation
Guidance for the Arsenic Rule Appendix H at www.epa.gov/safewater/ars/dimpappx.pdf
1-31
-------
Section II.
SDWIS Reporting, Violation
Determination, and SNC
Definitions
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
11-2
-------
II-A. SDWIS Reporting
Table II-1 summarizes the Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal (SDWIS/FED) reporting
requirements for the Revised Radionuclides Final Rule. The summary contains SDWIS/FED violation
and contaminant codes.
This table lists only potential federal violations. Appendix E provides SDWIS/FED Data Transfer
Format (DTP) reporting guidance on how to place these violations in the appropriate structure so that
SDWIS/FED can accept them, when reported.
Table II-1: Revised Radionuclides Final Rule Federal Reporting Violations
Contaminant
Code
4000
4010
4006
4100
4102
4174
4264
Contaminant
Gross Alpha
Combined Radium (-226 &-22S)
Combined Uranium
Gross Beta Particle Activity
Tritium
Strontium-90
Iodine-131
Violation
02, 03, 08
02, 03, 08
02, 03, 08
02, 03, 08
03,08
03,08
03,08
Note: Violation Types and Definitions
02 - MCL, Average
03 - Failure to Monitor/Report
08 - Variance/Exemption/Other Compliance Schedule
II-3
-------
II-B. Violation Determination
II-B.l Violation/Compliance Determination for Gross Alpha, Radium-226/228,
and Uranium
States must determine compliance based on the analytical result(s) obtained at each EPTDS (40 CFR
141.26(c)(3)). A system is in violation if:
• Any sampling point is in violation of an MCL (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)).
Any sample result will cause the running annual average to exceed the MCL at any EPTDS (i.e.,
the analytical result is greater than four times the MCL) (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)(i)).
For systems monitoring more than once per year, compliance with the MCL is determined by a running
annual average at each sampling point. Systems that monitor annually or less frequently and whose
sample result exceeds the MCL must revert to quarterly sampling for that contaminant during the next
quarter. Systems are required to conduct quarterly monitoring only at the EPTDS at which the sample
was collected and for the specific contaminant that triggered the system into the increased monitoring
frequency. Systems triggered into increased monitoring will not be considered in violation of the MCL
until they have completed one year of quarterly sampling (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)).
If a system does not collect all required samples when compliance is based on a running annual average
of quarterly samples, compliance will be based on the running annual average of the samples collected
(40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)(iv)). If a sample result is less than the method detection limit, zero will be used to
calculate the annual average. However, if a gross alpha particle activity result is being used in lieu of
radium-226 or uranium, then half the detection limit will be used to calculate the annual average (40 CFR
141.26(c)(3)(v)). States have the discretion to delete results of obvious sampling or analytic errors
(40CFR141.26(c)(4)).
States still have the flexibility to require confirmation samples for positive or negative results.13 States
may require more than one confirmation sample to determine the average exposure over a three month
period. Confirmation samples must be averaged with the original analytical result to calculate an average
(40 CFR 141.26(c)(l)). The three-month average would be used as one of the quarterly concentrations
for determining the running annual average. The running annual average must be used for compliance
determinations (40 CFR 141.26(c)(l)).
The Rule requires that monitoring be conducted at all entry points to the distribution system. However,
the State can require monitoring and determine compliance based on a case-by-case analysis of
individual drinking water systems. EPA encourages drinking water systems to inform State regulators of
their individual circumstances. Some systems have implemented elaborate plans including targeted,
increased monitoring that is much more representative of the average annual mean contaminant
concentration to which individuals are being exposed. (Some States determine compliance based on a
time-or-flow weighted average.) In many cases, the State can demonstrate that compliance is being
calculated based on scientific methods that are more representative of the true contaminant concentration
to which individuals are being exposed over a year, but it substantially increases the sampling and
analytical costs. Some States require that systems collect samples from wells that operate for only one
month out of the year regardless of whether they are operating during scheduled sampling times. The
13At a State's discretion, a system may be required to take additional samples to confirm sampling results.
II-4
-------
State may determine compliance based on several factors including the quantity of water supplied by a
source, the duration of service of the source, and contaminant concentration.
II-B.2 Violation/Compliance Determination for Gross Beta and Photon Emitters
The Radionuclides Rule uses a "sum-of-the-fractions" method to determine whether a system is in
compliance with the MCL for beta particle and photon radioactivity (40 CFR 141.66(d)). This method is
used because each photon emitter targets a different organ of the body, which results in a different
magnitude of risk. The sum of the beta and photon emitters shall not exceed 4 millirems/year (40 CFR
141.66(d)(2)).
While the measure used in risk calculations is "millirems," contaminants are analyzed in "pCi/L."
Therefore, to determine compliance, each beta and photon emitter must be converted from pCi/L to
millirems using the conversion tables listed in "Maximum Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum
Permissible Concentrations of Radionuclides in Air or Water for Occupational Exposure" [National
Bureau of Standards (NBS) Handbook 69 as amended August, 1963, U.S. Department of Commerce].
See Appendix I for the conversion tables.
The column titled "1976 limits based on critical organ at 4 mrem/yr" indicates what 4 mrem of exposure
would be for that contaminant expressed as pCi/L. For each emitter that is detected by the laboratory, the
system must divide the pCi/L found in the sample by the value in the conversion tables. This provides a
fraction of how much the particular beta or photon emitter is providing towards the maximum of
4 mrem/year for all of the beta photon emitters.
pCi/L found in sample
(from laboratory results) = fraction Qf ^ maximum 4 ^^^
pCi/L equivalent of 4 mrem of exposure (from exposure limit
conversion table)
Each fraction must then be converted to a dose equivalent of 4 mrem/year by multiplying the fraction by
4. The results for each emitter must be summed to determine compliance See Illustration II-1.
II-5
-------
ILLUSTRATION II-1
Conversion of Beta Particle and Photon Emitters
A water system near a nuclear power facility collects a sample which the laboratory speciates by EPA method
902.0 (gamma spectrometry analysis). The laboratory also analyses for strontium-90 using EPA method 905.0.
The analysis indicates the following:
Cesium-134 (Cs-134):
Cesium-137 (Cs-137):
Strontium-90 (Sr-90):
Iodine-131(1-131):
5,023 pCi/L
30 pCi/L
4pCi/L
2pCi/L
To determine compliance the following calculations are completed:
Emitter
Cs-134
1-131
Cs-137
Sr-90
(X)
Lab Analysis
(pCi/L)
5,023
2
30
4
00
Conversion from
table (pCi/4mrem)
20,000
3
200
8
Sum-of-the-fractions
(X/Y=A)
Calculated
Fraction1
0.25115
0.7
0.150
0.5
1.60115
(A*4)
Calculated
Total mrem2
7
'To ensure accuracy, the results were rounded to the number of figures in the conversion table. See Appendix I.
2Since data reported to the State or EPA should be in a form containing the same number of significant digits as the MCL, the results were
rounded to one significant digit. The last significant digit was increased by one unit if the digit dropped was a 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9; and was not
altered if the preceding number was a 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.
The system is in violation of the MCL because the "sum-of-the-fractions" is 7 mrem, which means that the sum of
the annual dose equivalent to the total body, or to any internal organ, exceeds 4 mrems/year.
II-6
-------
II-C. SNC Definitions
EPA's Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) is in the process of developing new
guidance in an effort to update its significant noncomplier (SNC) definitions. However, at this time, we
will use the following definition to remain consistent with the Arsenic Rule and OECA draft guidance.
A system is characterized as a SNC if it has a violation result twice the MCL (30 pCi/L for gross alpha,
10 pCi/L for combined radium-226 and radium-228, 60 (ig/L for uranium, and 8 mrem/year for man
made beta particle and photon emitters).
A system monitoring once a year or more is characterized as a SNC if it fails to monitor or report
analytical results for radionuclides for two consecutive monitoring periods. A system monitoring less
than once a year is characterized as a SNC if it fails to monitor or report the analytical results for
radionuclides in one monitoring period.
II-7
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
II-8
-------
Section III.
Primacy Revision
Applications
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
III-2
-------
III-A. State Primacy Program Revision
40 CFR Part 142 sets out requirements for States to obtain or retain primary enforcement responsibility
(primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program as authorized by SDWA Section
1413. The 1996 SDWA Amendments update the process for States to obtain or retain primacy. On April
28, 1998, EPA promulgated the Primacy Rule to reflect these statutory changes (63 FR 23361).
Pursuant to 40 CFR 142.12, complete and final requests for approval of program revisions to adopt new
or revised EPA regulations must be submitted to the Administrator no later than two years after
promulgation of the new or revised federal regulations (see Table III-l). Until those applications are
approved, EPA Regions have responsibility for directly implementing The Radionuclides Rule. The
State and EPA can agree to implement the Rule together during this period. EPA anticipates that, for
The Radionuclides Rule, those responsibilities will involve only outreach to ensure that systems desiring
flexibility for initial monitoring are able to grandfather appropriate data. However, if a State is eligible
for interim primacy, once it submits a complete and final revision package, it will have full
implementation and enforcement authority. A State may be granted an extension of up to two years to
submit its application package. During any extension period, an agreement outlining the State's and
EPA's responsibilities is required.
Table III-l: State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable for
Radionuclides Rule
EPA/State Action
Rule published by EPA
State and Region establish a process and agree upon a schedule for application
review and approval
State, at its option, submits draft program revision package including:
Preliminary Approval Request
Draft State Regulations and/or Statutes
Regulation Crosswalk
EPA Regional office (and Headquarters, if necessary) review draft
State submits final program revision package including:
Adopted State Regulations
Regulation Crosswalk
40 CFR 142.10 Primacy Update Checklist
40 CFR 142. 14 and 142. 15 Reporting and Recordkeeping
40 CFR 142.16 Special Primacy Requirements
Attorney General 'sEnforceability Certification
EPA conducts final review of State submittal:
Regional review (program and ORC)
Headquarters concurrence and waivers (OGWDW, OECA, OGC)
Public Notice
Opportunity for hearing
EPA's Determination
Rule Effective Date
Time Frame
December 7, 2000
May 2001
September 2001
(Suggested)
Completed within 90 days
of State submittal of Draft
by September 8, 2002*
Completed within 90 days
of State submittal of final
package
45 days Region
45 days Headquarters
December 8, 2003
* EPA suggests submitting an application by September 2002, to ensure timely approval. EPA regulations allow until
December 8, 2002, for this submittal. An extension of up to two additional years may be requested by the State.
III-3
-------
III-A.l The Revision Process
The approval of State program revisions is recommended to be a two-step process comprising the
submission of a draft request (optional) followed by the submission of a complete and final request for
program approval. Figure III-l diagrams these processes and their timing.
Draft Request — A State may submit a draft request for EPA review and tentative determination. The
request should contain drafts of all required primacy application materials. A draft request should be
submitted within nine months after Rule promulgation. EPA will make a tentative determination on
whether the State program meets the applicable requirements. The tentative determination should be
made within 90 days.
Complete and Final Request — This submission must be in accordance with 40 CFR 142.12(c)(l) and
(2) and include the Attorney General's statement. The State should also include its response to any
comments or program deficiencies identified in the tentative determination (if applicable). EPA Regions
should make States aware that submission of only a final request may make it more difficult for the
States to address any necessary changes within the time available for State rule adoption.
EPA requests that States submit their complete and final revision package within 21 months of Rule
promulgation. This will ensure that States will have interim primacy within 24 months and will prevent
States from becoming backlogged with revision applications to adopt future federal requirements.
The State and EPA Region should agree to a plan and timetable for submitting the State primacy revision
application as soon as possible after rule promulgation—ideally within five months after promulgation.
III-4
-------
Figure III-l: Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of
Program Revisions
TIMELINE
START
State Request for
Extension
40CFR§142.12(b)
1
Granted
Denied —
Additional
Time
Given
EPA Promulgates Radionuclides Rule
1
r
Establish Process and Tentative
Schedule for State Rule Approval
State Submits Draft Primacy Revision
Application to EPA
40CFR§142.12(d)(l)(i)
EPA Review and Tentative
Determination
(within 90 Days)
40CFR§142.12(d)(l)(n)
EPA suggests that States submit a
complete and final primacy revision
application package
40CFR§142.12(d)(2)
State Submits Complete and Final
Primacy Revision Application to EPA
(EPA to approve within 90 Days)
40CFR§142.12(d)(3)
December 7,2000
May2001^B 5 Months Later
Sept. 2001^1 9 Months Later
Sept. 2002
(or later if
extension is
granted)
21 Months Later
Dec. 2002,
(or later if
extension
is granted)
24 Months Later
III-5
-------
III-A.2 The Final Review Process
Once a State application is complete and final, EPA has a regulatory (and statutory) deadline of 90 days
to review and approve or disapprove of the revised program. The Office of Ground Water and Drinking
Water (OGWDW) will conduct detailed reviews of the first State package from each Region. We ask
that the Region submit its comments with the State's package for Headquarters review. Where the
Region has identified all significant issues, OGWDW will waive concurrence on all other State programs
in that Region, although they will retain the option to review additional State programs with cause. The
Office of General Counsel (OGC) and the OECA has delegated its review and approval to the Office of
Regional Counsel (ORC).
To meet the 90-day deadline for packages undergoing Headquarters review, the review period will be
equally split giving both the Regions and Headquarters 45 days to conduct their respective reviews. For
the first package in each Region, EPA Regional offices should forward copies of the primacy revision
applications to the Drinking Water Protection Division Director in OGWDW, which will take the lead on
the review process.
III-6
-------
III-B. State Primacy Program Revision Extensions
III-B.l The Extension Process
Under 40 CFR 142.12(b), States may ask that the two-year deadline for submitting the complete and final
request for EPA approval of program revisions be extended for up to two additional years in certain
circumstances. The extension request must be submitted to EPA within two years of the date that EPA
published the regulation. The Regional Administrator has been delegated authority to approve extension
applications: Headquarters concurrence on extensions is not required.
III-B.2 Extension Request Criteria
For an extension to be granted, the State must demonstrate that it is requesting the extension because it
cannot meet the original deadline for reasons beyond its control, despite a good faith effort to do so. A
critical part of the extension application is the State's proposed schedule for submitting of its complete
and final request for approval of a revised primacy program. The application must also demonstrate at
least one of the following:
(i) The State currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised
requirements;
(ii) The State currently lacks adequate program capability to implement the new or revised
requirements; or,
(iii) The State is requesting the extension to group two or more program revisions in a single
legislative or regulatory action.
In addition, the State must be implementing the EPA requirements to be adopted in its program revision
within the scope of its current authority and capabilities.
III-B.3 Conditions of the Extension
To be granted an extension, the State must agree to certain conditions that must be met during the
extension period. These conditions will be negotiated by the Region and the State during the extension
approval process and decided on a case-by-case basis. The conditions must be included in an extension
agreement between the State and the EPA Regional office. Appendix C contains a sample extension
agreement.
Conditions of an extension agreement may include:
• Informing PWSs of the new EPA (and upcoming State) requirements and that the Region will be
overseeing implementation of the requirements until it approves the State program revisions or
until the State submits a complete and final revision package if the State qualifies for interim
primacy.
• Collecting, storing, and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance and
operation data required by the EPA regulations.
• Assisting the Region in the development of the technical aspects of enforcement actions and
conducting informal follow-up on violations (telephone calls, letters, etc.).
III-7
-------
Providing technical assistance to PWSs.
For States whose extension is based on a lack of program capability adequate to implement the
new requirements, taking steps agreed to by the Region and the State during the extension period
to remedy the deficiency.
• Providing the Region with all the information required under 40 CFR 142.15 State reporting.
Table III-2 provides a checklist the Region can use to review State extensions.
III-8
-------
Table III-2: Extension Request Checklist
I. Reason for State Request
Clustering of Program Revisions
Statutory Barrier
Regulatory Barrier
Lack of Program Capability
Insufficient Resources
Funding Level
Staffing
Lack of Adequately Trained Staff
Inadequate Procedures, Guidelines, and Policies
Other
II. Actions Taken by the State to Justify an Extension
Schedule Dates
(or attachments)
Seeking Increases in Program Resources
Training Existing Personnel/Revising Training Programs
Revising State Regulations or Statutes
Developing Revised/New Procedures, Guidelines, Policies
Other
III. Extension Decision
Extension Request Approved Date: / /
Period of Extension Request: / / to / /
Extension Request Denied Date: / /
Reason Cited:
IV. Conditions of the Extension
During the extension period the State will (check all that apply):
Inform public water systems of the new requirements and the fact that EPA will be
overseeing their implementation until the State's program is approved or submitted if
the State qualifies for interim primacy
Collect and store laboratory results and other compliance data
Provide technical assistance to public water systems
Provide EPA with the information required under section 142.15 of the primacy rule
Other
III-9
-------
III-C. State Primacy Package
The Primacy Revision Application package should consist of the following sections discussed below:
III-C.l The State Primacy Revision Checklist (40 CFR 142.10)
This section is a checklist of general primacy requirements, taken from 40 CFR 142.10, as shown in
Table III-3. In completing this checklist, the State must identify the program elements that it has revised
in response to new federal requirements. If an element has been revised the State should indicate a "Yes'
answer in the second column next to the list of program elements and should submit appropriate
documentation. For elements that need not be revised, the State need only list the citation and date of
adoption in the second column. During the application review process, EPA will insert findings and
comments in the third column.
Table III-3; State Primacy Revision Checklist
Required Program Elements
142.10
142.10(a)
142.10(b)(l)
142.10(b)(2)
142.10(b)(3)
142.10(b)(4)
142.10(b)(5)
142.10(b)(6)(i)
142.10(b)(6)(ii)
142.10(b)(6)(iii)
142.10(b)(6)(iv)
142.10(b)(6)(v)
142.10(b)(6)(vi)
142.10(b)(6)(vii)
142.10(c)
142.10(d)
142.10(e)
142.10(f)
Primary Enforcement
- Definition of Public Water System*
Regulations No Less Stringent
Maintain Inventory
Sanitary Survey Program
Laboratory Certification Program
Laboratory Capability
Plan Review Program
Authority to apply regulations
Authority to sue in courts of competent
jurisdiction
Right of Entry
Authority to require records
Authority to require public notification
Authority to assess civil and criminal penalties
Authority to Require CWSs to Provide CCRs**
Maintenance of Records
Variance/Exemption Conditions (if
applicable)***
Emergency Plans
Administrative Penalty Authority*
Revision to
State Program
EPA
Findings/Comments
* New requirement from the 1996 Amendments. Regulations published in the April 28, 1998 Federal Register.
** New regulation published in the August 19, 1998 Federal Register.
*** New regulations published in the August 14, 1998 Federal Register.
The 1996 SDWA Amendments include new provisions for PWS definition and administrative penalty
authority. States must adopt provisions at least as stringent as these new provisions, now codified at
40 CFR 142.2 and 142.10. Failure to revise primacy for these new provisions can affect primacy for the
111-10
-------
Radionuclides Rule. However, States may still receive interim primacy for The Radionuclides Rule even
if they have not yet revised their base program to comply with the new statutory requirements provided
that the State has received an extension to adopt these requirements and that this extension period has not
expired (up to April 2002 with full extension).
Rule Bundling — States may bundle the primacy revision packages for multiple rules so long as the
submittal date (two years plus a two-year extension) has not lapsed. The Attorney General statement
should reference the new requirements.
III-C.2 Text of the State's Regulation
Each primacy application package must include a citation to the applicable State regulation (40 CFR
III-C.3 Primacy Revision Crosswalk
The Primacy Revision Crosswalk, found in Appendix D, should be completed by States to identify their
statutory or regulatory provisions that correspond to each federal requirement. If a State's provisions
differ from federal requirements, the State should explain how its requirements are "no less stringent."
III-C.4 State Reporting and Recordkeeping (40 CFR 142.14 and 142.15)
There are no new State recordkeeping requirements (40 CFR 142.14) under The Radionuclides Rule.
However, States must continue to comply with existing reporting and recordkeeping requirements that
pertain to Radionuclides.
III-C.5 Special Primacy Requirements (40 CFR 142.16)
Section III-D provides guidance on how States may choose to meet each special primacy requirement.
III-C.6 Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability
The complete and final primacy revision application must include an Attorney General statement
certifying that the State regulations were duly adopted and are enforceable. The Attorney General's
statement should also certify that the State does not have any audit privilege or immunity laws, or if it has
such laws, that these laws do not prevent the State from meeting the requirements of SDWA. If a State
has submitted this certification with a previous revision package, then it should indicate the date of
submittal and the Attorney General need only certify that the status of the audit laws has not changed
since the prior submittal. An example of an Attorney General's statement for The Radionuclides Rule is
presented in Table III-5.
III-C.7 Variances and Exemptions
States that want to have the ability to grant general variances or exemptions for uranium under this Rule
must also adopt 40 CFR 142.65. (See Section I-C.l 1 for more information on variances and exemptions.)
Table III-4: Example of Attorney General Statement
m-ii
-------
Model Language
I hereby certify, pursuant to my authority as (1) and in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act as amended,
and (2). that in my opinion the laws of the [State / Commonwealth of (3)1 [or tribal ordinances of (4)1 to carry out
the program set forth in the "Program Description" submitted by the (5) have been duly adopted and are
enforceable. The specific authorities provided are contained in statutes or regulations that are lawfully adopted at
the time this Statement is approved and signed, and will be fully effective by the time the program is approved.
Guidance For States on Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws
In order for EPA to properly evaluate the State's request for approval, the State Attorney General or independent
legal counsel should certify that the State's environmental audit immunity and/or privilege and immunity law does
not affect its ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe Drinking Water
Act. This certification should be reasonably consistent with the wording of the State audit laws and should
demonstrate how State program approval criteria are satisfied.
EPA will apply the criteria outlined in its "Statement of Principles" memo issued on February 14, 1997 (see
Appendix F), in determining whether States with audit laws have retained adequate enforcement authority for any
authorized federal programs. The principles articulated in the guidance are based on the requirements of federal
law, specifically the enforcement and compliance and State program approval provisions of environmental
statutes and their corresponding regulations. The principles provide that if provisions of State law are ambiguous,
it will be important to obtain opinions from the State Attorney General or independent legal counsel interpreting
the law as meeting specific federal requirements. If the law cannot be so interpreted, changes to the State law may
be necessary to obtain federal program approval. Before submitting a package for approval, States with audit
privilege and/or immunity laws should initiate communications with appropriate EPA Regional Offices to identify
and discuss the issues raised by the State's audit privilege and/or immunity law.
Model Language
I. For States with No Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws
Furthermore, I certify that the [State / Commonwealth of £3}] has not enacted any environmental audit privilege
and/or immunity laws.
II. For States with Audit Laws that do Not Apply to the State Agency Administering the Safe Drinking
Water Act
Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the [State / Commonwealth
of (3)1 does not affect (3) ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act because the [audit privilege and/or immunity law] does not apply to the program set forth in
the "Program Description." The Safe Drinking Water Act program set forth in the "Program Description" is
administered by (5}; the [audit privilege and/or immunity law] does not affect programs implemented by (5). thus
the program set forth in the "Program Description" is unaffected by the provisions of the [State / Commonwealth
of (3)1 [audit privilege and/or immunity law].
m-12
-------
III. For States with Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws that Worked with EPA to Satisfy
Requirements for Federally Authorized, Delegated or Approved Environmental Programs
Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the [State / Commonwealth
of (3)1 does not affect (3) ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe
Drinking Water Act because the [State / Commonwealth of £3}] has enacted statutory revisions and/or issued a
clarifying Attorney General's statement to satisfy requirements for federally authorized, delegated or approved
environmental programs.
Seal of Office
Signature
Name and Title
Date
(1) State Attorney General or attorney for the primacy agency if it has independent legal counsel
(2)40 CFR 142.1 l(a)(6)(i) for initial primacy applications or 142.12(c)(l)(iii) for primacy program revision
applications..
(3)Name of State or Commonwealth
(4)Name of Tribe
(5)Name of Primacy Agency
m-13
-------
III-D. Guidance for Special Primacy Requirements
This section contains guidance States can use when addressing the special primacy requirements of
40 CFR 142.16. It specifically addresses the special primacy conditions added for implementation of
The Radionuclides Rule. The guidance addresses special primacy conditions in the order that they occur
in the Rule.
States should note that, in several sections, the guidance makes suggestions and offers alternatives that go
beyond the minimum requirements indicated by reading the subsections of 40 CFR 142.16. EPA does
this to provide States with information or suggestions that may be helpful to States' implementation
efforts. Such suggestions are prefaced by "may" or "should" and are not required elements of States'
applications for program revision.
III-D.l Special Primacy Requirements
III-D. La. Special primacy requirements: 40 CFR 142.16(1)
40 CFR 142.16(1) states:
An application for approval of a State program revision for Radionuclides which adopts the
requirements specified in 141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C) must contain the following (in addition to the
general primacy requirements enumerated in this part, including that State regulations be at
least as stringent as the Federal requirements):
(1) If a State chooses to use grandfathered data in the manner described in
141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C), then the State must describe the procedures and criteria which it
will use to make these determinations (whether distribution system or entry point
sampling points are used).
(i) The decision criteria that the State will use to determine that data collected in the
distribution system are representative of the drinking water supplied from each
entry point to the distribution system. These determinations must consider:
(A) All previous monitoring data.
(B) The variation in reported activity levels.
(C) Other factors affecting the representativeness of the data (e.g., geology).
III-D.l.b. Guidance 40 CFR 142.16(1)
The Revised Radionuclides Rule requires systems to collect compliance samples from each EPTDS.
40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(ii)(E) gives States the flexibility to allow systems to use monitoring data collected
from the distribution system to satisfy the initial monitoring requirements.
EPA believes that requests for use of grandfathered data are best handled by States on a case-by-case
basis. Therefore, to meet this special primacy requirement, State applications for program revision must
demonstrate that each request for use of previously collected data will be evaluated on its merits. The
application must include an explanation of how the State will use all previous monitoring data and the
variation in reported activity levels. It must also explain what other factors affecting the
representativeness of the data the State will use to determine if the data can be used for the initial
monitoring requirement.
m-14
-------
For example, a State may find that the distribution samples are representative of each entry point
for a system that has:
Three wells, drawing from the same aquifer, that are from different parts of a well field;
Three EPTDSs; and,
Good historical data showing low to no uniform radionuclide occurrence from the raw
water and the distribution system samples.
III-D.l.c. Special primacy requirements: 40 CFR 142.16(l)(2)
40 CFR 142.16(1)(2) states:
A monitoring plan by which the State will ensure all systems complete the required
monitoring within the regulatory deadlines. States may update their existing monitoring
plans or use the monitoring plans submitted for the requirements in 40 CFR 142.16(e)(5)
under the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for the inorganic and organic
contaminants (i.e. the Phase II/V Rules). States may note in their applications any revision
to an existing monitoring plan or note that the same monitoring plan will be used. The
State must demonstrate that the monitoring plan is enforceable under State law.
III-D.l.d. Guidance 40 CFR 142.16(l)(2)
For 40 CFR 142.16(1)(2), States should simply explain how they will modify their monitoring plans for
radionuclides to fit within their existing monitoring plans for Phase II/V organic and inorganic
contaminants. EPA recommends that States without Phase II/V primacy establish a schedule for initial
monitoring for all of their systems. Some States may choose to phase-in the monitoring over the three-
year compliance period based on system size or source of water. Other States may simply require one-
third of their systems to monitor during each year of the three-year compliance period. States may
prepare and submit such schedules with their primacy revision applications. States could also specify that
they will use the schedule they developed for implementing the Phase II/V Rules (standardized
monitoring framework) for inorganic and organic contaminants. The Revised Radionuclides Rule was
developed so that radionuclides monitoring would fit into the standardized monitoring framework. The
State must also describe how the schedule will be enforced and the authority that will allow the State to
enforce the schedule.
IE-IS
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
m-16
-------
Section IV.
Other Resources and
Guidance
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
IV-2
-------
IV-A. Fact Sheet
jj.'trf -
&EPA
Office of
- Ground Water
Drinking Water
EPA815-F-00-014
November 2000
Final Radionuclides
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
EPA has revised the current radionuclides regulation, which has been in effect since 1977, by requiring
new monitoring provisions that will ensure that all customers of community water systems will receive
water that meets the Maximum Contaminant Levels for radionuclides in drinking water and has
promulgated a standard for uranium as required by the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water
Act. The current standards are: combined radium 226/228 of5pd/L; a gross alpha standard for all
alphas of!5pd/L, not including radon and uranium; a combined standard of 4 mrem/yearfor beta
emitters. The new MCLfor uranium is 30 /ug/L. This final rule will provide improved health protection
for 420,000 persons through monitoring improvements for the combined radium-226/-228 standard (a
carcinogen) and for an additional 620,000 persons through a new standard for uranium (a kidney toxin
and carcinogen) in drinking water.
Final Standards
The regulated radioactive drinking water contaminants are:
Contaminant
Combined
radium-226/-228
(Adjusted)
Gross Alpha
Beta Particle
and Photon
Radioactivity
Uranium
MCL
5 pCi/L (1976)
15 pCi/L (not
including radon or
uranium)
4 mrem/year
(look-up table)
30 ug/L
Source
Naturally occurs in
some drinking water
sources.
Naturally occurs in
some drinking water
sources.
May occur due to
contamination from
facilities using or
producing
radioactive materials.
Naturally occurs in
some drinking water
sources.
Health Effect (Year Promulgated)
Some people who drink water containing
radium -226 or -228 in excess of the
MCL over many years may have an
increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing
alpha emitters in excess of the MCL over
many years may have an increased risk of
getting cancer. (1976)
Some people who drink water containing
beta and photon emitters in excess of the
MCL over many years may have an
increased risk of getting cancer. (1976)
Exposure to uranium in drinking water
may result in toxic effects to the kidney.
Some people who drink water containing
alpha emitters in excess of the MCL over
many years may have an increased risk of
getting cancer. (2000)
IV-3
-------
Background
Radionuclides emit "ionizing radiation," a known human carcinogen, when they radioactively decay.
Long-term exposure to radionuclides (see table above) in drinking water may cause cancer. As described
in the Notice of Data Availability published on April 21, 2000, EPA has performed new health effects
analyses based on improved scientific models and data. These new analyses demonstrate that the health
effects analyses performed in 1991 generally understated the risks associated with the proposed
Maximum Contaminant Level(MCL) changes. In fact, the new health effects analytical results indicate
that radionuclides in drinking water are as risky (in some cases riskier) than originally estimated in 1976.
For this reason, EPA has retained the more stringent 1976 MCLs in the final rule, since the proposed
MCL changes were determined to be insufficiently protective of human health.
In addition, exposure to uranium in drinking water may cause toxic effects to the kidney. In 1991, EPA
proposed an MCL of 20 (ig/L, which was determined to be as close as feasible to the Maximum
Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG). Based on human kidney toxicity data collected since then and on its
estimate of the costs and benefits of regulating uranium in drinking water, EPA has determined that the
benefits of a uranium MCL of 20 (ig/L do not justify the costs. Instead, EPA has determined that 30
(ig/L is the appropriate MCL, since it maximizes the net benefits (benefits minus costs), while being
protective of kidney toxicity and carcinogenicity with an adequate margin of safety.
Provisions of the Final Radionuclides Rule
In addition to the MCLs discussed above, this final rule requires community water systems to ensure that
all water served to all customers meets the MCLs for radionuclides in drinking water. This provision
will be accomplished by the requirement that all future monitoring be performed such that all water
entering the distribution system is tested. Under the old rule, community water systems only tested water
from a "representative point" in the distribution system. The old monitoring requirements did not protect
every customer, since water quality may vary significantly within the distribution system.
The monitoring frequency requirements have changed to be more consistent with the "Standardized
Monitoring Framework" that are used for other drinking water standards. This improvement will result
in increased consistency in monitoring requirements and will provide monitoring relief for those water
systems that have very low contaminant levels.
In addition, the new rule corrects a monitoring deficiency in the 1976 framework for monitoring for
combined radium-226 and -228. Under the old rule, it was assumed that radium-226 and gross alpha
levels could be used to screen for radium-228. Since then, EPA has collected substantial evidence that
this assumption is false. The correction involves separate monitoring requirements for radium-228 and
radium-226, further ensuring that drinking water system customers will be protected from harmful
radioactive contaminant levels.
This final rule will apply only to community water systems, which are water systems with at least 15
service connections or that serve 25 or more persons year-round. EPA will further consider whether or
not to regulate radionuclides levels in drinking water served by non-transient non-community water
systems, which are water systems that serve at least 25 of the same people more than six months per year,
such as schools, churches, nursing homes, and factories that supply their own water. EPA is consulting
with the National Drinking Water Advisory Council to determine the best course of action to take with
respect to regulating chronic contaminant levels for non-transient non-community water systems,
including radionuclides.
IV-4
-------
Occurrence of Radionuclides in Drinking Water
Most drinking water sources have very low levels of radioactive contaminants ("radionuclides"). These
very low levels are not considered to be a public health concern. Of the small percentage of drinking
water systems with radioactive contaminant levels high enough to be of concern, most of the
radioactivity is naturally occurring. Certain rock types have naturally occurring trace amounts of "mildly
radioactive" elements (radioactive elements with very long half-lives) that serve as the "parent" of other
radioactive contaminants ("daughter products"). These radioactive contaminants, depending on their
chemical properties, may accumulate in drinking water sources at levels of concern. The "parent
radionuclide" often behaves very differently from the "daughter radionuclide" in the environment.
Because of this, parent and daughter radionuclides may have very different drinking water occurrence
patterns. For example, ground water with high radium levels tend to have low uranium levels and vice
versa, even though uranium-238 is the parent of radium-226.
Most parts of the United States have very low "average radionuclide occurrence" in drinking water
sources. However, some parts of the country have, on average, elevated levels of particular radionuclides
compared to the national average. For example, some parts of the mid-West have significantly higher
average combined radium-226/-228 levels. On the other hand, some Western States have elevated
average uranium levels compared to the national average. However, in general, average uranium levels
are very low compared to the MCL throughout the United States. While there are other radionuclides
that have been known to occur in a small number of drinking water supplies, their occurrence is thought
to be rare compared to radium-226, radium-228, and uranium.
A very small percentage of drinking water systems are located in areas that have potential sources of
man-made radioactive contamination from facilities that use, manufacture, or dispose of radioactive
substances. Drinking water contamination may occur through accidental releases of radioactivity or
through improper disposal practices. Water systems that are vulnerable to this type of contamination are
required to perform extensive monitoring for radioactive contamination to ensure that their drinking
water is safe. These radionuclides are regulated under the "beta particle and photon radioactivity"
standard.
Costs
For the small percentage of households that are served by water systems that will be required to take
corrective actions because of this rule, it is estimated that households served by typical large water
systems will experience increased water bills of less than $30 per year and that households served by
typical small water systems (those serving 10,000 persons or fewer) will experience increased water bills
of $50 - $100 per year. Over 96 percent of the cost to water systems comes from mitigation of
radionuclide levels through treatment, purchasing water, developing alternative water sources, and other
compliance measures.
Since 1996, EPA's drinking water State revolving fund program has made available $3.6 billion to assist
drinking water systems with projects to improve their infrastructure. EPA has funded over 1000 loans
for projects around the country.
For More Information
For general information on radionuclides in drinking water, contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, at
1-800-426-4791, or visit the EPA Safewater website at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ or the
radionuclides website at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/radionuc.html.
IV-5
-------
IV-B. Question and Answers
R^^^orM-r,.. ' - GroundWater
f ivf ' ' .. «»
tec or ^
EPA815-F-00-013
November 2000
Technical Fact Sheet:
Final Rule for (Non-Radon) Radionuclides in Drinking Water
1. What are we announcing?
EPA is promulgating the final drinking water standards for (non-radon) radionuclides in drinking water:
combined radium-226/-228, (adjusted) gross alpha, beta particle and photon radioactivity, and uranium.
This promulgation consists of revisions to the 1976 rule, as proposed in 1991.
2. What are the requirements of this final rule?
Community water systems (CWSs), which are public water systems that serve at least 15 locations or 25
residents regularly year round, are required to meet the final MCLs and to meet the requirements for
monitoring and reporting.
Non-transient, non-community water systems (NTNCWSs) will not be regulated at this time. EPA will
further consider this matter and may propose to regulate radionuclides at these systems in the future.
NTNCWSs are public water systems that are not a CWS and serve at least 25 of the same people more
than 6 months per year (e.g. schools and nursing homes).
The final rule requires that all new monitoring be conducted at each EPTDS under a schedule designed to
be consistent with the Standardized Monitoring Framework.
3. How soon after publishing the final rule will the changes take effect?
The rule will become effective three years after the December 7, 2000 promulgation date (December 8,
2003). New monitoring requirements will be phased-in between that date and the beginning of the next
Standardized Monitoring Framework period, December 31 of 2007. "Phased-in monitoring" refers to the
fact that States will require some fraction of water systems to complete their initial monitoring
requirements each year of the period between the effective date (December 8, 2003) and the beginning of
the new cycle (December 31, 2007). Water systems will determine initial compliance under the new
monitoring requirements using the average of four quarterly samples or, at State discretion, using
appropriate grandfathered data. Compliance will be determined immediately based on the annual average
of the quarterly samples for that fraction of systems required by the State to monitor in any given year or
based on the results from the grandfathered data. Water systems with existing radionuclides monitoring
data demonstrating that the system is out of compliance with new provisions will be out of compliance
on the effective date of December 8, 2003. Water systems with existing data that demonstrates
non-compliance with the current (1976) rule are currently in violation of the radionuclides National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
IV-6
-------
4. Why is this rule significant?
This rule promulgates new monitoring provisions that will ensure that all customers of community water
systems will receive water that meets the Maximum Contaminant Levels for radionuclides in drinking
water. Under the 1976 rule, water systems with multiple entry points to the distribution system were not
required to test at every entry point, but rather to test at a "representative point to the distribution
system." While the 1976 requirement did ensure that the "average customer" was protected, it did not
ensure that all customers were protected. Under the new rule, all entry points will be tested and all CWS
customers will be ensured of receiving water that meets the MCLs for radionuclides in drinking water. In
addition, this requirement is more consistent with the monitoring requirements for other comparable
drinking water contaminants.
This rule promulgates a new standard for uranium in drinking water, which will result in reduced
uranium exposures for 620,000 persons. The uranium standard, which is required by the Safe Drinking
Water Act, will protect drinking water customers from uranium levels that may cause toxic effects to the
kidney and will reduce cancer risk. In addition, the new rule promulgates separate monitoring
requirements for radium-228, which is expected to result in reduced exposure to 420,000 persons. This
monitoring correction is based on sound science and is necessary for ensuring compliance with the
combined radium-226/-228 standard.
5. What health effects are associated with exposure to radionuclides from drinking water?
Exposure to radionuclides from drinking water results in the increased risk of cancer. The radioactive
particles (alpha, beta and gamma particles) emitted by radionuclides are called "ionizing radiation"
because they ionize ("destabilize") nearby atoms as they travel through a cell or other material. In living
tissue, this ionization process can damage chromosomes or other parts of the cell. This cellular damage
can lead to the death of the cell or to unnatural reproduction of the cell. When a cell reproduces
uncontrollably, it becomes a cancer. Certain elements accumulate in specific organs: radium (like
calcium) accumulates in the bones and iodine accumulates in the thyroid.
For uranium, we must consider not only the carcinogenic health effects from its radioactive decay and the
decay of its daughter products ("radiotoxicity"), but also damage to the kidneys from exposure to the
uranium itself ("chemical toxicity"). Exposure to elevated uranium levels in drinking water has been
shown to lead to changes in kidney function that are indicators of potential future kidney failure.
6. What are the sources of radionuclides in water?
Most drinking water sources have very low levels of radioactive contaminants ("radionuclides"), levels
low enough not to be considered a public health concern. Of the radionuclides that have been observed to
occur in drinking water sources, most are naturally occurring. However, contamination of drinking water
sources by anthropogenic ("human-made") nuclear materials also occurs. Naturally occurring
radionuclides are found in the Earth's crust and are created in the upper atmosphere. For example, trace
amounts of long-lived isotopes (e.g., uranium-238, which has a half-life of almost five billion years) have
been present in earth's crust since the crust first formed. As these long-lived trace radionuclides decay,
shorter-lived ("more radioactive") daughter products are formed. Of particular concern are naturally
occurring uranium and the naturally occurring radium isotopes, radium-226 and radium-228, which have
been observed to accumulate to levels of concern in drinking water sources.
Most of the naturally occurring radionuclides are alpha particle emitters (e.g., the uranium isotopes and
radium-226), but naturally occurring beta particle emitters do occur (e.g., radium-228 and potassium-40).
Certain rock types contain trace amounts of the radioactive isotopes of uranium, thorium, and/or
actinium. As these parent rocks weather, the resulting clays and other aquifer-forming materials may
IV-7
-------
become a source of naturally-occurring radionuclides to drinking water sources. Other naturally
occurring radionuclides include tritium, a beta particle emitter, which forms in the upper atmosphere
through interactions between cosmic rays (nuclear particles coming from outer space) and the gases
comprising the atmosphere. Tritium can be deposited from the atmosphere onto surface waters via rain or
snow and can accumulate in ground water via seepage. Tritium is also formed from human activities, as
described below. Natural tritium tends not to occur at levels of concern, but contamination from human
activities can result in relatively high levels.
The man-made radionuclides, which are primarily beta and photon emitters, are produced by any of a
number activities that involve the use of concentrated radioactive materials. These radioactive materials
are used in various ways in the production of electricity, nuclear weapons, nuclear medicines used in
therapy and diagnosis, and various commercial products (such as televisions or smoke detectors), as well
as in various academic and government research activities. Release of man-made radionuclides to the
environment, which may include drinking water sources, are primarily the result of improper waste
storage, leaks, or transportation accidents.
7. How many people and how many systems will be affected by this rule?
Higher levels of radionuclides tend to be found more in ground water sources than in surface water
sources, likes rivers and lakes. While most water systems do not have detectable radionuclide activities,
there are some areas of the country that have levels significantly higher than the national average levels.
For example, some areas of the Mid-West have elevated radium-226 levels and some Western States
have elevated uranium levels compared to the rest of the United States. Separate monitoring for radium is
expected to result in roughly half of one percent of the nation's 54,000 CWSs needing to take measures to
lower radium in their drinking water. The uranium standard is expected to result in slightly less than one
percent of CWSs needing to take measures to reduce uranium in their drinking water. Table 1 below
shows the estimated number of CWSs that would be affected by this rule and the estimated population
served by these public water systems.
Table 1. Estimates of the Community Water Systems That Would Need to Mitigate Contaminant Levels
and the Population Served by These CWSs
Regulatory Action
Radium-228 Monitoring Correction
Uranium MCL of 30 \igfL
Number of CWSs Affected
-300
-500
Total Population Served
- 420 thousand
- 620 thousand
8. How much will this rule cost?
Over 96% of the cost of this final rule is expected to come from the mitigation of radionuclide levels
through treatment, purchasing water, developing alternate water sources, and other compliance measures.
Table 2 below shows the total annualized costs of mitigation, monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, and
administration for this rule.
IV-8
-------
Table 2. Total National Annualized Costs of the Radionuclides Rule
(Mitigation, monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, and administration)
Regulatory Action
Radium-228 Monitoring Correction, Mitigation Costs
Uranium MCL of 30 ug/L, Mitigation Costs
New Monitoring, Reporting, Record Keeping, and Administration Costs for all
Radionuclides
Annual Costs
~ $ 26 million
~ $ 50 million
~ $ 5 million
• For systems that need to take corrective action to comply with the new rule, the annual
costs per system will range from $9,000 per year for the smallest community water
systems to over $150,000 annually for systems serving 3,300 to 10,000, and over $0.5
million annually for larger systems.
• For the small percentage of households that are served by water systems that will be
required to take corrective actions because of this rule, it is estimated that households
served by typical large water systems will experience increased water bills of less than
$30 per year and that households served by typical small water systems (those serving
10,000 persons or fewer) will experience increased water bills of $50 - $100 per year.
Costs will vary depending on the system size.
9. What are the benefits of this rule?
The requirement for separate radium-228 monitoring is expected to result in the
avoidance of 0.4 cancer cases per year, with estimated monetized health effects benefits
of $2 million annually. Water mitigation for radium also tends to reduce iron and
manganese levels and hardness, which also has significant associated benefits.
The kidney toxicity benefits for the uranium standard can not be quantified because
limitations in existing health effects models at levels near the MCL. In addition to these
non-quantified kidney toxicity benefits, 0.8 cancer cases per year are expected to be
avoided, with estimated monetized cancer health effects benefits of $3 million annually.
Water mitigation for uranium also removes other contaminants, which has associated
benefits.
10. Is there funding associated with this rule?
Since 1996, the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund has made over $3.6. billion available for
loans to help water systems improve their infrastructure. This program has now made over 1000 loans.
EPA also provides funding to States that have primary enforcement responsibility for their drinking water
programs through the Public Water Systems Supervision (PWSS) grants program. Other federal funds are
available through Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant Program,
and the Rural Utilities Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
11. How did EPA consult with stakeholders?
In 1997, EPA conducted a public meeting regarding the finalization of portions of the 1991 radionuclides
proposal. This meeting was advertised in the Federal Register. During the meeting, we discussed a range
of regulation development issues with the stakeholders, including the statutory requirements, court
stipulated agreement, MCLs for each of the radionuclides, the current and proposed monitoring
IV-9
-------
frameworks, and new scientific information regarding health effects, occurrence, analytical methods, and
treatment technologies. The presentations generated useful discussion and provided us with feedback
regarding technical issues, stakeholder concerns and possible regulatory options. Participants in the
stakeholder meeting included representatives from water utilities, environmental and citizens groups,
State drinking water programs and health departments, other federal agencies, and other groups.
In addition, during the regulation development process, we gave presentations on the radionuclides
regulation at various professional conferences, meetings between State programs and EPA Regions, the
American Water Works Association's Technical Advisory Workgroup (TAW), and at Tribal meetings in
Nevada, Alaska, and California. Finally, we held a one-day meeting with associations that represent
State, county, and local government elected officials on May 30, 2000 and discussed five upcoming
drinking water regulations, including radionuclides.
Stakeholders were also asked to comment on a variety of issues in the April 21, 2000 Notice of Data
Availability. We utilized the feedback received from the stakeholders during all these meetings and
comments from the NODA in developing the final radionuclides rule.
12. Where can the public get more information about the final radionuclides rule?
For general information on radionuclides in drinking water, contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, at
(800) 426-4791, or visit the EPA Safewater website at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ or the
radionuclides website at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/radionuc.html.
In addition to this technical fact sheet, the following documents and fact sheets are available to the public
at EPA's web site on radionuclides in drinking water:
• Federal Register notice of the Notice of Data Availability
• A Technical Support Document
• Consumer Fact Sheet on Radionuclides in Drinking Water
• The Economic Analysis for the final rule
A copy of the Federal Register notice of the final regulation, the Notice of Data Availability, or
supporting material can be obtained by contacting the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791.
The Safe Drinking Water Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, from 9:00
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
IV-10
-------
Appendix A
Monitoring Scenario
Figures
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix A-2
-------
Initial Monitoring Scenario for New
System or Sources, or Existing
Systems Without Data That Can Be
Grandfathered
Appendix A-3
-------
Initial Monitoring Scenario for New System or Sources, or Existing Systems Without
Data That Can Be Grandfathered
Begin collecting 4 consecutive quarterly samples for Ra-
226, Ra-228, and gross alpha1 concurrently
Collect 1st quarterly sample and review results. Did
you detect gross alpha, Ra-226, or Ra-228?2
Collect 2nd quarterly sample and review results. Did
you detect gross alpha, Ra-226, or Ra-228?
Did gross alpha exceed 15 pCi/L1;
State may waive final two quarterly
samples. Otherwise, continue
collecting 4 consecutive quarterly
samples for gross alpha, Ra-226,
and Ra-228
Continue collecting 4 consecutive
quarterly samples for gross alpha,
Ra-226, and Ra-228
Continue collecting 4 consecutive
quarterly samples for gross alpha,
Ra-226, and Ra-228 ; Collect 4
consecutive quarterly samples for
uranium
The analytical results from these samples can be used to direct the system into the decision path for repeat monitoring, outlined in Figure 2, paths I through IV.
1 Note that systems may also choose to monitor for gross alpha and uranium separately.
2 If gross alpha results are less than 5 pCi/L, then gross alpha may be substituted for Ra-226 (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5)). However, EPA is recommending only
substituting gross alpha for Ra-226 when the gross alpha is less than non-detect. See Section I.C.4.e for more information.
Appendix A-4
-------
Initial and Reduced Monitoring Requirements for Gross Alpha, Radium 228,
Combined Radium 226/228, and Uranium
Initial Monitoring will include sampling concurrently for
gross alpha, radium 226, radium 228. Some systems may
also sample for uranium. Dependent on the results, the
system would follow Path I through IV.
4 consecutive quarterly
samples for gross alpha,
or grandfathered data
Gross Alpha
Average < ND4
4 quarterly samples for
radium-226/228, or
grandfathered data
ND < Gross Alpha
Average < 7.5 pCi/L4
Reduced Monitoring
Average Ra
5
1
Radium
226/228
MCL violation
1
1 sample every
9 years for
gross alpha
Quarterly
samples for
226/228
1 sample every
9 years for
uranium
7.5pCi/L30pCi/L
Go to following pages for
continuation of flow chart
(III-IV)
4 quarterly samples for
radium-226/228, or
grandfathered data
Reduced Monitoring
Average Ra <
ND
ND < Average
Ra<2.5
1 sample every
6 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
9 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
2.5 < Average
Ra<5
1 sample every
6 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
6 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
1 sample every
6 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
3 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
Average Ra > 5
1
Radium
226/228
MCL violation
1
1 sample every
6 years for
gross alpha
Quarterly
samples for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
* Assumes system does not collect quarterly samples for uranium to determine the actual concentration of uranium. Sampling points that exceed 15 pCi/L for gross alpha must collect
samples for uranium to determine compliance with the gross alpha and uranium MCLs.
*Gross alpha may be substituted for Ra-226 if the result does not exceed 5 pCi/L. However, EPA is recommending only substituting gross alpha for Ra-226 when the gross alpha is less than
non-detect. See Section I.C.4.e for more information.
Appendix A-5
-------
cont.: Initial and Reduced Monitoring Requirements for Gross Alpha, Radium 228,
Combined Radium 226/228, and Uranium
ND>to< 7.5pCi/L
Go to previous page for
continuation of flow chart
(HI)
4 consecutive quarterly
samples for gross alpha,
or grandfathered data
4 quarterly samples for
radium-226/228, or
grandfathered data
Reduced Monitoring
Average Ra < ND
1 sample every
3 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
9 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
ND < Average Ra
<2.5
1 sample every
3 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
6 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
2.5 < Average Ra
<5
1 sample every
3 years for
gross alpha
1 sample every
3 years for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
Average Ra > 5
1
Radium
226/228
MCL violation
1
1 sample every
3 years for
gross alpha
Quarterly
samples for
226/228
1 sample every
6 years for
uranium*
Average Gross Alpha < 15pCi/L
> 15pCi/L
Go to following page for
continuation of flow chart
(IV)
* Assumes system does not collect quarterly samples for uranium to determine the actual concentration of uranium. Sampling points that exceed 15 pCi/L for gross alpha must collect
samples for uranium to determine compliance with the gross alpha and uranium MCLs.
Appendix A-6
-------
cont.: Initial and Reduced Monitoring Requirements for Gross Alpha, Radium 228,
Combined Radium 226/228, and Uranium
< 15 pCi/L
Go to previous pages for
continuation of flow chart
(I-III)
4 consecutive quarterly
samples for gross alpha,
or grandfathered data
Average Gross Alpha > 15pCi/L
4 Quarterly samples
for uranium
Is total uranium > 30 ug/L
4 quarterly samples for Ra-226/228
Is gross alpha
minus uranium
> 15 pCi/L
NO
Go to Boxes I, II, III
YES ^
NO
f
Go to
Boxes I, II, III
^
TT
^
3L violation
r
Is gross alpha
minus uranium > 15 pCi/L
YES
^
Gross alpha MCL violation
1
4 quarterly samples
for radium 226/228
^"'""""---•^^^ EXCEPT: monitor
-^ for uranium as
follows:
W)
s
S
s
,Q
,2
1
T3
e=^
^
^^
Average U
5
Radium
226/228
MCL violation
Quarterly
samples for
gross alpha
Quarterly
samples for
226/228
Quarterly
samples for
uranium
* Sampling points that exceed 15 pCi/L for gross alpha must collect samples for uranium to determine compliance with the gross alpha and uranium MCLs.
Appendix A-7
-------
Gross Beta Monitoring Scenario
Appendix A-8
-------
Gross Beta Monitoring Requirements
System targeted as vulnerable
or using a radioactive
contaminated source
NO
No monitoring required
Collect quarterly
gross B samples3
NO
Is system known to be using
a contaminated source
YES
W
Collect quarterly gross B3
and iodine-1311
Collect annual tritium and
strontium-90 sample3
Is quarterly B average
> 50 pCi/L
YES
Speciate same sample for
major radioactive constituents
MCL compliance based on
sum of fractions of speciated
radioactive compounds
Is there an MCL violation
YES
Conduct monthly monitoring
for all species2
NO
State may allow system
to reduce sampling to 1
sample every 3 years
NO
Continue quarterly B
monitoring and annual
tritium/strontium
monitoring
Collect annual tritium
and strontium-90 sample3
Is quarterly B average
> 15 pCi/L
YES
Speciate same sample for
major radioactive constituents
MCL compliance based on
sum of fractions of speciated
radioactive compounds
Is there an fv
1
.
rYES
Conduct monthly monitoring
for all species2
1
r
Is tritium, iodine, and/or
strontium > MCL
NO
YES
Tritium, iodine,
and/or strontium
MCL violation
Conduct monthly
monitoring for
tritium, iodine
and/or strontium
State may allow system
to reduce sampling to 1
sample every 3 years
Continue quarterly B and
iodine-131 monitoring and
annual tritium/strontium
monitoring
'A composite of five consecutive daily samples for iodine-131 must be analyzed each quarter. 40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(ii).
2 Typically, a State will require a system to speciate the sample for the most likely emitters associated with the nearby source.
3 For the quarterly monitoring requirements for gross beta particle activity, samples must be collected monthly and analyzed or composited and analyzed. For the annual
monitoring requirements for tritium and strontium-90, samples must be collected quarterly and analyzed or composited and analyzed.
Appendix A-9
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix A-10
-------
Appendix B
Violation Tables for Data
Management and
Enforcement Purposes
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix B-2
-------
VIOLATION TABLES FOR DATA MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES
For information on violation tables for data management and enforcement purposes, please contact:
Kate Anderson
Associate Division Director
Office of Regulatory Enforcement
Water Enforcement Division
(202) 564-4016
e-mail: anderson.kate@epamail.gov
Appendix B-3
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix B-4
-------
Appendix C
Sample Extension
Agreement
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix C-2
-------
Under 40 CFR 142.12, States must adopt the requirements of the Radionuclides Rule
within 2 years of the new Rule's publication or by December 8, 2002.
An extension agreement will be necessary only when States have not submitted a
complete and final primacy revision application package by December 8, 2002. For
further detail, please refer to Section III-B.
A sample extension agreement is presented on the following pages.
Appendix C-3
-------
EXTENSION AGREEMENT
On December 7, 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the final
Radionuclides Rule. This Rule amends the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR Part
141, and the regulations for implementation of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR
Part 142. Provisions of the Rule take effect on December 8, 2003.
The April 28, 1998, revisions to the Primacy Rule extend the time allowed for States and Tribes to adopt
new Federal regulations from 18 months to 2 years. Therefore, the State or Tribe must adopt regulations
pertaining to the Radionuclides Rule and submit a complete and final primacy revision application by
December 8, 2002, unless it requests an extension of up to 2 years to adopt the new or revised
regulations.
Until the State/Tribal Primacy Revision Application has been submitted, the State or Tribe and appropriate
EPA Regional office will share responsibility for implementing the primary program elements as indicated
in the extension agreement. The State or Tribe and the EPA Regional office should discuss these
elements and address terms of responsibility in the agreement. The State, Tribe, and EPA should be
viewed as partners in this effort, working toward two very specific public health-related goals. The first
goal is to achieve a high level of compliance with the regulation. The second goal is to facilitate successful
implementation of the regulation during the transition period before the State or Tribe has interim primacy
for the Rule. In order to accomplish these goals, education, training, and technical assistance will need to
be provided to water suppliers on their responsibilities under the Radionuclides Rule.
This document will record the terms of a Primacy Extension Agreement between the State or Tribe and
EPA for the Radionuclides Rule and shall remain effective from the date this agreement is signed until
either December 8, 2002, or the date the State's or Tribe's primacy application is submitted under 40 CFR
142.12. To retain primacy the State or Tribe must submit a final and approvable Primacy Revision
Application incorporating the above-referenced provisions of the Federal Register to EPA by December
8, 2002, or no later than December 8, 2004, if the State or Tribe has been granted an extension.
Appendix C-4
-------
{Regional Administrator}
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA Region {Region}
{Street Address}
RE: Request/approval for an Extension Agreement
Dear {Regional Administrator} :
The State of {State} / {Tribe} Tribe is requesting an extension to the date that final primacy
revisions are due to EPA for the Radionuclides Rule until {insert date - no later than December 8.
2004}, as allowed by 40 CFR 142.12 and would appreciate your approval. Staff of the {State
Pep artment/Agen cv} have conferred with your staff and has agreed to the requirements listed below
for this extension. This extension is being requested because the State of {State} / {Tribe} Tribe:
Q Is planning to group two or more program revisions into a single legislative or regulatory action.
G Currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce the new or revised requirements.
G Currently lacks adequate program capability to implement the new or revised requirements.
{State Department/Agencv/Tribal Organization} will be implementing the Radionuclides Rule
within the scope of its current authority and capability as outlined in the six areas identified in
i) Informing PWSs of the new EPA (and upcoming State/Tribal) requirements and that EPA will
be overseeing implementation of the requirements until EPA approves the State/Tribal
revision.
State/ EPA
Tribe
_ _ Provide copies of regulation and guidance to other State agencies, PWSs, technical
assistance providers, associations, or other interested parties.
_ _ Educate and coordinate with State staff, public water supplies (PWSs), the public, and
other water associations about the requirements of this regulation
_ _ Notify affected systems of their requirements under the Radionuclides Rule.
Other
Appendix C-5
-------
ii) Collecting, storing and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance
and operation data required by the EPA regulations.
State/ EPA
Tribe
Devise a tracking system for PWS reporting pursuant to the Radionuclides Rule.
Keep States informed of SDWIS reporting requirements during development and
implementation.
Report Radionuclides Rule violations and enforcement information to SDWIS as required.
Other
iii) Assisting EPA in the development of the technical aspects of the enforcement actions and
conducting informal follow-up and violations (telephones calls, letters, etc.).
State/ EPA
Tribe
Issue notices of violation (NOVs) for treatment technique and monitoring/reporting
violations of the Radionuclides Rule
Provide immediate technical assistance to PWSs with treatment technique and/or
monitoring/reporting violations to try to bring them into compliance.
Refer all violations to EPA for enforcement if they have not been resolved within 60 days
of the period that triggered the violation. Provide information as requested to conduct and
complete any enforcement action referred to EPA.
Other
iv) Providing technical assistance to public water systems.
State/ EPA
Tribe
Conduct training within the State/Tribe for PWSs on Radionuclides Rule requirements.
Provide technical assistance through written and/or verbal correspondence to PWSs.
Provide on-site technical assistance to PWSs as requested and needed to ensure
compliance with this regulation.
Evaluate requests for variances in an expedient manner.
Coordinate with other technical assistance providers and organizations to provide
accurate information and aid in a timely manner.
Other
v) Providing EPA with all information prescribed by the State Reporting Requirements in
142.15.
State/ EPA
Tribe
Report any violations incurred by PWSs for these regulations each quarter.
Report any enforcement actions taken against PWSs for these regulations each quarter.
Report any variances or exemptions granted for PWSs for these regulations each
quarter.
Other
Appendix C-6
-------
vi) For States/Tribes whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program
capability to implement the new or revised requirements agrees to take the following steps to
remedy the capability deficiency.
State/ EPA
Tribe
Acquire additional resources to implement these regulations (List of specific steps being
taken attached as (Appendix A}).
Provide quarterly updates describing the status of acquiring additional resources.
Other
I affirm that the (State Department/Agencv/Tribal Organization} will implement provisions of the
Radionuclides Rule as outlined above.
(Agency Director or Secretary} Date
(Name of State Agency/Tribe}
I have consulted with my staff and approve your extension for the aforementioned regulation. I affirm
that EPA Region {Region} will implement provisions of the Radionuclides Rule as outlined above.
Regional Administrator Date
EPA Region {Region}
This Extension Agreement will take effect upon the date of the last signature.
Appendix C-7
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix C-8
-------
Appendix D
Primacy Revision
Crosswalks
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix D-2
-------
Primacy Revision Crosswalk for the Radionuclides Rule
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
SUBPART B - MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS
§141.25 ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR RADIOACTIVITY
Analysis for the following contaminants shall be conducted to
determine compliance with § 141 .66 (radioactivity) in accordance with
the methods in the following table, or their equivalent determined by
EPA in accordance with § 141.27.
To determine compliance with §141.66(b)(c) and (e) the detection limit
shall not exceed the concentrations in Table B.
Detection Limits for Gross alpha particle activity, Radium 226, Radium
228, and Uranium
Contaminant Detection Limit
Gross alpha particle activity 3 pCi/L
Radium 226 1 pCi/L
Radium 228 1 pCi/L
Uranium Reserve
To determine compliance with §141.66 (d) the detection limits shall not
exceed the concentrations listed in Table C.
Table C-Detection Limits for Man-Made Beta Particle and Photon
Emitters [Note: name revised]
To judge compliance with the maximum contaminant levels listed in
§141.66, averages of data shall be used and shall be rounded to the
same number of significant figures as the maximum contaminant level
for the substance in question.
FEDERAL
CITATION
§141. 25 (a)
§141.25 (c)(l)
§ 141. 25 (c)(l) Table
B
§141.25 (c)(2)
§141.25(c)(2)
Table C
§141.25(d)
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-3
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
SUBPART C - MONITORING AND ANALYTICAL REQUIREMENTS
§141.26 MONITORING FREQUENCY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR RADIONUCLIDES IN COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS
Monitoring and compliance requirements for gross alpha particle
activity, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium.
Community water systems (CWSs) must conduct initial monitoring to
determine compliance with § 141.66 (b), (c) and (e) by December 31,
2007. For the purposes of monitoring for gross alpha particle activity,
radium-226, radium-228, uranium, and beta particle and photon
radioactivity in drinking water, "detection limit" is defined as in
§141.25(c).
Applicability and sampling location for existing community water
systems or sources. All existing CWSs using ground water, surface
water or systems using both ground and surface water ("systems")
must sample at every entry point to the distribution system that is
representative of all sources being used ("sampling point") under
normal operating conditions. The system must take each sample at the
same sampling point unless conditions make another sampling point
more representative of each source or the State has designated a
distribution system location, in accordance with §141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C).
Applicability and sampling location for new community water systems
or sources. All new CWSs or CWSs that use a new source of water
must begin to conduct initial monitoring for the new source within the
first quarter after initiating use of the source. CWSs must conduct
more frequent monitoring when ordered by the State in the event of
possible contamination or when changes in the distribution system or
treatment processes occur which may increase the concentration of
radioactivity in finished water.
Initial monitoring: Systems must conduct initial monitoring for gross
alpha particle activity, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium as follows:
§141. 26 (a)
§141.26 (a)(l)
§141.26 (a)(l)(i)
§141.26 (a)(l)(ii)
§141.26(a)(2)
Appendix D-4
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Systems without acceptable historical data (defined below) must
collect four consecutive quarterly samples at all sampling points
before December 31,2007.
§141.26(a)(2)(i)
Grandfathering of data: States may allow historical monitoring data
collected at a sampling point to satisfy the initial monitoring
requirements, for that sampling point, for the following situations:
§141.26(a)(2)(ii)
To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system
having only one entry point to the distribution system may use the
monitoring data from the last compliance monitoring period that began
between June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
§141.26 (a)(2)(ii)(A)
To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system
with multiple entry points and having appropriate historical monitoring
data for each entry point to the distribution system may use the
monitoring data from the last compliance monitoring period that
began between June 2000 and December 8,2003.
§141.26 (a)(2)(ii)(B)
To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system
with appropriate historical data for a representative point in the
distribution system may use the monitoring data from the last
compliance monitoring period that began between June 2000 and
December 8, 2003, provided that the State finds that the historical data
satisfactorily demonstrate that each entry point to the distribution
system is expected to be in compliance based upon the historical data
and reasonable assumptions about the variability of contaminant
levels between entry points. The State must make a written finding
indicating how the data conforms to the these requirements.
§141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C)
For gross alpha particle activity, uranium, radium-226 and radium-228
monitoring, the State may waive the final two quarters of initial
monitoring for a sampling point if the results of the samples from the
previous two quarters are below the detection limit.
Appendix D-5
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
If the average of the initial monitoring results for a sampling point is
above the MCL, the system must collect and analyze quarterly samples
at that sampling point until the system has results from four
consecutive quarters that are at or below the MCL, unless the system
enters into another schedule as part of a formal compliance agreement
with the State.
§141.26(a)(2)(iv)
Reduced monitoring: States may allow community water systems to
reduce the future frequency of monitoring from once every three years
to once every six or nine years at each sampling point, based on the
following criteria:
§141.26 (a)(3)
If the average of the initial monitoring results for each contaminant is
below the detection limit specified in §141.25 (c)(l) (Table B), the
system must collect and analyze for that contaminant using at least
one sample at that sampling point every nine years.
§141.26 (a)(3)(i)
For gross alpha particle activity and uranium, if the average of the
initial monitoring results for each contaminant is at or above the
detection limit but at or below 1A the MCL, the system must collect and
analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling
point every six years. For combined radium-226 and radium-228, the
analytical results must be combined. If the average of the combined
initial monitoring results for radium-226 and radium-228 is at or above
the detection limit but at or below 1A the MCL, the system must collect
and analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that
sampling point every six years.
§141.26(a)(3)(ii)
Appendix D-6
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
For gross alpha particle activity and uranium, if the average of the
initial monitoring results for each contaminant is above 1A the MCL but
at or below the MCL, the system must collect and analyze at least one
sample at that sampling point every three years. For combined radium-
226 and radium-228, the analytical results must be combined. If the
average of the combined initial monitoring results for radium-226 and
radium-228 is above 1A the MCL but at or below the MCL, the system
must collect and analyze at least one sample at that sampling point
every three years.
Systems must use the samples collected during the reduced
monitoring period to determine the monitoring frequency for
subsequent monitoring periods (e.g., if a system's sampling point is on
a nine year monitoring period, and the sample result is above 1A MCL,
then the next monitoring period for that sampling point is three years).
§141.26 (a)(3)(iv)
If a system has a monitoring result that exceeds the MCL while on
reduced monitoring, the system must collect and analyze quarterly
samples at that sampling point until the system has results from four
consecutive quarters that are below the MCL, unless the system enters
into another schedule as part of a formal compliance agreement with
the State.
§141.26(a)(3)(v)
Compositing: To fulfill quarterly monitoring requirements for gross
alpha particle activity, radium-226, radium-228, or uranium, a system
may composite up to four consecutive quarterly samples from a single
entry point if analysis is done within a year of the first sample. States
will treat analytical results from the composited as the average
analytical result to determine compliance with the MCLs and the future
monitoring frequency. If the analytical result from the composited
sample is greater than 1A MCL, the State may direct the system to take
additional quarterly samples before allowing the system to sample
under a reduced monitoring schedule.
§141.26(a)(4)
Appendix D-7
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
A gross alpha particle activity measurement may be substituted for the
required radium-226 measurement provided that the measured gross
alpha particle activity does not exceed 5 pCi/1. A gross alpha particle
activity measurement may be substituted for the required uranium
measurement provided that the measured gross alpha particle activity
does not exceed 15 pCi/1. The gross alpha measurement shall have a
confidence interval of 95% (1.65a, where a is the standard deviation of
the net counting rate of the sample) for radium-226 and uranium.
When a system uses a gross alpha particle activity measurement in
lieu of a radium-226 and/or uranium measurement, the gross alpha
particle activity analytical result will be used to determine the future
monitoring frequency for radium-226 and/or uranium. If the gross
alpha particle activity result is less than detection, Vi the detection limit
will be used to determine compliance and the future monitoring
frequency.
§141.26 (a)(5)
Monitoring and compliance requirements for beta particle and photon
radioactivity. To determine compliance with the maximum contaminant
levels in §141.66(d) for beta particle and photon radioactivity, a system
must monitor at a frequency as follows:
5141.26 (b)
Community water systems (both surface and ground water) designated
by the State as vulnerable must sample for beta particle and photon
radioactivity. Systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters
and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point to
the distribution system (hereafter called a sampling point), beginning
within one quarter after being notified by the State. Systems already
designated by the State must continue to sample until the State
reviews and either reaffirms or removes the designation.
§141.26 (b)(l)
Appendix D-8
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity at a sampling point has a running
annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 50 pCi/L
(screening level), the State may reduce the frequency of monitoring at
that sampling point to once every 3 years. Systems must collect all
samples required in paragraph (b)(l) of this section during the reduced
monitoring period.
§141.26 (b)(l)(i)
For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the State may allow the
CWS to utilize environmental surveillance data collected by the
nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry point(s),
where the State determines if such data is applicable to a particular
water system. In the event that there is a release from a nuclear
facility, systems which are using surveillance data must begin
monitoring at the community water system's entry point(s) in
accordance with paragraph (b)(l).
Community water systems (both surface and ground water) designated
by the State as utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear
facilities must sample for beta particle and photon radioactivity.
Systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and iodine-
131 and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point
to the distribution system (hereafter called a sampling point),
beginning within one quarter after being notified by the State.
Systems already designated by the State as systems using waters
contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities must continue to
sample until the State reviews and either reaffirms or removes the
designation.
§141.26(b)(2)
Quarterly monitoring for gross beta particle activity shall be based on
the analysis of monthly samples or the analysis of a composite of three
monthly samples. The former is recommended.
§141.26(b)(2)(i)
Appendix D-9
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
For iodine-131, a composite of five consecutive daily samples shall be
analyzed once each quarter. As ordered by the State, more frequent
monitoring shall be conducted when iodine-131 is identified in the
finished water.
§141.26(b)(2)(ii)
Annual monitoring for strontium-90 and tritium shall be conducted by
means of the analysis of a composite of four consecutive quarterly
samples or analysis of four quarterly samples. The latter procedure is
recommended.
If the gross beta particle activity beta minus the naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity at a sampling point has a running
annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 15 pCi/L, the
State may reduce the frequency of monitoring at that sampling point to
every 3 years. Systems must collect all samples required in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section during the reduced monitoring period.
§141.26(b)(2)(iv)
For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the State may allow the
CWS to utilize environmental surveillance data collected by the
nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry point(s),
where the State determines if such data is applicable to a particular
water system. In the event that there is a release from a nuclear
facility, systems which are using surveillance data must begin
monitoring at the community water system's entry point(s) in
accordance with paragraph (b)(2).
§141.26(b)(2)(v)
Community water systems designated by the State to monitor for beta
particle and photon radioactivity can not apply to the State for a
waiver from the monitoring frequencies specified in paragraphs (b)(l)
or (b)(2) of this section.
§141.26 (b)(3)
Appendix D-10
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Community water systems may analyze for naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity from the same or equivalent sample
used for the gross beta particle activity analysis. Systems are allowed
to subtract the potassium-40 beta particle activity value from the total
gross beta particle activity value to determine if the screening level is
exceeded. The potassium-40 beta particle activity must be calculated
by multiplying elemental potassium concentrations (in mg/L) by a
factor of 0.82.
§141.26(b)(4)
If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring
potassium-40 beta particle activity exceeds the screening level, an
analysis of the sample must be performed to identify the major
radioactive constituents present in the sample and the appropriate
doses must be calculated and summed to determine compliance with
§141.66(d)(l), using (d)(2). Doses must also be calculated and
combined for measured levels of tritium and strontium to determine
compliance.
§141.26 (b)(5)
Systems must monitor monthly at the sampling point(s) which exceed
the maximum contaminant level in § 141.66(d) beginning the month
after the exceedance occurs. Systems must continue monthly
monitoring until the system has established, by a rolling average of 3
monthly samples, that the MCL is being met. Systems who establish
that the MCL is being met must return to quarterly monitoring until
they meet the requirements set forth in paragraphs (b)(l)(ii) or (b)(2)(i)
of this section.
§141.26(b)(6)
General monitoring and compliance requirements for radionuclides.
§141.26 (c)
The State may require more frequent monitoring than specified in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, or may require confirmation
samples at its discretion. The results of the initial and confirmation
samples will be averaged for use in compliance determinations.
§141.26 (c)(l)
Appendix D-11
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Each public water system shall monitor at the time designated by the
State during each compliance period.
Compliance: Compliance with 141.66 (b) through (e) will be determined
based on the analytical result(s) obtained at each sampling point. If
one sampling point is in violation of an MCL, the system is in violation
oftheMCL.
For systems monitoring more than once per year, compliance with the
MCL is determined by a running annual average at each sampling
point. If the average of any sampling point is greater than the MCL,
then the system is out of compliance with the MCL.
For systems monitoring more than once a year, if any sample result will
cause the running average to exceed the MCL at any sample point, the
system is out of compliance with the MCL immediately.
Systems must include all samples taken and analyzed under the
provisions of this section in determining compliance, even if that
number is greater than the minimum required.
If a system does not collect all required samples when compliance is
based on a running annual average of quarterly samples, compliance
will be based on the running average of the samples collected.
If a sample result is less than the detection limit, zero will be used to
calculate the annual average, unless a gross alpha particle activity is
being used in lieu of radium-226 and/or uranium. If the gross alpha
particle activity result is less than detection, 1A the detection limit will
be used to calculate the annual average.
States have the discretion to delete results of obvious sampling or
analytic errors.
FEDERAL
CITATION
§141.26(c)(2)
§141.26 (c)(3)
§141.26 (c)(3)(i)
§141.26 (c)(3)(ii)
§141.26(c)(3)(iii)
§141.26 (c)(3)(iv)
§141.26 (c)(3)(v)
§141.26(c)(4)
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-12
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
If the MCL for radioactivity set forth in § 141.66(b) through (e) is
exceeded, the operator of a community water system must give notice
to the State pursuant to § 141.31 and to the public as required by
subpart Q of this part.
§141.26 (c)(5)
SUBPART F - MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL GOALS AND MAXIMUM RESIDUAL DISINFECTANT LEVEL GOALS
§ 141.55
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL GOALS FOR RADIONUCLIDES
Contaminant
1. Combined radium-226 and radium -228
2. Gross alpha particle activity
(excluding radon and uranium)
3. Beta particle and photon radioactivity
4. Uranium
MCLG
Zero
Zero
Zero
Zero
141.55
Appendix D-13
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
SUBPART G - NRPDWR: MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS AND MAXIMUM RESIDUAL DISINFECTANT LEVELS
§ 141.66 MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS FOR RADIONUCLIDES
[reserved]
MCL for combined radium-226 and 228.
The maximum contaminant level for combined radium-226 and radium-
228 is 5 pCi/L. The combined radium-226 and radium-228 value is
determined by the addition of the results of the analysis for radium-226
and the analysis for radium-228.
MCL for gross alpha particle activity (excluding radon and uranium).
The maximum contaminant level for gross alpha particle activity
(including radium-226 but excluding radon and uranium) is 1 5 pCi/L.
MCL for beta particle and photon radioactivity.
The average annual concentration of beta particle and photon
radioactivity from man-made radionuclides in drinking water must not
produce an annual dose equivalent to the total body or any internal
organ greater than 4 millirem/year (mrem/year).
§ 14 1.66 (a)
§ 141. 66 (b)
§141.66(c)
§ 141. 66 (d)
§141.66(d)(l)
Appendix D-14
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Except for the radionuclides listed in Table A, the concentration of
man-made radionuclides causing 4 mrem total body or organ dose
equivalents must be calculated on the basis of 2 liter per day drinking
water intake using the 168 hour data list in "Maximum Permissible
Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible Concentrations of
Radionuclides in Air and in Water for Occupational Exposure, " NBS
(National Bureau of Standards) Handbook 69 as amended August
1963, U.S. Department of Commerce. This incorporation by reference
was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)and 1 CFRpartSl. Copies of this document are
available from the National Technical Information Service, NTIS ADA
280 282, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, Virginia 22161 . The toll-free number is 800-553-6847.
Copies may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. If
two or more radionuclides are present, the sum of their annual dose
equivalent to the total body or to any organ shall not exceed 4
mrem/year.
Table A - Average Annual Concentrations Assumed to Produce A
Total Body or Organ Dose of 4 mrem/yr
Radionuclide Critical Organ pCi per Liter
Tritium Total body 20,000
Strontium- 90 Bone marrow 8
MCL for uranium.
The maximum contaminant level for uranium is 30 ng/L.
Compliance dates
FEDERAL
CITATION
§141.66(d)(2)
§141.66(d)(2)
Table A
§141.66(e)
§141.66(f)
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-15
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Compliance dates for combined radium 226 and 228, gross alpha
particle activity, gross beta particle and photon radioactivity, and
uranium: Community water systems must comply with the MCLs listed
in paragraphs (b), (c), (d) and (e) of this section beginning December 8,
2003 and compliance shall be determined in accordance with the
requirements of § 141 .25 and § 141 .26. Compliance with reporting
requirements for the radionuclides under Appendix A to Subpart O
and Appendix A and B to Subpart Q is required on December 8, 2003.
Best Available Technologies (BATs) for Radionuclides.
The Administrator, pursuant to section 1412 of the Act, hereby
identifies as indicated in the following table the best technology
available for achieving compliance with the maximum contaminant
levels for combined radium-226 and and radium-228, uranium, gross
alpha particle activity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity.
FEDERAL
CITATION
§ 141.66 (fXl)
§141. 66 (g)
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-16
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Contaminant
1. Combined Radium-
226 and Radium-228
2. Uranium
3. Gross alpha
particle activity
(Excluding Radon
and Uranium)
4. Beta Particle and
Photon Radioactivity
BAT
Ion Exchange, Reverse Osmosis, Lime
Softening
Ion Exchange, Reverse Osmosis, Lime
Softening, Coagulation/Filtration
Reverse Osmosis
Ion Exchange, Reverse Osmosis
§141.66 (g)
Table B
List of Small Systems Compliance Technologies for Radionuclides and
Limitations to Use
§ 141.66 (h)
Table C
Limitations
(see footnotes)
Operator Skill
Level Required
1. Ion Exchange (IE)
(a) Intermediate
2. Point of Use (POU2) IE
(b) Basic
3. Reverse Osmosis (RO)
(c) Advanced
4. POU2RO
(b)
Basic
Raw Water Quality Range
and Considerations
All ground waters
All ground waters
Surface waters usually require
pre-filtration
Surface waters usually require
pre-filtration
Appendix D-17
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Limitations Operator Skill Raw Water Quality Range
(see footnotes) Level Required and Considerations
5. Lime Softening
(d) Advanced All waters
6. Green Sand Filtration
(e) Basic
7. Co-precipitation with Barium Sulfate
(f) Intermediate to Ground waters with suitable
Advanced water quality
8. Electrodialysis/Electrodialysis Reversal
Basic to All ground waters
Intermediate
9. Pre-formed Hydrous Manganese Oxide Filtration
(g) Intermediate All ground waters
10. Activated alumina
(a), (h) Advanced All ground waters, competing
anion concentrations may affect
regeneration frequency
1 1 . Enhanced coagulation/filtration
(i) Advanced Can treat a wide range of water
qualities
See § 141.66 (h) Table C for footnotes.
FEDERAL
CITATION
§ 141. 66 (h)
Table C continued
§ 141. 66 (h)
Table C, Footnotes
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-18
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Compliance Technologies by System Size Category for Radionuclide
NPDWRs
1 . Combined radium-226 and radium-228
25-500 501-3,300 3,300-10,000
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
2. Gross alpha particle activity
25-500 501-3,300 3,300-10,000
3,4 3,4 3,4
3. Beta particle activity and photon activity
25-500 501-3,300 3,300-10,000
1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4
4. Uranium
25-500 501-3,300 3,300-10,000
1,2,4,10,11 1,2,3,4,5,10,11 1,2,3,4,5,10,11
Note: (1) Numbers correspond to those technologies found listed in
the table C of 141. 66(h).
FEDERAL
CITATION
§ 141. 66 (h)
Table D
§ 141. 66 (h)
Table D
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-19
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
SUBPART O - CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORTS
APPENDIX A TO SUBPART O OF PART 141
Regulated Contaminants Table
Beta/photon emitters (mrem/yr)
MCL in mg/L: 4 mrem/yr
MCL in CCR units: 4
MCLG: 0
Major sources in drinking water: Decay of natural and man-made
deposits
Health effects: Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit forms of
radiation known as photons and beta radiation. Some people who
drink water containing beta particle and photon radioactivity in excess
of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting
cancer.
Alpha emitters (pCi/L)
MCL in mg/L: 15pCi/L
MCL in CCR units: 15
MCLG: 0
Major sources in drinking water: Erosion of natural deposits
Health effects: Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit a form of
radiation known as alpha radiation. Some people who drink water
containing alpha emitters in excess of the MCL over many years may
have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Appendix A to
Subpart O
Appendix D-20
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
Combined radium (pCi/L)
MCL in mg/L: 5 pCi/L
MCL in CCR units: 5
MCLG: 0
Major sources in drinking water: Erosion of natural deposits
Health effects: Some people who drink water containing radium 226 or
228 in excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk
of getting cancer.
Uranium (pCi/L)
MCLinmg/L:30ug/L
MCL in CCR units: 30
MCLG: 0
Major sources in drinking water: Erosion of natural deposits
Health effects: Some people who drink water containing uranium in
excess of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of
getting cancer and kidney toxicity.
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
Appendix D-21
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
SUBPART Q - PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF DRINKING WATER VIOLATIONS
APPENDIX A TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141 - NPDWR VIOLATIONS AND OTHER SITUATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC NOTICE'
I. Violations of National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations(NPDWR)3:
1 . Beta/photon emitters:
MCL/MRDL/TT violations2
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
2 141. 66 (d)
Monitoring and testing procedure violations
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
3 141.25 (a), 141.26 (b)
2. Alpha emitters:
MCL/MRDL/TT violations2
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
2 141. 66 (c)
Monitoring and testing procedure violations
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
3 141. 25 (a), 141. 26 (a)
3. Combined radium (226 & 228):
MCL/MRDL/TT violations2
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
2 141.66 (b)
Monitoring and testing procedure violations
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
3 141. 25 (a), 141. 26 (a)
I
I.F.I.
I.F.2.
I.F.3.
Appendix D-22
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
4. Uranium:
MCL/MRDL/TT violations2
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
29 141.66 (e)
Monitoring and testing procedure violations
Tier of Public Notice Required Citation
310 141.25 (a), 141.26 (a)
I.F.4.
1. Violations and other situations not listed in this table (e.g., reporting
violations and failure to prepare Consumer Confidence Reports), do
not require notice, unless otherwise determined by the primary agency.
Primacy agencies may, at their option, also require a more stringent
public notice tier (e.g., Tier 1 instead of Tier 2 or Tier 2 instead of Tier
3) for specific violations and situations listed in this Appendix, as
authorized under Sec. 141.202(a)and Sec. 141.203(a).
2. MCL—Maximum contaminant level, MRDL—Maximum residual
disinfectant level, TT—Treatment technique
Appendix A,
Endnotes
3. The term Violations of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWR) is used here to include violations of MCL, MRDL, treatment
technique, monitoring, and testing procedure requirements.
Appendix A,
Endnotes
9. The uranium MCL Tier 2 violation citations are effective December
8, 2003 for all community water systems.
10. The uranium Tier 3 violation citations are effective December 8,
2003 for all community water systems.
Appendix A,
Endnotes
Appendix D-23
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141 - STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
B. Standard Health Effects Language for Surface Water Treatment Rule
(SWTR), Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR)
and Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR) violations:
Contaminant MCLG1 MCL2 Standard Health Effects
mg/L mg/L Language for PN
79. Uranium16 Zero 30 |ig/L Some people who drink water
containing uranium in excess of
the MCL over many years may
have an increased risk of getting
cancer and kidney toxicity.
1 . MCLG- Maximum contaminant level goal
2. MCL- Maximum contaminant level
16. The uranium MCL is effective December 8, 2003 for all community
water systems.
G.79.
Appendix B
Endnotes
PART 142-NATioNAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTATION
SUBPART B - PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY
§ 142. 16 SPECIAL PRIMACY REQUIREMENTS
[reserved]
[reserved]
[reserved]
§142. 16 (i)
§ 142.16 CJ)
§142. 16 (k)
Appendix D-24
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
An application for approval of a State program revision for
Radionuclides which adopts the requirements specified in §
141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C) of this chapter must contain the following (in
addition to the general primacy requirements enumerated in this part,
including that State regulations be at least as stringent as the Federal
requirements):
§142.16(1)
If a State chooses to use grandfathered data in the manner described
in § 141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C) of this chapter, then the State must describe the
procedures and criteria which it will use to make these determinations
(whether distribution system or entry point sampling points are used).
§142.160X1)
The decision criteria that the State will use to determine that data
collected in the distribution system are representative of the drinking
water supplied from each entry point to the distribution system. These
determinations must consider:
All previous monitoring data.
§ 142.16 (l)(l)(i)(A)
The variation in reported activity levels.
§ 142.16 (l)(l)(i)(B)
Other factors affecting the representativeness of the data (e.g.
geology)
§ 142.16 (l)(l)(i)(C)
A monitoring plan by which the State will assure all systems complete
the required monitoring within the regulatory deadlines. States may
update their existing monitoring plan or use the same monitoring plan
submitted for the requirements in § 142.16(e)(5) under the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for the inorganic and organic
contaminants (i.e. the Phase II/V Rules). States may note in their
application any revision to an existing monitoring plan or note that the
same monitoring plan will be used. The State must demonstrate that
the monitoring plan is enforceable under State law.
142.16GX2)
Appendix D-25
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
§ 142.65 VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FROM THE MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS FOR RADIONUCLIDES
(OPTIONAL - STATES THAT PLAN TO ALLOW VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS MUST COMPLETE THIS SECTION)
Variances and exemptions from the maximum contaminant levels for
Combined Radium-226 and Radium-228, Uranium, Gross alpha particle
activity (Excluding Radon and Uranium), and Beta Particle and Photon
Radioactivity.
The Administrator, pursuant to section 1415(a)(l)(A) of the Act,
hereby identifies the following as the best available technology,
treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving
compliance with the maximum contaminant levels for the radionuclides
listed in §141.66 (b), (c), (d), and(e) of this chapter, for the purposes of
issuing variances and exemptions, as shown in § 141 .66 (g)
Table B.
In addition, the Administrator hereby identifies the following as the
best available technology, treatment techniques, or other means
available for achieving compliance with the maximum contaminant
levels for the radionuclides listed in §141 .66 (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this
chapter, for the purposes of issuing variances and exemptions to small
drinking water systems, defined here as those serving 10,000 persons
or fewer, as shown in § 141 .66 (h) Table D.
A State shall require community water systems to install and/or use
any treatment technology identified in Table A of this section,
paragraph (1 ), or in the case of small water systems (those serving
10,000 persons or fewer), § 141 .66 (h) Tables C and D, as a condition
for granting a variance except as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section. If, after the system's installation of the treatment technology,
the system cannot meet the MCL, that system shall be eligible for a
variance under the provisions of section 1415(a)(l)(A) of the Act.
§ 142.65(a)(l)
§ 142.65(a)(2)
Appendix D-26
-------
FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
FEDERAL
CITATION
STATE CITATION (DOCUMENT TITLE,
PAGE NUMBER, SECTION/PARAGRAPH)
DIFFERENT FROM
FED.
REQUIREMENT?
EXPLAIN ON
SEPARATE SHEET
If a community water system can demonstrate through comprehensive
engineering assessments, which may include pilot plant studies, that
the treatment technologies identified in this section would only
achieve a de minimus reduction in the contaminant level, the State may
issue a schedule of compliance that requires the system being granted
the variance to examine other treatment technologies as a condition of
obtaining the variance.
§ 142.65(a)(3)
If the State determines that a treatment technology identified under
paragraph (a)(3) of this section is technically feasible, the
Administrator or primacy State may require the system to install and/or
use that treatment technology in connection with a compliance
schedule issued under the provisions of section 1415(a)(l)(A)of the
Act. The State's determination shall be based upon studies by the
system and other relevant information.
§ 142.65(a)(4)
The State may require a community water system to use bottled water,
point-of-use devices, point-of-entry devices or other means as a
condition of granting a variance or an exemption from the requirements
of §141.66 of this chapter, to avoid an unreasonable risk to health.
§ 142.65(a)(5)
Community water systems that use bottled water as a condition for
receiving a variance or an exemption from the requirements of §141.66
of this chapter must meet the requirements specified in either
paragraph (g)(l) or (g)(2) and (g)(3) of §142.62.
§ 142.65(a)(6)
Community water systems that use point-of-use or point-of-entry
devices as a condition for obtaining a variance or an exemption from
the radionuclides NPDWRs must meet the conditions in §142.62 (h)(l)
through (h)(6).
142.65(a)(7)
Appendix D-27
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix D-28
-------
Appendix E
SDWIS/FED DTP
Reporting Requirements
Guidance
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-2
-------
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
State Reporting
Guidance for
Radionuclides
Appendix E-3
-------
Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water (4606M)
EPA816-R-02-012
www. epa. gov/safewater
March 2002
Printed on Recycled Paper
Appendix E-4
-------
Contents
Introduction Appendix E-7
I. Federal Reporting Requirements for the Radionuclides Rule Appendix E-11
A. Summary of Requirements Appendix E-ll
B. Key Dates Appendix E-ll
C. Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) Appendix E-ll
D. Method Detection Limits (DLs) Appendix E-12
E. Monitoring Period Appendix E-12
1. Initial Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -2267-228, and Uranium .... Appendix E-13
2. Initial Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters Appendix E-13
3. Reduced Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -2267-228, and
Uranium Appendix E-14
4. Reduced Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters Appendix E-14
5. Increased Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -2267-228,
and Uranium Appendix E-14
6. Increased Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters Appendix E-14
II. Violation Determination, SNCs, & Enforcement Appendix E-15
A. Violation Determination Based on Monitoring Period Appendix E-15
B. Reporting of Violations by System Versus Sampling Point Appendix E-15
C. Types of Violations Appendix E-16
D. Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) Violation Determination Appendix E-17
E. Monitoring and/or Reporting (M7R) Violation Determination Appendix E-18
F. Variance/Exemption/Other Compliance Schedule (V/E) Violation
Determination Appendix E-18
G. Return to Compliance (RTC) and Enforcement Actions Appendix E-19
H. Linking Enforcement and Follow-up Actions, and RTC to Violations Appendix E-19
I. Public Notification Appendix E-23
J. Significant Noncomplier (SNC) Appendix E-23
III. SDWIS/FED Data Transmittal Appendix E-25
IV. Sources for Additional Information Appendix E-29
Appendix A. Monitoring, Reporting, and Compliance Determination Examples Appendix E-31
Appendix E-5
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-6
-------
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to define the reporting requirements and related Safe Drinking
Water Information System/Federal Version (SDWIS/FED) Data Transfer Format (DTP) record layout
for information required under the Radionuclides Rule published in the Federal Register on
December 7, 2000 (65 FR 76 708). This document addresses the requirements for State reporting to
EPA and the definitions of monitoring, reporting, violations and Return to Compliance (RTC) data
applicable to community water systems (CWSs), under the Radionuclides Rule. Such reporting is
required under Section 1445 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) (codified at Section 142.15 of
Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations). The Radionuclides Rule currently does not apply to
nontransient noncommunity water systems, nor to transient noncommunity water systems.
This guidance document is designed for use by State program officials; however, States may at
their discretion share components of this guidance with water systems, drinking water laboratories, and
others in the drinking water community.
EPA and State decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case
basis that differ from this guidance where appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular facility will
be made based on the applicable statutes and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to raise
questions and objections about the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a particular
situation, and EPA will consider whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance
are appropriate in that situation. EPA may change this guidance in the future.
Appendix E-7
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-8
-------
GLOSSARY OF SPECIAL TERMS USED IN THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Term Definition
1976 Rule MCLs and National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Radiologicals,
promulgated on July 9, 1976 (41 FR 28404). This Rule was modified by technical
amendments published on August 27, 1980 (45 FR 57346). (Note: The National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations became the National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations with the passage of the June 19, 1986,
Amendments to SDWA.)
CWS An acronym for Community Water Systems.
DL An acronym for Method Detection Limit. The DL is the concentration which can be
counted with a precision of ± 100 percent at the 95 percent confidence level (1.96a
or 1.65a, where a is the standard deviation of the net counting rate of the sample).
DTP An acronym for Data Transfer Format, which is the format used to report data to
SDWIS/FED.
EPTDS Acronyms for an Entry Point To the Distribution System for a water system.
Exemption Allows a system with compelling circumstances an extension of time before the
system must comply with applicable requirements. Only exemptions for the uranium
MCL may be granted.
Grandfathered At State discretion, data collected between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, may
data be used to comply with the initial monitoring requirements for gross alpha, combined
radium (-226 & -228), and uranium.
GW An acronym for Ground Water
M/R An acronym for Monitoring and/or Reporting.
MCL An acronym for Maximum Contaminant Level.
OECA An acronym for EPA's Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance.
PN An acronym for Public Notice. PN is required for MCL and M/R violations, or
failure to comply with the conditions of a variance or exemption. If PN is not
properly performed, a PN violation is required to be reported to SDWIS/FED.
RTC An acronym for Return to Compliance. This designation indicates that a system that
was previously in violation for a requirement is now considered as being in
compliance, either because it corrected the violation or is no longer required to do so.
Sampling point An entry point to the distribution system at where the State has designated that
sampling should occur. A system must sample at every entry point to the distribution
system that the State considers to be representative, such that samples taken are
representative of all sources of water being used under normal operating conditions.
SDWA An acronym for the Safe Drinking Water Act.
SDWIS/FED An acronym for EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal Version,
the national repository for drinking water information.
Appendix E-9
-------
GLOSSARY OF SPECIAL TERMS USED IN THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Term Definition
Small system A system that serves 10,000 or fewer people.
SNC An acronym for Significant Noncomplier. A designation by EPA for those systems
that are considered to pose the most serious threats to public health.
State Refers to the government agency that is responsible for reporting the State's
drinking information to SDWIS/FED.
SW An acronym for Surface Water.
Variance Allows a system to provide drinking water that contains contaminant levels
exceeding the MCL, if it can demonstrate that it is still protective of public health.
As a condition of the variance, the system must adhere to a State-specific schedule.
Waiver At State discretion, allows a system to waive (not sample for) the final two quarters
of initial monitoring for gross alpha, uranium, radium-226, and radium-228, if the
sampling results from the previous two quarters are below the DL (40 CFR141.26
Appendix E-10
-------
I. Federal Reporting Requirements for the Radionuclides Rule
This section discusses the Safe Drinking Water Information System/ Federal Version
(SDWIS/FED) Radionuclides Rule reporting requirements for community water system (CWS)
monitoring programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Compliance, violations, follow-up
and enforcement actions, and Return to Compliance (RTC) reporting requirements are defined.
A. Summary of Requirements
The Radionuclides Rule still applies to CWSs only. It sets a new maximum contaminant level
(MCL) for uranium, which was not previously regulated, and revises the monitoring requirements for
combined radium (-226 & -228), gross alpha particle radioactivity, and beta particle and photon
radioactivity. The frequency for monitoring was changed to make it more similar to that for Phase U/V.
The Rule retains the existing MCL for combined radium (-226 & -228), gross alpha particle
radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity.
B. Key Dates
The Radionuclides Rule becomes effective on December 8, 2003. The 1976 Rule remains in
effect through December 7, 2003. All CWSs must complete initial monitoring by December 31, 2007.
A CWS must conduct initial monitoring according to a State-specified plan between December 8,
2003 and December 31, 2007, unless the State allows the system to grandfather data. At State
discretion, results from samples collected between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, may be used to
satisfy initial monitoring requirements for gross alpha, combined radium (-226 & -228), and uranium.
C. Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)
The following table summarizes the contaminants for the Radionuclides Rule and their
respective MCLs. The Radionuclides Rule sets a new MCL for uranium, which was not previously
regulated, and retains the existing MCLs for combined radium (-226 & -228), gross alpha particle
radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity.
Appendix E-11
-------
SDWIS/FED Radionuclides Contaminants
Contaminant Name
Gross Alpha, Excluding Radon & Uranium
Combined Uranium
Combined Radium (-226 & -228)
Man-Made Beta Particle & Photon Emitters
Tritium
Strontium -90
Iodine-131
SDWIS/FED
Contaminant
Code
4000
4006
4010
4101
4102
4174
4264
Maximum
Contaminant
Level (MCL)
15 pCi/L
30|jg/L
5pCi/L
4 mrem/year
n/a
n/a
n/a
D. Method Detection Limits (DLs)
The following table contains the method detection limits (DLs) used to determine compliance
applicable to radionuclides reporting (40 CFR 141.25(c)(l)(Table B)). The Agency will propose a DL
for uranium in a future rule before the effective date of the Radionuclides Rule (December 8, 2003).
Contaminant Name
Gross Alpha
Particle Activity
Radium-226
Radium-228
Uranium
DL
3pCi/L
IpCi/L
IpCi/L
Reserved
E. Monitoring Period
In SDWIS/FED, a monitoring period refers to the period of time during which monitoring was
to have been performed, such as a quarter, a year, etc. For example, assume a system is required to
monitor for contaminant X each calendar quarter. If this system fails to conduct the required monitoring
for contaminant X for the first calendar quarter of 2004, a Monitoring and/or Reporting (M/R) violation
is incurred. When this M/R violation is reported to SDWIS/FED, the State must supply the beginning
date of the monitoring period, and the ending date of the monitoring period. The beginning date of the
Appendix E-12
-------
monitoring period in this example would be 01/01/2004; the ending date of the monitoring period would
be 03/31/2004.
1. Initial Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -226/-22S, and Uranium
A CWS must collect four consecutive quarterly samples for gross alpha, radium-226, radium-
228, and uranium at all sampling points (40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)). If the annual average of the initial
monitoring results for each contaminant at a specific sampling point is above the MCL, the system must
collect and analyze quarterly samples at that sampling point until it has results from four consecutive
quarters that are at or below the MCL as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(iv).
Criteria for Determining Frequency of Subsequent Monitoring for
Gross Alpha, Combined Radium (-226 & -228), and Uranium*
If the results from initial
monitoring are:
DLbut ^ MCL but < MCL
>MCL
Then the subsequent
monitoring cycle is:
one sampling event every nine years
one sampling event every six years
one sampling event every three years
until the annual averages from each of
four consecutive quarters are at or below
the MCL
*Note: The DL has not been set for uranium but will be by December 8, 2003. Until the DL is set, if a system
is allowed to grandfather data for uranium, it may reduce monitoring frequency to a minimum of one sample
every six years (but not nine years).
2. Initial Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters
Systems designated by the State as vulnerable CWSs must collect quarterly samples for gross
beta and collect annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 (40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)). CWSs using
waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities must collect quarterly samples for gross beta
and iodine-131 and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)). Sampling
must begin the quarter after the system is notified by the State.
For the quarterly monitoring requirements for gross beta particle activity, samples must be
collected and analyzed monthly, or the composite of three monthly samples must be collected and
analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(i)). In addition, for the quarterly iodine-131 monitoring requirements,
samples must be collected for five consecutive days, composited, and analyzed.
Appendix E-13
-------
For the annual monitoring requirements for strontium-90 and tritium, samples must be collected
quarterly and analyzed or composited and analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(iii)).
3. Reduced Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -226/-22S, and Uranium
If the average of the monitoring results for each contaminant is below the DL, CWSs must
collect and analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling point every nine years
as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(i). A CWS may reduce the future monitoring frequency to once
every six years at each sampling point if the average of the monitoring results for each contaminant is at
or above the DL but at or below !/2 the MCL (40 CFR 141 .26(a)(3)(ii)). If the average of the
monitoring results for each contaminant is above !/2 the MCL, but at or below the MCL, a CWS must
collect and analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling point every three
years (40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(iii)). Systems must use the samples collected during the reduced
monitoring period to determine the monitoring frequency for subsequent monitoring periods (40 CFR
4. Reduced Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters
For systems using waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities, if the gross beta
minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 activity is less than or equal to 15 pCi/L, the system must
collect one gross beta sample every three years (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(iv)). In a vulnerable system, if
the gross beta minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 activity is less than or equal to 50 pCi/L, the
system must collect one gross beta sample every three years (40 CFR 141.26(b)(l)(i)).
5. Increased Monitoring for Gross Alpha, Radium -226/-22S, and Uranium
If a CWS on reduced monitoring has a monitoring result that exceeds the MCL for any
contaminant, the system must collect and analyze quarterly samples at that sampling point until the
system has results from four consecutive quarters that are below the MCL, unless the system enters into
another schedule as part of a formal compliance agreement with the State as defined in 40 CFR
141.26(a)(3)(v). Note: If the annual averages from four consecutive quarters are at the MCL, the
system must continue to monitor quarterly.
6. Increased Monitoring for Beta Particle and Photon Emitters
If the gross beta minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 activity exceeds 15 pCi/L (for
systems using waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities) or 50 pCi/L (for systems
determined by the State to be vulnerable), the system must speciate as required by the State, and
collect gross beta samples at the initial monitoring frequency (40 CFR 141.26(b)).
Appendix E-14
-------
II. Violation Determination, SNCs, & Enforcement
A. Violation Determination Based on Monitoring Period
The violation compliance period reflects the actual monitoring period for which the samples
were taken. As long as samples are taken within the specified monitoring period, the system will be
considered in compliance, even if the elapsed time between sample dates is greater than the specified
sampling frequency (e.g., every three years).
B. Reporting of Violations by System Versus Sampling Point
States have the option of reporting violations to SDWIS/FED by sampling point, or by system.
States choosing to report on a sampling point specific basis would report every violation that a system
incurs, even if a system has multiple violations of the same type and for the same contaminant and
monitoring period at multiple sampling points. Each would be reported to SDWIS/FED. States
choosing to report on a system specific basis would only report one violation per contaminant per
monitoring period even if the system violated the same MCL or monitoring requirement during a given
period at more than one sampling point. In choosing which of the sampling points to report a same type
violation for, always report the more severe violation.
Regardless of the option a State chooses for reporting violations to SDWIS/FED, EPA views
violations on a system-specific basis. For EPA purposes, each system can be in violation only one time
for each type of violation for each contaminant for each monitoring period — even though the CWS
may have had multiple violations of the same type and for the same contaminant and monitoring period
at multiple sampling points.
CWSs can have both MCL and monitoring violations during the same period. As one example,
consider a system in a State which chooses to report violations by system rather than by sampling point.
A system which has multiple sampling points may have a MCL violation for a specific contaminant at
one point and fail to monitor for that contaminant at another point. The CWS has both an MCL
violation and an M/R violation for the contaminant for the same monitoring period. Both violations are
to be reported to SDWIS/FED.
Appendix E-15
-------
C. Types of Violations
Types of violations for the Radionuclides Rule are as follows:
SDWIS/FED
Violation Type
Code
02
03
06
08
Violation Name
MCL, Average
M/R
Public Notice (PN)
Variance/Exemption
SDWIS/FED Violation Description
At a sampling point, the computed running
annual average exceeds the MCL or any
one sample causes the running annual
average to exceed the MCL (e.g. one
sample result exceeds four times the
MCL).
At a sampling point, when required,
failure to: conduct any sampling, properly
analyze any sample, or accurately report
the running annual average analytical
result of samples to the State.
Failure to properly provide PN according
to40CFR141 SubpartQ.
Failure to adhere to the schedules and
conditions of a variance or exemption.
For each violation listed above, the State reports the following data to SDWIS/FED. Section
HI - SDWIS/FED Data Transmittal explains these data elements in more detail.
A unique PWS-ID.
• A unique violation ID.
• A code identifying the contaminant for which the violation applies.
• A code describing the type of violation.
• Calendar date of the beginning of the monitoring period.
• Calendar date of the end of the monitoring period.
Appendix E-16
-------
Analysis result (running annual average) causing the violation. Reported using the same
unit as the MCL for the contaminant in question. (For MCL violations only.)
A numeric value that represents the MCL which was exceeded that led to the
identification of an MCL violation for a public water system. (Where the MCL
violated is other than the Federal MCL only.)
• A code designating whether the violation is of major or minor severity. (For M/R
violations only.)
• A source/entity ID at which the violation was incurred. (Enter the five-character
Source/Entity ID if reporting by sampling point; leave blank to report by
system.)
D. Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) Violation Determination
States must determine compliance based on the analytical result(s) obtained at each Entry Point
to the Distribution System (EPTDS) (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)). A system is in violation if:
Any sampling point is in violation of an MCL (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)); or,
Any sample result will cause the running annual average to exceed the MCL at any
EPTDS (i.e., the analytical result is greater than four times the MCL).
For systems monitoring more than once per year, compliance with the MCL is determined by a
running annual average at each sampling point.1 Systems that monitor annually or less frequently and
whose sample result exceeds the MCL must revert to quarterly sampling for that contaminant during the
next quarter. Systems are required to conduct quarterly monitoring only at the EPTDS at which the
sample was collected and for the specific contaminant that triggered the system into the increased
monitoring frequency. Systems triggered into increased monitoring will not be considered in violation of
the MCL until they have completed one year of quarterly sampling (40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)).
Individual analytical results should never be reported to SDWIS/FED as the analytical result of
a MCL violation. A State should always report the annual average regardless of whether a single result
would cause the system to exceed the MCL.
Data reported to SDWIS/FED should be in a form containing the same number of significant
digits as the MCL. The last significant digit should be increased by one unit if the next digit is 5, 6, 7, 8,
'The first year, the running annual average would be calculated by averaging the results of quarters 1-4.
Starting with quarter 5, the average is determined using the previous four quarters (e.g., quarter 5 results encompass
quarters 2, 3, 4, and 5; quarter 6 results encompass quarters 3, 4, and 6, etc.).
Appendix E-17
-------
or 9. The last significant digit should not be increased if the next digit is 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. Please refer to
the Water Supply Guidance #21 for additional instruction.
Several examples of reporting MCL violations are contained in Appendix A.
E. Monitoring and/or Reporting (M/R) Violation Determination
In accordance with 40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)(i), CWSs must collect compliance samples at every
EPTDS. Systems are required to conduct initial monitoring between December 8, 2003, and
December 31, 2007 (40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)). An M/R violation occurs and must be reported for any
system that fails to:
• collect the required number of samples during the specified time frame, in accordance
with 40 CFR 141.26;
ensure samples are analyzed properly in accordance with 40 CFR 141.25; or,
• submit all required monitoring information on time in accordance with 40 CFR 141.31
and 40 CFR 142.15.
Radionuclide M/R violations are expressed with severity indicators of major or minor. A
major M/R radionuclide violation is defined as a monitoring or reporting violation in which no samples
were collected and/or reported. A minor radionuclide violation is defined as a monitoring or reporting
violation in which some, but not all, of the required samples were collected and/or reported. For States
electing to report by sampling point, any violation during a monitoring period will be a "major" violation,
since in this case it would be impossible for a CWS to conduct some but not all of the required
monitoring. If reporting at the system level, systems with multiple sampling points may conduct
monitoring at some points but not all points; such violations would be coded as "minor" violations.
Systems that do not conduct monitoring at any of the points will have violations coded as "major."
The beginning date of an M/R violation would be the first day of the monitoring period during
which the system was to have taken the sample. For reduced monitoring, violations would occur during
that (three-year, six-year, or nine-year) span. Initial and quarterly monitoring violations would occur in
a three-month (January to March, April to June, July to August, or October to December) span, and
would continue to occur each quarter, as long as the system has not completed the initial monitoring.
Refer to the Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides for more detailed information on initial,
reduced, and increased monitoring requirements and the use of grandfathered data.
Several examples of reporting monitoring violations are contained in Appendix A.
Appendix E-18
-------
F. Variance/Exemption/Other Compliance Schedule (V/E) Violation Determination
A variance generally allows a system to provide drinking water that may be above the MCL on
the condition that the quality of the drinking water is still protective of public health. SDWA § 1415(a)
requires that any system obtaining a variance must enter into a compliance schedule with the primacy
entity as a condition of the variance.
Small system variances are not available for any contaminant regulated under the Radionuclides
Rule. However, all systems are eligible for general variances from the MCLs for gross alpha, combined
radium (-226 & -228), uranium, and gross beta particle activity.
An exemption for the uranium MCL may be granted, allowing a system with compelling
circumstances an extension of time before the system must comply with applicable SDWA § 1416
requirements. Gross alpha, combined radium (-226 & -228), and gross beta particle activity are
ineligible for exemptions.
When a CWS does not adhere to the Variances, Exemptions and Other Compliance
Schedules stated under 40 CFR 141.26 and 142.65, a violation must be reported to SDWIS/FED.
Section m - SDWIS/FED Data Transmittal explains in more detail how to report these data
elements.
Refer to the Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides for more detailed information on
small system compliance technologies, general variance requirements, and exemption criteria.
G. Return to Compliance (RTC) and Enforcement Actions
When a violation for the Radionuclides Rule is incurred, it must be reported to SDWIS/FED.
When the State has determined that the system is no longer in violation and meets the criteria for RTC
as specified below, it must report to SDWIS/FED an RTC properly linked to the respective
violation(s).
Appendix E-19
-------
Definitions for Compliance Achieved by Violation Type
Violation Type
Criteria for Violations
If-
Criteria for Return to
Compliance (RTC)
Then a system will be
considered RTC when...
MCL
Initial Monitoring. If the
average of four quarters of
initial monitoring exceeded the
MCL
four consecutive quarterly
samples are at or below the
MCL.
Reduced Monitoring. If the
results of reduced monitoring
exceeded the MCL
four consecutive quarterly
samples are below the MCL.*
M/R
If a system failed to properly
monitor or report
the system properly monitors
and reports according to the
requirements in 40 CFR
141.26 and 40 CFR 141.31.
Public Notice
If a system fails to properly
deliver public notice
the system properly delivers
public notice according to the
requirements in 40 CFR
141.32.
Variance/Exemption/
Other Schedule
If a system fails to meet the
conditions or schedules of a
variance, exemption, or other
compliance schedule
the system corrects the
problem that caused the failure
to meet the schedule, to the
satisfaction of the State.
The criteria for RTC for MCLs differs slightly, depending on whether the MCL was incurred
during initial or reduced monitoring. This is a change from the 1976 Rule.
As part of the Enforcement Action Escalation Policy, a State must state an escalating response
to violations, consisting of informal follow-up and formal enforcement actions. That continues until the
system either returns to compliance or is on a compliance schedule as part of a formal enforcement
action taken by the State. Specific enforcement actions taken against violations for this Rule must be
reported to SDWIS/FED, properly linked to the violations that caused the need for enforcement.
Actions in bold and prefaced by an asterisk are required to be reported to SDWIS.
Appendix E-20
-------
Follow-up Activities and Enforcement Actions
>t Violation/Reminder Notice
>t Compliance Meeting Conducted
;t Tech Assistance Visit
>t Site Visit (enforcement)
;t Public Notif Requested
;t Public Notif Received
it Public Notif issued
it Boil Water Order
St Formal NO V issued SFJ
>t Show-cause Hearing
St BCA signed
St AO (w/o penalty) issued
St AO (w/penalty) issued
'St Admin Penalty assessed
>t Civil Case under development
St Civil Case Referred to AG
St Civil Case filed SFQ
St Civil Case concluded
>t Consent Decree/Judgement
>t Default Judgement
>t Injunction
>t Temp Restrain Order/Prelim Injunc
St Crim Case referred to AG
St Crim Case filed
St Crim Case concluded
>t Case appealed
>t Case dropped
>t Hook-up/Extension Ban
'St Compliance achieved
'St Variance/Exemption issued
>t turbidity Waiver issued
StNo addtl Formal Action needed
'St Intentional no-action
>t Unresolved
it Other
SIA
SIB
SIC
SID
SIE
SIF
SFG
SFH
SFJ
SFN
SFK
SFL
SFO
SFM
SFP
SF9
SFQ
SF%
SFR
SFS
SFT
SFU
SF&
SFV
SFW
SFS
SF4
SF5
SOX
SOY
soz
SO+
SO6
SO7
SOS
Fed Violation/Reminder Notice
Fed Compliance Meeting Conducted
Fed Tech Assistance Visit
Fed Site Visit (enforcement)
Fed Public Notif Requested
Fed Public Notif Received
Fed Public Notif issued
Fed Boil Water Order
"Fed Formal NO V issued
Fed Show-cause Hearing
"Fed BCA signed
"Fed PAO issued
"Fed FAO issued
"Fed 1431 (Emergency) Order
"Fed CFP issued
"Fed CFP Consent Order/Decree w/penalty
"Fed CFP Default Judgement
"Fed Civil Case Referred to DOJ
"Fed Civil Case filed
"Fed Civil Case concluded
Fed Consent Decree/Judgement
Fed Default Judgement
Fed Injunction
Fed Temp Restrain Order/Prelim Injunc
"Fed Crim Case referred to DOJ
"Fed Crim Case filed EFV
"Fed Crim Case concluded EFW
*Fed Compliance achieved
*Fed Variance/Exemption issued
Fed Turbidity Waiver issued
*Fed No addtl Formal Action needed
*Fed Intentional no-action
Fed Unresolved
Fed Other
EIA
EIB
EIC
EID
EIE
EIF
EFG
EFH
EFJ
EFN
EFK
EF!
EFL
EF/
EF<
EF-
EF=
EF9
EFQ
EF%
EFR
EFS
EFT
EFU
EF&
EFV
EFW
EOX
EOY
EOZ
EO+
EO6
EOT
EOS
Appendix E-21
-------
H. Linking Enforcement and Follow-up Actions, and RTC to Violations
All responses to violations (e.g., informal follow-up actions, formal enforcement, RTC) must be
linked to the specific violations they address. The following describes the three appropriate ways in
which these responses may be linked to violations:
Associated Violation IDs (Y5000) - FY & VIOLATION ID NUMBER.
Entering the specific violation ID(s) to which the enforcement action is related will establish a
link between the enforcement record and each violation record matching the specific violation ID. If no
links are established (reported violation IDs are not found or matched in the data base) the enforcement
record will be posted to the data base and the link data will be rejected.2
Associated Violation Contaminant Groups (Z5000) - VIOLATION TYPE,
CONTAMINANT, MONITORING PERIOD BEGIN DATE
Entering the Radionuclides violation type code, the contaminant code and the monitoring period
begin date will establish a link between the enforcement action and all Radionuclides violations which
exactly match the enforcement link data. If no matches are found, the enforcement record will be
posted to the data base and the link data will be rejected.2
Associated J5000 Group (J5000) - VIOLATION TYPE, CONTAMINANT
CODE, MONITORING PERIOD BEGIN DATE, ENFORCEABLE
COMPLIANCE END DATE
Entering the ASSOCIATED J5000 GROUP data, which consists of Violation Type,
Contaminant Code or Rule Code, Monitoring Period Begin Date, and Projected Compliance End
Date, of those violations will establish a link between enforcement actions and violations.3 If the
violation record data exactly matches the specified ASSOCIATED J5000 GROUP, SDWIS/FED will
automatically establish a link between the enforcement record and that violation record. If no exact
matches are found, no links will be established, and the enforcement action will be rejected. J5000
cannot be used with EOX or SOX enforcements.
Corrections should be submitted to SDWIS/FED as soon as possible to provide the correct link data for
the violation-to-violation and enforcement-to-violation records.
Projected Compliance End Date can be the compliance due date associated with enforcement actions, or
some other defined end date in the future.
Appendix E-22
-------
The J5000 is only valid for long-term compliance issues and was intended for specific formal
enforcement actions such as administrative orders, civil referrals, bilateral compliance agreements, and
referrals to the Department of Justice. It is not intended for Notices of Violation, boil orders, etc. It is
not appropriate for linking RTC records to violation. It was designed to capture violations during
compliance periods where construction was required and additional violations would likely occur
between the issuance of the formal action and the construction completion or compliance achievement
date. If the system continues to have violations after the end date and the system has not RTC, the
addressed flag in the SNC/Exceptions Tracking System reverts to unaddressed and will be displayed
on the Management Tracking Report. This link method should be used cautiously. Again, it is not
appropriate for RTC.
The Y5000 transaction link is the preferred method for linking enforcement actions to
violations. Refer to the SDWIS/FED Data Entry Instructions for more detailed information on linking
violations.
The Z5000 transaction link is not recommended for linking enforcement actions to violations
and will be removed from SDWIS in the near future.
I. Public Notification
The Final Radionuclides Rule requires CWSs to provide a Tier 2 public notice (notice as soon
as possible, within 30 days) for MCL violations and failure to comply with variance and exemption
conditions. CWSs are to provide a Tier 3 public notice (annual notification) for M/R violations and
operations under a variance and exemption (40 CFR Part 141, Subpart Q, Appendix A).
Violations of the Radionuclides Rule and the Public Notification Rule are required to be linked.
Refer to the State Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification (PN) Rule for detailed
information on reporting violation information to the general public.
J. Significant Noncomplier (SNC)
EPA's Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) is in the process of developing
new guidance in an effort to update its significant noncomplier (SNC) definitions. However, at this
time, we will use the following definition to remain consistent with the Arsenic Rule and OECA draft
guidance.
Appendix E-23
-------
A system is characterized as a SNC if it has a violation result twice the MCL (30 pCi/L for
gross alpha, 10 pCi/L for combined radium-226 and radium-228, 60 |ig/L for uranium,
and 8 mrem/yr for man made beta particle and photon emitters).
A system monitoring once a year or more is characterized as a SNC if it fails to monitor or
report analytical results for radionuclides for two consecutive monitoring periods. A system monitoring
less than once a year is characterized as a SNC if it fails to monitor or report the analytical results for
radionuclides in one monitoring period.
Refer to the SDWIS/FED Data Entry Instructions and the SDWIS/FED Significant Non-
Compliance Specifications for more detailed information.
SNC Levels for Radionuclides
Contaminant Name
Combined Radium (-226 & -228)
Combined Uranium
Gross Alpha, Excluding Radon & Uranium
Man-Made Beta Particle & Photon
Emitters
Tritium
Strontium-90
Iodine-131
MCL
5pCi/L
30|ig/L
15 pCi/L
4 mrem/year
n/a
n/a
n/a
SNC
10 pCi/L
60|ig/L
30 pCi/L
8 mrem/year
n/a
n/a
n/a
Appendix E-24
-------
III. SDWIS/FED Data Transmittal
The Data Transfer Format (DTP) is the only format by which data can be entered into the
SDWIS/FED data base.
Each Data Transfer File record is 80 characters in length and has the following format:
Definition
Form ID
Qualifier 1
Qualifier 2
Qualifier 3
Action Code
Data Element Number
Data Value
Reserved for SDWIS/FED
Batch Sequence Number
Positions
1 -2
3 - 11
12- 18
19-25
26
27-31
32-71
72-74
75-80
Example
Dl
PWS-ID
VIOLATION-ID
D, I, or M*
Cnnnn
NNNNNN, where the batch
date with format MMDDYY
is suggested
D = DELETE, I = INSERT, and M = MODIFY
Appendix E-25
-------
FORM
ID
1-2
DATA ADDRESS
QUALIFIERS
QUAL 1 QUAL 2 QUAL 3
3-11 12-18 19-25
ACT.
CODE
26
DATA
ELEM.
NUM
27-31
DATA VALUE
32-71
N/A
72-74
Batch Sequence
Number
75-80
The following table presents the SDWIS/FED violation record data elements for reporting
Radionuclides Rule violations.
SDWIS/FED DTP C1100 - Violation Record Data Elements
DTP
Number
C101
cnoi
C1103
C1105
C1107
C1109
Format
Character 9
Character 7
Character 4
Character 2
Date 8 (YYYYMMDD)
Date 8 (YYYYMMDD)
Description
PWSID
Violation ID
Contaminant Code
Violation Type Code
Monitoring Period Begin Date
Monitoring Period End Date
Permissible Values
Must be included within
SDWIS/FED inventory
Characters 1 & 2 must be the
Federal fiscal year (FY) in which
the violation was issued by the
State or Federal agency
4000=Gross Alpha
401 0=Combined Radium
(-226&-22S)
4006=Combined Uranium
4101 =Man-Made Beta Particle
4102=Tritium
4174=Strontium-90
4264=Iodine-131
02=MCL, Average
03=M/R
06=Public Notice
08= Variance/Exemption
Date monitoring period begins
Date monitoring period ends
Appendix E-26
-------
SDWIS/FED DTP C1100 - Violation Record Data Elements
DTP
Number
C1123
C1125
C1131
C1143
Format
Decimal 6.9
Decimal 6.9
Character 1
Numeric 5
Description
Analysis Result
MCL Violated
Major Violation Indicator
Source/Entity ID
Permissible Values
Required for MCL violations
only; Must be > 0; Must be
reported in same unit as MCL
Required when primacy agency
has a different MCL than in the
Federal regulations
Required for M/R viols only;
Y = Yes, a major M/R violation
N = No, a minor M/R violation
Source/Entry ID must be
included within SDWIS/FED
inventory; OR blank
Note: SDWIS/FED DTF element Cl 111 - Monitoring Period Duration will not be stored in the SDWIS/FED database
and will not be acceptable in SDWIS/FED as of January 2003.
Appendix E-27
-------
The following table presents the SDWIS/FED Enforcement/Violation Link record data
elements for linking Radionuclides Rule violations to enforcement actions.
SDWIS/FED DTP C1200 - Enforcement/Violation Link Record Data Elements
DTP
Number
C1201
C1203
C1205
Y5000
Z5000
J5000
Format
Character 7
(YYNNNNN)
Date 8 (YYYYMMDD)
Character 3
Character 40
Character 40
Character 40
Description
Enforcement ID
Enforcement Action Date
Enforcement Action Type
Code
Enforcement Link to Violation
ID
Enforcement Link to Violation
Contaminant Group
Enforcement Link to Violation
J5000 Group
Permissible Values
Uniquely identifies a specific
enforcement action taken by a State or
Federal agency.
Characters 1 & 2 must be the Federal
fiscal year (FY) in which the
enforcement action was taken
Characters 3 through 7 contain a
unique identification number for each
enforcement action for the PWS for the
Federal fiscal year.
Calendar date on which an
enforcement action was taken by the
State or Federal agency against a
public water system
Refer to Section II-G of this document
or the SDWIS/FED Online Data
Dictionary for the listing of valid
action codes
The specific violation ID to which the
enforcement action is related
The associated violation contaminant
group data (violation type;
contaminant code; and
monitoring period begin date) of those
violations to be linked to an
enforcement action
The associated J5000 group data
(violation type;
contaminant code or rule code;
enforcement action begin date;
enforceable compliance date) of those
violations to be linked to an
enforcement action
Appendix E-28
-------
IV. Sources for Additional Information
Additional technical information on SDWIS/FED reporting information can be obtained by
contacting Valerie Love-Smith of the Infrastructure Program, Drinking Water Protection Division,
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water at (202)-564-4630, or from the following resources:
SDWIS/FED Internet Site (www.epa.gov/safewater/sdwisfed/sdwis.htm).
SD WIS/FED Data Entry Instructions. July 23, 2001.
SDWIS/FED Online Data Dictionary. July 23, 2001.
SDWIS/FED Significant Non-Compliance Specifications. February 4, 2002.
Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides. March 2002.
Radionuclides Internet Site (www.epa.gov/safewater/rads/implement.html).
Radionuclides Final Rule. EPA-815-Z-00-006. December 7, 2000.
Radionuclides Rule: A Quick Reference Guide. EPA-816-F-01 -003. January 2001.
Technical Fact Sheet: Final Rule for (Non-Radon) Radionuclides in Drinking Water.
EPA-815-F-00-013. November2000.
State Implementation Guidance for Public Notification (PN) Rule. See
www. epa.gov/safewater/pn.html
Water Supply Guidance Manual. EPA-816-R-00-003. January 2000.
SDWIS/FED Regional Coordinators
Region 1
Josh Nemzer
617-918-1961
Region 3
Jackie Pine
215-814-5782
Region 5
Kris Werbach
312-886-6527
Region 7
Carolyn Mitchell
913-551-7187
Region 9
Mark Rathbun
415-744-1840
Region 2
Mark Rasso
212-637-3839
Region 4
Charlie O'Donnell
404-562-9762
Region 6
Andrew Waite
214-665-7332
Region 8
Rich Gomez
303-312-7073
Region 10
Jane Schuster
206-553-1096
Appendix E-29
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-30
-------
Appendix A
Monitoring, Reporting, and Compliance Determination Examples
Appendix E-31
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-32
-------
Example 1 - "Major" M/R Violation
On June 3, 2005, a "new" ground water (GW) system MD5234590 with one sampling site begins to
collect its four consecutive quarterly samples of gross alpha, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium
during the initial monitoring period of December 8, 2003, to December 31, 2007.1
Example 1 - Initial Monitoring Results
Gross Alpha
Radium-226
Radium-228
ladium
2267-228
Jranium
Quarter 1
6/03/05
7 ± 2 pCi/L
no sample
3 ± 2 pCi/L
-
IVS/L
Quarter 2
9/10/05
6 ± 2 pCi/L
2 ± 2 pCi/L
2 ± 2 pCi/L
4pCi/L
7,ig/L
Quarter 3
12/12/05
7 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
3 ± 2 pCi/L
4pCi/L
?H8^
Quarter 4
3/31/06
7 ± 2 pCi/L
2 ± 1 pCi/L
2 ± 2 pCi/L
4pCi/L
6|ig/L
Quarter 5
5/30/06
n/a
1 ± 2 pCi/L
3 ± 2 pCi/L
4pCi/L
n/a
Annual
Average
7pCi/L
-
-
4pCi/L
7n^L
Monitoring Schedule based upon Initial Monitoring Results:
Gross Alpha - The gross alpha annual average of 7 pCi/L (do not add or subtract the ± values) is
between the gross alpha DL (3 pCi/L) and l/2 the MCL; therefore, the system reduces monitoring for
gross alpha to one sample every six years (i.e., the next sample must be collected between 2008 and
2013).2
Combined Radium-226/228 - The combined radium (-226 & -228) annual average of 4 pCi/L (do not
add or subtract the ± values) is greater than 1A the MCL but less than the MCL. The system must
collect one sample every three years (next sample required between 2008 and 2010).3
'New CWS without acceptable historical data must collect four consecutive quarterly samples at all
sampling points as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(l)(ii) and 141.26(a)(2)(i).
2States may allow CWS to reduce the future monitoring frequency to once every six years at each sampling
point as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(ii).
3States may allow CWS to reduce the future monitoring frequency to once every three years at each
sampling point as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(iii).
Appendix E-33
-------
Uranium - The uranium annual average of 7 |ig/L is less than 1A the MCL, thereby allowing the system
to reduce monitoring for uranium to one sample every six years (i.e., the next sample must be collected
between 2008 and 2013).
Violation Determination and Reporting:
The resultant rounded annual average of each contaminant is below the MCL, therefore, no MCL
violations are incurred. The system failed to collect a combined radium (-226 & -228) sample during
the monitoring period of 4/01/05 to 6/30/05. M/R violations are to be reported using the major and
minor severity indicators. A major M/R violation is defined as "no" samples were collected/reported
during the monitoring period. A minor M/R violation is defined as "some, but not all" samples were
collected/reported during the monitoring period. In this example the system failed to collect any
combined radium (-226 & -228) samples during the monitoring period and would therefore receive a
major M/R violation.
The State, reporting at the system level, would report the following violation information:
1 - Combined Radium (-226 & -228) Major M/R Violation incurred during the 1st quarter
(4/1/05 - 6/30/05)
Example 1 -Major M/R Violation Record
:i!01 0555111 Violation ID
! 1103 4010 Contaminant Code
! 1105 03 Violation Type Code
! 1107 20050401 Monitoring Period Begin Date
:i!09 20050630 Monitoring Period End Date
\ 1131 Y Maj or Violation Indicator
Appendix E-34
-------
The DTP transactions for this violation are:
Example 1 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions
Positions 1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions 3-11
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
Positions 12-18
0555111
0555111
0555111
0555111
0555111
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
Positions 32-71
4010
03
20050401
20050630
Y
Appendix E-35
-------
Example 2 - MCL Violation
A GW system MD5234590 serving 1,510 people has been in operation since 1994. The system has
one sampling site (#34555). On July 17, 2004, the system starts collecting its four consecutive
quarterly samples of gross alpha, radium-226, radium-228 and uranium during the Rule initial
monitoring period of December 8, 2003 to December 31, 2007.4
Example 2 - Initial Monitoring Results
Gross Alpha
Radium-226
Radium-228
Radium-226/228
Uranium
Quarter 1
7/17/04
10 ± 2 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
2 ± 1 pCi/L
34|ig/L
Quarter 2
10/12/04
12±lpCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
2 ± 1 pCi/L
32|ig/L
Quarter 3
1/23/05
ll±2pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
2 ± 1 pCi/L
31|ig/L
Quarter 4
4/07/05
13 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
1 ± 1 pCi/L
2 ± 1 pCi/L
30|ig/L
Annual
Average
12 pCi/L
-
-
2pCi/L
32|ig/L
Monitoring Schedule based upon Initial Monitoring Results:
Gross Alpha - The annual average of 12 pCi/L is greater than 1A the MCL but less than the MCL. The
system must collect a sample once every three years (next sample required between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium-226/228 - The annual average of 2 pCi/L is between the DL and /^ the MCL. The
system is allowed to reduce monitoring to one sample every six years (i.e., the next sample is due
between 2008 and 2013).
Uranium - The annual average of 32 |ig/L is greater than the MCL. The system must collect quarterly
samples until four consecutive quarterly results are less than or equal to the MCL, or the State specifies
a different monitoring frequency as part of a formal compliance agreement.5
4A CWS without acceptable historical data must collect four consecutive quarterly samples at all sampling
points as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(i).
540CFR141.26(a)(2)(iv).
Appendix E-36
-------
Violation Determination and Reporting:
After collecting four consecutive quarters of radionuclide data, the system can compute its running
annual average. The annual average for uranium (after rounding) is above the MCL, therefore, the
system would incur an MCL violation. The system collected all of its required radionuclide samples
and has incurred no M/R violations.
The State, reporting by sampling point, would report the following violation information:
1 - Uranium MCL Violation of 32 |ig/L incurred during qtr 4 (4/1/05 - 6/30/05)
cnoi
C1103
C1105
C1107
C1109
C1123
C1143
Fxamnle 7 - MCT
0555333
4006
02
20050401
20050630
32
34555
Violation RemrH
Violation ID
Contaminant Code
Violation Type Code
Monitoring Period Begin Date
Monitoring Period End Date
Analysis Result
Source/Entity ID*
*The Source/Entity ID must exist within SDWIS/FEDs inventory or the record(s) will be rejected [e.g.,
source/entity #34555 must already be defined as an entry point for this system (MD5234590) prior to
entering violation data].
The DTP transactions for this violation are:
Examole 2 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions
Positions 1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions 3-11
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
MD5234590
Positions 12-18
0555333
0555333
0555333
0555333
0555333
0555333
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
Positions 32-71
4006
02
20050401
20050630
32
34555
Appendix E-37
-------
Example 3 - Multiple Entry Points
A surface water (SW) system serving 5,332 people has been in operation since 1995. The system has
two sampling sites, identified as Samplesite-1 and Samplesite-2. At each sampling site, the system has
collected the last of its four consecutive quarterly radionuclide samples on March 23, 2007, during the
Rule initial monitoring period of December 8, 2004, to December 31, 2007.
Initial Annual Average Monitoring Results:
Samplesite-1 Samplesite-2
Gross Alpha = 10 pCi/L Gross Alpha = 4 pCi/L
Radium-226 = 1 pCi/L Radium-226 < 1 pCi/L
Radium-228 = 2 pCi/L Radium-228 < 1 pCi/L
Uranium = ND Uranium = ND
Monitoring Schedule based upon Initial Monitoring Results:
Samplesite-1
Gross Alpha - The annual average is greater than /^ the MCL but less than the MCL.
The system must collect a sample once every three years (next sample required
between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium-226/228 - The annual average is greater than 1A the MCL but less
than the MCL. The system must collect a sample once every three years.
Uranium - The annual average is less than the regulatory DL.6 The system must collect
a sample once every nine years (next sample must be collected between 2008 and
2016).7
Samplesite-2
Gross Alpha - The annual average is greater than the regulatory DL but less than 1A the
MCL. The system must collect a sample once every six years (next sample required
between 2008 and 2013).
Compliance is determined based upon the DLs as defined in 40 CFR 141.25(c)(l)(Table B). The Agency will
propose a DL for uranium in a future rule before the effective date of the Radionuclides Rule.
7States may allow CWSs to reduce the future monitoring frequency to once every nine years at each
sampling point as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(3)(i).
Appendix E-38
-------
Combined Radium-226/228 - The annual average is less than the regulatory DL. The
system must collect a sample once every nine years.
Uranium - The annual average is less than the regulatory DL. The system must collect a
sample once every nine years.
The system collected all required radionuclide samples and had no MCL exceedances, therefore, the
system is in compliance with the Rule and has no violations to be reported to SDWIS/FED.
Appendix E-39
-------
Example 4 - MCL Violations at Multiple Entry Points
A GW system serving 3,862 people has been in operation since 1995. The system has two sampling
sites, identified as Samplesite-98775 and Samplesite-98766. The system has collected gross alpha
samples from a representative point in the distribution system for the three compliance periods under
the existing (1976) Radionuclides Rule (1992-1996, 1996-2000, 2000-2004). The system has been in
compliance with the existing Rule.
• The gross alpha levels have exceeded the trigger of 5 pCi/L
Radium-226 levels have not exceeded 3 pCi/L, so the system has been
in compliance with the existing Rule.
• The system does not collect any radium-228 samples prior to the
effective date of the Radionuclides Rule.
The State has made a written finding that the samples collected from the distribution system during the
2000-2004 compliance period under the existing Rule are representative of both entry points and
allows the system to grandfather the gross alpha and radium-226 data (gross alpha = 10 ± 1 pCi/L, and
radium = 3 ± 1 pCi/L). The system decides not to use gross alpha as a surrogate for uranium. The
system starts collecting quarterly samples for radium-228 and uranium beginning September 3, 2006, at
each sampling point, since they did not have grandfatherable data for these two contaminants.
Example 4 - Initial Monitoring Results
ladium 228 (SS-98775)
ladium 226/228 (SS-98775)
Uranium (SS-98775)
ladium 228 (SS-98766)
ladium 226/228 (SS-98766)
Uranium (SS-98766)
Quarter 1
9/3/06
6pCi/L
9pCi/L
ND
4pCi/L
7pCi/L
35 ,ig/L
Quarter 2
12/19/06
5pCi/L
8pCi/L
ND
4pCi/L
7pCi/L
38|ig/L
Quarter 3
3/07/07
4pCi/L
7pCi/L
waived8
4pCi/L
7pCi/L
40|ig/L
Quarter 4
6/16/07
3pCi/L
6pCi/L
waived8
4pCi/L
7pCi/L
38|ig/L
Annual
Average
—
8pCi/L
ND
7pCi/L
38|ig/L
8States may waive the final two quarters of initial monitoring if the results of the first two quarters are below
the DL. The system is then required, under the reduced monitoring requirements, to sample once every nine years
(40CFR141.26(a)(2)(iii)).
Appendix E-40
-------
Quarterly combined radium (-226 & -228) results were calculated by adding the grandfathered
radium-226 result of 3 pCi/L to the quarterly radium-228 sample results.
Monitoring Schedule based upon Initial Monitoring Results:
Samplesite-98775
Gross Alpha - The grandfathered result of 10 pCi/L is greater than 1A the MCL but less
than the MCL. The system must collect a sample once every three years (i.e., the next
sample must be collected between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium-226/228 - The annual average of 8 pCi/L is greater than the MCL.
The system must collect quarterly samples until four consecutive quarterly results are
less than or equal to the MCL, or until the State specifies a different monitoring
frequency as part of a formal compliance agreement.
Uranium - Uranium was not detected at this entry point. The system must collect a
sample once every nine years (i.e., the next sample must be collected between 2008
and 2016).
Samplesite-98766
Gross Alpha - The grandfathered result of 10 pCi/L is greater than /^ the MCL but less
than the MCL. The system must collect a sample once every three years (i.e., the next
sample must be collected between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium-226/228 - The annual average of 7 pCi/L is greater than the MCL.
The system must collect quarterly samples until four consecutive quarterly results are
less than or equal to the MCL, or until the State specifies a different monitoring
frequency as part of a formal compliance agreement.
Uranium - The annual average of 38 |ig/L is greater than the MCL. The system must
collect quarterly samples until four consecutive quarterly results are less than or equal
the MCL, or until the State specifies a different monitoring frequency as part of a formal
compliance agreement.
Appendix E-41
-------
Violation Determination and Reporting:
If Reporting Violations by System:
1 - Combined Radium (-226 & -228) MCL Violation of 8 pCi/L for the 4th qtr at Samplesite-
98775
1 - Uranium MCL Violation of 38 |ig/L 4th qtr at Samplesite-98766
(Even though both entry points had MCL violations for combined radium (-226 & -228) during the
same monitoring period, the State only has to report the highest concentration for each contaminant for
each monitoring period, if reporting at the system level.)
The DTP transactions for this violation are:
Example 4 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions (by System)
Positions
1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions
3-11
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
Positions
12-18
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755555
Positions
19-25
Positions
26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
Positions
32-71
4010
02
20070401
20070630
8
4006
02
20070401
20070630
38
Appendix E-42
-------
If Reporting Violations by Sampling Point: The State has to report three MCL violations.
1 - Radium-226/228 MCL Violation of 8pCi/L for the 4th qtr at Samplesite-98775
1 - Radium-226/228 MCL Violation of 7pCi/L for the 4th qtr at Samplesite-98766
1 - Uranium MCL Violation of 38 |ig/L for the 4th qtr at Samplesite-98766
Example 4 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions (by Sampling Point)
Positions
1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions
3-11
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
Positions
12-18
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755444
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755555
0755666
0755666
0755666
0755666
0755666
0755666
Positions
19-25
Positions
26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
Positions
32-71
4010
02
20070401
20070630
8
98775
4010
02
20070401
20070630
7
98766
4006
02
20070401
20070630
38
98766
Appendix E-43
-------
Example 5 - M/R Violation Determination at Multiple Entry Points
SW system #MD4001320 samples for combined radium, which has an MCL of 5 pCi/L. The samples
are taken from three different sampling points within the system.
A major M/R violation is defined as "no" samples collected/reported during the monitoring period. A
minor M/R violation is defined as "some, but not all" samples collected/reported during the monitoring
period.
Example 5 - Monitoring Results
Quarter 1
Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Quarter 5
Quarter 6
Quarter 7
Quarter 8
Monitoring Period
7/1/04 - 9/30/04
10/1/04-12/31/04
1/1/05-3/31/05
4/1/05 - 6/30/05
7/1/05 - 9/30/05
10/1/05-12/31/05
1/1/06-3/31/06
4/1/06 - 6/30/06
EP-1
sampled
no sampling
sampled
sampled
sampled
N/A
N/A
N/A
EP-2
sampled
no sampling
no sampling
sampled
sampled
sampled
N/A
N/A
EP-3
sampled
no sampling
no sampling
no sampling
sampled
sampled
sampled
N/A
Note: Monitoring is completed at EP-1 by the end of the 5th quarter, at EP-2 by the end of the 6
quarter, and at EP-3 by the end of the 7th quarter.
Appendix E-44
-------
If reporting violations by system:
- One major M/R violation during quarter 2.
- One minor M/R violation during quarter 3.
- One minor M/R violation during quarter 4.
- No violations during quarters 1, 5, 6, 7, or 8.
Example 5 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions (by System)
Positions
1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions
3-11
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
Positions
12-18
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555556
0555556
0555556
0555556
0555556
Positions
19-25
Positions
26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
Positions
32-71
4000
03
20041001
20041231
Y
4000
03
20050101
20050331
N
4000
03
20050401
20050630
N
If reporting violations by sampling point:
- Three major M/R violations (one at each entry point) during quarter 2.
- Two major M/R violations (one each at entry points 2 and 3) during quarter 3.
- One major M/R violation (at entry point 3) during quarter 4.
- No violations at any entry point during quarters 1, 5, 6, 7, or 8.
Appendix E-45
-------
Example 5 - SDWIS/FED DTF Transactions (by Sampling Point)
Positions 1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions 3-11
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
MD5612950
Positions 12-18
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555444
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555555
0555556
0555556
0555556
0555556
0555556
0555556
Positionsl9-25
Positions 26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
IC1143
Positions 32-71
4000
03
20041001
20041231
Y
1
4000
03
20041001
20041231
Y
2
4000
03
20041001
20041231
Y
3
4000
03
20050101
20050331
Y
2
4000
03
20050101
20050331
Y
3
4000
03
20050401
20050630
Y
3
Appendix E-46
-------
Example 6 - M/R Violation while on Reduced Monitoring
GW system #MD5234577 with one sampling site completed its initial radionuclides monitoring on
November 10, 2005. The system was placed on a reduced monitoring schedule of one sample every
six years for gross alpha, combined radium (-226 & -228), and uranium. On December 31, 2013, the
system obtained the following sample results:
Monitoring Results:
Gross Alpha = 7 ± 2 pCi/L
Uranium = 7 |ig/L
Monitoring Schedule:
Gross Alpha - The gross alpha value of 7 pCi/L is between the gross alpha DL (3 pCi/L) and /^ the
MCL; therefore, the system continues to monitor for gross alpha once every six years (i.e., the next
sample must be collected between 2014 and 2019).
Uranium - The uranium value of 7 |ig/L is less than 1A the MCL, and the system is allowed to continue
reduced monitoring for uranium at once every six years (i.e., the next sample must be collected between
2014 and 2019).
Violation Determination and Reporting:
Combined Radium-226/228 - The system failed to collect a combined radium (-226 & -228) sample
during the monitoring period of 1/01/08 to 12/31/13.
The State, would report a major M/R Violation for combined radium (-226 & -228) incurred during
the six-year monitoring period of 1/01/08 to 12/31/13.
The DTP transactions for this violation are:
Example 6 - SDWIS/FED DTP Transactions
Positions 1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions 3-11
MD5234577
MD5234577
MD5234577
MD5234577
MD5234577
Positions 12-18
1400111
1400111
1400111
1400111
1400111
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
IC1131
Positions 32-71
4010
03
20080101
20131231
Y
Appendix E-47
-------
Example 7 - MCL Violation Determination
GW system #MD4782412 samples for combined radium, which has an MCL of 5 pCi/L. The system
has one sampling point.
Example 7 - Monitoring Results
Quarter 1
Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Quarter 5
Quarter 6
Quarter 7
Quarter 8
Monitoring Period
7/1/04 - 9/30/04
10/1/04-12/31/04
1/1/05-3/31/05
4/1/05 - 6/30/05
7/1/05 - 9/30/05
10/1/05-12/31/05
1/1/06-3/31/06
4/1/06 - 6/30/06
Result
6pCi/L
7pCi/L
7pCi/L
5pCi/L
IpCi/L
10 pCi/L
3pCi/L
8pCi/L
MCL Violated
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Rounded Annual
Average
N/A
N/A
N/A9
6pCi/L
5pCi/L
6pCi/L
5pCi/L
6pCi/L
If reporting violations by system OR sampling point:
- One MCL violation during quarter 4.
- One MCL violation during quarter 6.
- One MCL violation during quarter 8.
- No violations during quarters 1, 2, 3, 5 or 7.
9Note: At the end of quarter 3, the running annual average was equal to 5 pCi/L, which was at but not above
the MCL, so no violation was incurred.
Appendix E-48
-------
Example 8 - Annual Average Determination
GW system #MD4782412 samples for combined radium, which has an MCL of 5 pCi/L. The system
has one sampling point.
Example 8 - Monitoring Results
Quarter 1
Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Quarter 5
Quarter 6
Quarter 7
Quarter 8
Monitoring Period
7/1/04 - 9/30/04
10/1/04-12/31/04
1/1/05-3/31/05
4/1/05 - 6/30/05
7/1/05 - 9/30/05
10/1/05-12/31/05
1/1/06-3/31/06
4/1/06 - 6/30/06
Result
24 pCi/L
6pCi/L
2pCi/L
4pCi/L
2pCi/L
10 pCi/L
9pCi/L
3pCi/L
MCL Violated
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Rounded Annual
6 pCi/L*
8 pCi/L*
8 pCi/L*
9pCi/L
4pCi/L
5pCi/L
6pCi/L
6pCi/L
* During quarters 1, 2, and 3, the system had quarterly results that were so great that they caused the
system to be in violation before the annual compliance period was complete.10
If reporting violations by system OR sampling point:
- One MCL violation during quarter 1.
- One MCL violation during quarter 2 .
- One MCL violation during quarter 3 .
- One MCL violation during quarter 4 .
- One MCL violation during quarter 7 .
- One MCL violation during quarter 8.
- No violations during quarters 5 or 6.
10The system is out of compliance immediately, if any sample result causes the running annual average to
exceed the MCL as stated in 40 CFR 141.26(c)(3)(ii).
Appendix E-49
-------
Example 9 - MCL Violations & RTC
System with MD1011100 has one sampling site (#1). While on reduced monitoring, sample results
exceeded the radium-226/228 MCL of 5 pCi/L, so the system was placed on quarterly monitoring for
radium 226/228.n
Example 9 - Monitoring Results
Quarter 1
Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Quarter 5
Quarter 6
Quarter 7
Quarter 8
Quarter 9
Quarter 10
Monitoring Period
7/1/08 - 9/30/08
10/1/08-12/31/08
1/1/09-3/31/09
4/1/09 - 6/30/09
7/1/09 - 9/30/09
10/1/09-12/31/09
1/1/010-3/31/10
4/1/10-6/30/10
7/1/10-9/30/10
10/1/10-12/31/10
Result
OpCi/L
6pCi/L
16 pCi/L
6pCi/L
OpCi/L
OpCi/L
6pCi/L
8pCi/L
2pCi/L
IpCi/L
MCL Violated
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Rounded Annual
N/A*
N/A*
6 pCi/L*
7 pCi/L*
7 pCi/L*
6 pCi/L*
3 pCi/L*
4 pCi/L*
4 pCi/L*
4pCi/L
* Values of zero are used to calculate the running annual average when the result is less than the DL.
12
1 'if a monitoring result exceeds the MCL while on reduced monitoring, the system must collect and analyze
quarterly samples at that sampling point until results from four consecutive quarters are below the MCL as stated in
40 CFR 141.26 (a)(3)(v).
1240CFR141.26(c)(3)(v).
Appendix E-50
-------
Example 9 - SDWIS/FED DTP Violation Transactions
Positions 1-2
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Dl
Positions 3-11
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
MD101110
Positions 12-18
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910001
0910003
0910003
0910003
1010004
1010004
1010004
1010004
1010004
1010004
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
IC1103
IC1105
IC1107
IC1109
1C 1123
1C 1143
Positions 32-71
4010
02
20090101
20090331
6
00001
4010
02
20090401
20090630
7
00001
4010
02
20090701
20090930
7
00001
4010
02
20091001
20091231
6
00001
Appendix E-51
-------
Because the running annual averages for quarters 7, 8, 9, and 10 are below the MCL, the State
determines that the system has returned to compliance as of 12/31/10 for these violation. The State
reports the RTC properly linked to the violations using the preferred Y5000 linking method:
Example 9 - SDWIS/FED DTP RTC Transactions
Positions 1-2
El
El
El
Positions 3-11
MD1011100
MD1011100
MD1011100
Positions 12-18
1100001
1100001
1100001
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1203
IC1205
IY5000
Positions 32-71
20101231
SOX
1010004
Alternatively, the State could have reported the RTC via the Z5000 linking method:
Positions 1-2
El
El
El
Positions 3-11
MD1011100
MD1011100
MD1011100
Positions 12-18
1100001
1100001
1100001
Positions 19-25
Positions 26-31
IC1203
IC1205
IZ5000
Positions 32-71
20101231
SOX
2401020090101
Appendix E-52
-------
Example 10 - Compliance Determination
GW system MD5234590 serving 1,510 people has been in operation since 1994. The system only has
one sampling site. The system has collected gross alpha samples for two compliance periods under the
existing Radionuclides Rule (1992-1996, 1996-2000). The average gross alpha value for these
periods was 4 pCi/L, so no radium-226 or radium-228 monitoring was required under the 1976
regulations. The State has informed the system that the Rule will not be effective until December 8,
2003. The State tells the system that if it collects samples for gross alpha, radium-226, and radium-
228, and uranium between June 2000 and December 8, 2003, then it may be able to grandfather this
data and not be subject to the initial quarterly monitoring requirements. The system collects samples for
gross alpha, radium-226 and radium-228 on July 17, 2002, at its sampling point. Since all previous
gross alpha results were less than 15 pCi/L, the system elects to use gross alpha as a surrogate for
uranium.
July 17. 2002. Results:13
Gross Alpha = 4 ± 1 pCi/L
Radium-226 = 1 ± 1 pCi/L
Radium-228 = 2 ± 1 pCi/L
Uranium = Not measured. The gross alpha value of 4 ± 1 is used as a surrogate for uranium.
The system is in compliance with the existing Rule for the 2000-2004 compliance period (i.e., 1976
regulations). When the revised Radionuclides Rule becomes effective December 8, 2003, the system
will be able to grandfather these data for the initial monitoring period of December 8, 2003, to
December 31,2007.
Monitoring Schedule:
Gross Alpha - The result is greater than the DL but less than 1A the MCL. The system must collect a
sample once every six years (i.e., the next sample is due between 2008 and 2013).
Combined Radium (-226 & -228^ - The result is greater than Y2 the MCL but less than the MCL. The
system must collect one sample every three years (i.e., the next sample is due between 2008 and
2010).
Uranium - Using gross alpha as a surrogate for uranium, the system assumes a value of 4 pCi/L. Since
the gross alpha value is less than l/2 the MCL for uranium, an activity to mass ratio of 1:1 is assumed
and a value of 4|ig/L is used for determining reduced monitoring for uranium (40 CFR 141.26(a)(5).
Since 4 |ig/L is between the DL and 1A the MCL, the system is allowed to reduce monitoring for
uranium to one sample every six years (i.e., the next sample is due between 2008 and 2013).
13The Agency is encouraging systems to monitor early to ensure sufficient time for contingency planning.
Appendix E-53
-------
Example 11 - Using Grandfathered Data
GW system MD5234590 serving 1,510 people has been in operation since 1994. The system has one
sampling site (#34555). The system has collected gross alpha and radium-226 samples for two
compliance periods under the existing Radionuclides Rule (1992-1996, 1996-2000). The State has
informed the system that the revised Rule will not be effective until December 8, 2003. The State tells
the system that if it collects samples for gross alpha, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium between
June 2000 and December 8, 2003, then it may be able to grandfather these data and not be subject to
the initial quarterly monitoring requirements. Since all previous gross alpha results were less than 15
pCi/L, the system elects to use gross alpha as a surrogate for uranium. The system collects samples for
gross alpha, radium-226, and radium-228 on July 17, 2002, at its sampling point.
Results:
Gross Alpha = 12 ± 1 pCi/L
Radium-226 = 3 ± 1 pCi/L
Radium-228 = 6 ± 1 pCi/L14
Monitoring Schedule:
Gross Alpha - The result of 12 pCi/L is greater than 1A the MCL but less than the MCL. The system
must collect a sample once every three years (the next sample is required between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium (-226 & -228} - The result of 9 pCi/L is greater than the MCL; therefore, these
results do not satisfy the initial monitoring requirements. The system must collect four consecutive
quarterly samples at its sampling point during the initial compliance period of December 8, 2003, to
December 31, 2007.15
Uranium - Using gross alpha as a surrogate, the system assumes a value of 12 pCi/L. Since the gross
alpha value is less than 1A the MCL for uranium, an activity to mass ratio of 1:1 is assumed and a value
of 12 |ig/L is used for determining reduced monitoring. Since 12 jig/L is below /^ the MCL, the system
is allowed to reduce monitoring for uranium to one sample every six years (the next sample is required
between 2008 and 2013).
The system is in compliance with the current Rule. The State does not need to report any violations to
SDWIS/FED.
14Since the system was not required to monitor for radium-228 under the existing Rule, the system would not
receive a combined radium 226/228 violation.
15CWSs without acceptable historical data must collect four consecutive quarterly samples at all sampling
points as defined in 40 CFR 141.26(a)(2)(i).
Appendix E-54
-------
Example 12 - More on Grandfathered Data
GW system MD5234590 serving 1,510 people has been in operation since 1994. The system only has
one sampling site. The system has collected gross alpha and radium-226 samples for two compliance
periods under the existing Radionuclides Rule (1992-1996, 1996-2000). The State has informed the
system that the revised Rule will not be effective until December 8, 2003. The State tells the system
that if it collects samples for gross alpha, radium-226, radium-228, and uranium between June 2000
and December 8, 2003, then it may be able to grandfather these data and not be subject to the initial
quarterly monitoring requirements. The system collects samples for gross alpha, radium-226, radium-
228, and uranium on August 3, 2001, at its sampling point.
Augusts. 2001. Results:
Measured gross alpha = 41 ± 1 pCi/L
Gross alpha (excluding uranium) = 41 pCi/L - 29 pCi/L =12 pCi/L
Radium-226 = < 1 pCi/L
Radium-228 = < 1 pCi/L
Uranium = 32 |ig/L and 29 ± 3 pCi/L (mass spec)
The system is in compliance with the existing Rule for the 2000-2004 compliance period (i.e., 1976
regulations). When the revised Radionuclides Rule becomes effective December 8, 2003, the system
will be able to grandfather these data for the initial monitoring period of December 8, 2003, to
December 31,2007.
Monitoring Schedule:
Gross Alpha - For determining compliance with the gross alpha MCL, uranium should be excluded
from the calculation (41 pCi/L - 29 pCi/L = 12 pCi/L). After subtracting out uranium, gross alpha is
greater than 1A the MCL but less than the MCL. Therefore, the system must collect a sample once
every three years (i.e., the next sample must be collected between 2008 and 2010).
Combined Radium (-226 & -228^ - The result is less than the regulatory DL of 1 pCi/L. The system
must therefore collect a sample once every nine years (i.e., the next sample must be collected between
2008 and 2016).
Uranium - The result is greater than the MCL, but the uranium MCL is not effective until December 8,
2003. Legally, the system is in compliance with the current Rule. When the revised Rule becomes
effective it will not be in violation of the Rule, but the EPA is encouraging States to ensure these systems
are in compliance by the effective date of the revised Rule. Since the uranium results exceed the MCL,
the system must conduct four consecutive quarters of monitoring for uranium during the initial monitoring
period of December 8, 2003, to December 31, 2007.
Appendix E-55
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix E-56
-------
Appendix F
Statement of Principles-
Guidance on Audit Law
Issues
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix F-2
-------
STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT! ON AGENCY
WASHINGTON, Q.C.
14 IS37
MFMORAVDIiM
SUBJECT:
TO:
FROM:
Statement of Principles
Effect of State Audit Immuniiy/Frivtlefis
On ertfotcemejit Authority for Federal
Regior.il Administrators
Steven A. Henna
Assistant Adniiaist&iQr,, OEClA,
Robert Pexciascpe
AssislaPt
Mary Nichols
Assistant Admmi:
Timothy Fields
Acting Assistant Ad
OSWER
Under federal law, states must have adequate authority to enforce the Ecquirenients of any
federal programs they are authorized to administer. Some state audit immunity/privilege Saws
place restrictions cm the ability of states to obtain penalties and injunetrve relief for violations of
federal program requirements, or to obtain informstion. ttiaf may be needed to determine
compliance status. This statement of principles reflects EPA's oriantHtion to approving new state
programs or program modifications in the face of state audit laws that restrict state enforcement
and information gathering authority. While such state laws may laise questions about other
federal program requirements, this statement is limited to the qucstioa of whsn enforcement and
information- gathering authority may be considered ftdetpiate for the purpose of approving or
delegating programs in States *itll audit privilege or immntilty laws,
Appendix F-3
-------
I. Audit Immunity Law?
Federal law and regulation requires states 'to have authority to obtain iajuucttve relief, and
civil and crimiaal penalties for any violation of program rcquircaMate. In detenniiiiiag wHether
to authorize or approve a program or program modification in a state with an audit immunity
taw, EPA must consider whwther the state's enforcement authority meets federal program
• requirements, To mamtain such authority while at tic same time ;?rovidljig incentives for self-
policing in appropriate circumstances, states should rely oa policies rathe* than essact statutory
immunities for any violations, However, in determining whether these requirements are met in
states with laws pertaining to voluntary auditing,, EPA will be pariculaiiy concerned, among
other factors, with whether the state has the ability to;
1 ) Obtain immediate and complete injunetrve relief;
2) Recover civit penalties for:
i) significant economic benefit;
ii) repeat violations and violations of judicial or administrative orders;
'j
iii) serious harm,;
iv) activities that may present LmmineDdt & substantial endangermeat,
3} Obtain criminal -fujfts/sanctions for wilful sad knowing violations of federal law, and
in additioa for violations that result from gross negligence under the Clean Water Act
The presumption is that each of these authorities must be present at a minimum before the state's
enforcement authority may be considered adequate. However, other factors in the statute may
eliminate or so narrow the scope of penalty immunity to the point where EPA's 'conccmg are
tact. For esample:
1)' The [nunuaity provided by the statute may be limited to minor violations and contain
other restrictions that sharply limit its applicability to federal
2) The statute may include explicit provisions that make ,t inapplicable to federal
programs.
n. Audit Privilege Laws
Adequate civil and criminal enforwcwut audiority means that the state must have die
ability to obtain information needed to identify ncacQCftpUance J.nd Criminal conduct. In
Appendix F-4
-------
er to authorize or approve a program or program- modification in a state with
an audit privilege litw, EPA expsKts the state to:
I} retain information gathering authority it is required to have under the Specific,
requirements of regulations governing authorized or delegated programs;
2) avoid making the privilege applicable to criminal investigations, grand jury
proceedings, sad prosecutions, or exempt evidence of criminal conduct from the scope of
privilege;
3) preserve the right of the public to obtain Ja&nnatiOTi about nooxxunpliancei, report
violations and bring enforcement actions for violations of federal environmental law. For
example, sanctions for whistleblowera or state laws that prevent citizens from obtaining
information .about nonoomptiancc to which they sue entitled under federal law appear to
be inconsistent with this
IDL Applicability of Principles
It is important for E?A to clearly cormnuaitato its position to state and to interpret the
requirements for enforcement authority consistently. According! y, these principles will be
' applied in reviewing whether enforcement authority is adequate under the following programs:
I) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), PretrcataicQt and
Wetlands programs under the Clean Water Act;
2) Public Water Supply Systems and Underground Injection Control programs under the
Safe Drinking Water Act;
3) Hazardous Waste (Subtitle C) and Underground Storage Tank (Subtitle I) programs
under the Resource Conservation Recovery Act;
4) Title V, New Source. Performance'Standards, National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Review Programs under the Clean Air Act.
These principles are subject to three important qualifications:
1) While these principles will be consistently applied in reviewing stats enforcement
authority under federal programs, state laws vary in their detail. It will be important to
scrutinize the provisions of such statutes closely in determining whether enforcement
authority ts provided,
2) Many provisions of state law way be ambiguous, and :.t will generally be important to
obtain in opinion from the state Attorney General regarding the meaning of the state law
Appendix F-5
-------
and the effect of ike state's law go its snfbrcemeat authority as IL is awtlincd in these
principles. Depending on its conclusions, EPA may determine that tht Attorney
GcneraJ's opiiott is sufficient to establish (bat tb
-------
Appendix G
Rule Presentations
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix G-2
-------
A Guide to the *
Radionuclides Rule
65 Federal Register 76708
December 7, 2000 0
VIII-1
Radionuclides: Summary of
Agenda
t /
Introduction to new rule requirements
Provide justification for Agency
decisions
Identify rule flexibility's and burden
reduction
Implementation tools
VIII-1
Appendix G-3
-------
Training Structure
Part 1
• Gross alpha
. Radium-226/228
• Uranium
Part 2
• Beta and Photon
emitters
VIII-1
Radionuclides Introduction:
Major Points
Summary of 2000 Final Rule
requirements
Comparison of 1976 vs. 2000 Rules
Health benefits
Occurrence and likely sources
Critical dates
VIII-1
Appendix G-4
-------
The Final Radionuclides Rule
Sets an MCL for:
. Uranium (30 |jg/L)
Retains the existing
MCLs for:
. Radium-226/228
• 5 pCi/L
• Gross alpha particle
radioactivity
• 15 pCi/L
• Beta particle and photon
activity
» 4 mrem/yr
Revises monitoring
requirements
• Standardized
monitoring
framework
Applies to all CWSs
VIII-1
Rule Comparison
Provision
MCLG
Uranium
MCL
Monitoring
baseline
Beta
Particle &
Photon
Emitters
1976 Rule
None
Not Regulated
4 quarterly measurements
> 1/2 MCL? 4 samples/4 yrs
< 1/2 MCL? 1 sample/4 yrs.
Surface water systems >
100,000 & vulnerable systems
screen at 50 pCi/L. Vulnerable
Contaminated systems screen at
15pCi/L.
2000 Final Rule
(Effective 12/03)
MCLG = 0
30|ig/L
Standardized
Monitoring
Framework.
Vulnerable systems
screen at 50 pCi/L.
Contaminated
systems screen at 15
pCi/L.
VIII-6
Appendix G-5
-------
Rule Comparison: GA and Ra-226/228
-fu-
1976
Rule
Monitor for Gross Alpha
If Gross Alpha
> 5 pCi/L
2000 Final Rule
Monitor for Ra-226
Alpha Emitter
Monitor for Ra-228
Beta Emitter
Requires Monitoring:
• Gross Alpha
• Radium-226
• Radium-228
•Uranium
Ra 226 +
Ra228
Ra 226 +
Ra228
VIII-1
•
I
I • • v^
•-». i
*
Uranium
Reduces toxic kidney
effects from uranium
Reduces risk of
bladder cancer
Other Rads
• Reduces risk of
cancer
Reduces kidney and
liver toxin
VIII-1
Appendix G-6
-------
Likely Sources
Naturally Occurring
Sources
• Regions
» Piedmont - East Coast
» Continental Shield - GL
» Mountainous regions
» Coastal Plains - TX
• Geological
» Granitic formations
» Sandstone aquifers
» Shales
» Phosphate deposits
Man-Made Sources
• Mining
• Nuclear weapons
• Nuclear power plants
• Hospitals/Medical
treatments
• Industry
» Laboratories
» Pharmaceuticals
VIII-1
Important Dates
12/8/03
Rule Effective Date
Initial Monitoring Begins
12/7/00
Final Rule
6/00 to 12/8/03
Data Eligible
for Grandfathering
09/02
States goal to submit final
primacy package
12/31/07
Initial Monitoring
Ends
12/02
States must submit complete
and final primacy application
Appendix G-7
-------
Gross Alpha Particle
Activity
Combined Radium-
226/228
Uranium
VIII-1
Radionuclides Monitoring:
Major Points
Standardized monitoring framework
Initial, reduced, and increased
monitoring requirements
Grandfathered data
Compliance determination
VIII-1
Appendix G-8
-------
Initial Monitoring
Gross Alpha, Ra-226, Ra-228 and Uranium
December 31, 2007
4 consecutive
quarterly samples at
each EPTDS
Waiver
• Last 2 quarters
Compositing
Grandfathered Data
Gross Alpha, Ra-226, Ra-228 and Uranium
we
Primacy Agency may allow data
between 6/00 - 12/08/03 to satisfy the initial
monitoring requirements if:
• Samples were collected at each EPTDS
• The system has a single EPTDS and samples were
collected from the distribution system
• The system has multiple EPTDS and samples were
collected from the distribution system but the
Primacy Agency must make a written finding that
the data are representative of all EPTDS
VIII-1
Appendix G-9
-------
Standardized Monitoring Framework - Radionuclides
Compliance
Period
2002-2004
Grandfather
Data
6/00 12/8/03
|
Compliance
Period
2005-2007
Initial
Monitoring
2003 2007
A
Monitoring
Results
< Detect
Limit
> Detect
Limit but <
VzMCL
> 1A MCL
butMCL || A AIAHAIAIAH AIAIA
REMEMBER
Increased/Decreased Monitoring and
Compliance are based on the:
Combined Value of
Radium-226 and Radium 228
Ra226 + Ra228
VIII-1
Appendix G-10
-------
Increased Monitoring
Gross Alpha, Ra-226, Ra-228 and Uranium
A system can remain on a monitoring
schedule only if the sampling results support
the schedule
MCL Exceedance?
• Must begin quarterly sampling
• Must continue until 4 consecutive quarterly
samples are below the MCL
* NOTE: compliance determination based on
annual average
VIII-1
Compliance Determination Review
Ground Water System Monitors
for Gross Alpha (MCL 15 pCi/L)
Date
Jan.
04
Apr 04
Jul04
Oct04
Result
Initial Result
Confirmation
16
15
12
13
16
Running Annual
Average
14
^
•4-
Average =16 pCi/L
16 + 12 + 13 + 16 = 14
4
VIII-1
Appendix G-11
-------
f-
7
Rule Flexibility
and Burden
Reduction
VIII-1
Radionuclides Burden
Reduction: Major Points
* Substitution => reduces monitoring burden
• Gross alpha for Ra-226
* Net Alpha => reduces number of violations
• Subtracting uranium
«• Variances => allows PWS to operate above
MCL
«• Exemptions => extends effective date
VIII-1
Appendix G-12
-------
Burden Reduction
Gross Alpha, Ra-226, Ra-228 and Uranium
Substitution
• Gross alpha for Ra-226
Net Alpha
• Subtracting uranium
Variances
Exemptions
Ra226 + Ra228
VIII-1
If a System Substitutes Gross
Alpha for Radium-226. . .
And the
GAis:
< Detect
detect < GA > 5
Use the following
formula:
1.5 pCi/L + Ra 228
GA result + Ra 228
To Determine:
Reduced monitoring
frequency
(Qtrly, 3, or 6 yrs)
Compliance with
226/228 MCL
Reduced monitoring
frequency
(Qtrly or 3 yrs)
VIII- 1
Appendix G-13
-------
Example 1: Gross Alpha for
Ra-226
Sample
GA
Ra-228
Value
< Detect
2 pCi/L
Total
Ra-226/228
3.5
pCi/L
1 sample every 3
years
> 1/2 MCL (2.5 pCi/L)
but < Ma (5 pCi/L)
1.5pCi/L+2pCi/L=3.5pCi/L
VII-23
Example 2: Ra-226 and Ra-228
Sample
Ra-226
Ra-228
Total
Ra-226/228
Value
< Detect
2 pCi/L
2 pCi/L
1 sample every 6
years
I
> Detect but < 1/2 MCL
(2.5 pCi/L)
I
0+2 pCi/L = 2 pCi/L
VII-24
Appendix G-14
-------
If a system substitutes Gross
Alpha for Uranium. . .
And the result is: The Primacy Agency must:
Assume all of gross alpha =
uranium
<15pCi/L
Use mass to activity ratio of
1:1
>15 pCi/L
Require the system to
collect uranium samples
VIII-1
Subtracting Uranium Activity From
GA to Determine "Net Alpha"
VIII-1
Appendix G-15
-------
Net Alpha
-fc
The laboratory must analyze and report the
activity to the Primacy Agency
Either use the laboratory analyzed
mass/activity levels
OR Primacy Agency can convert uranium
• Uranium Mass to activity conversion factor
» Multiply by 0.67 pQAug
• Uranium activity to mass conversion factor
» multiply by 1.49 //g/pCi
VIII-1
Example 3: Net Alpha
22 //g/L x 0.67 pCi/Vg = 15 pCi/L
1—
Sample
Gross alpha
U (mass)
U (activity)
Net Alpha
Result
24 ± 3 pCi/L
22 Mg/L
15 pCi/L
9 pCi/L
24 pCi/L - 15 pCi/L = 9 pCi/L 1 sample every 3 years
Appendix G-16
-------
Variances
The system must install a
BAT or SSCT for small
systems
A Primacy Agency
evaluation indicates that an
alternative source of water
is not reasonably available
Will not result in an
unreasonable risk to public
health
VIII-1
C
E
:X
J
*
;en
NO
• G
P
. *
Ura
ipl
Ex(
irOS!
hot(
1CL
niu
tioi
amp
5 Alf
Dn e
was
m e
IS
)ti
)h
m
n
;x
0
a,
itt
ot
er
ns
Rac
ers
rev
npt
Jium 226/228, bel
ised
ions
•«
...
:a ar
id
VIII- 1
Appendix G-17
-------
A System is eligible for an exemption^
from the Uranium MCL if:
Due to compelling factors:
• Unable to comply with the MCL(e.g. economically); or,
• It cannot develop an alternative source of supply;
If operating before December 2003; or,
• If operating after 12/03 and there is no reasonable
alternative source of supply;
The exemption will not result in an unreasonable
risk to public health; and,
Management and/or restructuring changes will
not lead to compliance or improve the quality of
water.
VIII-1
Lab Methods and
Analytical Results
VIII-1
Appendix G-18
-------
Laboratory Methods
90 radiochemical methods
EPA is currently reviewing :
• The use of an Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass
Spectrometry (ICP-MS) method for uranium
analysis
• The feasibility of using Gamma Spectrometry for
radium-228 analysis
Detection limits
• Uranium limit will be set before December 8, 2003
VIII-1
System Analytical Result
Reporting
Systems must report entire analytical
result (including the standard deviation)
to the Primacy Agency
• Within 10 days of the result or the end of
the compliance period
• Within 48 hours of NPDWR violation
VIII-1
Appendix G-19
-------
f-
7
Beta Particle and
Photon Radioactivity
VIII-1
Radionuclides Beta Emitters;
Major Points
1976 vs. 2000 Radionuclide Rules
Routine, reduced, and increased
monitoring
Compliance determinations
VIII-1
Appendix G-20
-------
What do we mean by Gross
Beta Particle activity?
Primarily manmade radioactive contaminants
• Operating nuclear power plants
• Facilities that use radioactive material for research
or manufacturing
• Facilities that dispose of radioactive material
168 contaminants
• Each impact the body differently at different levels
Screen to determine compliance with
individual MCLs
VIII-1
Applicability
"Vulnerable" systems
Systems "Designated" as utilizing
waters contaminated by effluents from
nuclear facilities
Primacy Agency discretion
VIII-1
Appendix G-21
-------
Routine Monitoring
Vulnerable
Systems
Contaminated
Systems
Quarterly
Gross
Beta
Gross Beta
Iodine - 131
Annually
Tritium
Strontium-90
VIII-1
-9r
Reduced Monitoring
If Gross Beta Minus Potassium-40 Reduce
Monitoring to
Has a Running Annual Average of...
Once Every. .
<50pCi/L
Vulnerable Systems
Three Years
<15pCi/L
Contaminated Systems
Three Years
VIII- 1
Appendix G-22
-------
Increased Monitoring
Exceedance of Gross
Beta Minus
Potassium-40
• Speciate for most
likely emitters
MCL violation
• Monthly Monitoring
VIII-1
Compliance Determination
Sum of the fractions
4 millirems/year
"Maximum Permissible Body Burdens
and Maximum Permissible
Concentrations of Radionuclides in Air
or Water for Occupational Exposure"
VIII-1
Appendix G-23
-------
Example 4: Sum of the
Fractions
Emitter
Cs-134
Cs-137
Sr-90
1-131
X
Lab
Analysis
(pCi/L)
5,023
30
4
2
Y
Conversion
from table
(pCi/4mrem)
20,000
200
8
3
X/Y
Calculate
Fraction
0.25115
0.150
0.5
0.7
Sum of the Fractions = 1.60115
4(X/Y)
Calculate
Total
(mrem)
6
VII-43
Appendix G-24
-------
Appendix H
Rule Language
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix H-2
-------
For reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR parts 9, 141, and 142 are amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 etseq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,2005, 2006,2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a,
348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33 U.S.C. 1251 etseq., 1311, 1313d, 1314,1318, 1321,1326-1330,1324, 1344,1345 (d) and(e), 1361;
E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b,243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-l, 300g-2,
300g-3, 300g^l, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-1, 300J-2, 300J-3, 30QH, 300J-9, 1857 etseq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542,
9601-9657,11023,11048.
2. In § 9.1 the table is amended by:
(a) Removing the entry for 141.25-141.30 and adding new entries for 141.25(a)-(e), 141.26 (a)-(b),
and!41.27-141.30;
(b) Removing the entry for 142.14(a)-(d)(7) and adding new entries for 142.14(a)-(d)(3), 142.14(d)(4)-(5), and
142.14(d)(6)-(7);and
(c) Removing the entry for 142.15(c)(5)-(d) and adding new entries for 142.15(c)(5), 142.15(c)(6)-(7), and
142.15(d).
The additions read as follows:
§ 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
* * * *
40 CFR citation OMB
control No.
National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations
141.25(a)-(e) 2040-0090
141.26(a)-(b) 2040-0228
141.27-141.30 2040-0090
Appendix H-3
-------
40 CFR citation
* *
* *
142 14(a)-(d)(3)
142.14(d)(4)-(5)
142.14(d)(6)-(7)
* *
142 15(c)(5)
142.15(c)(6)-(7)
142 15(d)
* *
OMB
control No.
* * *
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations Implementation
* * *
2040-0090
2040-0228
2040-0090
* * *
2040-0090
2040-0228
2040-0090
* * *
PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g^, 300g-5, 300g-6, 30QH, 300J-9, and 300J-11.
Subpart B—[Amended]
§§ 141.15 and 141.16 [Removed]
2. Sections 141.15 and 141.16 are removed.
Subpart C—[Amended]
3. Section 141.25 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text (the table remains unchanged),
b. Revising paragraph (c)(l),
c. Revising paragraph (c)(2) and redisgnating Table B in paragraph (c)(2) as Table C and
d. Revising paragraph (d).
Appendix H-4
-------
The revisions read as follows:
§ 141.25 Analytical methods for radioactivity.
(a) Analysis for the following contaminants shall be conducted to determine compliance with § 141.66
(radioactivity) in accordance with the methods in the following table, or their equivalent determined by EPA in
accordance with § 141.27.
* * * *
(c) * * *
(1) To determine compliance with § 141.66(b), (c), and (e) the detection limit shall not exceed the
concentrations in Table B to this paragraph.
TABLE B.—DETECTION LIMITS FOR GROSS ALPHA PARTICLE ACTIVITY, RADIUM 226, RADIUM 228, AND
URANIUM
Contaminant
Gross alpha particle activity
Radium 226
Radium 228
Uranium
3pCi/L
1 pCi/L.
1 pCi/L.
Reserve
Detection
limit
(2) To determine compliance with § 141.66(d) the detection limits shall not exceed the concentrations listed
in Table C to this paragraph.
* * * *
(d) To judge compliance with the maximum contaminant levels listed in § 141.66, averages of data shall be
used and shall be rounded to the same number of significant figures as the maximum contaminant level for the
substance in question.
* * * *
4. Section 141.26 is revised to read as follows:
§ 141.26 Monitoring frequency and compliance requirements for radionuclides in community water systems
(a) Monitoring and compliance requirements for gross alpha particle activity, radium-226, radium-228,
and uranium.
(1) Community water systems (CWSs) must conduct initial monitoring to determine compliance with §
141.66(b), (c), and (e)by December 31, 2007. For the purposes of monitoring for gross alpha particle activity, radium-
226, radium-228, uranium, and beta particle and photon radioactivity in drinking water, "detection limit" is defined as
in§141.25(c).
(i) Applicability and sampling location for existing community water systems or sources. All existing CWSs
using ground water, surface water or systems using both ground and surface water (for the purpose of this section
hereafter referred to as systems) must sample at every EPTDS that is representative of all sources being used
(hereafter called a sampling point) under normal operating conditions. The system must take each sample at the same
sampling point unless conditions make another sampling point more representative of each source or the State has
designated a distribution system location, in accordance with paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(C) of this section.
(ii) Applicability and sampling location for new community water systems or sources. All new CWSs or
CWSs that use a new source of water must begin to conduct initial monitoring for the new source within the first
Appendix H-5
-------
quarter after initiating use of the source. CWSs must conduct more frequent monitoring when ordered by the State in
the event of possible contamination or when changes in the distribution system or treatment processes occur which
may increase the concentration of radioactivity in finished water.
(2) Initial monitoring: Systems must conduct initial monitoring for gross alpha particle activity, radium-226,
radium-228, and uranium as follows:
(i) Systems without acceptable historical data, as defined below, must collect four consecutive quarterly
samples at all sampling points before December 31, 2007.
(ii) Grandfathering of data: States may allow historical monitoring data collected at a sampling point to
satisfy the initial monitoring requirements for that sampling point, for the following situations.
(A) To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system having only one entry point to the
distribution system may use the monitoring data from the last compliance monitoring period that began between
June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
(B) To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system with multiple entry points and
having appropriate historical monitoring data for each entry point to the distribution system may use the monitoring
data from the last compliance monitoring period that began between June 2000 and December 8, 2003.
(C) To satisfy initial monitoring requirements, a community water system with appropriate historical data for
a representative point in the distribution system may use the
monitoring data from the last compliance monitoring period that began between June 2000 and December 8, 2003,
provided that the State finds that the historical data satisfactorily demonstrate that each entry point to the
distribution system is expected to be in compliance based upon the historical data and reasonable assumptions
about the variability of contaminant levels between entry points. The State must make a written finding indicating
how the data conforms to these requirements.
(iii) For gross alpha particle activity, uranium, radium-226, and radium-228 monitoring, the State may waive
the final two quarters of initial monitoring for a sampling point if the results of the samples from the previous two
quarters are below the detection limit.
(iv) If the average of the initial monitoring results for a sampling point is above the MCL, the system must
collect and analyze quarterly samples at that sampling point until the system has results from four consecutive
quarters that are at or below the MCL, unless the system enters into another schedule as part of a formal compliance
agreement with the State.
(3) Reduced monitoring: States may allow community water systems to reduce the future frequency of
monitoring from once every three years to once every six or nine years at each sampling point, based on the
following criteria.
(i) If the average of the initial monitoring results for each contaminant (i.e., gross alpha particle activity,
uranium, radium-226, or radium-228) is below the detection limit specified in Table B, in § 141.25(c)(l), the system
must collect and analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling point every nine years.
(ii) For gross alpha particle activity and uranium, if the average of the initial monitoring results for each
contaminant is at or above the detection limit but at or below 1/2 the MCL, the system must collect and analyze for
that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling point every six years. For combined radium-226 and
radium-228, the analytical results must be combined. If the average of the combined initial monitoring results for
radium-226 and radium-228 is at or above the detection limit but at or below 1/2 the MCL, the system must collect and
analyze for that contaminant using at least one sample at that sampling point every six years.
(iii) For gross alpha particle activity and uranium, if the average of the initial monitoring results for each
contaminant is above 1/2 the MCL but at or below the MCL, the system must collect and analyze at least one sample
at that sampling point every three years. For combined radium-226 and radium-228, the analytical results must be
combined. If the average of the combined initial monitoring results for radium-226 and radium-228 is above 1/2 the
MCL but at or below the MCL, the system must collect and analyze at least one sample at that sampling point every
three years.
(iv) Systems must use the samples collected during the reduced monitoring period to determine the
monitoring frequency for subsequent monitoring periods (e.g., if a system's sampling point is on a nine year
Appendix H-6
-------
monitoring period, and the sample result is above 1/2 MCL, then the next monitoring period for that sampling point is
three years).
(v) If a system has a monitoring result that exceeds the MCL while on reduced monitoring, the system must
collect and analyze quarterly samples at that sampling point until the system has results from four consecutive
quarters that are below the MCL, unless the system enters into another schedule as part of a formal compliance
agreement with the State.
(4) Compositing: To fulfill quarterly monitoring requirements for gross alpha particle activity, radium-226,
radium-228, or uranium, a system may composite up to four consecutive quarterly samples from a single entry point if
analysis is done within a year of the first sample. States will treat analytical results from the composited as the
average analytical result to determine compliance with the MCLs and the future monitoring frequency. If the
analytical result from the composited sample is greater than 1/2 MCL, the State may direct the system to take
additional quarterly samples before allowing the system to sample under a reduced monitoring schedule.
(5) A gross alpha particle activity measurement may be substituted for the required radium-226
measurement provided that the measured gross alpha particle activity does not exceed 5 pCi/1. A gross alpha particle
activity measurement may be substituted for the required uranium measurement provided that the measured gross
alpha particle activity does not exceed 15 pCi/1.
The gross alpha measurement shall have a confidence interval of 95% (1.65o, where a is the standard
deviation of the net counting rate of the sample) for radium- 226 and uranium. When a system uses a gross alpha
particle activity measurement in lieu of a radium-226 and/or uranium measurement, the gross alpha particle activity
analytical result will be used to determine the future monitoring frequency for radium-226 and/or uranium. If the
gross alpha particle activity result is less than detection, 1/2 the detection limit will be used to determine compliance
and the future monitoring frequency.
(b) Monitoring and compliance requirements for beta particle and photon radioactivity. To determine
compliance with the maximum contaminant levels in § 141.66(d) for beta particle and photon radioactivity, a system
must monitor at a frequency as follows:
(1) Community water systems (both surface and ground water) designated by the State as vulnerable must
sample for beta particle and photon radioactivity. Systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and
annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each entry point to the distribution system (hereafter called a sampling
point), beginning within one quarter after being notified by the State. Systems already designated by the State must
continue to sample until the State reviews and either reaffirms or removes the designation.
(i) If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity at a
sampling point has a running annual average (computed quarterly) less than or equal to 50 pCi/L (screening level),
the State may reduce the frequency of monitoring at that sampling point to once every 3 years. Systems must collect
all samples required in paragraph (b)(l) of this section during the reduced monitoring period.
(ii) For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the State may allow the CWS to utilize environmental
surveillance data collected by the nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry point(s), where the State
determines if such data is applicable to a particular water system. In the event that there is a release from a nuclear
facility, systems which are using surveillance data must begin monitoring at the community water system's entry
point(s) in accordance with paragraph (b)(l) of this section.
(2) Community water systems (both surface and ground water) designated by the State as utilizing waters
contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities must sample for beta particle and photon radioactivity. Systems
must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and iodine-131 and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at
each entry point to the distribution system (hereafter called a sampling point), beginning within one quarter after
being notified by the State. Systems already designated by the State as systems using waters contaminated by
effluents from nuclear facilities must continue to sample until the State reviews and either reaffirms or removes the
designation.
(i) Quarterly monitoring for gross beta particle activity shall be based on the analysis of monthly samples or
the analysis of a composite of three monthly samples. The former is recommended.
Appendix H-7
-------
(ii) For iodine-131, a composite of five consecutive daily samples shall be analyzed once each quarter. As
ordered by the State, more frequent monitoring shall be conducted when iodine-131 is identified in the finished
water.
(iii) Annual monitoring for strontium-90 and tritium shall be conducted by means of the analysis of a
composite of four consecutive quarterly samples or analysis of four quarterly samples. The latter procedure is
recommended.
(iv) If the gross beta particle activity beta minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity
at a sampling point has a running annual average (computed quarterly)less than or equal to 15 pCi/L, the State may
reduce the frequency of monitoring at that sampling point to every 3 years. Systems must collect all samples required
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section during the reduced monitoring period.
(v) For systems in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, the State may allow the CWS to utilize environmental
surveillance data collected by the nuclear facility in lieu of monitoring at the system's entry point(s), where the State
determines if such data is applicable to a particular water system. In the event that there is a release from a nuclear
facility, systems which are using surveillance data must begin monitoring at the community water system's entry
point(s) in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(3) Community water systems designated by the State to monitor for beta particle and photon radioactivity
can not apply to the State for a waiver from the monitoring frequencies specified in paragraph (b)(l) or (b)(2) of this
section.
(4) Community water systems may analyze for naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity from
the same or equivalent sample used for the gross beta particle activity analysis. Systems are allowed to subtract the
potassium-40 beta particle activity value from the total gross beta particle activity value to determine if the screening
level is exceeded. The potassium-40 beta particle activity must be calculated by multiplying elemental potassium
concentrations (in mg/L) by a factor of 0.82.
(5) If the gross beta particle activity minus the naturally occurring potassium-40 beta particle activity
exceeds the screening level, an analysis of the sample must be performed to identify the major radioactive
constituents present in the sample and the appropriate doses must be calculated and summed to determine
compliance with § 141.66(d)(l), using the formula in § 141.66(d)(2). Doses must also be calculated and combined for
measured levels of tritium and strontium to determine compliance.
(6) Systems must monitor monthly at the sampling point(s) which exceed the maximum contaminant level in
§ 141.66(d) beginning the month after the exceedance occurs. Systems must continue monthly monitoring until the
system has established, by a rolling average of 3 monthly samples, that the MCL is being met. Systems who
establish that the MCL is being met must return to quarterly monitoring until they meet the requirements set forth in
paragraph (b)(l)(ii) or (b)(2)(i) of this section.
(c) General monitoring and compliance requirements for radionuclides.
(1) The State may require more frequent monitoring than specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section,
or may require confirmation samples at its discretion. The results of the initial and confirmation samples will be
averaged for use in compliance determinations.
(2) Each public water systems shall monitor at the time designated by the State during each compliance
period.
(3) Compliance: Compliance with § 141.66 (b) through (e) will be determined based on the analytical result(s)
obtained at each sampling point. If one sampling point is in violation of an MCL, the system is in violation of the
MCL.
(i) For systems monitoring more than once per year, compliance with the MCL is determined by a running
annual average at each sampling point. If the average of any sampling point is greater than the MCL, then the
system is out of compliance with the MCL.
(ii) For systems monitoring more than once per year, if any sample result will cause the running average to
exceed the MCL at any sample point, the system is out of compliance with the MCL immediately.
(iii) Systems must include all samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of this section in
determining compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.
Appendix H-8
-------
(iv) If a system does not collect all required samples when compliance is based on a running annual average
of quarterly samples, compliance will be based on the running average of the samples collected.
(v) If a sample result is less than the detection limit, zero will be used to calculate the annual average, unless
a gross alpha particle activity is being used in lieu of radium-226 and/or uranium. If the gross alpha particle activity
result is less than detection, 1/2 the detection limit will be used to calculate the annual average.
(4) States have the discretion to delete results of obvious sampling or analytic errors.
(5) If the MCL for radioactivity set forth in § 141.66 (b) through (e) is exceeded, the operator of a community
water system must give notice to the State pursuant to § 141.31 and to the public as required by subpart Q of this
part.
Subpart F—[Amended]
5. A new § 141.55 is added to subpart F to read as follows:
§ 141.55 Maximum contaminant level goals for radionuclides.
MCLGs for radionuclides are as indicated in the following table:
Contaminant
MCLG
1. Combined radium-226 and radium-228..
2. Gross alpha particle activity (excluding radon and uranium)..
3. Beta particle and photon radioactivity
4. Uranium .
Zero.
Zero.
Zero.
Zero.
Subpart G—National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Maximum Contaminant Levels and Maximum
Residual Disinfectant Levels
6. The heading of subpart G is revised as set out above.
7. A new § 141.66 is added to subpart G to read as follows:
§ 141.66 Maximum contaminant levels for radionuclides.
(a) [Reserved]
(b) MCL for combined radium-226 and -228. The maximum contaminant level for combined radium-226 and
radium-228 is 5 pCi/L. The combined radium-226 and radium-228 value is determined by the addition of the results of
the analysis for radium-226 and the analysis for radium-228.
(c) MCL for gross alpha particle activity (excluding radon and uranium). The maximum contaminant level
for gross alpha particle activity (including radium-226 but excluding radon and uranium) is 15 pCi/L.
(A) MCL for beta particle and photon radioactivity. (1) The average annual concentration of beta particle
and photon radioactivity from man-made radionuclides in drinking water must not produce an annual dose
equivalent to the total body or any internal organ greater than 4 millirem/year (mrem/year).
(2) Except for the radionuclides listed in table A, the concentration of man-made radionuclides causing 4
mrem total body or organ dose equivalents must be calculated on the basis of 2 liters per day drinking water intake
using the 168 hour data list in "Maximum Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible Concentrations of
Radionuclides in Air and in Water for Occupational Exposure,'' NBS (National Bureau of Standards) Handbook 69 as
Appendix H-9
-------
amended August 1963, U.S. Department of Commerce. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of this document are available
from the National Technical Information Service, NTIS ADA 280 282, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. The toll-free number is 800-553-6847. Copies may be inspected at EPA's Drinking
Water Docket, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol
Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC. If two or more radionuclides are present, the sum of their annual dose
equivalent to the total body or to any organ shall not exceed 4 mrem/year.
TABLE A.—AVERAGE ANNUAL CONCENTRATIONS ASSUMED TO PRODUCE: A TOTAL BODY OR ORGAN
DOSE OF 4 MREM/YR
1 Radionuclide
2 Tritium
3. Strontium-90
Critical organ
Total body
Bone Marrow
pCi per liter
20000
8
(e) MCLfor uranium. The maximum contaminant level for uranium is 30 ng/L.
(f) Compliance dates. (1) Compliance dates for combined radium-226 and -228, gross alpha particle activity,
gross beta particle and photon radioactivity, and uranium: Community water systems must comply with the MCLs
listed in paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this section beginning December 8,2003 and compliance shall be
determined in accordance with the requirements of §§ 141.25 and 141.26. Compliance with reporting requirements for
the radionuclides under appendix A to subpart O and appendices A and B to subpart Q is required on December 8,
2003.
(g) Best available technologies (BATs) for radionuclides. The Administrator, pursuant to section 1412 of
the Act, hereby identifies as indicated in the following table the best technology available for achieving compliance
with the maximum contaminant levels for combined radium-226 and -228, uranium, gross alpha particle activity, and
beta particle and photon radioactivity.
TABLE B.—BAT FOR COMBINED RADIUM-226 AND RADIUM-228, URANIUM, GROSS ALPHA PARTICLE
ACTIVITY, AND BETA PARTICLE AND PHOTON RADIOACTIVITY
Contaminant
BAT
1. Combined radium-226 and radium-228..
2. Uranium..
3. Gross alpha particle activity (excluding Radon and Uranium)..
4. Beta particle and photon radioactivity
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis, lime
softening.
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis, lime
softening, coagulation/filtration.
Reverse osmosis.
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis.
Appendix H-10
-------
(h) Small systems compliance technologies list for radionuclides.
TABLE C.—LIST OF SMALL SYSTEMS COMPLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES FOR RADIONUCLIDES AND
LIMITATIONS TO USE
Unit technologies
1 Ion exchange (IE)
2. Point of use (POU2) IE
3 Reverse osmosis (RO)
4.POU2RO
5 Lime softening
6. Green sand filtration
7. Co-precipitation with Barium
sulfate
8. Electrodialysis/electrodialysis
reversal
9. Pre-formed hydrous Manganese
oxide filtration
1 0 Activated alumina
1 1 . Enhanced coagulation/filtration...
Limitations
(see foot-
notes)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(b)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(a) (h)
(')
Operator skill level
required. '
Intermediate
Basic
Advanced
Basic
Advanced
Basic
Intermediate to Advanced
Basic to Intermediate
Intermediate
Advanced
Advanced
Raw water quality
range and
considerations.1
All ground waters
All ground waters.
Surface waters usually
require pre-filtration.
Surface waters usually
require pre-filtration.
All waters
Ground waters with suitable
water quality
All ground waters.
All ground waters.
All ground waters'
competing anion
concentrations may affect
regeneration frequency.
Can treat a wide range of
water qualities.
1 National Research Council (NRC). Safe Water from Every Tap: Improving Water Service to Small
Communities. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 1997.
2 A POU, or "point-of-use" technology is a treatment device installed at a single tap used for the purpose
of reducing contaminants in drinking water at that one tap. POU devices are typically installed at the kitchen tap. See
the April 21, 2000 NODA for more details.
Limitations Footnotes: Technologies for Radionuclides:
a The regeneration solution contains high concentrations of the contaminant ions. Disposal options should
be carefully considered before choosing this technology.
b When POU devices are used for compliance, programs for long-term operation, maintenance, and
monitoring must be provided by water utility to ensure proper performance.
0 Reject water disposal options should be carefully considered before choosing this technology. See other
RO limitations described in the SWTR Compliance Technologies Table.
d The combination of variable source water quality and the complexity of the water chemistry involved may
make this technology too complex for small surface water systems.
e Removal efficiencies can vary depending on water quality.
Appendix H-11
-------
f This technology may be very limited in application to small systems. Since the process requires static
mixing, detention basins, and filtration, it is most applicable to systems with sufficiently high sulfate levels that
already have a suitable filtration treatment train in place.
g This technology is most applicable to small systems that already have filtration in place.
h Handling of chemicals required during regeneration and pH adjustment may be too difficult for small
systems without an adequately trained operator.
1 Assumes modification to a coagulation/filtration process already in place.
TABLE D.—COMPLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES BY SYSTEM SIZE CATEGORY FOR RADIONUCLIDE NPDWR'S
Contaminant
1 . Combined radium-226 and radium-
228
2 Gross alpha particle activity
3. Beta particle activity and photon
activity
4. Uranium
Compliance technologies ' for system size categories (population served)
25-500
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9..
3 4
1234
1,2,4,10,11
501-3,300
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9..
3 4
1234
1,2,3,4,5,10,11
3,300-10,000
1,2,3,4,5,6,7.8,9.
3,4.
1,2,3,4.
1,2,3,4,5,10,11.
Note: ' Numbers correspond to those technologies found listed in the table C of 141.66(h).
Subpart O—[Amended]
8. The table in appendix A to subpart O is amended under the heading ' 'Radioactive contaminants'' by
revising the entries for "Beta/photon emitters (mrem/yr)", "Alpha emitters (pCi/1)", and "Combined radium (pCi/1)"
and adding a new entry for "Uranium (pCi/L)" to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart O—Regulated Contaminants
Contaminant
units
*
Radioactive
contaminants:
Beta/photon
emitters
(mrem/yr).
Traditio- To MCL MCLG Major sources
nalMCL convert in in
in mg/L for CCR, CCR drinking water
multiply units
by
* * * *
4 mrem/yr - 40 Decay of
natural and
man-made
deposits.
Health effects language
* *
Certain minerals are
radioactive and may emit
forms of radiation known as
photons and beta radiation.
Some people who drink water
containing beta particle and
photon radioactivity in excess
of the MCL over many years
may have an increased risk of
getting cancer.
Appendix H-12
-------
Contaminant
units
Alpha emitters
(pCi/L).
Traditio- To MCL
nal MCL convert in
inmg/L forCCR, CCR
multiply units
by
15pCi/L - 15
MCLG Major sources
in
drinking water
0 Erosion of
natural
deposits.
Health effects language
Certain minerals are
radioactive and may emit a
form of radiation known as
alpha radiation. Some people
who drink water containing
alpha emitters in excess of the
MCL over many years may
have an increased risk of
getting cancer.
Combined ra- 5 pCi/L
dium
(pCi/L).
Uranium 30 ug/L
(pCi/L)
30
Erosion of Some people who drink water
natural containing radium-226 or - 228
deposits. in excess of the MCL over
many years may have an
increased risk of getting
cancer.
Erosion of Some people who drink water
natural containing uranium in excess
deposits. of the MCL over many years
may have an increased risk of
getting cancer and kidney tox-
icity.
Subpart Q—[Amended]
9. Appendix A to subpart Q under I.F. ' 'Radioactive contaminants'' is amended by:
a. Revising entries 1, 2, and 3;
b. Adding entry 4;
c. Redesignating endnotes 9 through 17 as endnotes 11 through 19; and
d. Adding new endnotes 9 and 10.
Appendix H-13
-------
Appendix A to Subpart Q—NPDWR Violations and Other Situations Requiring Public Notice '
Contaminant
MCL/MRDL/TT Violations 2
Monitoring and testing
procedure violations
Tier of Citation
public
notice
required
Tier of
public
notice
required
Citation
I. Violations of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) 3
F. Radioactive contaminants
1 Beta/photon emitters
2 Alpha emitters
3 Combined radium (226 and 228)
4. Uranium
* * *
2 141 66(d)
2 141 66(c)
2 141 66(b)
9 2 141.66(e)
* *
3 141 25(a)
141.26(b)
3 141 25(a)
141.26(a)
3 141 25(a)
141.26(a)
103 141.25(a)
141.26(a)
* *
Appendix A—Endnotes
* * * *
1. Violations and other situations not listed in this table (e.g., reporting violations and failure to prepare
Consumer Confidence Reports), do not require notice, unless otherwise determined by the primary agency. Primacy
agencies may, at their option, also require a more stringent public notice tier (e.g., Tier 1 instead of Tier 2 or Tier 2
instead of Tier 3) for specific violations and situations listed in this Appendix, as authorized under Sec. 141.202(a)
and Sec. 141.203(a).
2. MCL—Maximum contaminant level, MRDL—Maximum residual disinfectant level, TT—Treatment
technique.
3. The term Violations of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) is used here to include
violations of MCL, MRDL, treatment technique, monitoring, and testing procedure requirements.
* * * *
9. The uranium MCL Tier 2 violation citations are effective December 8, 2003 for all community water
systems.
10. The uranium Tier 3 violation citations are effective December 8, 2000 for all community water systems.
* * * *
10. Appendix B to Subpart Q is amended by:
a. Redesignating entries 79 through 84 and 86 through 88 as 80 through 85 and 87 through 89, respectively,
and entries 85a and 85b as 86a and 86b, respectively;
b. Adding a new entry 79 for uranium under "G. Radioactive contaminants";
c. Redesignating endnote entries 16 through 21 as 17 through 22; and
d. adding a new endnote 16.
Appendix H-14
-------
Appendix B to Subpart Q—Standard Health Effects Language for Public Notification
Contaminant
MCLG
mg/L
MCL2
mg/L
Standard health effects language for public notification
National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NPDWR)
G. Radioactive contaminants
79. Uranium'
Zero... 30 |ig/L.. Some people who drink water containing uranium in
excess of the MCL over many years may have an
increased risk of getting cancer and kidney toxicity.
Appendix B — Endnotes
1 . MCLG — Maximum contaminant level goal
2. MCL — Maximum contaminant level
* * * *
16. The uranium MCL is effective December 8, 2003 for all community water systems.
* * * *
PART 142— NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTATION
1 . The authority citation for part 142 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2, 300g-3,
Subpart B — Primary Enforcement Responsibility
, 300g-5, 300g-6, 30QH, 300J-9, and 300J-11.
2. Section 142. 16 is amended by adding and reserving paragraphs (i), (j),
and (k) and adding a new paragraph (1) to read as follows:
§ 142.16 Special primacy requirements.
* * * *
(i)-(k) [Reserved]
(1) An application for approval of a State program revision for radionuclides which adopts the requirements
specified in § 141 .26(a)(2)(ii)(C) of this chapter must contain the following (in addition to the general primacy
requirements enumerated in this part, including that State regulations be at least as stringent as the Federal
requirements):
(1) If a State chooses to use grandfathered data in the manner described in § 141.26(a)(2)(ii)(C) of this
chapter, then the State must describe the procedures and criteria which it will use to make these determinations
(whether distribution system or entry point sampling points are used).
Appendix H-15
-------
(i) The decision criteria that the State will use to determine that data collected in the distribution system are
representative of the drinking water supplied from each entry point to the distribution system. These determinations
must consider:
(A) All previous monitoring data.
(B) The variation in reported activity levels.
(C) Other factors affecting the representativeness of the data (e.g. geology).
(ii) [Reserved]
(2) A monitoring plan by which the State will assure all systems complete the required monitoring within the
regulatory deadlines. States may update their existing monitoring plan or use the same monitoring plan submitted for
the requirements in § 142.16(e)(5) under the national primary drinking water regulations for the inorganic and organic
contaminants (i.e. the phase II/V rules). States may note in their application any revision to an existing monitoring
plan or note that the same monitoring plan will be used. The State must demonstrate that the monitoring plan is
enforceable under State law.
Subpart G—[Amended]
3. Section 142.65 is added to read as follows.
§ 142.65 Variances and exemptions from the maximum contaminant levels for radionuclides.
(a)(l) Variances and exemptions from the maximum contaminant levels for combined radium-226 and radium-
228, uranium, gross alpha particle activity (excluding Radon and Uranium), and beta particle and photon
radioactivity, (i) The Administrator, pursuant to section 1415(a)(l)(A) of the Act, hereby identifies the following as
the best available technology, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the
maximum contaminant levels for the radionuclides listed in § 141.66(b), (c), (d), and (e) of this chapter, for the
purposes of issuing variances and exemptions, as shown in Table A to this paragraph.
TABLE A.—BAT FOR RADIONUCLIDES LISTED IN §141.66
Contaminant
BAT
Combined radium-226 and radium-228..
Uranium
Gross alpha particle activity (excluding radon and uranium)..
Beta particle and photon radioactivity
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis, lime softening.
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis, lime softening,
coagulation/filtration.
Reverse osmosis.
Ion exchange, reverse osmosis.
(ii) In addition, the Administrator hereby identifies the following as the best available technology, treatment
techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the maximum contaminant levels for the
radionuclides listed in § 141.66(b), (c), (d), and (e) of this chapter, for the purposes of issuing variances and
exemptions to small drinking water systems, defined here as those serving 10,000 persons or fewer, as shown in
Table C to this paragraph.
Appendix H-16
-------
TABLE B.—LIST OF SMALL SYSTEMS COMPLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES FOR RADIONUCLIDES AND
LIMITATIONS TO USE
Unit technologies
1. Ion exchange (IE)
2. Point of use (POU2) IE
3 Reverse osmosis (RO)
4 POU2RO
5. Lime softening
6. Green sand filtration
7. Co-precipitation with barium sulfate.
8. Electrodialysis/electrodialysis
reversal
9. Pre- formed hydrous manganese
oxide filtration
10. Activated alumina
1 1 Enhanced coagulation/filtration
Limitations
(see footnotes)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(b)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(B)
( a ), ( h )
(')
Operator skill level
required '
Intermediate
Basic
Advanced
Basic
Advanced
Basic.
Intermediate to
Advanced
Basic to Intermediate
Intermediate
Advanced
Advanced
Raw water quality range
& considerations '
All ground waters.
All ground waters.
Surface waters usually
require pre-filtration.
Surface waters usually
require pre-filtration.
All waters.
Ground waters with
suitable water quality
All ground waters
All ground waters.
All ground waters;
competing anion
concentrations may affect
regeneration frequency
Can treat a wide range of
water qualities.
1 National Research Council (NRC). Safe Water from Every Tap: Improving Water Service to Small
Communities. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 1997.
2 A POU, or "point-of-use" technology is a treatment device installed at a single tap used for the purpose
of reducing contaminants in drinking water at that one tap. POU devices are typically installed at the kitchen tap. See
the April 21, 2000 NODA for more details.
Limitations Footnotes: Technologies for Radionuclides:
a The regeneration solution contains high concentrations of the contaminant ions. Disposal options should
be carefully considered before choosing this technology.
b When POU devices are used for compliance, programs for long-term operation, maintenance, and
monitoring must be provided by water utility to ensure proper performance.
0 Reject water disposal options should be carefully considered before choosing this technology. See other
RO limitations described in the SWTR compliance technologies table.
d The combination of variable source water quality and the complexity of the water chemistry involved may
make this technology too complex for small surface water systems.
e Removal efficiencies can vary depending on water quality.
Appendix H-17
-------
f This technology may be very limited in application to small systems. Since the process requires static
mixing, detention basins, and filtration, it is most applicable to systems with sufficiently high sulfate levels that
already have a suitable filtration treatment train in place.
g This technology is most applicable to small systems that already have filtration in place.
h Handling of chemicals required during regeneration and pH adjustment may be too difficult for small
systems without an adequately trained operator.
1 Assumes modification to a coagulation/filtration process already in place.
TABLE C.—BAT FOR SMALL COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS FOR THE RADIONUCLIDES LISTED IN S 141.66
Contaminant
Combined ra
Gross alpha
Beta particle
Uranium
dium-226 and radium-228..
particle activity
activity and photon activity.
Compliance technologies ' for system size categories (population
served)
25-500
1
Q
3,
1,
1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,
4
2,3,4
2 4 10 11
501-3,300
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,
9
3,4
1,2,3,4
1 2 3 4 5 10 11
3,300-10,000
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.
3,4.
1,2,3,4.
1 2 3 4 5 10 11
1 Note: Numbers correspond to those technologies found listed in the table B to this paragraph.
(2) A State shall require community water systems to install and/or use any treatment technology identified
in Table A to this section, or in the case of small water systems (those serving 10,000 persons or fewer), Table B and
Table C of this section, as a condition for granting a variance except as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
If, after the system's installation of the treatment technology, the system cannot meet the MCL, that system shall be
eligible for a variance under the provisions of section 1415(a)(l)(A) of the Act.
(3) If a community water system can demonstrate through comprehensive engineering assessments, which
may include pilot plant studies, that the treatment technologies identified in this section would only achieve a de
minimus reduction in the contaminant level, the State may issue a schedule of compliance that requires the system
being granted the variance to examine other treatment technologies as a condition of obtaining the variance.
(4) If the State determines that a treatment technology identified under paragraph (a)(3) of this section is
technically feasible, the Administrator or primacy State may require the system to install and/or use that treatment
technology in connection with a compliance schedule issued under the provisions of section 1415(a)(l)(A) of the
Act. The State's determination shall be based upon studies by the system and other relevant information.
(5) The State may require a community water system to use bottled water, point-of-use devices, point-of-
entry devices or other means as a condition of granting a variance or an exemption from the requirements of § 141.66
of this chapter, to avoid an unreasonable risk to health.
(6) Community water systems that use bottled water as a condition for receiving a variance or an exemption
from the requirements of § 141.66 of this chapter must meet the requirements specified in either § 142.62(g)(l) or §
142.62(g)(2)and(g)(3).
(7) Community water systems that use point-of-use or point-of-entry devices as a condition for obtaining a
variance or an exemption from the radionuclides NPDWRs must meet the conditions in § 142.62(h)(l) through (h)(6).
[FRDoc. 00-30421 Filed 12-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
Appendix H-18
-------
Appendix I
Comparison of Derived
Values of Beta and Photon
Emitters
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix 1-2
-------
Derived Concentrations (pCi/L) of Beta and Photon Emitters in Drinking Water
Yielding a Dose of 4 mrem/y to the Total Body or to Any Critical Organ as Defined
in NBS Handbook 69
Nuclide
H-3
Be-7
C-14
F-18
Na-22
Na-24
Si-31
P-32
S-35 inorg
Cl-36
Cl-38
K-42
Ca-45
Ca-47
Sc-46
Sc-47
Sc-48
V-48
Cr-51
Mn-52
Mn-54
Mn-56
Fe-55
Fe-59
Co-57
Co-58
Co-58m
Co-60
Ni-59
Ni-63
Ni-65
Cu-64
Zn-65
Zn-69
Zn-69m
Ga-72
Ge-71
As-73
As-74
As-76
As-77
pCi/L
20,000
6,000
2,000
2,000
400
600
3,000
30
500
700
1,000
900
10
80
100
300
80
90
6,000
90
300
300
2,000
200
1,000
300
9000
100
300
50
300
900
300
6,000
200
100
6,000
1,000
100
60
200
Nuclide
Sr-85 m
Sr-85
Sr-89
Sr-90
Sr-91
Sr-92
Y-90
Y-91
Y-91m
Y-92
Y-93
Zr-93
Zr-95
Zr-97
Nb-93m
Nb-95
Nb-97
Mo-99
Tc-96
Tc-96m
Tc-97
Tc-97m
Tc-99
Tc-99m
Ru-97
Ru-103
Ru-105
Ru-106
Rh-103m
Rh-105
Pd-103
Pd-109
Ag-105
Ag-llOm
Ag-111
Cd-109
Cd-115
Cd-115m
In- 11 3m
In-114m
In-115
pCi/L
20,000
900
20
8
200
200
60
90
9,000
200
90
2,000
200
60
1,000
300
3,000
600
300
30,000
6,000
1,000
900
20,000
1,000
200
200
30
30,000
300
900
300
300
90
100
600
90
90
3,000
60
300
Nuclide
Sb-124
Sb-125
Te-125m
Te-127
Te-127m
Te-129
Te-129m
Te-131m
Te-132
1-126
1-129
1-131
1-132
1-133
1-134
1-135
Cs-131
Cs-134
Cs-134m
Cs-135
Cs-136
Cs-137
Ba-131
Ba-140
La-140
Ce-141
Ce-143
Ce-144
Pr-142
Pr-143
Nd-147
Nd-149
Pm-147
Pm-149
Sm-151
Sm-153
Eu-152
Eu-154
Eu-155
Gd-153
Gd-159
pCi/L
60
300
600
900
200
2,000
90
200
90
3
1
3
90
10
100
30
20,000
80
20,000
900
800
200
600
90
60
300
100
30
90
100
200
900
600
100
1,000
200
200
60
600
600
200
Nuclide
Er-169
Er-171
Tm-170
Tm-171
Yb-175
Lu-177
Hf-181
Ta-182
W-181
W-185
W-187
Re- 186
Re- 187
Re-188
Os-185
Os-191
Os-191m
Os-193
Ir-190
Ir-192
Ir-194
Pt-191
Pt-193
Pt-193m
Pt-197
Pt-197m
Au-196
Au-198
Au-199
Hg-197
Hg-197m
Hg-203
Tl-200
Tl-201
Tl-202
Tl-204
Pb-203
Bi-206
Bi-207
Pa-230
Pa-233
pCi/L
300
300
100
1,000
300
300
200
100
1,000
300
200
300
9,000
200
200
600
9,000
200
600
100
90
300
3,000
3,000
300
3,000
600
100
600
900
600
60
1,000
900
300
300
1,000
100
200
600
300
Appendix 1-3
-------
Nuclide
Se-75
Br-82
Rb-86
Rb-87
pCi/L
900
100
600
300
Nuclide
In- 11 5m
Sn-113
Sn-125
Sb-122
pCi/L
1,000
300
60
90
Nuclide
Tb-160
Dy-165
Dy-166
Ho- 166
pCi/L
100
1,000
100
90
Nuclide
Np-239
Pu-241
Bk-249
pCi/L
300
300
2,000
Appendix 1-4
-------
Appendix J
References
-------
This page has been intentionally left blank.
Appendix J-2
-------
REFERENCES
Goodrich, J.A., Adams, J.Q., Lykins, B.W., Jr., and Clark, R.M. 1992. Safe Drinking Water from
Small Systems'.Treatment Options. JAWWA Vol. 84, No. 4, p. 49. May 1992.
National Research Council (NRC). 1997. Safe Water From Every Tap: Improving Water Service to
Small Communities. National Academy Press. Washington, DC.
US Department of Commerce. 1963. Maximum Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible
Concentrations of Radionuclides in Air and in Water for Occupational Exposure. National
Bureau of Standards (NBS) Handbook 69, amended.
USEPA. 1990. Suggested Guidelines for Disposal of Drinking Water Treatment Wastes Containing
Naturally-Occurring Radionuclides (July 1990 draft).
USEPA. 1991. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Radionuclides; Proposed Rule.
Federal Register. Vol. 56, No. 138, p. 33050. July 18, 1991.
USEPA. 1992. Technologies and Costs for the Removal of Radionuclides from Potable Water
Supplies. Prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. July 1992.
USEPA. 1994. Suggested Guidelines for Disposal of Drinking Water Treatment Wastes Containing
Radioactivity (June 1994 draft).
USEPA. 1996. Performance Evaluation Studies Supporting Administration of the Clean Water Act
and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Federal Register. Vol. 61, No. 139, p. 37464. July 18, 1996.
USEPA. 1997a. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Analytical Methods for
Radionuclides; Final Rule and Proposed Rule. Vol. 62, No. 43, p. 10168. March 5, 1997.
USEPA. 1997b. Performance Evaluation Studies Supporting Administration of the Clean Water
Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Federal Register. Vol. 62, No. 113, p. 32112. June 12,
1997.
USEPA. 1997c. Performance Based Measurement System. Federal Register. Vol. 62, No. 193, p.
52098. October 6, 1997.
USEPA. 1997d. Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing Drinking Water. EPA
815-B-97-001. 1997.
USEPA. 1998a. Announcement of Small Systems Compliance Technology Lists for Existing
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations and Findings Concerning Variance
Technologies. Federal Register. Vol. 63, No. 151, p. 42032. August 6, 1998.
Appendix J-3
-------
USEPA. 1998b. Small System Compliance Technology List for the Non-Microbial Contaminants
Regulated Before 1996. EPA-815-R-98-002. September 1998.
USEPA. 1998c. Actual Cost for Compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act Standard for
Radium-226 and Radium-228. Final Report. Prepared by International Consultants, Inc. July
1998.
USEPA. 1999a. Technologies and Costs for the Removal of Radionuclides from Potable Water
Supplies. Draft. Prepared by International Consultants, Inc. April 1999.
USEPA. 1999b. Small System Compliance Technology List for the Radionuclides Rule. Prepared
by International Consultants, Inc. Draft. April 1999.
USEPA. 1999c. Revised Cost Estimates of Radiochemical Analysis. Prepared by EPA and Science
Applications International Corporation (SAIC). April 1999.
USEPA. 1999d. State Implementation Guidance for the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule.
EPA 816-R-99-008. August 1999.
USEPA. 2000. Radionuclide Notice of Data Availability. April 2000.
Appendix J-4
------- |