&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Public Webinar:
Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4)
Meeting Presentations
Held January 13, 2016
USEPA, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Office of Water (MLK 140) EPA 815-R-16-001 January 2016
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Revisions to the Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4)
for Public Water Systems
Public Webinar
January 13, 2016
Meeting starts at 1:00 p.m. E.T.
USEPA
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
WELCOME
Gregory J. Carroll, USEPA
1 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
General Meeting Information
Purpose
Review of EPA's proposed rule and discussion with the
public
Webinar lines are muted to minimize background
noise
10 minute break at approximately 2:30 p.m.
Public questions and discussion at the end of the
webinar
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Agenda
1:00
1:15
1:45
2:15
2:30
2:40
3:00
3:05
Introduction
Proposed UCMR 4
UCMR 4 Sampling Design
UCMR 4 Reporting
Break
UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval Process & MRLs
Submitting Public Comments
Statements from Webinar Participants, Q&A
and Discussion
4:45 Closing Remarks
(15 minutes)
(30 minutes)
(30 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(20 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(100 minutes)
(5 minutes)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
2 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Introduction
Brenda Parris, USEPA
UCMR 4 Introduction Overview
Regulatory background for UCMR
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) authority
Relationship to:
Candidate Contaminant List (CCL)
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR)
Regulatory Determination
Six-Year Review
UCMR
Objectives
Approach
Implementation
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
3 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
SDWA
Passed in 1974, SDWA authorized EPA to set
enforceable health standards for contaminants in
drinking water
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs)
1996 SDWA amendments changed the process of
developing and reviewing NPDWRs
CCL
UCMR
Regulatory Determination
Six-Year Review
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
General Flow of SDWA Regulatory Processes
List unregulated
contaminants*
Contaminant
Candidate List^
2~
List and collect
monitoring data for
up to 30 unregulated
contaminants
Unregulated <
Contaminant
Monitoring Rule
r
1
Determine whether
at least five need a
drinking water
standard*
Regulatory
Determ inations^_A
T -
r
lfyes_
r
"^^-Opportunity f
Develop or revise
the drinking water
standard*
Regulation
Development __,
>
If yes
Reviews decide
whether to revise
the standard
Six-Year Review
*For these three stages, we like to have increased specificity and confidence in the type of supporting data used
(e.g. health and occurrence). SDWA requires that we used best available data to make our decisions.
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
4 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
CCL
List of priority unregulated contaminants
Chemicals and microbes
Published every five years
Known or anticipated to occur in public water systems
(PWSs)
May require regulation under SDWA
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Draft CCL 4
Published February 4, 2015
Carried forward the final list of CCL 3 contaminants
(multi-step process evaluating ~7,500 contaminants)
Requested and evaluated contaminant nominations
from the public
Evaluated any new data from previous negative
regulatory determinations
In establishing the proposed list of contaminants for UCMR 4, EPA started
with this priority set of contaminants, which includes 100 chemicals or
chemical groups and 12 microbes
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
10
5 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR
SDWA section 1445(a)(2), as amended in 1996,
redesigned the UCMR Program; requirements
included:
Issue list of no more than 30 unregulated contaminants,
once every 5 years
Require PWSs serving population >10,000 people as well as
a nationally representative sample of PWSs serving <10,000
people to monitor
Store analytical results in the National Drinking Water
Contaminant Occurrence Database (NCOD)
Direct implementation - EPA manages program in
partnership with states
EPA funds testing/analytical costs for small PWSs
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
11
UCMR History
UCMR 1 (2001-2005, 26 contaminants)
UCMR 2 (2007-2011, 25 contaminants)
UCMR 3 (2012-2016, 30 contaminants)
Monitoring concluded in 2015
Data review will occur in 2016
UCMR 4 (2017-2021, 30 contaminants)
Proposed in the FR on December 11, 2015
Final publication anticipated in late 2016/early 2017
National occurrence data publically available:
http://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/occurrence-data-unregulated-
contaminant-monitoring-rule
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
12
6 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Objective of UCMR Program
Collect national occurrence data for suspected
drinking water contaminants that do not have
health-based standards set under the SDWA
Drinking water occurrence information is used to
support future regulatory actions to protect public
health
Public will benefit from information about whether or
not unregulated contaminants are present in their
drinking water
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
13
UCMR Approach
UCMR established a 3-tiered approach for monitoring
Assessment Monitoring (List 1)
Screening Survey (List 2)
Pre-Screen Testing (List 3)
Based on:
Availability and complexity of analytical methods
Laboratory capacity
Sampling frequency
Relevant universe of PWSs
Other considerations (e.g., cost/burden)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
14
7 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Typical UCMR System Applicability
Assessment Monitoring
(List 1 Contaminants)
System Type
CWS1 & NTNCWS2
Systems Serving Systems Serving
> 10,000 < 10,000
All systems (~4,200)
800 randomly selected
systems
Screening Survey
(List 2 Contaminants)
CWS & NTNCWS
All systems (~410) serving
more than 100,000, and
~320 randomly selected
systems serving 10,001 to
100,000
480 randomly selected
systems
Pre-Screen Testing
(List 3 Contaminants)
May be conducted by a limited number of PWSs
Community Water System
2Non-transient Non-community Water System
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
15
EPA Implementation Roles
Review, track and determine PWS applicability and
monitoring progress
Coordinate Laboratory Approval Program
Provide technical support for Regions, states,
PWSs and laboratories
Coordinate outreach
Assist and support Regional compliance efforts
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
16
8 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
EPA Implementation Roles
Small PWS support:
EPA funds small system testing including kits, sample
analysis and shipping
Manages sample kit distribution
Maintains lab and implementation contracts to support
UCMR
Responsible for data review
Large and small PWS support:
Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System (SDWARS)
reporting system and users
Prepares data for NCOD
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
17
States' Role in the UCMR 4 Program
State participation is voluntary
EPA has established Partnership Agreements (PAs)
under previous UCMRs and will continue to do so for
UCMR4
States, tribes and territories help EPA implement the UCMR
program; help to ensure high data quality
Review and revise State Monitoring Plans (SMPs)
Update system information to preload into SDWARS
Review and approve proposed Ground Water Representative
Monitoring Plans (GWRMPs)
Compliance assistance
Notification and instructions for systems
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
18
9 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Regulatory Determination
Determine which contaminants may have an adverse
effect on human health
Determine if a contaminant occurs in drinking water at
a frequency and at levels of public health concern
Meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction
Made every five years
Determinations for at least five contaminants from the
CCL
UCMR helps provide the necessary data
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
19
Six-Year Review
Reviews existing NPDWRs and determines if a
revision is appropriate
Includes the re-evaluation of exposure to regulated
contaminants based on their health effects and
occurrence in drinking water
Any revisions to existing NPDWRs must maintain
protection or provide for greater health protection
Made every six years
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
20
10 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Proposed UCMR 4
Melissa Simic, USEPA
Proposed UCMR 4 - Overview
Timeline
Notable proposed changes from UCMR 3
Contaminant selection process
Proposed contaminants and analytical methods
Estimated costs
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
22
11 Of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Timeline
December11,2015
UCMR 4 Proposal
Published
Public Comment
Period Begins
UCMR 4 Development
Review Rule Drafting
1
Jv
2013 - 2014 2015
T T It
May 15, 2013
June 25, 2014
UCMR 4
Stakeholder
Meetings
Public Commen
Period Ends
February 9, 201
1
Late 201 6/ Early 201 7
UCMR 4 Final Rule
Published
Pre-implementation Monitoring
i Activities ' -y '
1
2016
T
December 31, 201 5 |~
Applicability Date L
._-/\__ UCMR 4 Stakeholder Meet
L^£ January 13, 2016
January 2016
1 A
'_J_ \
2017 2018-2020 2021 ^1
t T
GWRMP Submittals | Process
Complete
Reporting/
Analysis of
Data
ng
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 23
Notable Proposed Changes
Analytes
Applicability
Monitoring time frame
Sampling frequency
Sampling locations
Reporting requirements
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
24
12 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Candidate Contaminants -
Information Compendium
Provides the initial list of contaminants that EPA
considered
Outlines the contaminant prioritization process
Indicates the reason a contaminant was not
included on the proposed list
Provides supporting information for each of the
proposed contaminants
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
25
UCMR 4 Candidate Contaminants -
Information Compendium
Primary source for the information is the CCL program
Reviewed and evaluated other publically available data
sources
Generally includes five sections:
Background & Use
Health Effects
Production & Release
Occurrence in Water
Persistence & Mobility
The document is located in the docket
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26
13 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Prioritization Process
Draft Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) 4
[100 chemicals or chemical groups +
121 microbes]
45 CCL + 48 related non-CCL analytes1
[16 methods]
UCMR4 Candidates:
31 CCL + 18 related non-CCL
analytes [9 methods]
+ other contaminants under/
consideration2
Propose up to 30
contaminants for
comment
7
Ndl monitored for on UCMR 2 or UCMR 3
Anticipated to have national occurrence
Have a completed & validated drinking water
/nethod
Mofst contaminants in method group:
/Have an available health assessment to facilitate
/egulatory determinations and/or high public concern
Have critical health endpoints (e.g., likely and
suggestive carcinogens), active-use pesticides
Have an occurrence data gap
'orkgroup and stakeholder input
Cost-effective method group
Further evaluation of health and occurrence data
Implementation factors (e.g., laboratory capacity)
After considering comments, publish up to
30 contaminants for UCMR 4 monitoring
tentatively starting in 2018
1 Analytes with potential health effects of concern that can be measured concurrently,
using the analytical methods for the CCL contaminants; creates a more cost-effective
design and reduces the likelihood of needing to include them in a subsequent UCMR.
2 Workgroup or stakeholder nominations
27
Proposed UCMR 4 Analytes
)d 525.3 (SPE GC/MS)
I microcystins"
EPA Method 544 (SPE LC/MS/MS)
EPA invites public comment on the following
contaminants that were considered by the
workgroup but not included in the proposed list:
Legionella pneumophila and Mycobacterium
avium, ammonia, and the pesticides
vinclozolin, hexazinone and disulfoton.
butylated hydroxyanisole
o-toluidine
quinolone
14 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Cyanotoxins
EPA Method 544 (LC/MS/MS1)
Analyte
microcystin-LR
microcystin-LA
microcystin-LF
microcystin-LY
microcystin-RR
microcystin-YR
nodularin
EPA Health
Advisory (HA)2
1.6 u.g/L (ten-day HA for
school-age children and
adults);
0.3 u.g/L (ten-day HA for
young children)
Not available
Critical Health
Effect
Liver effects
Liver toxicity
Occurrence
Microcystins in water
supplies: 77 samples from
33 water supplies; Range of
detects = <0.15 - 0.36 [ig/L
(Haddixetal.,2007)
Not available
'Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
2Total microcystins will also be measured by ADDA ELISA; EPA HA applies
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
29
Cyanotoxins
EPA Method 545 (LC/ESI-MS/MS1)
Analyte
anatoxin-a
cylindrospermopsin
EPA Health
Advisory (HA)
Not available
3 [ig/L (ten-day HA for
school-age children
through adults);
0.7 [ig/L (ten-day HA for
bottle-fed infants and
young children)
Critical Health
Effect
Targets nervous system
Increased relative
kidney weight and
decreased urinary
protein
Occurrence
Florida Waters (Burns
2008), drinking water
max = 8.46 [ig/L
Florida Waters (Burns
2008), drinking water
range of detects = 8-97
Hg/L
^Liquid Chromatography Electrospray lonization-Tandem Mass Spectrometry
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
30
15 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Metals
EPA Method 200.81 (ICP-MS2)
Analyte
germanium
manganese
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
7.44 u.g/L3
300 u.g/L
Critical Health
Effect
Kidney, ureter, bladder-
changes in tubules
Central nervous system
effects
Occurrence
MRS4 drinking water
range of detects = 26-230
|ig/L; detected in 4 out of
989 samples
NIRS drinking water
median = 11.96 u.g/L;
detected in 672 out of
989 samples
1Metalscan also be measured by alternate Standard Methods (SM) 3125 or SM 3125-09 or ASTM International D5673-10
inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry
3Based on OW's evaluation of the dose information in the critical study, the HRL should be about ten times larger (i.e.,
0.744 to 7.44 ug/L)
4National Inorganics and Radionuclides Survey, 1984-1986
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
31
Pesticides
EPA Method 525.3 (SPE GC/MS1)
Analyte
alpha-
hexachlorocyclohexane
chlorpyrifos
dimethipin
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
0.006 ug/L
Not available
153 ug/L
Critical Health Effect
Cancer
Significant plasma and RBC
cholinesterase inhibition
Kidney, lungs, duodenum,
liver, glandular stomach,
heart, aortic artery, and
testes toxicity; decreased
body weight gain
Occurrence
NAWQA2 ambient water
median =0.011 iig/L;
detected in 21 out of 7,119
samples
PDF3 drinking water = not
detected in the 13 sites
sampled
TRI4 = 87 pounds released in 1
state in 2010
1Solid Phase Extraction and Capillary Column Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
2USGS, National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA)
3Pesticide Data Program (POP)
4Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
32
16 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Pesticides
EPA Method 525.3 (SPE GC/MS)
Analyte
ethoprop
oxyfluorfen
prof en of os
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
1.25 ng/L
210 ng/L5
0.35 ng/L
Critical Health Effect
Cancer
Liver toxicity
Plasma and RBC
cholinesterase (ChE)
inhibition
Occurrence
POP drinking water = not
detected in the 13 sites
sampled
POP drinking water = not
detected in the 13 sites
sampled
POP drinking water = not
detected in the 13 sites
sampled
5Human Health Benchmark for Pesticides
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
33
Pesticides
EPA Method 525.3 (SPE GC/MS)
Analyte
tebuconazole
total permethrin (cis- &
trans-)
tribufos
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
210 ng/L
3.65 ng/L
7ng/L
Critical Health Effect
Decreased body weights,
absolute brain weights, brain
measurements and motor
activity in offspring
Cancer
Plasma cholinesterase (ChE)
inhibition
Occurrence
PDP drinking water median
detect = 0.01 iig/L; detected
at 4 out of 13 sites
California Drinking Water
Monitoring Data = not
detected in the 35 PWSs
sampled
PDP drinking water = not
detected in the 13 sites
sampled
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
34
17 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Haloacetic Acids (HAAs)
EPA Method 552.3 (GC-ECD)1 or EPA Method 557 (IC-ESI-MS/MS)2
(Median cone, andtt
detections)
iromochloroacetic acid
BCAA)
iromodichloroacetic
acid (BDCAA)
zhlorodibromoacetic
acid (CDBAA)
ribramoacetic acid
TBAA)
nonobromoacetic acid
MBAA)
dibromoacetic acid
DBAA)
dichloroacetic acid
DCAA)
nonochloroacetic acid
MCAA)
richloraacetic acid
TCAA)
Not
available
Not
available
Not
available
Not
available
Not
available
Not
available
Oug/L
70 ug/L
20 ug/L
Clear evidence of carcinogenicity
(NTP 2009); Reproductive effects
Clear evidence of carcinogenicity
(NTP 2014)
Clear evidence of carcinogenicity in
mice (NTP 2007)
Cancer
Decreased body, liver, kidney and
spleen weights
Liver changes
33 ug/L;
263 of 291 systems
3.2 ug/L;
90 of 102 systems
3.2 ug/L;
66 of 101 systems
5 ng/L;
15 of 98 systems
1.5 ug/L;
124 of 291 systems
2.3 ug/L;
202 of 291 systems
11 ug/L;
272 of 291 systems
3 ug/L;
215 of 290 systems
9.7 ug/L;
259 of 291 systems
HAA6Br
HAAS
Group
MCL5 =
60ug/L
1Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture Detection
2lon Chromatography Electrospray lonization Tandem Mass Spectrometry
3MCLGs established under the Stage 1 and Stage 2 DBPRs
Disinfection By-product Information Collection Rule (DBP ICR) (1997-1998)
5The HAAS group is currently regulated in drinking water at a MCL of 60 ug/L per Stage 1 and Stage 2 DBPRs
35
Alcohols
EPA Method 541 (GC/MS1)
Analyte
l-butanol
2-propen-l-ol
2-methoxyethanol
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
700 ug/L
35 Ug/L
21 ug/L
Critical Health
Effect
Abnormally diminished
activity in the
body/organs; inability to
control muscles
Impaired kidney
function and increased
relative liver, spleen and
kidney weights
Reproductive effects
Usage
TRI2= 11,093,815 pounds
released in 47 states in
2010
TRI =445,833 pounds
released in 13 states in
2010
TRI = 23,240 pounds
released in 16 states in
2010
1Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
2Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
36
18 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Semivolatile Organic Chemicals
Analyte
butylated
hydroxyanisole
o-toluidine
quinoline
Health Reference
Level (HRL)
0.581 u.g/L
0.194u.g/L
0.01 u.g/L
Critical Health
Effect
Changes in liver weight
Usage
NREC2 Median =0.1
|ig/L; detected at 2 out
of 85 sites
TRI3= 6,623 pounds
released in 1 state in
2010
TRI = 15,789 pounds
released in 9 states in
2010
1Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
2USGS, National Reconnaissance of Emerging Contaminants (NREC) Surface Water Data, 1999-2004
3Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
37
Additional Contaminants and Indicators
Considered for UCMR 4
Legionella pneumophila (on CCL 4)
Method was not ready at the time of proposal
Thought to be largely a premise plumbing issue
Health effects:
Legionnaire's Disease and Pontiac Fever
52 reported waterborne disease outbreaks affecting
225 people between 1990 and 2010 (CDC MMWR)
OW Draft (October 2015) - Technologies for Legionella
Control: Scientific Literature Review:
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
10/documents/drafttechlegionellaoct2015.pdf
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
38
19 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Additional Contaminants and Indicators
Considered for UCMR 4
Mycobacterium avium (on CCL 4)
Method was not ready at the time of proposal
Health effects:
Pulmonary disease, lymphadenitis, post-traumatic wound
infection
No reported outbreaks between 1990 and 2008 (CDC
MMWR)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
39
Additional Contaminants and Indicators
Considered for UCMR 4
Ammonia
May be oxidized to nitrite and nitrate (contaminants of
greater toxicological concern) via nitrification
Nitrite/Nitrate are regulated in drinking water: MCLG/MCL 1,000
and 10,000 u.g/L respectively based on methemoglobinemia
The NPDWRfor nitrite and nitrate requires compliance
monitoring at each entry point to the distribution system
(EPTDS) '
Limited research indicates that nitrification downstream of EPTDS
(i.e., in distribution system) may lead to higher nitrite and/or
nitrate exposure (especially for PWSs using chloramine
disinfection)
Measuring ammonia at entry point could serve as a surrogate for
nitrification potential
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
40
20 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Additional Contaminants and Indicators
Considered for UCMR 4
Three pesticides in method 525.3 were identified as
lower priority based on data evaluation:
Disulfoton: Production cancelled 2009; non-cancer
endpoint; not detected in 2,300 samples from 295 systems
(UCMR 1 SS 2001-2003); not persistent to moderately
persistent in the environment; very regionalized usage
Hexazinone: Not on CCL 4; non-cancer endpoint; not
detected in 221 samples (PMP, 1999); moderately persistent
to persistent in the environment
Vinclozolin: No current usage; non-cancer endpoint; was
being phased out in 2004; persistent in the environment
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
41
Proposed Contaminants
EPA invites comments on:
The proposed contaminants and their
associated methods
The six additional contaminants
considered for UCMR 4, but not
included on the proposed list
Additional contaminants that may not
have been considered for UCMR 4
Suggestions for which
contaminants) to remove if others
are added
Additional consensus analytical
methods for the proposed
contaminants
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
42
21 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Cost Estimates
Average Annual Cost per Respondent (2017-2021)
Small systems
Large systems
Very large systems
States
EPA
Labor
$100
$410
$750
$8,990
$815,240
Non-labor
(methods & shipping)
$0
$3,630
$9,780
$0
$3,864,860
Labor plus
Non-labor
$100
$4,040
$10,530
$8,990
$4,680,100
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
43
UCMR 4 Cost Estimates
Ave. Annual Cost All Respondents
ReSP°ndent (2017-2021)
Small systems (25-10,000), including labor only (non-labor
costs paid for by EPA)
Large systems (10,001-100,000), including labor and non-labor
costs
Very large systems (100,001 and greater), including labor and
non-labor costs
States, including labor costs related to implementation
coordination
EPA, including labor for implementation, non-labor for small
system testing
AVERAGE ANNUAL NATIONAL TOTAL
$0.16 m
$15.7 m
$4.3 m
$0.50 m
$4.7 m
$25.3 m
*Note that totals may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
*EPA assumes that one-third of the systems would monitor during each of the three monitoring years.
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
44
22 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Sampling Design
Brenda Parris, USEPA
UCMR 4 Sampling Design Overview
System applicability
Sampling frequency and timing
Revised sampling locations
Phased sample-analysis for microcystins
Haloacetic acid (HAA) groups
Source water sampling
Representative sampling
Schedules
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
46
23 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
System Applicability:
National Sample Assessment Monitoring Design (List 1)
System Size
(# of people
served)
Small systems1
(25 - 10,000)
Large systems2
(10,001 and over)
TOTAL
10 Cyanotoxins 20 Additional Chemicals
Total # of
Systems per
Size Category
800 randomly selected SW or
GWUDI systems
All SW or GWUDI systems
(1,987)
2,787
800 randomly selected SW,
GWUDI and GW systems
All SW, GWUDI and GW
systems (4,292)
5,092
1,600
4,292
5,892
1Total for small systems is additive because these systems would only be selected for one component of UCMR 4
sampling (10 cyanotoxins or 20 additional chemicals). EPA would pay for all analytical costs associated with
monitoring at small systems.
2 Large system counts are approximate. The number of large systems is not additive. All SW and GWUDI systems
would monitor for cyanotoxins; those same systems would also monitor for the 20 additional List 1 chemicals, as
would the large GW systems.
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
47
Sampling Frequency and Timing
Sample collection time frame
March through November
Exclude December, January and February
Except for re-sampling events, as needed
Better reflect the times of year when
contaminants are more likely to occur in drinking
water (e.g., cyanotoxins and pesticides)
Monitoring will take place over a three-year period
(2018-2020)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
48
24 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Sampling Frequency and Timing
Contaminant Water Source
SWorGWUDI
Contaminants -
Cyanotoxins
SWorGWUDI
Contaminants -
Additional
Chemicals
GW
Time Frame Frequency
March - November You must monitor twice a month for four
consecutive months (total of eight sampling
events). Sample events must occur two weeks
apart.
March - November
You must monitor four times during your 12-
month monitoring period. Sample events must
occur two months apart. (Example: If your first
sampling event is in March, the second
monitoring must occur during May the third
during July and the fourth during September).
March - November You must monitor two times during your 12-
month monitoring period. Sample events must
occur six months apart. (Example: If your first
monitoring is in March, the second monitoring
must occur during September. If your first
monitoring is in November, the second
monitoring must occur in May).
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
49
Sampling Locations - Overview
Microcystins
Phased sample analysis
PWSs will collect all required samples but not all samples may need to be
analyzed
"Total microcystins" (ADDA ELISA) at source water intake and EPTDS
Method 544 (specific microcystin congeners) at the EPTDS
Temperature and pH at source water intake (concurrently)
Haloacetic Acid Groups
Stage 2 Disinfection Byproduct Rule (DBPR) locations and/or
distribution system maximum residence time (DSMRT)
Source water intake [bromide and total organic carbon (TOC)]
concurrently
Remaining UCMR 4 contaminants
EPTDS sampling
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
50
25 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Phased Sample-Analysis for Microcystins
PWSs(SW and GWUDI) must
collect all required samples for
each sampling event (source
water intake and EPTDS
samples) but all samples may
not need to be analyzed.
0.3 |ig/L (the reporting limit
for total microcystins)
ELISA analysis of the EPTDS
sample would be the first
step for consecutive
systems (purchase 100% of
their water)
analyzed for tha
Source water result would be
reported to EPA. The EPTDS
sample would then be
analyzed by ELISA
Sampling Location
Source water intake
Entry pointtothe
distribution system
(EPTDS)
Samples Collected
ADDA ELISA, pH and
temperature
ADDA ELISA, EPA
Method 544 and 545
EPTDS result would be reported
to EPA and the other microcystin
sample collected at the EPTDS
vould be analyzed using Method
544 to identify particular
* Method 544 (identifies six specific congeners) is not a confirmation check of the ADDA ELISA result (provides a 'total' of 80-100 congeners)
Sampling Locations - HAA Groups
If subject to Stage 2 DBPR:
Collect distribution system samples at the locations
identified under that rule
If not subject to Stage 2 DBPR:
Collect samples at a location that represents the
DSMRT
DSMRT is an active point (i.e., location that currently provides
water to customers) in the distribution system where water
has been in the system longest relative to the EPTDS
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
52
26 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Sampling Locations - HAA Groups
UCMR 4 HAA samples and HAAS
Stage 2 DBPR compliance samples
can be collected at the same time
Must use a UCMR 4 approved
laboratory and EPA Method 552.3
or 557
PWSs report HAA results to EPA for
three groups (HAAS, HAA6Br and
HAA9)
Labs also report individual HAA
analyte data for QC purposes
Better understand co-occurrence
between regulated and unregulated
disinfection byproducts
dichloroacetic acid (DCAA)
trichloroacetic acid (TCAA)
nonochloroacetic acid (MCAA)
monobromoacetic acid (MBAA)
dibromoacetic acid (DBAA)
Dromochloroacetic acid (BCAA)
jromodichloroacetic acid (BDCAA)
chlorodibromoacetic acid (CDBAA)
iribromoacetic acid (TBAA)
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HAA6Br
53
Source Water Sampling
Applies to microcystin (i.e., ADDA ELISA, pH and temperature)
and HAA (i.e., bromide and TOC) monitoring
Untreated water entering the water treatment plant
A location prior to any treatment
Systems subject to:
The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR)
Use the source water sampling site(s) under that rule
Stage 1 DBPR (remain unchanged under Stage 2 DBPR)
Use TOC source water sampling site(s)
Systems with two different source water sampling locations for
LT2/Stage 1 DBPR
Use sample point that best represents the definition of source water
sample location(s) for UCMR
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
54
27 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Representative Sampling
Large GW systems with multiple EPTDSs can
sample at representative sampling locations rather
than at each EPTDS if prior approval is received
Representative sampling plans approved under prior
UCMRs will be recognized for UCMR 4
These systems must submit a copy of the
documentation from their state or EPA that approved
their representative sampling locations
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
55
Representative Sampling
New GW representative monitoring plans must be
submitted for review by the state or EPA within
120 days from publication of the final rule
Approved representative locations must be loaded
into the SDWARS by December 31, 2017
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
56
28 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Schedules
Large system schedules
EPA initially drafts schedule
Partnered state has opportunity to review and modify
PWS has opportunity to review and modify
Systems must NOT modify their schedules to avoid a
suspected vulnerable period
Small system schedules
EPA initially drafts schedule
Partnered state has opportunity to review and modify
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
57
Sampling Design
EPA invites comment on:
Monitoring time frame (March-
November)
Cyanotoxin monitoring
approach
Including "indicator" monitoring
Phased sample-analysis for
microcystins
Balance between burden
(e.g., number of PWSs,
monitoring frequency) and
data representativeness
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
58
29 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Reporting
Jennifer Tully, ORISE
UCMR 4 Reporting Overview
Initial and on-going reporting requirements
New/revised data elements
Timing of reporting
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
60
30 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Reporting by All Systems §141.35(b)
EPA's electronic data reporting system (SDWARS)
can be accessed:
http://www.epa.gov/dwucmr
Hard copy documentation mailed:
UCMR Sampling Coordinator, USEPA, Technical Support
Center, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive (MS 140),
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Electronic files emailed:
UCMR_Sampling_Coord inator@epa.gov
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61
Large System Reporting §141.35(c)
Contact and zip code information
SDWARS by December 31, 2017
Sampling location information
SDWARS by December 31, 2017
Changes after applicability date must be submitted to (with
reason) and approved by EPA's UCMR Sampling Coordinator
Samples
PWSs must report all data elements specified in §141.35(e) Table 1
(e.g., disinfectant type, treatment information and disinfectant
residual)
Monitoring results
Entered by UCMR approved laboratory to SDWARS
Reviewed and submitted by PWS
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
62
31 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Small System Reporting §141.35(d)
If notified that system will be subject to UCMR 4:
Contact and zip code information
To SDWARS within 90 days of notification (new)
Sampling location information
To SDWARS by December 31, 2017 (new)
Samples
PWSs must report all data elements specified in §141.35(e) Table
1 on each sample form as appropriate (e.g., disinfectant type,
treatment information and disinfectant residual)
Monitoring results
Entered by contracted laboratory to SDWARS
Reviewed by EPA
Viewed by PWS
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
63
Reporting Data Elements §141.35(e)
1. Public Water System Identification (PWSID)
Code
14. Sample Identification Code
2. Public Water System Name*
15. Contaminant
3. Public Water System Facility Identification
Code
16. Analytical Method Code
4. Public Water System Facility Name*
5. Public Water System Facility Type*
17. Extraction Batch Identification Cod
18. Extraction D-
6. Water Source Type
7. Sampling Point Identification Code
19. Analysis Batch Id
20. Analysis Date
8. Sampling Point Name*
21. Sample Analysis Type (more details)
9. Sampling Point Type Code
22. Analytical ResultsSign
10. Disinfectant Type (more details)
11. Treatment Information (more detai
"" Disinfectant Residual Type
23. Analytical ResultMeasured Value
Additional Value
25. Laboratory Identification Code
13. Sample Collection Date
26. Sample Event Code
Blue indicates new data element
Green indicates updated data element
*New data elements that were used in previous UCMRs but not required per rule language
January 2016 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
64
32 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Disinfectant Type - Data Element 10
PEMB = permanganate (applied before
SR sample location)
PEMA = permanganate (applied after SR
sample location)
HPXB = hydrogen peroxide (applied
before SR sample location)
HPXA = hydrogen peroxide (applied after
SR sample location)
CLGA = gaseous chlorine
CLOF = offsite generated hypochlorite
(stored as a liquid form)
CLON = onsite generated hypochlorite
CAGC = chloramine (formed from
gaseous chlorine)
CAOF = chloramine (formed from offsite
hypochlorite)
CAON = chloramine (formed from onsite
hypochlorite)
CLDB = chlorine dioxide (applied before
SR sample location)
CLDA = chlorine dioxide (applied after SR
sample location)
OZON = ozone
ULVL = ultraviolet light
OTHD = all other types of
disinfectant/oxidant
NODU = no disinfectant/oxidant used
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
65
Treatment Information - Data Element 11
CON = conventional (non-softening)
SCO = softening conventional
RBF = river bank filtration
PSD = pre-sedimentation
INF = in-line filtration
DFL= direct filtration
PCF = precoat filtration
SSF = slow sand filtration
BIO = biological filtration
REC = reactor clarification (e.g., solids contact
clarification, slurry recirculation clarification, Aciflo")
SBC = sludge blanket clarification (e.g., Pulsator",
Super Pulsator", contact adsorption clarifiers,
floe-blanket clarifiers)
ADC = adsorption clarification (contact adsorption
clarification)
UTR = unfiltered treatment
PAC = application of powder activated carbon
GAC = granular activated carbon (not part of
filters in CON, SCO, INF, DFLorSSF)
AIR = air stripping (packed towers, diffused
gas contactors)
POB= pre-oxidation/disinfection with
chlorine (applied before SR sample
location)
PDA = pre-oxidation/disinfection with
chlorine (applied after SR sample location)
MFL = membrane filtration
IEX = ionic exchange
UVT= ultraviolet light
AOX = advanced oxidation (ultraviolet light
with hydrogen peroxide and/or ozone)
DAF = dissolved air floatation
CWL = clear well/finished water storage
without aeration
CWA = clear well/finished water storage
with aeration
ADS = aeration in distribution system
(localized treatment)
OTH = all other types of treatment
NTU = no treatment used
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
66
33 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Sample Analysis Type - Data Element 21
CF = concentration fortified; the concentration of
a known contaminant added to a field sample
reported with sample analysis types LFSM,
LFSMD, LFB, CCCandQCS.
CCC = continuing calibration check; a calibration
standard containing the contaminant, the
internal standard, and surrogate analyzed to
verify the existing calibration for those
contaminants.
FS = field sample; sample collected and
submitted for analysis under this rule.
IS = internal standard; a standard that measures
the relative response of contaminants.
LFB = laboratory fortified blank; an aliquot of
reagent water fortified with known quantities of
the contaminants and all preservation
compounds.
LRB = laboratory reagent blank; an aliquot of reagent
water treated exactly as a field sample, including the
addition of preservatives, internal standards, and
surrogates to determine if interferences are present in
the laboratory, reagents, or other equipment.
LFSM = laboratory fortified sample matrix; a UCMR
field sample with a known amount of the contaminant
of interest and all preservation compounds added.
LFSMD = laboratory fortified sample matrix duplicate;
duplicate of the laboratory fortified sample matrix.
QCS = quality control sample; a sample prepared with
a source external to the one used for initial calibration
and CCC. The QCS is used to check calibration standard
integrity.
QH = quality HAA; HAA sample collected and
submitted for quality control purposes.
SUR = surrogate standard; a standard that assesses
method performance for each extraction.
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
67
Timing of Reporting Results
Large systems
Laboratory posts results to SDWARS within 120 days of
sample collection
Systems review, approve and submit to state and EPA
within 60 days of laboratory's post
Small systems
EPA will still manage laboratory contracts for small
water systems
Laboratory posts results to SDWARS within 120 days of
sample collection
Systems have the option to view data in SDWARS
EPA will not mail hard copy reports to systems or states
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
68
34 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
10-Minute Break
UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval
Process and MRLs
Melissa Simic, USEPA
35 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval Program
Similar to the process used in UCMR 3
Only UCMR 4 approved laboratories can analyze UCMR
4 samples collected at PWSs
Approval is by method and by individual location
A laboratory may apply for any number of UCMR 4 methods
Laboratories need to meet:
UCMR 4 approval program criteria
Required equipment criteria
Laboratory performance criteria
Data reporting criteria
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
71
UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval Manual
Procedures for obtaining UCMR 4 approval and procedures for revocation
of approval
Quality assurance (QA) and quality management requirements
Initial Demonstration of Capability (IDC)
Minimum reporting level (MRL) verification
Quality control (QC) requirements:
Extraction/Analysis Batch
Initial calibration of analytical instruments
Continuing calibration checks (CCC)
Surrogate and internal standard
Laboratory reagent blanks (LRB) and laboratory fortified blanks (LFB)
Quality control samples (QCS)
Laboratory fortified sample matrix (LFSM)
Sample handling requirements
Uploading data to SDWARS
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
72
36 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
General Procedure
Step 1: Request to Participate
Step 2: Registration
Step 3: Application Package
Step 4: EPA Review of Application Package
Step 5: Proficiency Testing (PT)
Step 6: Written EPA approval
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
73
Step 1 - Request to Participate
Submit a written request to EPA Laboratory
Approval Coordinator
UCMR_Sampling_Coord inator@epa.gov
EPA provides:
Registration material
Customized application package
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
74
37 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Step 2 - Registration
Complete registration sheet:
List of the UCMR 4 methods that the laboratory is seeking
approval
Laboratory information
Mailing and shipping address
Contact information
EPA will provide a UCMR-specific laboratory ID to each
participant
Must complete and submit the necessary registration
forms within 60 days of publication of the final rule
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75
Step 3 - Application Package
Separate application for each method
Application must include:
Proof of current drinking water laboratory certification (for select
compliance monitoring methods)
Personnel information
QA information
Information regarding analytical equipment and sample handling
procedures
Data submission for each method (e.g., IDC study, QC sample results,
quantification reports)
Confirmation on reporting to SDWARS
Must complete and submit the necessary application materials
(method specific) within 120 days from publication of final rule
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
76
38 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Step 4 - Review of Application Package
EPA reviews application package
If deficiencies are identified the lab will have an
opportunity to make corrective actions and submit new
application information
If all requested information is present and acceptable,
EPA will notify the laboratory that they are eligible to
participate in corresponding PT studies
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77
Step 5 - Proficiency Testing
EPA provides method-specific PT samples
Laboratories:
Analyze PT sample(s) for each analyte and method
If do not pass PT, may have another opportunity
One successful PT per method
No PT studies after monitoring begins
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
78
39 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Step 6 - Written EPA Approval
After successful participation in a PT study for a
specific method, EPA will notify the laboratory in
writing
Before final rule is published, the laboratory will be
granted a "pending approval" contingent upon:
Changes applied to the final rule
Resolution of any findings from a laboratory audit
Granted "final approval" after promulgation of the
final rule
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
79
Maintaining Approval
Adhere to QA/QC measures in the methods, rule
language and the UCMR 4 Laboratory Approval
Manual
Post occurrence data and required QC data via
SDWARS within prescribed time frame
Successfully complete audits and meet all the
other stated conditions
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
80
40 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
MRLs
MRL is an estimate of the quantitation level,
achievable with a 95% confidence, by at least 75% of
laboratories nationwide
Established with data from several laboratories
performing LCMRL studies
LCMRL - The lowest true concentration for which the
future recovery is predicted to fall between 50% to
150% with 99% confidence
Estimate of lowest concentration at which measurements of
specified quality can be repeatedly made
Simultaneous application of precision and accuracy
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
81
MRLs
To achieve quality across laboratories, while
allowing for reasonable national laboratory
capacity
MRLs are generally established as low as is
reasonable; typically lower than current HRLs and
health advisories
EPA will consider raising MRLs if there is evidence
that a proposed MRL is unattainable or impractical
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
82
41 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
MRLs - Cyanotoxins
2-CAS Registry 4-Minimum Reporting
1-Contaminant 3-Analytical Methods
Number Level
microcystin-LA
microcystin-LF
microcystin-LR
microcystin-LY
microcystin-RR
microcystin-YR
nodularin
total microcystin
anatoxin-a
cylindrospermopsin
96180-79-9
154037-70-4
101043-37-2
123304-10-9
111755-37-4
101064-48-6
118399-22-7
N/A
64285-06-9
143545-90-8
EPA 544
EPA 544
EPA 544
EPA 544
EPA 544
EPA 544
EPA 544
ADDA ELI SA
EPA 545
EPA 545
0.008 ng/L
0.006 ng/L
0.02 ng/L
0.009 ng/L
0.006 ng/L
0.02 ng/L
0.005 ng/L
0.3 ng/L
0.03 ng/L
0.09 ng/L
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
83
MRLs-Metals
2-CAS Registry 4-Minimum Reporting
1-Contaminant 3-Analytical Methods
Number Level
germanium
manganese
7440-56-4
7439-96-5
EPA 200.8, ASTM D5673-
10, SM 3125
EPA 200.8, ASTM D5673-
10, SM 3125
0.3 ng/L
0.4 ng/L
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
84
42 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
MRLs - Pesticides and Pesticide Byproduct
2-CAS Registry 3-Analytical 4-Minimum
1-Contaminant
Number Methods Reporting Level
alpha-hexachlorocydohexane
chlorpyrifos
dimethipin
ethoprop
oxyfluorfen
profenofos
tebuconazole
total permethrin (cis- & trans-)
tribufos
319-84-6
2921-88-2
55290-64-7
13194-48-4
42874-03-3
41198-08-7
107534-96-3
52645-53-1
78-48-8
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
EPA 525.3
0.01 ng/L
0.03 ng/L
0.2 ng/L
0.03 ng/L
0.05 ng/L
0.3 ng/L
0.2 ng/L
0.04 ng/L
0.07 ng/L
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
85
MRLs - Haloacetic Acids
2-CAS Registry 4-Minimum
1-Contaminant 3-Analytical Methods
Number Reporting Level
bromochloroacetic acid (BCAA)
bromodichloroacetic acid (BDCAA)
chlorodibromoacetic acid (CDBAA)
tribromoacetic acid (TBAA)
monobromoacetic acid (MBAA)
dibromoacetic acid (DBAA)
dichloroacetic acid (DCAA)
monochloroacetic acid (MCAA)
trichloroacetic acid (TCAA)
5589-96-8
71133-14-7
5278-95-5
75-96-7
79-08-3
631-64-1
79-43-6
79-11-8
76-03-9
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
EPA 552.3 or EPA 557
0.3 ng/L
0.5 ng/L
0.3 ng/L
2.0 ng/L
0.3 ng/L
0.3 ng/L
0.2 ng/L
2.0 ng/L
0.5 ng/L
* Register forTOC and bromide
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
86
43 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
MRLs-Alcohols
2-CAS Registry 4-Minimum Reporting
1-Contaminant 3-Analytical Methods
Number Level
l-butanol
2-methoxyethanol
2-propen-l-ol
71-36-3
109-86-4
107-18-6
EPA 541
EPA 541
EPA 541
2.0 ng/L
0.4 ng/L
0.5 ng/L
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
87
MRLs - Semivolatile Organics
2-CAS Registry 4-Minimum Reporting
1-Contaminant 3-Analytical Methods
Number Level
butylated
hydroxyanisole
o-toluidine
quinoline
25013-16-5
95-53-4
91-22-5
EPA 530
EPA 530
EPA 530
0.03 ng/L
0.007 ng/L
0.02 ng/L
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
88
44 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Submitting Public Comments
Brenda Parris, USEPA
Comment Process/Accessing Docket
Go to http://www.regulations.gov
Enter Docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0218
Click Search button
January 2016
regulaHons.gov
Make a difference Submit your comments and let your voice be heard
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
90
45 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Comment Process/Accessing Docket
The UCMR 4 docket
should pop up on the
next screen
Click on the Comment
Now button on right
hand side of the screen
ort By: Best Match
Comment Now!
Due Feb 09, 2016 11:59 PME'
to' Open Docket Folder
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
91
Comment Process/Accessing Docket
Enter comment and all
required information
on next screen
Upload a document by
clicking on the Choose
files button
Click on the Continue
button at the bottom
of the page to preview
your comment
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
92
46 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Comment Process/Accessing Docket
Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed
Do not electronically submit any information you
consider to be CBI
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment
Written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make
EPA public comment policy is at:
http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-
dockets
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
93
Statements from Webinar
Participants
47 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
Lynn Thorp
Paul Monroy
Amanda Foss
Andrew Eaton
Charmaigne Cortesio
Cynthia Andrews-Tate
Robert Holmes
Dave Dunaway
Judy Schmidt
Danielle Bonham
Steven Praiak
Melissa Simoncini
Clean Water Action
AWWA
Babcock Laboratories, Inc.
GreenWater Lab
Eurofins Eaton Analytical
Arizona Public Service
Long Beach Water Department
City of O'Fallon
City of Grand Prairie
Akron Water Supply
ADEQ
City of Arvada
CityofVallejo
City of Sterling
MDWID
City of Evanston
City of Bend Utility Department
Concord Public Works
Auburn Water System
BCWIDtfl
Closing Remarks
Further information:
Brenda D. Parris: parris.brenda@epa.gov
Melissa Simic: simic.melissa@epa.gov
Safe Drinking Water Hotline:
http://www.epa.gov/your-drinking-water/safe-
drinking-water-hotline
Meeting materials were sent to all registered
participants
If you did not receive a copy, please email
UCMRwebinar@cadmusgroup.com and we will send
you a copy
January 2016
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
96
48 of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
January 2016
Additional Information
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
97
ADDA
DSMRT
ELISA
EPTDS
GW
GWRMP
GWUDI
HAAS
HAA6Br
Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms
January 2016
(25, 3S, 85, 95, 4E, 6E)-3-amino-9-methoxy-2,6,8-trimethyl-10-phenyl-4, 6-decadienoic acid
Distribution System Maximum Residence Time
Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay
Entry Point to the Distribution System
Ground Water
Ground Water Representative Monitoring Plan
Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water
Dibromoacetic Acid, Dichloroacetic Acid, Monobromoacetic Acid, Monochloroacetic Acid,
Trichloroacetic Acid
Bromochloroacetic Acid, Bromodichloroacetic Acid, Dibromoacetic Acid,
Dibromochloroacetic Acid, Monobromoacetic Acid, Tribromoacetic Acid
Health Reference Level
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
98
49 Of 50
-------
Proposal: Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4) Webinar Presentations
IDC
LCMRL
MRL
PA
PT
SDWARS
SDWIS/Fed
SMP
SW
TOC
Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms
January 2016
Initial Demonstration of Capability
Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level
Minimum Reporting Level
Partnership Agreement
Proficiency Testing
Safe Drinking Water Accession and Review System
Federal Safe Drinking Water Information System
State Monitoring Plan
Surface Water
Total Organic Carbon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
99
50 Of 50
------- |