&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 ------- |