Drinking water protecting

In Germany, where many BEWS were installed in the river basins over the past decades, experience has taught that the fish-based systems applied in the monitoring of surface waters increasingly failed to detect adverse water conditions. This was attributed to a general improvement of the surface water quality and a lack of sensitivity of fish (von Danwitz et al., 1998). Obviously, in situations where a steep increase of (accidental) pollution is expected, such as in effluents, or terrorist attacks (drinking water protection), these systems remain of interest. 

Demonstiating compliance widi protected area objectives, especially drinking water protected areas (DWPA). 

Monitoring objective(s) Surveillance Monitoring Operational Monitoring Drinking Water Protected Area (DWPA) Monitoring... 

The selection of sites to monitor should be carefully considered by taking into account the characteristics of the pressures actually, or potentially, impacting on the groundwater body and the receptors at risk. Where specific receptors such as ecosystems are at risk, additional monitoring may be needed. In the case of drinking water abstractions in drinking water protected areas, monitoring will also need to include representative potable abstraction points to demonstrate compliance with the protected area objectives. 

Robert E. Malpass, P.E., Chief, Bureau of Drinking Water Protection, Department of Health and Environment Control—803-734-5310... 

During 2007, the Commission decided to pursue revision of the 1998 Directive to accommodate concepmal and other requirements for effective implementation of EU drinking water protections. Toward that end, it sought WHO s preparation of WHO—Europe s support document, issued in October 2007 (see above WHO, 2007). In addition, it commissioned a detailed study on a list of chemical parameters for directive revision, with a final report released in September 2008 (DG Env/DHl, 2008). This report recommended retaining the 10 p,g Pb/1 standard, measured at the tap, but noted that four member states were having compliance problems, and there were problems in terms of lead connections and monitoring. 

To check the suitability of the sewer pipes for their use as a one-pipe system for waste water pipelines in drinking-water protected areas, an expert s report was commissioned [23]. Table 3 summarises the results of this report. Ductile sewer pipes are particularly suitable for the repetitive tests specified in the guidelines [24] with water or air or vacuum tests [25],... 

Table 3 Ductile cast-iron pipeline system for the transportation of waste water in drinking-water protection zones II [23]...

Regulation 459/00-Drinking Water Protection, made under the Ontario Water Resources Act, in Ontario Gazette, August 26, Queen s Printer of Ontario, Toronto, 2000. 

The Analysis of Trihalomethanes in Drinking Water by Liquid Extraction US Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 9 Sept. 1977. 

Drinking Water Health Advisories for Pesticides, Office of Drinking Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lewis Pubhshets, Chelsea, Mich., 1989. Includes data used for evaluating 1-day, 10-day, and longer-term health advisories for 50 pesticides which have a potential for being found in drinking water, with specific references as sources of information. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under the Safe Drinking Water Act, set the secondary contaminant level for silver ia drinking water at 0.1 mg/L (20). Secondary contaminants are not considered to be hazardous to health and thus the limits are not federally enforceable. 

In 1980, the EPA pubHshed ambient water quaHty criteria for silver. An upper limit of 50 f-lg/L in natural waters was set to provide adequate protection against adverse health effects (38). In 1992, EPA deleted the human health criteria for silver from the ambient water quaHty criteria to be consistent with the drinking water standards (39). 

P. A. Fenner-Crisp, "Risk Assessment Methods for Pesticides in Food and Drinking Water," Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, presented at the Florida Pesticide Review Council Meeting, July 7, 1989. 

Environmental Levels and Exposures. Barium constitutes about 0.04% of the earth s cmst (47). Agricultural soils contain Ba " in the range of several micrograms per gram. The Environmental Protection Agency, under the Safe Drinking Water Act, has set a limit for barium of 1 mg/L for municipal waters in the United States. 

Drinking water suppHed to carbonated soft drink manufacturing faciUties from private or municipal sources must comply with all regulatory requirements. Treated water must meet all U.S. Environmental Protection Agency primary maximum contaminant levels and may also be subject to additional state requirements. Treated water is routinely analyzed for taste, odor, appearance, chlorine, alkalinity, iron, pH, total dissolved soHds, hardness, and microbiological contamination. 

Fluorides. Most woddwide reductions in dental decay can be ascribed to fluoride incorporation into drinking water, dentifrices, and mouth rinses. Numerous mechanisms have been described by which fluoride exerts a beneficial effect. Fluoride either reacts with tooth enamel to reduce its susceptibihty to dissolution in bacterial acids or interferes with the production of acid by bacterial within dental plaque. The multiple modes of action with fluoride may account for its remarkable effectiveness at concentrations far below those necessary with most therapeutic materials. Fluoride release from restorative dental materials foUow the same basic pattern. Fluoride is released in an initial short burst after placement of the material, and decreases rapidly to a low level of constant release. The constant low level release has been postulated to provide tooth protection by incorporation into tooth mineral. 

The radiological hazard of tritium to operating personnel and the general population is controlled by limiting the rates of exposure and release of material. Maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) of radionucHdes were specified in 1959 by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (79). For purposes of control all tritium is assumed to be tritiated water, the most readily assimilated form. The MPC of tritium ia breathing air (continuous exposure for 40 h/wk) is specified as 185 kBq/mL (5 p.Ci/mL) and the MPC for tritium in drinking water is set at 3.7 GBq/mL (0.1 Ci/mL) (79). The maximum permitted body burden is 37 MBq (one millicurie). Whenever bioassay indicates this value has been exceeded, the individual is withdrawn from further work with tritium until the level of tritium is reduced. 

States have made substantial recent progress in the adoption, and EPA approval, of toxic pollutant water-quahty standards. Furthermore, virtually all states have at least proposed new toxics criteria for priority toxic pollutants since Section 303 (c) (2) (B) was added to the CWA in February of 1987. Unfortunately, not all such state proposals address, in a comprehensive manner, the requirements or Section 303 (c) (2) (B). For example, some states have proposed to adopt criteria to protect aquatic hfe, but not human health other states have proposed human health criteria that do not address major exposure pathways (such as the combination of both fish consumption and drinking water). In addition, in some cases final adoption or proposed state toxics criteria that would be approved by EPA has been substantially delayed due to controversial and difficult issues associated with the toxic pollutant criteria adoption process. 

Determination of the content of organochlorine insecticides in the drinking water is primal for establishing the level of contamination of the water ecosystem and for human health protection. 

---