Protocols drinking water

Suppose you are asked to develop a way to determine the concentration of lead in drinking water. How would you approach this problem To answer this question it helps to distinguish among four levels of analytical methodology techniques, methods, procedures, and protocols. ... 

The ability to provide accurate and reliable data is central to the role of analytical chemists, not only in areas like the development and manufacture of drugs, food control or drinking water analysis, but also in the field of environmental chemistry, where there is an increasing need for certified laboratories (ISO 9000 standards). The quality of analytical data is a key factor in successfully identifying and monitoring contamination of environmental compartments. In this context, a large collection of methods applied to the routine analysis of prime environmental pollutants has been developed and validated, and adapted in nationally or internationally harmonised protocols (DIN, EPA). Information on method performance generally provides data on specificity, accuracy, precision (repeatability and reproducibility), limit of detection, sensitivity, applicability and practicability, as appropriate. 

Response protocol toolbox Planning for and responding to drinking water... 

In another liver foci study using Sprague-Dawley (Crl CD) rats, 1,2-dibromoethane in corn oil given by gavage was used as an initiator. Two dose regimens were used 75 mg/kg 1,2-dibromoethane at 0 and 24 hours or corn oil at 0 hours and 75 mg/kg 1,2-dibromoethane at 24 hours. Partial hepatectomies and phenobarbital in drinking water also were part of the protocol. With this system, at 16 months, 1,2-dibromoethane-exposed rats had increased numbers of foci of hepatic cellular alteration. Rats that received the two doses of 1,2-dibromoethane had increased numbers of nodules on hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections as well as increased number and size of GGT positive foci (Moslen 1984). These results indicate that 1,2-dibromoethane can act as an initiator. 

The panel meeting was organized and conducted to facilitate development of sample preparation protocols for mutagenicity testing of six media air, drinking water, nonaqueous liquid wastes, soils and sediments, waste solids, and waste water. The meeting objectives were established by the sponsors and were as follows ... 

Note For all protocol classes except NOVA, triplicate determinations were made from drinking water. For NOVA, triplicate determinations were made from industrial-municipal effluents. 

Isolation of Residue Organics from Waters via XAD Chromatography. Residue organics were isolated from the water samples via XAD chromatographic procedures developed in our laboratory. Drinking water and ground water samples were processed via the XAD procedure described in publications (3, 9, JO, 21, 22) and detailed in the Interim Protocol developed for the USEPA (5). Waste water samples were processed via a modification of the XAD procedure (4). 

They have come up with an idea or a protocol for a decision on the basic question Is this reuse water safe to drink And their idea is very simple. On the one hand, Denver has its normal drinking water they will subject it to all the testing possible. On the other hand, Denver has its reuse water if they subject it to the same tests, and the reuse water is no worse than the drinking water that the people normally get, they will consider it to be acceptable for drinking. What is the comment from the audience or the panel about that type of proposal ... 

The limit of detection of TNT was 0.11 ppb. Nevertheless, the limit of detection was 68ppb when IMs were carried out with whole antibodies. The EPA has proposed a lifetime health advisory level of 2 ppb for TNT in drinking water. The detection limit for PETN was 19.8 ppb. The authors observed the relation between the limit of detection and the Ka (affinity of the antibodies) of the antibodies. The Ka value of the anti-TNT antibodies used in this work was 5.8 x 105, which corresponds to a maximum sensitivity of 0.03 ppb. Finally, the authors concluded that the simple protocol ensures that IMs for a previously undetected analyte can be up and running within a few weeks of the antibodies and corresponding haptens becoming available. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2003). Response Protocol Toolbox Planning for and Responding to Drinking Water Contamination. Threats and Incidents. Interim Final -December 2003. 

USEPA, 1999a. Protocol for EPA Approval of Alternate Test Procedures for Organic and Inorganic Analytes in Wastewater and Drinking Water. EPA 821-B-98-002. 

USEPA, 2004. EPA Microbiological Alternate Test Procedure (ATP) Protocol for Drinking Water, Ambient Water, and Wastewater Monitoring Methods, Guidance. EPA 821-B-03-004. 

---