PB-250 961
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECTED CARCINOGENS IN
DRINKING WATER: REPORT TO CONGRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C.
December 1975
National Technical Information Service
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
-------
-------
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF
SUSPECTED CARCINOGENS IN
DRINKING WATER
REPORT TO CONGRESS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC. 20460
DECEMBER 1975
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read iHOnictions on the reverse before completing)
I. MLPOR V NO.
EPA 5GO/'!-75-OOS
2.
3. RECIPItNT'S ACCESSION-NO.
1. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5. REPORT DATE
Preliminary Assessment of Suspected Carcinogens
in Drinking Water; Report to Congress, December 1975
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Office of Toxic Subs., EPA
7. AUTHOR(S)
Office of Toxic Substances, EPA
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Toxic Substances
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
shington, B.C.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
None assigned
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
N/A (inhouse report)
12. SPONSOmN'6'AGEfjCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Same as #9.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
-? Report to Congress (1975)
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Expanded version Q£ the "interim" report to Congress (same title) of June 1975,
Includes General Overview section with recommendations; Appendix.
16. ABSTRACT
The Report is a compilation of the efforts ongoing in EPA to identify the
nature and extent of the contamination of the nation's drinking water, to
determine the possible health effects of exposure, and to develop the
technically and economically feasible means of removing those contaminants
of concern. It was prepared in response to Section 1442(a)(9) of the. Safe
Drinking Water Act. This Report fulfills the requirements of that Section
in that it includes recommendations which the interim report of June 1975
did not include. An Appendix is included in this volume.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Drinking Water Contaminants, Suspected
Carcinogens, Water Treatment. Technology,
Health Effects of Organic Contaminants,
Water Pollution.
18. vis I "!.'(?L/TION STATEMENT
Unlimited
!.). IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATM icId/CrOUp
Report to Congress, Safe
Drinking Water'Act,
Suspected Carcinogens,
Water Pollution.
. SECURITY CLASS (This Report!
Report to
Congress, Safe
Drinking Water
Act
71. NO. OFfA'-;.. J
20. SECURITY CLASS (Tluspagt")
->rr~. 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
EPA 560/4 75 005
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECTED
CARCINOGENS IN DRINKING WATER
REPORT TO CONGRESS
Compiled by
Office of Toxic Substances
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
December 1975
-------
PREFACE
This Report is in response to the mandate of the Public Health
Service Act as amended by the Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523) that
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency make "a compre-
hensive study of public water supplies and drinking water sources to
determine the nature, extent, sources of and means of control of contam-
ination by chemicals or other substances suspected of being carcinogenic"
(Section 1442(a)(9)). Accordingly, the Report presents the current
programs of EPA to identify the nature and extent of the contamination
of the Nation's drinking water with carcinogens, to determine the possible
health effects of exposure, and to develop the technically and economically
feasible means of removing those contaminants of concern.
An interim Report and supporting Appendix were submitted to Congress
in June 1975, with the understanding that the Report would be updated
to incorporate results of subsequent research and include appropriate
recommendations. This Report satisfies that understanding. The material
presented in the Appendix to the June Report has not been repeated
in the Appendix accompanying this Report. The June Appendix, however,
contains much detailed information concerning research methodologies
and other material relevant to both Reports.
Section 1442(a)(9) instructs the Administrator to provide "such
recommendations for further review and corrective action as he deems
appropriate." The recommendations presented in the Report should be
considered preliminary, however. Only the first phases of research
have been completed and many investigations are underway within EPA
and other Federal agencies.
The Report is organized into a General Overview, five Sections,
and Appendices. The first Section discusses the nature and occurrence
of carcinogenic contaminants in drinking water. The second Section
deals with the known health effects of these contaminants and efforts
underway to clarify these potential health hazards. The third Section
outlines the studies underway to determine the sources of these contaminants,
The final two Sections deal with treatment techniques for controlling
drinking water contaminants and the estimated costs of these treatment
processes. The Appendices present the results of several monitoring
surveys for drinking water contaminants, a selected list of references,
and a list of primary contributors.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE i
GENERAL OVERVIEW 1
Introduction 1
Activities and Results to Date 3
Recommendations 5
CHARACTER AND EXTENT OF -CONTAMINATION OF DRINKING WATER 7
National Organics Reconnaissance Survey 7
Region V Organics Survey 12
Assessment of General Organic Parameters 13
Inventory of Organics Identified in Drinking Water 15
Investigations of Pesticides in Drinking Water 16
Analyses for Polychlorinated Biphenyls 17
Studies of Leaching from Polyvinyl Chloride
(PVC) Water Pipes 17
Detection of Nitrosamines in Drinking Water 17
Surveillance for Inorganic Contaminants in Drinking Water 18
Occurrence of Radioactivity in Drinking Water 20
Survey of Rural Drinking Water Supplies 21
Analyses for Asbestos Fibers in Drinking Water 22
HEALTH EFFECTS OF DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS 25
Review of Drinking Water Contaminants by the National
Academy of Sciences 25
Development of Quality Criteria for Water . 26
Other Investigations of the Health Effects of Organics 26
Epidemiological Studies 30
11
-------
Evaluation of Health Risks from Inorganics 31
Estimate of Risk from Radiation 32
Assessment of Effects of Oral Ingestion of Asbestos 32
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION 35
Industrial Sources 35
Discharges from Municipal Waste Treatment Facilities • 36
Chlorination of Drinking Water 37
Contamination by Agricultural Chemicals 38
Other Non-Point Sources of Organics 39
Various Land Disposal Practices and Water Contamination 39
TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROLLING CONTAMINANTS IN
DRINKING WATER 40
Overview of EPA Treatment Program 40
Techniques for Controlling Organtcs 40
Treatment Studies on Inorganics 45
Techniques for Controlling Radionuclides 45
Methods of Removing Asbestiform Fibers 46
COST OF TREATMENT TO REMOVE CARCINOGENS 47
General Cost of Water 47
Cost of Removing Carcinogenic Contaminants 47
APPENDICES
Appendix I - National Organics Reconnaissance Survey
Appendix II - Organic Compounds Identified in Drinking Water
Appendix III - Analyses of Radioactivity in Interstate Carrier
Water Supplies
Appendix IV - Environmental Radiation Monitoring System
Survey (1974)
m
-------
Appendix V - Organics Survey in Region V
Appendix VI - Survey for Pesticides, PCBs, and Phthalates
in Region V
Appendix VII - Selected References
Appendix VIII - List of Primary Contributors
-------
GENERAL OVERVIEW
Introduction
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has the task of ensuring that the nation's
drinking water is safe. This task is formidable as many factors involved
in determining whether drinking water is "safe" are far from resolved.
Some of the principal problems facing EPA in the control of the
quality of the nation's drinking water are pressing the limits of
current research capabilities in health, science, and technology.
Regulatory decision making is further compounded by the dearth of definitive
information, and the lack of agreement within the scientific community,
on such questions as identification and characterization of carcinogens,
significance of human exposure to minute quantities of potentially
hazardous substances, and interpretation of results of high dose animal
exposure tests in relation to human experience. EPA is trying to answer
a variety of questions in the areas of hazard evaluation, epidemiology,
and analytical and treatment technology development. These questions
include:
1. Which compounds occur in a sufficient number of locations and
in sufficient quantity to warrant possible regulation?
2. What are the effects of those compounds on human health?
3. What analytical procedures are needed to monitor finished
water supplies to assure compliance with regulations?
4. What changes in treatment practices are required to minimize
the formation of these compounds during transport, storage, treatment
and distribution? .
5. What treatment technology can be applied to reduce contaminant
levels to concentrations specified in regulations?
6. What are the National and local costs of regulations?
Only within the last few years has instrumentation sophisticated
enough to measure very small quantities of contaminants been applied to
drinking water. .Despite recent intensive efforts, investigations to
date have only identified a small fraction of the contaminants present.
Further, extensive additional research is necessary to determine the
health effects, if any, of ingesting these substances occurring at concen-
trations near the microgram per liter (parts per billion) level.
Work is proceeding to provide the answers to many of those questions.
The specific activities underway or planned and the progress to date are
discussed in this Report.
Before the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523) on
December 16, 19/4, the Federal Government's program in this, area was
limited primarily to preventing the spread of communicable, diseases
resulting from drinking water in interstate commerce. Under the authority
-------
of the Public Health Service Act, EPA assists in the enforcement of
regulations that require interstate carriers to utilize only water from
sources that are in compliance with certain required drinking water
standards. This authority, however, affects only 700 of an estimated
240,000 public wate'r systems. Moreover, these drinking water standards
focus on microbiological contaminants associated with waterborne diseases
such as typhoid fever and cholera and do not provide legally enforceable
limits for chemical.,contaminants associated with carcinogenic or other
toxic properties. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (PL 92-500)
has had some limited effect in protecting underground drinking water
supplies and is gradually improving surface waters by requiring monitoring
and limiting discharges as specified in permits issued under the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System. The authorities in that Act,
however, have proven inadequate to ensure the safety of all sources of
drinking water.
A 1969 survey showed serious deficiencies such as the lack of
trained operators and adequate surveillance and monitoring programs in
over one-half of the water supply facilities investigated. Reported
outbreaks of disease and poisoning attributed to drinking water allegedly
resulted in thousands of illnesses and some deaths. Further, the possibility
of chronic health effects resulting from the presence of organic chemicals,
asbestos, and heavy metals in drinking water indicated the need for
additional authority to address this problem. To a great extent, concern
over these substances and their potential carcinogenic effects prompted
the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The primary responsibility to operate and maintain safe drinking
water systems remains with the water supplier. Under the Safe Drinking
Water Act, EPA is required to prescribe national drinking water regulations
for contaminants that may adversely affect health. The local utility is
then required to monitor its water and to give public notice if the
water fails to meet the drinking water regulations. To the maximum
extent possible, State Governments are to be responsible for enforcing
the regulations and for providing necessary technical assistance to the
local utility.
Pursuant to Section 1412(a)(l), EPA promulgated Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations in December 1975 to be effective in mid-1977.
Maximum contaminant levels are prescribed for microbiological contaminants,
certain organic pesticides, selected inorganic chemicals, and turbidity.
Maximum contaminant levels for radioactivity were proposed in August
1975 and should be promulgated in early 1976. Because the Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations do not contain maximum contaminant levels
for organic chemicals other than certain pesticides, EPA concurrently
published Special Monitoring Regulations that will provide a national
evaluation of the presence in drinking water of approximately 20 specific
organic chemicals and simultaneously attempt to correlate their presence
with several general organic parameters. The results of this survey,
anticipated by the end of 1976, should provide the basis for establishing
maximum contaminant levels for additional specific organic contaminants
that are found to be widespread or for a general organic parameter(s)
that may be incorporated in the Primary Drinking Water Regulations, or
both.
2
-------
Activities and Results to Date
Section 1442(a)(9) directs the Administrator to report to the
Congress on the contamination of drinking water by substances suspected
of being carcinogenic. Although the criteria for predicting the carcinogenic
potential of chemicals have been reviewed extensively during the last
decade and many experts have agreed on certain guidelines, no official
concensus exists as to what evidence is required to categorize a substance
as "carcinogenic". This Report considers a large number of chemicals in
addition to those that have been demonstrated as human carcinogens. No
attempt is made to distinguish among the various degrees of evidence of
carcinogenicity that apply to different "suspect carcinogens."
In the past year, EPA has undertaken an extensive program to characterize
the nature of drinking water problems. One step, initiated in November
1974, was the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey designed to provide
an estimate of the nationwide distribution of organics in drinking
water. Other projects have involved sampling and analysis of drinking
water for selected inorganics, pesticides, asbestos, and radioactivity.
Several studies are underway to investigate the toxicity of these substances
when ingested. Still other efforts are designed to identify the sources
of these contaminants and various treatment techniques effective in
removing them.
Organics
November 1975 data identify 253 different specific organic chemicals
in drinking water in the United States. The occurrence of these compounds
in drinking water suggests that other organics not yet identified may
also be present, and that the total number of compounds could be considerably
larger. The range of concentration for individual organics was from a
high of 366 yg/5, for chloroform (based on EPA Region V's survey) to a
low of 0.001 yg/£ for dieldrin. Another analytical procedure that
approximates the total organic carbon content showed concentrations
ranging from below the level of detection (0.05 mg/£) to over 12 mg/£.
The majority of chemicals identified in drinking water have not
been examined for potential carcinogenicity, although some have been
classified as carcinogens or suspected carcinogens by bioassay experiments.
On the other hand, even in the case of recognized carcinogens, the actual
risk posed by ingesting very low concentrations is not known at this
time.
Among the identified sources of these chemical compounds are industrial
and municipal discharges, urban and rural runoff, natural sources, and
water and sewage chlorination practices. Water treatment techniques
involving modification of current processes, use of adsorbents such as
granular activated carbon, or the use of oxidants such as ozone, are
being investigated for their value in reducing the concentration of
organics. Research is underway to develop the most cost effective
treatment technology.
3
-------
Several inorganic chemicals might be carcinogenic in drinking water
under certain circumstances: arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,
nickel, selenium, and nitrogenous compounds (possible nitrosamine precursors)
Research is underway to determine the occurrence of these and other
inorganics that may prove to be carcinogenic. A 1969 study found that
a small percentage (two percent or less) of drinking water-supplies
sampled contained'levels of arsenic, nitrate-nitrogen, and 'selenium that
exceeded the limits in the U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards. Treatment technologies are available for the control of all
three, although selenium in its oxidized form can only be removed by re-
verse osmosis, a rather expensive process at the present time.
Radionuclides
The presence of radionuclides in drinking water results from natural
contamination, primarily from ground waters flowing through radium
bearing geological formations, and from man's activities. These activities
may release naturally occurring radioactivity into the environment,
through phosphate and uranium ore mining operations, for example. In
addition, man-made radioactivity may enter from various sources such as
nuclear tests, nuclear power generation, and the use of radionuclides in
hospitals, scientific research, and industry. Several treatment techniques,
including lime softening, ion exchange softening, and reverse osmosis,
are effective for removing radium 226.
Recent monitoring data from interstate carrier water supply utilities
indicate that the average concentrations of radium 226 were 0.28 pCi/«, (46
samples in 1975); strontium 90, 0.82 pCi/£ (46 samples in 1975); and
tritium, 200 pCi/£ (71 samples in 1974). Of these samples, 22 to 59
percent contained radionuclides below the detection limit of the analytical
method used. Following the recommendation made by the National Academy
of Sciences, EPA bases its estimates of the health effects of radiation
exposure through ingestion of drinking water on the assumption that no
harmless dose level exists and that health effects will be proportional
to the radiation dose delivered by drinking water.
Asbestos
Over one-half of the 63 drinking waters tested had asbestos fiber
counts so low that they could not be quantified by the analytical method
used. Nine had fiber counts in excess of 500 thousand fibers per liter
and five had counts in excess of one million fibers per liter. In order
to clarify the effects of ingested asbestos, several studies are underway
to examine various aspects of this problem: asbestos absorption in the
gastrointestinal tract, possible correlation between cancer incidence
and asbestos in drinking water, and toxicology of ingested asbestos in
rats.
. Techniques for the removal of asbestiform fibers have been demon-
strated in pilot plants in Duluth, Minnesota. Pursuant to this research,
-------
the city of Duluth is constructing a full-scale water treatment plant
for fiber removal. Because the health effects of ingesting asbestos are
not fully understood, a maximum contaminant level for asbestos is not
included in the Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Recommendations
Although recent efforts outlined in this Report have dramatically
enhanced our understanding of the problems associated with drinking
water contamination, they represent only the beginning of the research
needed to assess confidently the character, extent, and health implications
of drinking water contaminants and the most cost-effective approach to
control them. The following general recommendations are presented to
identify the major areas of future research needs.
Future Monitoring
In order to address the problem of drinking water contamination,
additional research is needed to clarify the nature and extent of the
contamination. Although the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey in
80 locations was important in that it indicated that chlorinated by-
products were found in all the finished waters of the chlorinating water
utilities investigated, its focus was limited to six volatile contaminants.
The more comprehensive organic analyses in ten cities were not extensive
enough to demonstrate conclusively that the environmental contamination
found was likely to be present nationwide. The expansion of this survey
is critical to provide data on the qualitative and quantitative occurrence
of selected compounds and of total organic chemical concentrations in
water supplies representing a wide distribution of geographical areas
and various types of raw water sources. Such information is a prerequisite
for promulgating maximum contaminant levels for specific contaminants, or
for establishing a general organic parameter(s'), or both. As discussed
later in the Report ("Monitoring to Assess Parameters"), an expanded
survey is about to be initiated. Ongoing surveillance programs directed
to organics, inorganics, asbestos, and radioactivity in drinking water
may show the need for further research.
Health Effects Research
Several projects are underway to examine the health effects of
compounds found in drinking water. The results of these studies will
provide information needed to assess the health .risks associated with
exposure to these contaminants. As emphasized by EPA's Science Advisory
Board, additional health effects research is greatly needed. Specifically,
EPA feels that long-term animal laboratory and epidemiological studies
of the effects of various concentrations of specific contaminants are
needed. Likewise, various epidemiological studies relating exposed
populations to known common patterns of water contamination are important
to clarify the health risks involved. Although some epidemiological
studies are in progress, they are limited by inadequate data concerning
the presence of various contaminants, estimates of populations at risk,
and the accuracy of morbidity and mortality data.
-------
New Analytical Methodology
When the drinking water regulations are in effect, monitoring will
be required for each regulated contaminant or parameter. Research will
be initiated to make existing surveillance and analysis methodologies
practical or to develop new ones. In particular, methods to monitor the
effectiveness of contaminant removal unit processes are needed.
Water Treatment Research
Research is continuing to develop treatment technology capable of
reducing exposure to environmental contaminants to acceptable concentrations
Water treatment plant studies are now planned to test the effectiveness
of certain treatment techniques developed in the laboratory. Methods
of curtailing or eliminating potentially harmful contaminants are being
investigated while the needed health effects research is taking place.
Future Regulation
An extensive study of possible drinking water contaminants by the
National Academy of Science (NAS), mandated by Section 1412(e)(l),
should be completed in about one year. EPA will consider these NAS
findings in developing Revised Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Other revisions will be made as additional data on the presence and
effects of various contaminants indicate that such revisions are warranted
to protect the public health. These will include amendment of the
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations prior to their June 1977
effective date if adequate data become available.
-------
CHARACTER AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION OF DRINKING WATER
On April 18, 1975, EPA announced the preliminary results of a
nationwide survey for organics in drinking water. This National Organics
Reconnaissance Survey is one of several efforts underway to investigate
the possible problem of suspected carcinogens in drinking water. Another
investigation is focusing on whether drinking water contains significant
quantities of three pesticides (aldrin, dieldrin, and DDT).
In addition to the studies of organic contaminants, inorganic chem-
icals, especially those that are included in the Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations, are the subject of monitoring and analysis efforts.
A special assessment of rural drinking water supplies will be underway
in early 1976, and a study of asbestos in drinking water has started.
This Section discusses these and other programs to determine the nature
and extent of contamination of the Nation's drinking water.
Since the June report, five additional water utilities were analyzed
for a wide range of organic compounds, completing the National Organics
Reconnaissance Survey (NORS) of ten cities. In addition, several water
utilities have worked with EPA to address specific drinking water problems
identified in the survey. Among the activities conducted on the regional
level, EPA's Region V has undertaken a survey of the finished water
of 83 utilities in that Region to determine levels of organic chemicals
and other contaminants. The results of the NORS and Region V's survey
are summarized here. Other new material includes a brief assessment
of various general organics parameters and discussions of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), vinyl chloride, nitrosamines, and radioactivity in
drinking water. Some recent results from the nationwide survey for
certain pesticides and from investigations of asbestos are also reported
here.
National Organics Reconnaissance Survey
One of the Agency's most significant efforts to delineate the
problem of organics in drinking water was the National Organics Reconnaissance
Survey (NORS). Initiated in November 1974, NORS had three major objectives.
One was to determine the extent of the presence of the four trihalomethanes--
chloroform (trichloromethane), bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane,
and bromoform (tribromomethane)--in finished water, and to determine
whether or not these compounds are formed by chlorination. The second
objective was to determine the effects that raw water.source and water
treatment practices other than chlorination could have on the formation
of these compounds. The third objective was to characterize, as completely
as possible using existing analytical techniques, the organic content
of ten drinking waters. These ten utilities represent five major
categories of raw water sources in use in the United States today.
Survey of Eighty Water Utilities for Selected Contaminants
Eighty water utilities were chosen to determine the presence of
six specific organics of particular concern: the four trihalomethanes,
-------
carbon tetrachloride, and 1,2-dichloroethane. Selected in consultation
with State water supply officials, these 80 utilities provide a reasonably
representative sample of the Nation's community drinking water utilities
that chlorinate their water, representing a wide variety of raw water
sources, treatment techniques, and geographical locations. Survey
findings indicate that chlorination results in the formation of the
four trihalomethanes.
Results from the analysis of the raw or untreated water are presented
in Table 1. In 30 of the 80 locations surveyed, none of the six compounds
was detected.
Table 1
RAW WATER ANALYSIS
(Based on 80 Samples)
Number of Locations Detected Range of Concentrations
Chloroform
Bromodichloromethane
Di bromochloromethane
Bromoform
Carbon Tetrachloride
1,2-Dichloroethane
49
7
1
0
4
11
<0.1 - 0.9 (16)*
<0.2 - 0.8 (11)*
(3)*
<2 - 4
<0.2 - 3
*0ne location received raw water prechlorihated by a nearby industry:
This water contained 16 yg/£ of chloroform, 11 yg/«, bromodichloromethane,
and 3 yg/£ dibromochloromethane.
In contrast to these findings for raw water, the presence of the
four trihalomethanes, although mostly in low concentrations, was wide-
spread in finished water. Table 2 shows the distribution and range of
concentrations of the trihalomethanes, carbon tetrachloride and 1,2-
d.ichloroethane in finished water. Appendix I summarizes the results of
the analyses of the raw and finished water for each of the 80 utilities.
Table 2
FINISHED WATER ANALYSIS
(Based on 80 Samples)
Compound
Number of Loca-
tions Detected
Median Concentration
Chloroform 80
Bromodichloromethane 78
Dibromochloromethane 72
Bromoform 26
Carbon Tetrachloride 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 26
21
6
1.2
93.
Range of Concen-
trations (yg/)Q
<0.1
0.3
<0.4
<0.8
<2
<0.2
311
116
110
92
3
6
8
-------
Local Actions Pursuant to Survey
The findings of the survey reported in mid-April 1975 stimulated
several water utilities to take action. The water utilities in Miami,
Florida; Huntington, West Virginia; Whiting, Indiana; Mt. Clemens, Michigan;
and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, cooperatively participated with EPA
in conducting additional sampling in their areas in attempts to determine
the sources of various organic contaminants or to develop the treatment
capability for their removal. In two cases, industrial discharges
were demonstrated to be sources of organic contaminants. Steps are
currently being taken to control these discharges. In addition, Huron,
South Dakota, has received a research grant from EPA to study methods
of reducing the chloroform concentration in their finished water.
Survey of Ten Water Utilities for Broad Range of Organics
The second principal component of the National Organics Reconnais-
sance Survey involved selecting ten of the eighty water utilities as
sites representing five major categories of raw water sources for a
more comprehensive survey of the organic content of their finished
water. Two cities were selected for each basic type of water source.
The cities investigated and their raw water sources are: Miami, Florida,
and Tucson, Arizona, (ground water source); Seattle, Washington, and
New York, New York, (uncontaminated upland water); Ottumwa, Iowa, and
Grand Forks, North Dakota, (raw water contaminated with agricultural
runoff); Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana,
(raw water contaminated with municipal waste); and Cincinnati, Ohio,
and Lawrence, Massachusetts, (raw water contaminated with industrial
discharges).
Three different techniques were used to identify as broad a range
of organic compounds as possible. One technique, volatile organic analysis
(VOA), measured the organic contaminants that could be purged from the
sample by aeration with an inert gas. A second technique captured
organic contaminants that could be removed from the sample by liquid-
liquid extraction. A third technique involved adsorption of organics
onto activated carbon and desorption with chloroform. The concentration
data obtained with the first technique have been corrected for recovery
efficiencies. The other concentration data have not been corrected
and should be considered minimum values. That is, the actual concentrations
obtained in those cases are equal to or greater than the concentrations
listed. All of the data are listed in Appendix I, Table III.
The summary of these data presented in Table .3 shows the differences
found between utilities using similar types of raw water. The most
striking difference between two utilities using the same type of raw
water is between Miami, Florida, and Tucson, Arizona. The deep ground
water of Tucson was obviously far less contaminated with organics than
the shallow ground water of Miami. Subsequent Studies in Miami have
indicated that its ground water is contaminated by metropolitan and
industrial activities in the area of the water treatment plant.
-------
Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, had fewer organics present in its
water than its companion city, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Lawrence,
Massachusetts, had fewer than its "partner", Cincinnati, Ohio. These
results might be partially attributed to the use of granular activated
carbon filters/adsorbers in Terrebonne Parish and Lawrence. Because no
raw water samples were collected, however, the reasons for these differences
cannot be determined. Further research on the behavior of specific
organics during activated carbon treatment is underway to clarify the
role of such treatment in removing organics.
Table 3
SUMMARY OF TEN CITY SURVEY
City and Series
Miami, FL (I)
Tucson, AR (II)
Seattle, WA (I)
New York, NY (II)
Ottumwa, IA (I)
Grand Forks, ND
(II)
Philadelphia, PA
(I)
Terrebonne Parish,
LA (II)
Cincinnati, OH (I)
Lawrence, MA (II)
Type of Raw
Water Source
No. of Compounds
Identified
Ground Water . 76
Ground Water 7
Uncontaminated Upland 31
Water
Uncontaminated Upland 28
Water
Raw Water Contaminated 35
with Agricultural Runoff
Raw Water Contaminated 24
with Agricultural Runoff
Raw Water Contaminated 59
with Municipal Waste
Raw Water Contaminated 22
with Municipal Waste
Raw Water Contaminated 63
with Industrial Discharges
Raw Water Contaminated 30
with Industrial Discharges
No. of Compounds
Quantified
33
4
13
15
17
10
22
11
21
14
Series I sampled January-February 1975
Series II sampled July-August 1975
The data from the survey of the ten water utilities (see Appendix I,
Table III) were reanalyzed to determine the frequency of occurrence of
the various organics compounds identified. The data in Table 4 show
that almost one-half (46.5 percent) of the 129 compounds were found in
only one location and only 13.9 percent were found in six or more locations,
10
-------
Table 4
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN THE TEN CITY SURVEY
Number of Locations
Where Given
Compound Occurred
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Number of Compounds
Occurring in
Given Number
of Locations
2
4
3
1
6
11
15
14
15
64
Percent of Total
Compounds Found
1.5
3.0
2.2
0.7
4.4
8.2
11.1
10.4
11.1
47.4
The 18 compounds in Table 5 occurred most frequently in the ten city
survey. According to the scientific literature as of November 1975, none of
these 18 have been adequately evaluated for carcinogenicity. Some have been
tested, although the test protocols have not been evaluated for adequacy.
Two are now being tested by the National Cancer Institute, as indicated.
EPA will review the scientific literature on these 18 compounds and prepare
a report on their carcinogenicity in 1976.
Table 5
COMPOUNDS OCCURRING IN MORE THAN.ONE-HALF OF THE TEN FINISHED WATERS
Compound Occurrence
Currently
Under NCI Test
1. Bromodichloromethane
2. Chloral (Trichloroacetaldehyde)
3. Chlorobenzene
4. Cyanogen Chloride
5. Dibromochloromethane
6. Di-n-butyl Phthalate
7. Dichloroiodomethane
8. Dichloromethane (Methylene Chloride)
9. Diethyl Phthalate
10. Ethylbenzene
•11. Methanol
12. 2-Methylpropanal (Isobutyraldehyde)
13. Propanal (Propionaldehyde)
14. 2-Propanone (Acetone)
15. Tetrachloromethane (Carbon Tetrachloride)
16. Tetrachloroethene (Tetrachloroethylene)
17. Toluene
18. Trichloromethane (Chloroform)
9/10
6/10
9/10
8/10
9/10
6/10
7/10
9/10
6/10
6/10
6/10
7/10
7/10
10/10
8/10
8/10
6/10
10/10
October 1974
_*
October 1974
_**
*Used by the National Cancer Institute in several tests as positive carcin-
ogen control.
**Feeding study complete, and undergoing evaluation.
11
-------
Region_V Organi cs Survey
Raw and treated water from 83 utilities in Region V were checked
for organic chemical content during the first three months of 1975. In
addition to the six volatile organic compounds included in the National
Organics Reconnaissance Survey, water from these cities was analyzed for
methylene chloride, insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, polychlorinated
blphenyls, and certain phthalate esters. The results of volatile organic
analyses are summarized in Table 6 and are presented in Appendix
V. The pesticide survey is discussed later in this Section, and Appendix
VI contains the complete pesticide, polychlorinated biphyenyl, and
phthalate data for the survey.
Table 6
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR VOLATILE ORGANICS
Compound
Chloroform
Bromo-
dichloromethane
Dibromo-
chloromethane
Bromoform
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Methylene
Chloride
1,2-
Dichloroethane
% of Samples
Giving Positive
Results
Raw
Water
Mean Concentration Maximum Concentration
95
78
60
14
34*
8
13
27
2
0
18
Fin.
Water
20
6
1
Raw
Water
2*
14
Fin.
Water
366
51
14
7
26*
7
26
Raw
Water
94
11
1..4
20
1
15
*The 11 samples from Minnesota may have been contaminated by being
exposed to laboratory air containing carbon tetrachloride.
This study led to several conclusions: (1) Raw water with low tur-
bidity resulted in finished water that was relatively free of chloroform
and related halogenated compounds. Of the 25 utilities having the lowest
concentration of chloroform, 12 obtain water from the Great Lakes, 8 use
12
-------
deep wells, and only 5 use surface sources other than the Great Lakes;
(2) Chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform
result from chlorination of precursors in the raw water. On the other
hand, carbon tetrachloride, methylene chloride, and 1,2-dichloroethane
do not appear to be produced by chemical reaction in the treatment
process; (3) A correlation seems to exist between chloroform, dibromo-
chloromethane, bromodichloromethane, and bromoform. Examination of
data for only those ten cities having over 100 yg/£ of chloroform shows
that the level of bromodichloromethane is about 13 percent of the level
of chloroform and that dibromochloromethane levels average approximately
6 percent of the levels of bromodichloromethane. This relatively constant
ratio indicates a common precursor or group of precursors of these
halogenated pollutants. This same ratio, however, did not always occur
in the NORS; and (4) The use of powdered activated carbon treatment
as practiced by the water treatment plants studied was not effective
in removing volatile organic compounds. Of the 31 locations using
powdered activated carbon treatment, 14 had finished water chloroform
concentrations exceeding the mean concentration of 20 yg/fc.
Assessment of General Organic Parameters
The National Organics Reconnaissance Survey reaffirmed previous
indications that organics in drinking water are a national problem.
Accordingly, EPA included in the proposed Interim Primary Drinking Water
Regulations of March 14, 1975, a maximum contaminant level for an organic
parameter measured by an activated carbon adsorption-solvent extraction
test, using chloroform as a solvent. The shortcomings of this procedure
were highlighted in comments on the proposed regulations and, conse-
quently, a parameter based on this procedure is not included in the
regulations as promulgated. This parameter and others, however, are
currently under review. The following outlines some of the considerations
involved in selection of a general organic parameter. This discussion
was not included in the June report.
Organics - Carbon Adsorbable
Despite its recognized limitations, the principal method used for
quantifying the organic content of drinking water has been the Organics-
Carbon Adsorbable test (0-CA). Because chloroform is used as a solvent
in this test, it is often mistakenly termed the Carbon Chloroform Extract
(CCE) test.
Developed in the 1950's as an aid to taste and odor control, this method
has several advantages that have promoted its use in testing drinking
water. (1) The method selectively recovers non-polar organics from the
wide variety of organics that might be present in a given water sample.
(2) Natural organic materials are generally not recovered. Because they
are usually more polar or are easily converted to polar compounds,
they are less readily desorbed upon extraction with chloroform, a low
polarity solvent. (3) Because inorganics are very soluble in water and
not very soluble in chloroform, they are not likely to be present in the
0-CA extract (CCE). (4) Known taste and odor causing compounds have been
13
-------
recovered from 0-CA extracts (CCE). (5) The techniques involve relatively
inexpensive instrumentation and only one staff-day of effort per sample.
(6) The residue obtained is useful for further research.
On the other hand, the 0-CA test has the following disadvantages.
(1) No known correlation exists between the concentration of the 0-CA
extract (CCE) and the presence or absence of organics of health significance
in the water supply. (2) The concentration obtained in any given test
is influenced by adsorption and desorption kinetics. For example, the
presence of particulates in the water, changes in water temperature, or
changes in the organic content of the water may influence the final
concentration obtained. (3) The 0-CA test does not measure the more
volatile types of organics, such as chloroform, vinyl chloride, and
others that have recently been of concern. (4) The test is not sufficiently
sensitive to small changes in concentrations of selected organics. (5)
The test procedure involves the use of a possible carcinogen, chloroform.
(6) The test produces delayed results. (7) The test indicates only a
portion of the total organic composition.
Perhaps the major shortcoming of this test is that it cannot be
confidently relied upon as an index of the toxicity of drinking water.
For example, although the finished waters of several of the utilities
surveyed in the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey had 0-CA
extract concentrations considerably below the proposed maximum contaminant
level of 0.7 mg/fc, further study indicated that these water supplies
contained low levels of various organics that were potentially carcinogenic.
Alternatives include general organic parameters such as total
organic carbon (TOC), total organic chlorine (TOC1), ultraviolet (UV)
absorption, fluorescence, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical
oxygen demand (COD), or total oxygen demand (TOD). In comparison with
the 0-CA test, many of these determinations are more easily performed.
Some of the specific advantages and disadvantages of each are enumerated
below.
Total Organic Carbon
Both total organic carbon (TOC) and non-volatile total organic
carbon (NVTOC) are parameters with potential applicability as measures
of drinking water quality. Both methods are general and do not
distinguish between compound types. The precision of the TOC method
is particularly affected by experimental difficulties in accurately
quantifying the volatile portion of the organic compounds that are
present. At the present time, no good method is available for measuring
TOC between the concentrations of 0 to 5 mg/£, the typical range for
finished water. The instruments that are capable of measuring in this
range require that the sample be purged of carbon dioxide. This purging
process simultaneously removes some of the more volatile organic compounds
of concern, such as chloroform and vinyl chloride, that are consequently
not included in the measurement. NVTOC has been applied for organics
determinations with a detection limit of approximately 0.1 mg/d or less.
14
-------
Total Organic Chlorine
This test is a general indicator for chlorine-containing organic
compounds, most of which are from agricultural runoff, industrial
sources, and disinfection processes, and would not be influenced by
most natural organic compounds or other non-chlorine-containing organics
of possible concern. One disadvantage of this test is that current
techniques are incapable of measuring the total amount of organic
chlorine in water. EPA is investigating the applicability of the
test for possible use in the National Monitoring Program.
Ultraviolet Absorbance and Fluorescence
These determinations are rapid and inexpensive in unit cost. They
probably do not indicate the distribution of organics present in a water
sample, but are dominated by the aromatic fraction of the measured
organics. The other organic fractions such as low molecular weight
chlorinated hydrocarbons, chloroform, and others are excluded.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Chemical Oxygen Demand3 Total Oxygen
Demand
The BOD, COD, and TOD tests are not particularly useful as drinking
water organics monitoring tools. BOD and COD measurements lack precision
at low concentrations. Further, all three measure significant inorganic
fractions.
Monitoring to Assess Parameters
In view of EPA's desire to promulgate maximum contaminant levels
for certain nonpesticidal organics, a concerted effort will be made to
evaluate further the potential application of these general organic
parameters to specific organic contaminants of concern.
Using the authority of Sections 1445 and 1450 of the Public Health
Service Act as amended by the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA will expand
the scope of the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey beyond the
10 water utilities evaluated for a wide range of specific organic
contaminants. This monitoring effort will cover about 100 utilities
and a variety of raw water sources and water treatment practices. The
objectives of this monitoring will be to: (1) determine the occurrence
and concentration of specific organics, selected for suspected health
effects, that are in the Nation's drinking water; (2) determine if any
of the candidate general organic parameters can be related to the concentration
of these chemicals; and (3) attempt to determine if any of the candidate
general organics parameters can be related to the measurement of toxicity
of drinking water.
Inventory of Organics Identified in Drinking Water
EPA maintains a list of organic compounds that have been isolated
and identified from drinking water. Appendix II lists 253 compounds
identified to date (November 1975) with their highest reported concen-
trations. In addition to cataloging these compounds, EPA is assembling
and evaluating data concerning their chemical properties and toxicity.
15
-------
Investigations of Pesticides in Drinking Water
Analysis for Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides and Herbicides
To determine compliance with the 1962 U.S. Public Health Service
Drinking Water Standards, samples are periodically collected from approxi-
mately 700 water utilities serving airplane, train, and bus terminals,
and are shipped to EPA for analysis. Over the past 1-1/2 years, EPA
has tested some of these samples for chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides
and herbicides, compounds that were, considered for inclusion in the
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Of the 106 samples examined
for chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, six contained DDT in the range
of 1 to 2 ng/x, (nanogram per liter or parts per trillion) and 54 contained
dieldrin in the range of 1 to 10 ng/x.. Of the 54 samples examined for
herbicides, six contained from 60 to 440 ng/x, of 2,4-D, and two contained
10 to 70 ng/x, of 2,4,5-TP.
Region V Study
Out of 83 finished waters sampled in Region V's survey, five contained
DDT, with concentrations of 6 to 68 ng/x,. Four of these samples con-
tained from 4 to 7 ng/x, of dieldrin, one sample contained 4 ng/x. and
another 6 ng/x, of aldrin, and one contained 4 ng/x, of Tindane. Of the
other pesticides quantified, one sample contained 6 ng/x, hexachlorobenzene
and another 4 ng/x, of gamma chlordane. Of the herbicides, one sample
contained 50 ng/x. of treflan. All of the data are contained in Appendix
VI.
National Survey of Aldrint Dieldrin, and DDT in Drinking Water
A survey of drinking water utilities representing a stratified geo-
graphic sample of supplies is in progress. The survey's primary objective
is to ascertain ambient concentration levels of aldrin, dieldrin, and
DDT in the nanogram per liter concentration range. The results should
provide guidance to the Agency in the establishment of maximum contaminant
levels for these pesticides in drinking water.
The survey was designed to obtain samples of both raw and finished
water from two ground and nine surface water utilities in each of three
population ranges (less than 5,000, 5,000 to 49,999, and 50,000 or
greater) within each of the ten EPA regions. A computerized random
sampling program selected 330 of the approximately 40,000 community
water utilities. Two additional utilities were selected in each Region
based on high pesticide contamination potential and available treatment
technology. A total of 350 supplies were sampled in this study.
A screening analysis is performed on all samples by gas-liquid
chromatography utilizing a halogen-specific detector. Subsequent to
this analysis, positive samples (identified as either 2 4 ng/x, dieldrin,
£ 510 ng/x, aldrin, or > 10-20 ng/x. DDT) are confirmed by gas chromato-
graphy/mass spectrometry/computer analysis. The latter technique will
also confirm the identity of other chlorinated compounds that may be
present in quantities that appear significant from an analytical stand-
point. Included among these will be chlordane, heptachlor, heptachlor
16
-------
epoxide, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The data generated by
this study will be evaluated on the basis of degree of pesticide removal
from raw water following water treatment, effect of agricultural practices on
levels found, and an assessment of population exposure to these pesticides.
The sampling began March 1, 1975. A final analysis of the significance
of the findings, including populations at risk, should be prepared in
early 1976.
Analyses for Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Of 106 interstate carrier finished water samples examined for
chlorinated hydrocarbons over the past 1-1/2 years, two contained PCBs.
The finished water of Winnebago, Illinois, contained 3.0 yg/£ of Arochlor
1242 and that of Sellersburg, Indiana, contained 0.1 yg/£ of Arochlor
1260. Of the 83 water utilities surveyed in EPA's Region V, no PCBs
were detected in drinking water using an analytical technique sensitive
to 0-2 yg/£. Additional data are being collected that indicate the
possible presence of small quantities of PCBs in other drinking water
supplies. Among those identified to date (November 1975) are Escondido,
California, (0.4 yg/«,), New Bedford, Massachusetts, (2.5 yg/fc), and
Bridgeport, Connecticut, (1 yg/£)-
Studies of Leaching from Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Water Pipes
EPA has surveyed five water supply distribution systems utilizing
both old and new PVC pipe of various lengths in both hot and cold climates.
Little or no difference was found between the vinyl chloride (VC) concentra-
tions in the source water versus water that had traversed the PVC pipe,
except in one case, where the VC concentration was undetectable before
and was 1.4 yg/x, after passing through the pipe. (Jonah Water Supply
Corporation, Williamson County, Texas; 12-1/2 miles of 8 month-old
pipe.) VC levels in two cases approached the detection limit of 0.03
yg/.«,. Pioneer, California, 7 miles, 9 year-old pipe, had a VC level of
0.06 yg/£,'and Roseburg, Oregon, 3.4 miles, 4 to 9 year-old pipe, contained
0.03 yg/£ of VC. No VC was detected in the waters of the other two
systems. (Coolidge, Arizona, 1.7 miles, 11 year-old pipe; Sal ado,
Texas, 0.5 miles, 7 year-old pipe).
In addition, limited simulation studies were conducted in an EPA
laboratory using two types of potable grade chlorinated PVC pipe.
Preliminary conclusions are that the concentrations of VC in water in
contact with PVC pipe tend to increase as the monomer content of the
pipe, temperature, and contact time increase.
Detection of Nitrosamines in Drinking Water
Nitrosamines are compounds formed when secondary amines react
with nitrous acid (nitrite at low pH). The relative rates of their
formation and hydrolysis (reaction with water) are important in determining
their significance as possible contaminants of drinking water. At
the present time, no evidence exists to show that these reactions occur
in drinking water sources.
17
-------
In November 1974, EPA provided samples of Carbon Chloroform Extract
concentrates taken from three New Orleans area water treatment plants
for analysis for the presence of nitrosamines. In early December 1974,
results of this analysis showed that "volatile" N-nitroso compounds did
not exist in the water down to the one ng/fc level. More recently,
however, analyses of the same samples using a combination of high pressure
liquid chromatography and thermal energy analysis indicated that a
number of "non-volatile" nitrosamines were present. Carbon Chloroform
Extract concentrates from finished water at the three water treatment
plants in the New Orleans area were very similar. Recent liquid-liquid
extracts taken from Mississippi River raw water also indicated the
presence of nitrosamines. Approximately 24 N-nitroso compounds were
detected by this technique, although their identities were not verified
by independent analyses. One of the peaks in the chromatogram was
tentatively identified by its retention time as N-nitrosoatrazine, which
is derivable from the pesticide atrazine (a herbicide). Estimated
concentrations of individual compounds ranged from 50 to 100 ng/£. The
investigators concluded, however, that "...even this must be considered
tentative and speculative until the identity of each peak is confirmed
by other techniques."
The joint USDA/FDA Study Group on Nitrites, Nitrates, and Nitro-
samines is concerned that nitrosamines might be present in drinking
water in locations where the nitrate content of the water is excessive.
Twelve samples from wells with a known nitrate content were collected
from Runnels County, Texas, and Washington County, Illinois, during the
week of September 23, 1975. A combination of chromatography and thermal
energy analysis was used to analyze samples from some of these wells for
both volatile and non-volatile N-nitroso compounds. Nitrate-nitrogen
(N03-N) levels found in these wells ranged from 49 to 458 mg/s.; one
sample had a N03-N concentration of < 0.1 mg/£. The sampling included
wells with histories of both high and low bacterial counts. The possi-
bility of the formation of nitrites by bacterial reduction of nitrates
was considered. The wells were used as drinking water sources until a
few years ago; because of the known high nitrate concentrations, most
are now used only for other purposes. N-nitroso compounds were found
(< 15'ng/a) in the samples from these wells with high nitrate content.
Surveillance for Inorganic Contaminants in Drinking Water
Many inorganic chemicals in drinking water are potentially toxic at
certain concentrations. The Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
present maximum contaminant levels for 10 inorganics: arsenic, barium,
cadmium, chromium, fluoride, lead, mercury, nitrate, selenium, and
silver. All the water utilities sampled in the National Organics Recon-
naissance Survey were analyzed for these inorganics. In addition,
several other EPA projects are investigating the presence of these and
other inorganic chemicals in drinking water, as discussed below. Extensive
efforts have been directed to radionuclides and asbestos; because of the
special nature of these contaminants, they will be discussed separately.
18
-------
Analyses of Drinking Water Utilities
Until the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Federal Govern-
ment's authority to regulate drinking water was limited to interstate
carrier water supply utilities. At about six-year intervals, a survey of
each of the approximately 700 utilities is made jointly by the states and
the EPA Regional Offices. At the time of the survey, a water sample is
collected and analyzed for the chemicals limited by the 1962 U.S. Public
Health Service Drinking Water Standards. Tabulations of these data are
published in the Chemical Analysis of Interstate Carrier Water Supply
Systems. The results published in October 1973 indicate that chromium,
lead, and mercury were found in concentrations that exceed the Drinking
Water Standard limits in some instances. Mercury, which most frequently
exceeded the limit, did so in only 1.5 percent of the samples analyzed.
This report was updated in April 1975.
Special Studies in Selected Water Utilities
An analysis of drinking water quality at the consumer's tap was
performed using samples collected in the Community Water Supply Survey
of 1969. The concentrations of arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead,
selenium, and fluoride that were found in public drinking water utilities
instances exceeded the U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standard
limits. Of the 2,595 distribution samples analyzed, fluoride, that most
frequently .exceeded the proposed limits, did so in only 2.2 percent
of the samples; the lead limit was exceeded in only 1.4 percent of the
samples; and the nitrate-nitrogen limit in 2.1 percent of the samples.
With respect to the suspected inorganic carcinogens, the arsenic limit
was exceeded in 0.4 percent of the samples, and the selenium limit in
0.4 percent.
Water occasionally is contaminated by metals from corroded plumbing.
Special studies of the lead content in drinking water have shown that
approximately one-fourth of the homes surveyed in Boston and in Seattle
have lead in their tap water in amounts exceeding the 1962 U.S. PHS
Drinking Water Standard limit for lead. Preliminary data from the
Boston study indicate that lead is present in high enough concentrations in the
drinking water to affect the total body burden. In both Boston and Seattle,
lead levels in drinking water were frequently reduced to below the PHS
limit if the water was allowed to run before sampling. As a long-term solution,
however, a means of reducing the corrosion of the pipes is critical.
Various methods of accomplishing this are being tried in the Boston
and Seattle areas.
In addition, EPA and the National Heart and Lung Institute are
jointly studying the inorganics present in approximately.120 community
water utilities in 350 areas selected to be representative of U.S. water
utilities. . Some 28 elements and other parameters will be investigated.
An attempt will be made to determine the effects of drinking water
quality on health, especially the correlation between soft drinking
water and heart disease mortality. The field work has nearly been
completed and analysis of the data is in progress. Because some utilities
are being sampled over a 12-month period, a final report is not expected
until late 1976, or early 1977.
19
-------
Occurrence of Radioactivity in Drinking Water
Radium in drinking water is primarily a problem of smaller public
water systems. About 40 percent of the U.S. population is served
by 200 regional systems supplying large metropolitan areas. Yet, most
of the nation's 50,000 community water utilities serve fewer than 1,000
persons. Large regional systems utilize surface water that generally
contains very low concentrations of radium. Small utilities commonly use
ground water that in some cases may contain radium as the result of
geological conditions not subject to control. Radium-226 is the most
important of the naturally occurring radionuclides likely to be found in
public water systems. As shown in Table 7, the average radium-226 level
in 36 interstate carrier water supply utilities was 0.28 pCi/£ (picocuries
per liter).
In contrast to radium, man-made radioactivity is ubiquitous in
surface water because of radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons
testing. In some localities this radioactivity is increased by small
releases from nuclear facilities (such as nuclear power plants), hos-
pitals, and scientific and industrial users of radioactive materials.
The residual radioactivity in surface waters from fallout caused by
atmospheric nuclear weapons testing is mainly strontium-90 and tritium,
the former being the more important in health considerations. Current
data on the impact of strontium-90 on public water utilities are incomplete.
The available data (Table 7), however, indicate strontium-90 concentrations
averaged < 1 pCi per liter, corresponding to a dose equivalent of less
than 1 millirem1 (mrem) annually. Tritium concentrations in surface
water rarely exceed 1000 pCi per liter, corresponding to a dose equivalent
of less than 0.2 mrem per year, and averaged 200 pCi/n. These levels
are well below the maximum contaminant levels set forth in the Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations for radioactivity.
As part of the Agency's Environmental Radiation Monitoring System
(ERAMS), measurements of tritium radioactivity are made in drinking
water samples from 77 major population centers and communities near
selected nuclear facilities. Results of the 1974 ERAMS survey are
included in Appendix IV. In 1974, the highest observed concentration
of tritium was less than 20 percent of the maximum contaminant level
for radioactivity now prescribed for drinking water. The average concentration
was about one percent of this level. Additional data on radioactivity
in community water systems should become available as States begin
to implement monitoring requirements established under the Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
i
A millirem is one-thousandth of a rem, the unit of dose equivalent
from ionizing radiation that produces a biological effect.
20
-------
Table 7
SUMMARY OF INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLY RADIONUCLIDE DATA
(January - March 1975)
Gross Beta
Gross Alpha
90
Sr
226Ra
Specific Gamma
Activity
Jan-Mar 1974
Tritium
Number of Samples
Total Quantified
61
61
46
46
61
71
61
1
19
36
33
Average Level in
Quantified Samples
2.9
5.5 pCi/£
0.82 pCi/£
0.28 pCi/£
None Detected
200 pCi/£
Remarks
60 Samples
<2 pCi/x,
27 Samples
<0.5 pCi/£
10 Samples
<0.1 pCi/s,
38 Samples
<200 pCi/£
Survey of Rural Drinking Water Supplies
Section 3 of the Safe Drinking Water Act requires the Administrator
to survey rural water systems to determine the quality, quantity, and
availability of water supplies for rural Americans. EPA has designed a
survey of 5300 randomly selected rural households to assess, among other
things, the availability of water, water sources, and the quality of
drinking water.
In addition to bacteriological analyses of water samples to detect
the presence of contamination (total coliform, fecal coliform, standard
plate count), chemical and radiological analyses will be performed. All
samples will be analyzed for specific conductance, nitrate-nitrogen,
calcium, magnesium, sodium, lead, sulfates, manganese, iron, turbidity,
and color. Every tenth sample will also be analyzed for the inorganic
chemicals in the Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations (arsenic,
barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, selenium, silver, nitrate, lead, and
fluoride) and for chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides and herbicides,
gross alpha, and radium 226/228. The survey is scheduled to begin in
1976 and will be completed in one year.
21
-------
Analyses for Asbestos Fib_ers__jJi..pjrjnJ
-------
ores," such as talc and vermiculite, which may also be sources of asbestos;
and "asbestos manufacturing." For all categories, both air and water
samples are being taken. Over 60 sampling sites have been chosen,
including the water utilities of several major cities, such as San
Francisco, Denver, Chicago, Atlanta, and Dallas. In addition, 20 to 30
other drinking water utilities are being sampled.
Although fiber counts in discharges from asbestos plants have been
found as high as 10 billion f/£ of effluent, dilution of the discharge
in asbestos-free waters can reduce these levels downstream to minimal
levels, generally well below the level of detection by electron microscopy.
In one case, a discharge in excess of 10 billion f/£ was calculated to
be diluted to approximately 2000 f/£ downstream. On the other hand,
even in the absence of active asbestos mining, water sampled in areas
with naturally occurring asbestos have shown counts in excess of 10
million f/£ of chrysotile plus 10 million f/£ of asbestiform amphibole
fibers.
Because the geological degradation processes in these natural site
areas have probably been reasonably constant over a considerable period
of time, the asbestos levels in the surface water of these areas have
probably been equally constant. Accordingly, the medical records of
populations in such areas could provide useful data on the effects of
prolonged ingestion of asbestos fibers.
Results of Investigations of Asbestos from Asbestos Cement
(A-C) Pipe Erosion
Erosion of asbestos fibers from the walls of asbestos-cement (A-C)
pipe used, in water distribution systems may be a source of asbestos in
drinking water. Investigations of this possibility involve a controlled
experiment with water of a known chemical quality circulated through two
100-foot lengths of A-C pipe. One pipe is four inches in diameter, the
other six inches. Weekly samples of the effluent are being analyzed by
electron microscopy to determine whether or not asbestos fibers are
released from the pipe wall.
For the period May to September 1975, the chrysotile asbestos fiber
counts ranged from 14 to 1950 f/«, in the four-inch pipe, and from 360 to
2670 f/£ in the six-inch pipe. The average chrysotile count during this
period was 475 f/n for the four-inch and 1350 f/£ for the'six-inch pipe.
The water being used was "mildly aggressive," with pH 7.5 and total
hardness of 20 mg/t.
Disturbance probably causes an increase in fiber release. A sample
taken following disconnection and reassembly of the six-inch pipe had
19,000 chrysotile f/£. In contrast, the current (November 1975) fiber
counts have declined to 86 chrysotile f/t. .The pipes will be drilled
and tapped to determine how these operations affect fiber counts.
A "very aggressive" water, with pH 5.5 and total hardness of 20 mg/£,
will be tested following completion of the test now in progress.
23
-------
Another phase of this project is investigating tap waters in
locations where water low in asbestos fibers flows some distance through
A-C pipe prior to use. Bimonthly analyses are being made to determine
whether asbestos fiber content increases in water which passes through
A-C pipe.
*.
Systems using A-C pipe are being selected to provide a wide range
of "aggressiveness," as determined by the pH and hardness, of the water.
Thus far, of the six systems selected, some waters have been sampled
only once or twice while others have been sampled and analyzed five or
six times. These preliminary data indicate that only the two more
"aggressive" waters, Pensacola, Florida, (Montclair Subdivision) and
Seattle, Washington, contain relatively high numbers of fibers. Pensacola
water, classed as "most aggressive," had 0.7 to 32 million f/£, and Seattle
water, which was "somewhat less aggressive," had 0.4 to 1.5 million f/a.
24
-------
\
HEALTH EFFECTS OF DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS
With the aid of modern analytical techniques, such as gas chro-
matography, mass spectrometry, and atomic absorption, many types of
organic chemicals and heavy metals have been detected in drinking water
for the first time. Knowledge of the health effects of most of these
contaminants, particularly in the low concentrations that occur in
drinking water, is inadequate. Complete analyses of the health risks
involved should include evaluation of human exposure to these chemicals
from all sources, including contaminants in food and in the air. Although
the efforts described below are extensive, they represent only the
beginning of the research needed to assess fully the health effects of
drinking water contaminants.
Since the June report, data obtained from the National Organics
Reconnaissance Survey have been compared with cancer mortality occurring
in populations served by the water utilities surveyed. Two other
epidemiology studies have focused on the association between chloroform
in drinking water and cancer mortality, and the correlation between
fluoridation and cancer incidence. The results of these preliminary
analyses are reported here. Other new material includes discussion of a
proposed study on arsenic, estimation of risk from radiation, and
studies concerning effects of asbestos.
Review of Drinking Water Contaminants by the National Academy of Sciences
In fulfilling its responsibilities under the Safe Drinking Water
Act, EPA has arranged for a study by the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) to provide health data for setting maximum contaminant levels in
drinking water. NAS will provide information and scientific judgments
concerning the health effects that might be expected at various ranges
of concentrations for the contaminants. This information will enable
the Administrator to determine appropriate health goals for these contaminants
and then, after considering technological and economic feasibility, to
establish levels for National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
For those contaminants for which a sufficient data base exists, NAS
will make recommendations concerning the relationships between con-
taminant levels and health effects. Among the factors the Academy will
consider are the margin of safety required to protect particularly
susceptible segments of the population; exposure to the contaminants by
other routes; synergism among contaminants; and the relative risks of
different levels of exposure to the contaminants.
25
-------
The Academy will also investigate and report those contaminants
that may pose a threat to human health, but whose current level in
drinking water cannot be determined. For those contaminants, the Aca-
demy will recommend studies and test protocols for future research. The
project, initiated in April 1975, is scheduled for completion by De-
cember 16, 1976. This NAS review of drinking water contaminants should
provide an overview of the drinking water problem that will be essential
in determining future national strategies.
Development of Quality Criteria for Water
In addition to the studies being conducted by the National Academy
of Sciences to recommend maximum contaminant levels, EPA is developing
Quality Criteria for Water pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Section 304(a)(l) of PL 92-500). These
criteria are being developed to provide a scientific basis for estab-
lishing ambient water quality goals. These goals should be useful as
benchmarks for setting water quality standards, including State Water
Quality Standards, Effluent Guidelines, and the 1979 Interim Raw Source
Drinking Water Standards for the Safe Drinking Water Act (Section
1401(1)(D) of the PHS Act, as amended by PL 93-523). Included in the
list of about 60 constituents are organic and inorganic materials, in-
cluding some suspected carcinogens.
Other Investigations of the Health Effects of Organics
EPA Science Advisory Board Review of Selected Organics
EPA has sought the advice of its Science Advisory Board regarding
potential carcinogenic or other adverse health effects resulting from
exposure to organic compounds in drinking water. Principal attention
was directed to the compounds listed in Table 8, particularly chloro-
form, carbon tetrachloride, chloroethers, and benzene.
2
The Board prefaced its Report with the caveat that the chemicals
thus far identified in drinking water account for only a small fraction
of the total organic content, as previously noted in this Report. Thus,
the possibility exists that additional substances of equal or greater
toxicological significance may be in drinking water. The Board also
expressed concern that future studies should take into account possible
synergistic effects of common combinations of contaminants. It recom-
mended that a complete analysis of the problem consider data from all
routes of exposure, such as dietary and occupational exposure, to these
substances in addition to drinking water. Some of these additional
sources of exposure may pose a much greater potential intake than the
consumption of drinking water.
2A Report: Assessment of Health Risk from Organics in Drinking
Water, Hazardous Materials Advisory Committee, Science Advisory
Board, Environmental Protection Agency, May 20, 1975.
26
-------
Tables
SELECTED CONTAMINANTS IN U.S. DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES
Contaminant(s) Concentrations in yg/£ Estimated Distribution*
Carbon Tetrachloride <2 - 3 10%
Chloroform <0.1 - 311** 100%
Other Halogenated Ci and C2 <0.3 - 229 100%
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.02 - 0.12 low
e-chloroethylmethylether unknown low
Acetylenedichloride
-------
been demonstrated to be carcinogenic in laboratory animals and have been
identified in drinking water. Further sampling and analyses are necessary
to determine the levels to which the public is exposed to these contaminants,
The survey described earlier to monitor additional water utilities
should help provide this information.
Data from epidemiological studies on the contaminants of primary
concern to the Board were"very limited and the designs of studies were
generally inadequate for a conclusive assessment of health risk. Recent
studies alleging an association of high cancer incidence in New Orleans
with consumption of contaminated drinking water were considered by the
Board to be useful for forming hypotheses for future epidemiological
studies, but were not indicative of any clear cancer hazard. Numerous
other variables might explain the apparent associations. Experimental
toxicology studies suggest that, if a carcinogenic risk did exist,
increased liver cancer would be a probable finding. This was not,
however, revealed by the epidemiological studies. As part of its
recommendations to EPA, the Board suggested that epidemiological studies
be undertaken to relate drinking water contamination with differences in
cancer incidence or other effects in exposed populations. Some of these
studies are described in a later Section of this Report.
Experimental Evaluation of the Toxiaity of Organias
Although the occurrence of organic compounds in tap water is
universally accepted, the human health effects of exposure to these
compounds via drinking water are as yet unclear. Of those compounds
known to occur in tap water (Appendix II), a relatively large number
require intensive investigation to generate suitable data for health
hazard evaluations. Data are needed to evaluate whether these compo.unds
might produce tumors, genetic mutations, birth defects, or other equally
serious chronic diseases.
EPA is actively engaged in research to elucidate chemically-induced
chronic illnesses from organics present in the Nation's drinking water.
EPA will determine whether certain organic contaminants in drinking
water pose a risk to human health and to characterize that risk, if any.
A two-pronged approach is used to investigate organics in drinking
water. The first determines the toxic properties of individual compounds
with specialized protocols and systems. The second emphasizes the toxic
properties of mixtures of organics with the use of multiple biological
screening systems. .
Several compounds are being investigated with respect to their
toxicity and metabolism in experimental species. These compounds in-
clude bis(2-chloroethyl) ether, bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether, dibro-
mochloromethane, bromodichloromethane, the homologous series of chlo-
rinated benzenes, and the homologous series of brominated benzenes.
Comparative metabolism studies are being conducted to determine the
animal models that are most predictive of responses in man. Com-
parative toxicity studies (both acute and chronic) have been undertaken
28
-------
to determine types of pathological lesions, target organs, reversibility
of the lesions, and threshold doses associated with each compound.
Specialized studies are being carried out to examine the possible role
of the halogen-substituted benzenes in synergistically altering the
toxicity of other foreign organic compounds.
The investigation of the toxicity of mixtures of organics from
drinking water is being pursued with the use of several bioassay pro-
cedures. Organic extracts from the drinking water of five U.S. cities
(See Table 3, cities in Series I) are being collected for analyses by these
biological systems. If these extracts demonstrate activity suggestive
of carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, teratogenicity, or other serious
effects, they will be chemically fractionated to isolate the active
portion(s). Ultimate fractionation should lead to the identification of
the toxic agents. These compounds will then be subjected to more
definitive toxicity tests to assess the human health hazard.
Finally, the National Cancer Institute is studying chloroform in an
attempt to assess the health effects of ingesting chloroform and to
provide data for evaluating any health risks associated with the presence
of chloroform in drinking water. The results of this very important
study, which involves both rats and mice in a two-year experiment, are
expected to be reported soon.
Three other efforts to determine mutagenic effects may also be
useful in predicting the carcinogenic'potential of the tested compounds.
One study has used histidine-dependent mutant strains of Salmonella
typimurium to screen water at various locations in the lower Mississippi
River to determine the presence of potential mutagens/carcinogens.
Water samples were screened without concentration both directly and
after activation by use of liver homogenates; After a number of samples
were found to be positive, the study was expanded to include the screening
of raw and finished waters of other utilities using the lower Mississippi
River in addition to some using ground water.
A second study involves an EPA contract now underway to test the
mutagenic properties of 85 chemical compounds. Approximately 20 of
these compounds will probably be organics found in drinking water.
In vitro mutagenicity testing will be done on Salmonella, E, coli, and
yeast, using metabolic activating systems derived from mammalian livers.
In a third study, EPA is developing preliminary information on the po-
tential mutagenicity of substances that might be produced during the
ozonation process. A number of chemical compounds are being subjected
to conditions similar to those encountered during disinfection processes
using ozone. The ozonation product mixtures are being tested to determine
the potential mutagenic effects on certain microorganisms.
Health Effects of Organics Occurring in Nature (Himic. Substances)
As noted before, organics thus far identified in drinking water
represent only a small percentage of the total organics recoverable from
drinking water. The remaining fraction is heterogeneous and includes
mixtures of high molecular weight organics not susceptible to rigorous
chemical definition.
29
-------
When subjected to chlorine or ozone treatment, humic substances
might produce either halogenated organic compounds or oxidized forms,
including peroxides or epoxides, that may be hazardous to man. Studies
concerning the chemistry and toxicology of humic substances that occur
naturally in water are being planned.
Epidemiological Studies
Epidemiology, the study of the occurrence of disease in selected
human populations, is difficult .because precise data on environmental
exposure are seldom available. Epidemiological studies of chronic
diseases, for example, must make use of death certificate data that are
not always indicative of the underlying causes of death. Nonetheless,
epidemiology is based on a study of actual conditions and any indication
of an adverse health effect should be seriously evaluated.
Environmental Levels of Organics and Health Effects
An investigation scheduled to begin shortly will seek to identify
and measure environmental concentrations of selected halogenated organic
compounds and to determine the correlations of various concentrations
with health effects observed in the exposed population. This study will
focus on areas suspected of having high levels of these organics in the
environment and areas known to have a high incidence of cancer. Comparative
analyses will be made of other areas with moderate and low environmental
levels of the substances. The project should be completed in the spring
of 1976.
Estimating Exposure to Organics
EPA plans to explore the correlation between the concentrations of
organics that have been measured in each drinking water and the number of
users of that water. Extrapolations from these data to national exposure
curves will be attempted. The estimate of national exposure to organics,
in conjunction with the various local exposure levels, will assist in
providing a basis for estimating health risks.
Correlation of Cancer Mortality with Chloroform Content of
Drinking Water
Data obtained from the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey have
been compared with cancer mortality occurring in populations served by
these water utilities. One preliminary study has indicated a statisti-
cally significant correlation between the cancer mortality for all
anatomical sites and both sexes combined in the years 1969-71 with the
chloroform concentration in the samples collected in spring 1975. Such a
correlation was not noted with total mortality or with the sum of the con-
centrations of the four trihalomethanes in the drinking waters.
30
-------
In this analysis, only data from 50 of the 80 water utilities could
be utilized. Some of the cities were only partially served by one of
the water utilities sampled and some of the cities were too small to
have data available on mortality. A similar epidemiological analysis of
43 cities from the Region V survey of 83 cities (Appendix V) did not
show a statistically significant correlation between chloroform and
cancer mortality in contrast to the finding above.
Data concerning the chloroform concentrations in nine water utilities
have been analyzed using the average of the two samples (NORS and Region
V) collected for each utility. A statistically significant correlation
was again found between chloroform concentration in the drinking water
and cancer mortality for all disease sites and both sexes combined.
These epidemiological studies had several data validation problems and
should be considered preliminary. These preliminary results do, however,
underline the need for more definitive analyses.
The National Cancer Institute also studied the correlation of
cancer incidence at a number of anatomical sites with the presence of
chloroform in drinking water. The study looked at only a small number
of counties, however, and the results were inconclusive. Another study
at NCI focused on the effects of natural and artificial fluoridation.
This study failed to produce evidence linking natural or artifical
fluoridation of public water supplies to cancer.
Evaluation of Health Risks from Inorganics
Some of the inorganic chemicals that investigators have suggested
may be potentially carcinogenic in drinking water under certain circum-
stances are arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. Some
studies and brief assessments of the carcinogenicity of these inorganics
are described below. All the metals are being tested for mutagenicity.
Arsenic, beryllium, nickel, and cadmium have been tested in a bio-
assay system using cultured mammalian cells to determine mutagenicity.
Of these inorganics, beryllium and cadmium were found to produce muta-
tions; the others yielded no mutants, probably because they were either
not mutagenic or too weakly mutagenic to permit detection in this par-
ticular assay.
Although arsenic has been associated with the occurrence of cancer,
its exact role as a carcinogen has not been determined. Exposure appar-
ently must be high and occur over an extended period of time before skin
cancer develops. At certain exposure levels, however, arsenic is generally
recognized to be acutely and chronically toxic to man. In view of the
recent reduction in permissible arsenic concentrations set by the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration for the workplace, EPA is reviewing the
concentrations allowed in drinking water.
In addition, EPA is currently considering a study to help clarify
risks associated with exposure to arsenic. The first, part of a larger
study on various toxic substances, involves the relationship between
31
-------
environmental exposure to inorganic arsenic and health effects. Popula-
tions exposed to significant amounts of arsenic would be the subjects of
epidemiological studies to help determine the health effects of arsenic
exposure. A second study just beginning seeks to determine the body
burden of arsenic in humans who consume drinking water containing arsenic
at or exceeding the current maximum contaminant level of 0.05 mg per liter,
Nitrate concentrations in drinking water have been limited because
of the possibility that infants who ingest water high in nitrates may
develop methemoglobinemia. In addition, a possibility exists that
nitrates may be one of the precursors of nitrosamine formation. This
reaction, however, was demonstrated at much higher concentrations than
would normally occur in water.
Existing health effects evidence does not conclusively show whether
selenium is carcinogenic. After a complete review of its health ef-
fects, the Food and Drug Administration last year concluded that sele-
nium could be safely used as an additive to animal feed. Very low
levels of selenium are apparently necessary for red blood cell inte-
grity. On the other hand, some FDA critics are concerned because seve-
ral animal studies show that tumors were developed from exposure to
selenium. The doses used in those experiments were very high, however.
Estimate of Risk from Radiation
Radionuclides are recognized carcinogens. Following the recom-
mendation made by the National Academy of Sciences, EPA bases its es-
timates of the health effects of radiation exposure through ingestion of
drinking water on the assumption that no harmless dose level exists and
that any health effects produced will be linear and proportional to the
radiation dose received from drinking water.
Eighty to 85 percent of ingested radium is deposited in bone. Other
organs are also irradiated to a lesser extent, however, and the total
health risk from radium ingestion has been estimated by summing the dose
and resultant risk from all organs. Risk estimates indicate that
continuous consumption of drinking water containing radium-226 and
radium-228 at the proposed maximum contaminant level of 5 pCi/«. may
cause between 0.7 and 3 fatal cancers per year per million exposed
persons.
Assessment of Effects of Oral Ingestion of Asbestos
Although the development of cancer from exposure to airborne asbestos
has been documented by epidemiological studies, the effects of ingested
asbestos have not yet been determined. Several current projects are
studying various aspects of this problem, including asbestos absorption
32
-------
in the gastrointestinal tract, the possible correlation between cancer
incidence and asbestos in drinking water, and the toxicology of ingested
asbestos in rats.
Research on the problem of ingested asbestos in man has revealed
that excessive gastrointestinal cancer and peritoneal (abdominal)
mesotheliomas (neoplasms of the lining cells) occur in workers exposed
to airborne asbestos. Scientists believe that the workers under study
ingested asbestos particles that were in their mouths and respiratory
tracts and that this ingestion is related to the incidence of cancer.
EPA is studying the passage of asbestos fibers through the gastroin-
testinal tract in an effort to evaluate this aspect of ingestion exposure.
One study involves labelling asbestos with tritium to elucidate the
mechanism of asbestos absorption.
In a very important project, the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences has funded a toxicological study of the ingestion of
various asbestiform types. This four-year study is expected to begin
shortly.
'Epidemiology
Several studies have focused on the possible correlation between
asbestos in drinking water and the incidence of cancer. These studies
represent the beginning of work in this area. Because of the long
latency period between exposure and the development of the disease, data
being developed must be viewed as baseline. Two studies of the popu-
lation of Duluth, Minnesota, where the concentrations of asbestos fibers
in drinking water were very, high, have recorded no unusually high
incidence of cancer. In a National Cancer Institute study, risk ratios
were calculated for Duluth in comparison to the State of Minnesota and
Hennepin County (Minneapolis). Of 21 cancer sites in the body, only
cancer of the rectum had an excess that was statistically significant
and highest in the latest 5-year period of the comparison. The authors
felt that this finding was probably not related to asbestos exposure.
A second study, conducted by the Minnesota Department of Health, in
cooperation with the University of Minnesota and the Center for Disease
Control, was based on cancer incidence data instead of mortality and
compared Duluth with the Twin Cities. No clear pattern of difference in
gastrointestinal cancer incidence existed among the three cities in
1969-1971. This study is currently being continued, however, to include
cases of gastrointestinal cancer recorded in 1973 and 1974 in the three
cities as well as cases recorded in smaller communities (Two Harbors,
Silver Bay, and Beaver Bay, Minnesota) where asbestos fiber counts are
known to be even higher.
In cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Health, the Mayor
and Chief Health Officer of Duluth have organized a reporting system
33
-------
wherein all physicians are requested to report cases of diagnosed
mesotheliomas. All cases will be interviewed to obtain occupational and
residential histories. A retrospective study of all deaths caused by
mesothelioma in Minnesota during a five-and-one-half year period was
undertaken by the Minnesota Department of Health to see if more cases
without occupational histories occur in the Duluth area. The results of
this study indicate that in almost every case mesotheliomas were asso-
ciated with some asbestos exposure .other than through drinking water.
Finally, a study of lung cancer incidence data is planned to search for
additional cases of asbestos-related cancer during the period 1969 to
1974.
34
-------
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
Investigations underway address a variety of suspected sources
of contaminants, such as industrial effluents, municipal waste treatment
facilities, chlorination of drinking water, agricultural runoff, and
landfills. These investigations are discussed below.
Industrial Sources
EPA is identifying substances remaining in municipal and industrial
wastes and sludges after various treatment processes. This effort
will provide information on the presence of substances that are potentially
damaging to man and the environment; provide data on the effectiveness
of various treatments; and allow identification of the sources of
organics in water at microgram per liter or greater concentrations.
Several studies of industrial effluents have produced an extensive
inventory of organics that suggests that industrial sources may be
major contributors of organics found in drinking water. Two of the
substances in drinking water that have been rather clearly identified
as suspected carcinogens, chloroform and bis(2-chloroethyl) ether,
appear in industrial wastes and not in domestic sewage, an alternate
possible source. As noted earlier in this Report, however, the major
source of chloroform in drinking water is from chlorination practice,
not industrial discharges.
Extensive studies are needed to provide further information on
the relationship between industrial discharges and the appearance
of organics in drinking water. Systematic studies of the composition
of industrial effluents are on-going. EPA also is considering a program
that will help identify the industrial sources of organics discharged
into river basins that feed a number of public drinking water supplies.
The goal of this program would be to correlate the'organics appearing
in particular drinking waters with specific industrial discharges.
Over 200 organics identified in various drinking waters
have been examined to determine possible point source discharges during
manufacture and use; possible non-point sources; persistence; methods
of removal; and gross estimates of total discharge. Some preliminary
data have been collected on industrial discharges. A report describing
these efforts, along with preliminary recommendations, should be available
in the summer of 1977.
The generation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous wastes of the
following 13 industry categories are currently under investigation:
Pharmaceuticals; Paint and Allied Products; Storage and Primary Battery
Manufacturing; Inorganic Chemicals; Petroleum Refining, Primary Metals;
Metals Mining; Electroplating and Metal Finishing; Organic Chemicals;
Pesticides and Explosives; Textiles; Rubber and Plastics; Leather
35
-------
Tanning and Finishing; and Machinery (except Electrical). These studies
relate to the problem of carcinogens in drinking water insofar as they
clarify the types and quantities of recognized and potential carcinogens
that are disposed on land and subsequently might be transmitted to nearby
surface and ground waters. The first study (storage and primary battery
manufacturers) has been completed; the last in the series is expected
to be issued by the summary of 1976.
Discharges from Municipal Haste Treatment Facilities
Efforts are underway to determine the contributions of municipal
waste treatment practices and effluents to the presence of organic chemicals
in drinking waters. Under contract to EPA, a procedure for
separating and tentatively identifying refractory organics from municipal
waste treatment facilities was developed. The procedure, which is capable
of detecting organics at the microgram-per-liter level, was applied
to the study of primary and secondary effluents. In primary effluents,
identified compounds included simple carbohydrates, amino acids, and
other compounds apparently of metabolic origin. These same substances
were found in both chlorinated and unchlorinated effluents. Several
chlorinated compounds identified in chlorinated primary and secondary
effluents have been determined to be by-products of chlorination. Although
these compounds have not necessarily been identified in drinking water,
their presence in various wastewaters suggests that some might also
be found in drinking water.
As part of the industrial source program described earlier, a pre-
liminary literature search has been conducted to determine which organics
have been identified in municipal waste treatment effluents and which
are likely to be present either from industrial discharge or as a result
of biological treatment or chlorination. The preliminary results show
that 23 of the organics identified in drinking water have been positively
identified in municipal waste treatment effluents; an additional 27
may be found as intermediates or final products of biological treatment;
and 42 could be produced during chlorination of treatment effluents.
In addition to determining whether municipal waste treatment .practices
and effluents are significant sources of organics in drinking water,
investigations are also directed to assess whether control can be achieved
by regulating industrial discharges to sewer systems or whether further
treatment of municipal waste treatment effluents is required.' A report
describing these efforts and recommending steps that could be taken
to minimize the problem will be completed in June 1977.
36
-------
Chlorination of Drinking Water
As yet, no acceptable substitute exists for chlorine as a disin-
fectant that produces a residual, and the health hazards of foregoing
chlorination would be severe. p\t the same time, concern is increasing
over the effect of chlorination on organic materials found in natural
and waste waters. In 1974, the following compounds were identified
as formed by chlorination of drinking water: chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform. Naturally occurring humic substances
are thought to be precursors of these trihalomethanes. The maximum concentra-
tions found were: chloroform, 54 yg/£; bromodichloromethane, 20
dibromochloromethane, 13 ug/£; and bromoform, 10
A later study confirmed the presence of these trihalomethanes in
a variety of finished drinking waters from Ohio, Indiana, and Alabama.
These findings prompted studies to determine which factors influence
the rate and extent of trihalomethane formation during chlorination,
and which other halogenated compounds might be formed at the same time.
Studies were conducted to compare the rate and extent of chloroform
formation when chlorine was added to raw river water, dual -media filtered
water, and water treated by granular activated carbon. These experiments
were carried out at constant pH and at 25°C. When sufficient chlorine
was added to satisfy the chlorine demand for the duration of the experi-
ment, chlorination of raw river water yielded approximately seven times
as much chloroform as did chlorination of the coagulated, settled, and
dual -media filtered water, and approximately 80 times as muc.h as did
chlorination of the fresh granular activated carbon filter effluent
(207 yg/Ji, 32 yg/£, and 2.7 yg/£, respectively, in 7+ days). The rate
of chloroform formation in the river water was approximately 10 to 15
yg/£/hour for the first six hours. Similar results have been obtained
when the same experiments were conducted with realistic concentrations
of humic acid, but not with simple acetyl derivatives (precursors in
the classical haloform reaction). Acetone (a classical precursor known
to be in raw waters) was shown to react at higher pH, however. Rates
of reaction for both types of precursor also have been demonstrated
to increase with pH.
Concentrations of humic materials are probably reduced during alum
coagulation, settling, and dual-media filtration, thereby reducing the
rate and extent of chloroform formation by chlorination. These procedures
may not have this effect, however, if chlorination is carried out at
high pH, because the low molecular weight acetyl derivatives that react
well at that pH are not likely to be so well removed by conventional
water treatment.
Experiments have demonstrated that monochloramine will not react
with natural water precursors to form trihalomethanes, and that the
reaction rate with free chlorine at pH 7 varies directly with temperature.
37
-------
\
Other studies investigated the chloriination of approximately 50
of nitromethane, benzene, toluene, and m-xylene. Under the conditions
of the test, nine days of storage at 25°C, nitromethane was readily
converted to chloropicrin, and m-xylene was readily converted to chloroxylene.
Benzene did not react with the chlorine under these conditions, and
toluene produced chlorotoluene rather slowly. These studies indicate
that other chlorination by-products can occur during the chlorination
process.
The oxidation of bromide to hypobromite by hypochlorite and the
subsequent reaction of hypobromite with precursor compounds to form
bromo-substituted trihalomethanes has been demonstrated. This was done
experimentally by adding fluoride, bromide, and iodide in the form of
salts to Missouri River water and subsequently chlorinating that water.
The detected reaction products included all ten possible non-fluoro mixed
and single halogen-containing trihalomethanes.
Controlled studies are continuing in an attempt to identify the
individual compounds other than humic materials that react with chlorine
to form trihalomethanes. After identification of these precursors,
alternative pretreatment and treatment conditions will be investigated
with the goal of minimizing trihalomethane production.
Finally, investigations dealing with the formation of other haloge-
nated organics that are by-products of chlorination, such as chlorophenol
and dichlorobenzene, will continue. These studies will be carried out
by a combination of in-house research and an extramural grant program
for university investigators.
Contamination by Agricultural Chemicals
Two projects address the contamination of drinking water by agricul-
tural chemicals. One is an assessment of the impact of intensive appli-
cation of pesticides and fertilizers in underground water recharge areas
that may contribute to drinking water supplies. A preliminary investi-
gation has been done and a more detailed study should be completed by
November 1976. All reported problems with pesticides have been local.
Most pesticides have limited solubility in water and tend to accumulate
in the soil. Subject to the actions of microorganisms in the soil,
these pesticides can be metabolized to different compounds, a few of
which may be more toxic than the parent compound. More information
is needed to determine the sorptive properties of pesticides and their
degradation products, as well as the geographic areas vulnerable
to contamination.
No significant problems resulting from potassium or phosphorus
nutrients have been identified. Problems related to nitrogen seem to be
localized. Nitrate has slowly continued to increase in the ground
waters of areas where high concentrations of septic tanks, animal feed-
lots over high water tables, consistent applications of nitrogen fertilizer,
38
-------
and flash flooding occur. In certain areas, high concentrations of
i nitrates in ground water have resulted from natural sources, such as
{ the degradation of vegetation.
i •
1 A second project, which is a part of the national survey of aldrin,
j dieldrin, and DDT described earlier, is an attempt to determine whether
| various water treatment techniques effectively remove pesticides found
| in raw sources of drinking water. An analysis of the pesticides present
j in raw and finished water should indicate whether statistically significant
• differences in treatment efficiency occur.
1"
i Other Non-Point Sources of Organics
EPA is attempting to estimate the contribution of non-point sources
to the organic compounds found in river basins from which drinking water
supplies are taken. This activity will help determine whether significant
abatement can be achieved by regulation of point source discharges or
whether extensive treatment of drinking water is necessary.
A total of 154 organic chemicals identified in various drinking
waters have been studied preliminarily to determine possible non-point
sources of discharge, persistence, and methods of removal. A report
including the origins and estimates of the nationwide burden of these
chemicals as well as plans for major river basin investigations and
adoption of a pilot program was published by EPA in April 1975, "Identi-
fication of Organic Compounds in Effluents from Industrial Sources"
(EPA-560/3-75-002). Further laboratory work is needed to clarify the
speculative reactions reported to occur during chlorination.
Various Land Disposal Practices and Water Contamination
Several investigations are underway to clarify the possible correla-
tion between disposal practices and contamination of drinking water.
Monitoring of surface and ground waters at dumps and sanitary landfills
is being conducted to determine whether the waters have been contaminated
by materials present in the dumps or landfills. As a result of the
contamination of surface and ground waters, drinking water may be contaminated
Monitoring has begun at seven of the 11 selected sites and should be
completed by January 1976. Preliminary results from one dump site indicate
that ground water in the vicinity has been polluted. The results from
other sites will probably vary with climatological and physical parameters.
Another project is entitled "Development of a Data Base for Deter-
mining the Prevalence of Migration of Hazardous Chemical Substances
into the Groundwater at Industrial Waste Land Disposal Sites." This
study is expected to document the migration of hazardous substances,
including some suspected carcinogens, from approximately 75 industrial
land disposal sites, including dumps, landfills, lagoons, pits,.and
basins, into the Nation's ground waters. The primary objective of this
effort is to provide data for developing future land disposal guidelines
and standards. This investigation began in the fall of 1975 and should
be completed in the.summer of 1977.
39
-------
TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROLLING CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING WATER
Overview of EPA Treatment Program • .
During fiscal year 1976, EPA will spend almost $2.0 million to
expand its research effort to develop the technology needed to control
economically the concentration of carcinogenic contaminants in drinking
water. Universities, research institutions, and operating water utilities
will perform parts of this research under grants or contracts with EPA.
This Section describes this effort and significantly expands upon the
material in the June Report.
The first part describes treatment process modifications intended
to reduce the concentration of trihalomethanes in finished waters.
This Section also presents, the preliminary results of a major in-house
research effort to determine under what conditions trihalomethanes or
their precursors could be removed during water treatment. Five techniques
have been studied and their effectiveness compared. In addition, an
ongoing study on the removal of general organics with granular activated
carbon beds, and future research plans involving pilot and full-scale
research on treatment techniques are described. Techniques to control
inorganics are discussed, including those directed to removing radionuclides
and asbestos.
Techniques for Controlling Organics
Treatment Process Modification.- Field Scale
EPA is attempting to keep water utilities apprised of developments
in controlling organics. For example, the common, practice of prechlori-
nating raw surface water to ensure adequate disinfection is likely to
produce twice the amount of trihalomethanes compared to chlorination
after the water is coagulated and settled. For this reason, EPA has
been urging water purveyors to review critically their chlorination
practices to see if simple modifications (such as changing the point
of chlorine application) can be made that would minimize the formation
of chloroform yet still provide microbiologically safe drinking water.
In an attempt to reduce the concentration of trihalomethanes in
its finished water, one major water utility has made several operational
changes in its 160 mgd water treatment plant. These changes include:
1. Moving the chlorination application point to follow the
presettling basin stage in order to reduce the chlorine contact
time (and thus the time for trihalomethane formation) and to improve
the quality of water prior to chlorination.
40
-------
2. Adding powdered activated carbon (PAC) to the raw water
in an attempt to reduce the trihalomethane precursor concentration(s).
3. Adjusting the pH toward conditions less favorable for trihalo-
methane formation.
4. Changing the coagulant dosage to improve precursor removal.
5. Reducing the chlorine dose consistent with bacteriological
quality requirements.
6. Moving the point of chldrination to the last step in the
treatment process.
Data collected during these operation changes are still being
analyzed, but preliminary results are favorable.
Control of Specific Organics
To date, the major treatment technique investigated for the removal
of specific organics from drinking water has been granular activated
carbon (GAC). About ten years ago, partially exhausted granular activated
carbon was shown to remove dieldrin, 1indane,' 2,4,5-T, DDT, and parathion
to below the detection limit of the available analytic methodology.
About the same time, fresh granular activated carbon used to treat Kanawha
River water was shown to remove bis (2-chloroethyl) ether, a-methylbenzyl
alcohol, acetophenone, isophorone, and tetralin. This removal was effective
for most of these compounds for about six weeks. More recent studies
have shown that fresh granular activated carbon receiving finished water
from Evansville, Indiana, removed all detectable bis (2-chloroethyl)
ether and bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether. Finally, a GAC column removed
approximately 30 pg/£ of naphthalene spiked into Cincinnati, Ohio,
tap water for 8 months. After that time, although other organics
were penetrating the bed, the naphthalene was being removed within the
top 3 inches (10 cm) of the column. This indicates that GAC may be
very effective in removing naphthalene.
Removal- of Trihalometlvmes and Trihalomethane Precursors
Since the fall of 1974, a major in-house research effort has
been directed toward understanding under what conditions trihalomethanes
or their precursors could be removed during water treatment. Because
no test for trihalomethane precursors presently exists, the removal
of trihalomethane precursors is measured by the,concentration of trihalo-
methanes, primarily chloroform, formed during chlorination after some
specific treatment has been applied. This result is compared with the
concentration of trihalomethanes formed from a control sample after
similar chlorination.
Granular Activated Carbon '
The removal of trihalomethane by granular activated carbon was
studied by passing Cincinnati, Ohio, tap water over one coal-based and
-------
one lignite-based granular activated carbon bed. For about one month,
both columns removed all of the trihalomethanes, and then some chloroform
began appearing in the effluent. Within ten weeks, both columns were
exhausted for trihalomethane removal.
At the same time, a pilot plant, made of stainless steel and glass,
was treating 0.4 liters/minute (150 gal/day) of unchlorinated Ohio River
water to demonstrate how effectively trihalomethane precursors could
be removed. Studies have shown that coagulation of the river water
with alum, sedimentation, and passage through a 30-inch (75 cm) GAC
combination filter/adsorber was nearly 100 percent effective for removing
trihalomethane precursors for two weeks; 50 percent effective for 10
weeks; and exhausted after 20 weeks. After 10 weeks, the amount of
chloroform formed after a 4-day chlorine contact time was 16 yg/x,.
Finally, in a companion experiment, after 20 weeks of operation, a GAC
filter/adsorber that was twice as deep as the one previously described
was about 50 percent effective for trihalomethane precursor removal,
indicating a direct relationship between performance and bed depth.
Current experience indicates that the effective life of GAC for the
removal of trihalomethane precursor is somewhat limited.
Powdered Activated Carbon
Doses of powdered activated carbon (PAC) much higher than ordinarily
used in water treatment were required before any removal of trihalomethanes
or trihalomethane precursors occurred. A PAC dose of 100 mg/£ resulted
in only 50 percent removal of chloroform. Similarly, in a separate
experiment, the same dose removed approximately 50 percent of the trihalo-
methane precursors, as measured by the concentration of trihalomethanes
after chlorination.
Aeration .
Attempts were made to strip trihalomethanes, which have relatively
low boiling points, from water using aeration techniques. Little, if
any, success was obtained using diffused-air aeration with one-to-one
air-to-water ratios and contact times typical of aeration in water treatment
practice. On the other hand, larger doses of gas, up to fifteen-to-
one gas-to-water ratios, removed approximately 50 percent of the chloroform.
Even higher gas-to-water ratios were required for essentially complete
chloroform removal. Studies on aeration will continue, concentrating
on spray rather than diffused-air aeration.
Ozone
Ozone was used after coagulation, settling, and mixed-media filtra-
tion at a disinfection level dose (0.6 to 0.7 mg/a) and for approxi-
mately 6 minutes of contact. This application of ozone did not result
in reduction of trihalomethane precursors as evidenced by trihalomethane
formation upon subsequent chlorination. Increasing the ozone dose 30
times still produced no reduction in trihalomethane precursors. Only at
42
-------
an economically impractical dose, 350 times the disinfection dose, did
a 30 percent reduction in trihal omethane precursors occur. ;.
' • .'• .«'•''•
To investigate the role that contact time plays in precursor reduction '!
using ozone, batch studies have also been performed. These studies i
show that trihalomethane precursors are resistant to ozonation, at least >
under the test conditions selected. For example, two hours of continuous ;:
ozonation were required to reduce the trihalomethane precursor level
in dual-media filter effluent by 50 percent. Batch studies have also
shown that trihalomethane precursors are more readily removed by ozone
from Ohio River water than from dual-media filtered water, probably
because of their presence in much higher concentrations. Further studies /
will be directed towards raw water ozonation for trihal omethane precursor ';'
removal. Initial studies have shown that a dose of 24 mg/i of ozone V(
was not effective in removing trihal omethanes themselves. :.''
Chlorine Dioxide •}•{
Because of its oxidizing properties, chlorine dioxide has been ,.]
used to some extent for taste and odor control, but because of its cost, \l
it is not widely used in water treatment practice for disinfection.
In this study it is being used, however, as a disinfectant to investigate ,.
the formation of trihalomethanes. Pure chlorine dioxide can be formed i
by slowly adding 10 percent sulfuric acid to a 10 percent solution
of sodium chlorite. Under these conditions, over a wide range of doses •
(0.15 - 6 mg/£) and contact times (30 min. to 4 days), no trihalomethanes ,:
were formed. Disinfection was satisfactory.
When chlorine dioxide is used in water treatment, it is generated
by reacting excess chlorine with sodium chlorite; therefore, chlorine
dioxide is rarely .encountered in practice without excess chlorine also :
present. Initial data indicate that when water is dosed with both chlorine ;:
dioxide and chlorine, trihalomethane formation occurs. The concentration !
formed is less than that with the equivalent amount of chlorine alone,
however. At least under the test conditions studied, chlorine dioxide
apparently has some influence on the reaction of chlorine and the trihalo-
methane precursor(s). '.
Treatment for General Organics < \
An attempt is being made to produce continuously water low in ;
organic content. If the organic content of the treated water is low, '/
the likelihood that it contains any specific carcinogen is minimized. •;'
The parameter being used to judge the success of this experiment is non- ;>
volatile total organic carbon (NVTOC). The goal of this experiment is |,
to produce continuously water with an NVTOC concentration - 100 yg/a. >'
43
-------
The treatment method being studied is an upflow countercurrent,
"moving bed" GAC column. Water enters the bottom of the column and
flows upward through the GAC bed. NVTOC samples are periodically
collected from the column influent, GAC bed midpoint, and column effluent.
When the effluent NVTOC concentration exceeds 100 yg/£ and continues to
show an upward trend for several days, one-half of the GAC is removed
from the bottom of the bed and an equal quantity of fresh GAC is added
at the top.
Three bed depths of a coal-based GAC have been investigated for
effectiveness in treating Cincinnati tap water. Using an 8-inch (27 cm)
bed, the NVTOC limit was met for only 1 to 3 days of operation, while a
16-inch (41 cm) bed was able to meet the NVTOC limit for 8 to 12 days.
A 30-inch (76 cm) bed has met the limit for up to 30 days, although the
period is variable, possibly because of hydraulic short-circuiting.
Further study of GAC treatment will use various grades and types of GAC
and larger diameter columns to improve hydraulic flow. The effluent
will be analyzed for the penetration of specific organics of interest as
well as for NVTOC.
Extramural Research
Future plans include pilot- and full-scale research designed to
examine the effectiveness of granular activated carbon, aeration, syn-
thetic resins, potassium permanganate, UV catalyzed oxidation, and
ozonation for the removal of specific raw water contaminants of concern,
particularly carcinogens. Negotiations are currently in progress with
the water utilities of Miami, Florida; Cincinnati, Ohio; Evansville,
Indiana; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, that
hopefully will lead to the award of research grants to these utilities
for the large scale study of various water treatment organic removal
unit processes. In addition, the Ohio River Valley Sanitation Commission
(ORSANCO) has proposed to act as a broker for several water utilities in
the Ohio Valley who wish to alter their treatment practices to reduce
the concentration of trihalomethanes in their finished water.
Other planned research grants and contracts*will investigate various
aspects of the problem of carcinogens in drinking water, such as the
influence of agricultural runoff on trihalomethane formation, reaction
of chlorine with activated carbon and resulting by-products, competitive
adsorption on GAC of specific organics of concern, specific precursors
of trihalomethane formation, methods of reactivation of GAC, and formation
of other chlorinated by-products during disinfection. At this time
(November 1975), none of these research grants has been awarded and
funding is uncertain.
44
-------
Treatment Studies on Inorganics
Of the substances studied thus far, only arsenic, selenium, and
nitrates (potential nitrosoamine precursors) have been considered as
suspected carcinogens in drinking water. Treatment technology studies
for these substances have been conducted. Arsenic and selenium were
studied in bench- and pilot-scale investigations by spiking Ohio River
water and ground water from Glendale, Ohio, with concentrations of arsenic
from two to ten times the levels in the Interim Primary Drinking Water
Regulations.
Bench- and pilot-scale studies on arsenic, selenium, mercury, barium,
cadmium, and chromium have been conducted. These investigations showed
that no one technique was effective for all contaminants studied. Lirce
softening achieved good removals on inorganic mercury, barium, arsenic
V, cadmium, and chromium III. Ferric sulfate coagulation was effective
for removing inorganic mercury, arsenic V, selenium IV, cadmium, and
chromium III. Alum coagulation was effective on arsenic V, cadmium,
and chromium III, although ferrous sulfate produced good removals on
chromium VI. No technique was found very effective for arsenic III
and selenium VI. Arsenic III can be removed by any method effective
on arsenic V, providing arsenic III is first oxidized (chlorinated)
to arsenic V. Preliminary results showed that reverse osmosis was effective
for selenium VI removal. Anion exchange resins were effective for nitrate- ,
nitrogen removal in soft water, but were less efficient in highly mineralize^
water.
The optimum removals were as follows: arsenic V, excess lime softening,
60 to >90 percent removal, selenium IV, iron coagulation at pH <7, 30
to 60 percent removal, and nitrate-nitrogen, anion exchange >90 percent
removal. Data presented earlier in the Report show that trihalomethane
formation is enhanced by chlorination at higher pH. Therefore, any
treatment processes used for inorganic contaminant removal that results
in a higher pH may cause an increase in trihalomethane concentration,
other factors being the same. Future work will consist of continuing
the studies on the removal of selenium VI and investigating the removal
of lead. In addition, a research grant was funded to study further
the removal of nitrate from drinking water by ion exchange.
Techniques for Controlling Radionuclides
Information on the treatment potential of various techniques for
radium 226 removal was obtained by monitoring several water treatment
plants in Iowa and Illinois that are treating water that is naturally
high in radium 226. Ion exchange, softening, lime softening, and reverse
osmosis were found to be effective for removing radium 226. To improve
treatment cost data, a research grant was funded to determine the cost
of unit treatment processes to remove radium 226 and the cost of disposing
of the waste sludge material.
45
-------
Methods of Removing Asbestiform Fibers
Mixed media filtration and diatomaceous earth (DE) filtration were
shown to be effective for reducing asbestiform fiber counts in Lake
Superior water during pilot plant research conducted for five months
in 1974. Among the most effective techniques were pretreatment of the
water with alum and a nonionic polymer before mixed media filtration,
and coating of the DE filter aid with alum or a polymer. Both amphibole
and chrysotile fiber counts can be markedly reduced by either filtration
technique. During the pilot plant study, engineering data were also
obtained for making cost estimates for construction and operation of
both granular media and DE filtration plants ranging in capacity from
0.03 to 30 million gallons per day.
The City of Duluth has accepted a demonstration grant from EPA
to build and operate a 30-million gallon per day filtration plant to
demonstrate full-scale water treatment for reduction of asbestiform
fiber count. EPA will provide guidance and direction for the research
to be conducted at the plant. EPA is also considering research grant
applications for development of a rapid optical means of detecting asbestiform
fibers in drinking water, and for pilot plant research to reduce the
chrysotile fiber count in water from a protected mountain watershed.
46
-------
COST OF TREATMENT TO REMOVE CARCINOGENS
General Cost of Water
In most major metropolitan areas, the cost of drinking water,
including coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and dis-
infection, is from 30 to 50 cents per 1000 gallons. Of this overall
cost, only 5 to 8 cents per 1000 gallons is the cost of water treatment.
EPA has nearly completed a study that shows the average cost of drinking
water in eleven major utilities to be about 43 cents per 1000 gallons.
Twelve percent of these costs are for treatment, with the balance for
acquisition of water, pumping, salaries of employees, administration,
amortization of distribution systems, and other nontreatment costs.
Additional treatment costs should be viewed in relation to the overall
cost. Although treatment costs are relatively small, these costs will
be significantly affected as a result of the implementation of the Safe
Drinking Water Act.
In an effort to determine possible cost increases, an attempt was
made to estimate treatment costs for the control of a variety of contaminants.
These costs, which include amortization of capital equipment as well as
operation and maintenance costs, are only very general estimates because
of several uncertain factors. These factors include the availability of
chemicals, costs of chemical handling and disposal, cost of energy,
general inflationary trends in materials and labor, and uncertainty of
specific technology application, such as the reactivation schedule
necessary when using granular activated carbon to prevent the breakthrough
of toxic contaminants. For example, other investigators have estimated
the cost of treating highly contaminated water by granular activated
carbon to be about 11 cents per 1000 gallons as' compared with the estimates
contained in Table 10. Other uncertainties are lack of knowledge as to
where, nationwide, these treatment processes will have to be applied and
the impact of economics of scale. For example, the unit cost of applying
these treatment processes to small systems may be much higher than in
large systems. Finally, future research may develop new treatment
methods unknown at this time (November 1975). Therefore, although these
costs are accurate within the assumptions used, they must be viewed
within the context of the above uncertainties. EPA is sponsoring several
extramural projects that are designed to collect better cost information
so that these estimates can be refined in the future.
Cost of Removing Carcinogenic Contaminants
By-Products of Chlorination (Chloroform and Other Trihalomethanes)
Studies have shown that removing trihalomethanes is more difficult
than preventing their formation. Two techniques are available for avoiding
trihalomethane formation. One is the use of an alternative to chlorine
as a disinfectant; the other is to remove the precursor(s) that react
with chlorine.
The most common choices for alternate disinfectants are ozone and
chlorine dioxide. Ozone is a very strong disinfectant, but has the
47
-------
disadvantage of not producing a disinfectant residual to carry through-
out the distribution system. Furthermore, the reactions of ozone with
organic compounds in the water are not well known. The possibility of
the formation of undesirable by-products is under investigation. Chlo-
rine dioxide has the advantage of producing a disinfectant residual, but
generation of this material without excess chlorine is somewhat dif-
ficult. Further, sodium chlorite, one of the reactants to produce
chlorine dioxide, is relatively expensive, 65 cents per pound. The by-
products of chlorine dioxide oxidation are also unknown at this time,
and the toxicity of chlorite, should any remain in the water, is of
concern.
Because the disinfecting powers of these three disinfectants are
different, the most appropriate way to compare them is on an equal
disinfection basis. At the present time, this is not possible and
research is necessary to better understand their disinfecting powers.
On the basis of a dose of 1 mg/£, the cost of disinfection in cents per
one thousand gallons is 0.08 cents for chlorine, 0.5 cents for chlorine
dioxide, and 0.1 cents for ozone.
Studies have shown that for 10 weeks granular activated carbon can
remove sufficient concentrations of trihalomethane precursors to reduce
the resultant chloroform concentration to 50 percent of that which would
have been produced without treatment. To illustrate the costs that are
involved in using and reactivating GAC on-site, costs have been estimated
for two treatment plants with 10 and 100 million gallons per day filter
capacity. Estimates were calculated for various reactivation times for
GAC. Depending on the quality of the input water, reactivation require-
ments will differ and accordingly affect the size of the furnace required
to reactivate the exhausted activated carbon. The plant and furnace-
capacity will have a major impact on capital cost, although the rate of
activated carbon attrition, maintenance, and energy .requirements will;.,.'
affect operating costs. The cost assumptions used for the calculations
are in Table 9.
The data contained in Table 10 are based on the assumptions listed
in Table 9, and illustrate the dual impact of economies of scale and
water quality on unit treatment costs. For example, for any given
reactivation cycle and flow rate, the cost per unit volume-is less for
the 100 mgd plant than the 10 mgd plant, illustrating the economies of
scale. In addition, operating .costs (fuel, labor, attrition losses, and
maintenance) decline as the reactivation cycles become longer, although
the capital costs remain almost constant. Further, the increase in the
unit volume costs that occurs when the treatment plant is operating at a
rate below that of the initial design illustrates the cost of excess
capacity. Finally, a not so apparent effect on cost is that of input
water quality as reflected by reactivation frequency. The activated
carbon in a 10 mgd plant operating at 7 mgd might be expected to become
exhausted at a slower rate than when the plant is operating at full
capacity, thereby reducing the cost of reactivation. The exact relation
between flow rate and input water quality is not known at this time.
48
-------
Table 9
ESTIMATED COSTS FOR GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT*
Plant Filtration Capacity
10 mgd 100 mgd
Furnace Cost
1 - 3 month reactivation $304,000 $1,100,000
6-8 month reactivation 275,000 560,000
Initial Activated Carbon
-Charge (TbsTT260,000 2,600,000
-Cost ($) 98.,800 988,000
Engineering Fees, Steam
Generator, Quench Tank 20,000 3% of furnace
and carbon costs
Labor per Reactivation 2,500 15,000
*Assumptions Used in Estimating Costs for Granular Activated Carbon
Treatment of Drinking Water
Filter capacity - One million gallons per day ~
Filter design flow rate per square foot (for sizing) -2 gpm/ft
Activated carbon depth - 30 inches 3
Activated carbon loading per filter - 30 pound per ft
Activated" carbon cost - $0.38 per pound
Activated carbon attrition - 10% per reactivation
Amortization rate - 20 years @ 7% -
Fuel requirements - 6000 BTU's per pound of activated carbon reactivated
Fuel costs -$1.26 per million BTU's
Maintenance - 1% of capital costs*
*Capital Costs - Activated carbon, furnace, engineering fees, steam
generator, quench tank.
These costs in Table 10 are in addition to the costs of treating
water for particulate removal and disinfection. The data given are for
the use of GAC as a replacement for the granular media used in conventional
water treatment. Studies have shown that, in terms of organic removal
capacity, the filtration of carryover floe by GAC does not interfere
significantly with adsorption for organic removal. Calculations have
estimated that this is a less expensive method of treatment than the use
of GAC following filtration for clarification.
49
-------
en
o
Table 10
ESTIMATED UNIT COSTS FOR USING GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON IN THE TREATMENT OF DRINKING WATER
Unit Costs (cents/1000 gallons)
Plant Size
(mod)
Actual
Average
Production
(mod)
1 .Month
0 T
Reactivation Frequency
3'Months 6 Months 12 Months 18 Months
C- 0
0
0
0
10 10
7 •
i oo i oo •:
70
1.1
1.6
0.5
0.7
-4.8
6.8
4,6
6.6
5. .9
8.4
5.1
7.3
1..1
1.6
0.5
0.7
1.5
2.1
1.4
2.0
2.6
3.7
1.9
2.7
1.0
1.4
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
0.8
1.1
1.8
2.6
1.2
1.7
1.0
1.4
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.4
2.0
0.8
1.1
1.0
1.4
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.4
1.3
1.9
0.7
1.0
C = Capital costs : (activated carbon, activated carbon furnace, engineering fee, steam generator, eductor,
quench tank) .-•';•
0 = Operating costs (Fuel, labor, attrition losses, maintenance)
T = Total cost . .
These costs may be significantly higher for smaller systems or for
systems that do not have filters that may be.converted to GAC.
For example, some surface water supplies are not generally filtered.
•-*«^--
-------
Organic Contaminants in Raw Water
Thus far, the best method for removing environmental contaminants
such as carbon tetrachloride, dieldrin, and haloethers from raw water is
the use of beds of granular activated carbon. Studies are not suf-
ficiently advanced at this time (November 1975) to determine the exact
length of time of operation before the activated carbon needs to be
reactivated for a wide variety of environmental carcinogens. GAC does,
however, begin to lose some of its effectiveness for general organic
carbon removal as evidenced by an increase in NVTOC concentration in
the effluent after 4 to 6 weeks. In actual practice, the GAC beds might
not have to be reactivated as frequently as these data indicate. For
example, tests have shown that naphthalene is completely removed by GAC
for at least 8 months (the duration of the study). Similarly, other
specific organic compounds of concern may be effectively removed evenf <
though some other organics begin to pass,through the bed. A further < ^
advantage of using GAC beds is that not Only are environmental contanjfinants
removed, but so are trihalpmethane precursors. Finally, the extent off
the national requirement for granular activated carbon treatment will
not be known until the monitoring program described earlier on page 15, \
"Monitoring to Assess Parameters", is completed.
' < v;
Inorganics
Arsenic
Chemical coagulation and l!ime softening can effectively remove
arsenic V and also arsenic III, providing the latter has been oxidized
(by chlorination) to the higher oxidation state prior to treatment.
Because the two water treatment processes are somewhat similar, the
estimated costs for either process to remove arsenic are approximately
the same, 12 to 15 cents per 1000 gallons, for a 1 mgd treatment plant.
Selenium
Lime softening and chemical coagulation can remove selenium IV with
the latter being more effective. As noted above, the costs of the two
processes are approximately the same, 12 to 15 cents per 1000 gallons.
Presently, only reverse osmosis seems effective for the removal of
selenium VI. Consequently, the costs of removing this form of selenium
are much higher than for the reduced form. The range of costs for re-
verse osmosis is estimated to be 71 to 104 cents per 1000 gallons for a
0.15 mgd treatment plant.
Nitrate-nitrogen
The only known treatment system currently (November 1975) in
operation in the United States that is specifically designed to remove
nitrate-nitrogen from drinking water is an ion exchange plant located on
Long Island, New York. The plant has been operating for only a short
time and operating costs are not available. The estimated cost for a 4
mgd plant operating at 40 percent of capacity, however, was 12 to 21
51
-------
cents per 1000 gallons for the removal of 20 to 40 mg/x, of nitrate-
nitrogen. This cost includes operating and amortized capital cost.
Operating costs alone were estimated at 7 to 16 cents per 1000 gallons.
Radium 226/228
Estimates on costs for removing radium from drinking water can be
based on softening costs as the processes that soften water also remove
radium. Typical costs are presented in Table 11.
Table 11
COSTS FOR SOFTENING WATER
Process Plant Size Cost Range. Cents/1000 Gal.
Ion Exchange 1.0 mgd 12 - 15
Lime Softening 1.0 mgd 27-34
Reverse Osmosis 0.15 mgd 71-104
The costs in this table may be low because they do not reflect the costs
of disposing wastes generated by the treatment process in environmentally
acceptable ways. If water treatment plants are compelled by pollution
control agencies to treat wastes from softening processes, these costs
will increase. EPA has funded a research grant designed to develop
better estimates for the cost of radium removal from drinking water,
including waste disposal costs.
Asbestos Fibers
As a result of the pilot-plant research on asbestos fiber removal
conducted in Duluth, Minnesota, where the raw water is relatively low in
turbidity, the estimated cost of water from a new 30 mdg direct filtration
plant capable of removing particulates and asbestos fibers was approximately
7 cents per 1000 gallons. This included amortization of first cost,
plus operating-and maintenance costs. In existing plants currently
operating to remove particulates, the additional cost to upgrade the
treatment to remove asbestos fibers would be small-, involving changes in
coagulants and polyelectrolytes. '
52
-------
APPENDIX I
NATIONAL ORGANICS RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY
-------
APPENDIX I
NATIONAL OR6ANICS RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY
-------
Table 1-1
NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF WATER UTILITIES SURVEYED
Region I
1. Lawrence Water Works
Lawrence, Massachusetts
Merrimack River"
2. Waterbury Bureau of Water
Waterbury, Connecticut
Wigwam and Morris Reservoirs
Morris Treatment Station
3. Metropolitan District Commission
Boston, Massachusetts
Quabbin & Wachusett Reservoirs
Norumbego Treatment Station
4. Newport Department of Water
Newport, Rhode Island Reservoirs
South Pond Reservoir Treatment
Plant #1
Region II
5. Department of Water Resources
New York, New York
Croton Reservoir
6. Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer
Authority
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Lake Carraizo
Sergio Curevas Water Treatment Plant
7. Passaic Valley Water Commission
Little Falls, New Jersey
Passaic River
3. Toms River Water Company
Tons River, Mew Jersey
Ground
Well *20 ( •
9. Buffalo Hater Department
Buffalo,.New York
Lake. Eri'e
10. Village of Rhinebeck Water Dept.
Rhinebeck, New York
Hudson River
Region III
11. Philadelphia Water Department
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Delaware River
Torresdale Plant
12. Wilmington Suburban Water Corp.
Claymont, Delaware
Red Clay and White Clay Creek
Stanton Plant
13. Artesian Water Company
Newark, Delaware
Ground
Llangolen Well Field Plant
14. Washington Aqueduct
Washington, D.C.
Potomac River
Delacarlia Plant
15. Baltimore City - Bureau of
Water Supply
Baltimore, Maryland
Loch Raven Reservoir
Montebello Plant #1
16. Western Pennsylvania Water Company
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Monongahela River
Hays Mine Plant
17. Strasburg Borough Water System
Strasburg, Pennsylvania
Ground
18. Fairfax County Water Authority
Annandale, Virginia
Occoquan River Impoundment
New Lorton Plant
Table I-2 .uses the same numbers to designate the different water utilities.
The name of the utility is listed first, followed by the city name, the name of the
raw we/ter source, and, if the utility has more than one treatment plant, the name of
the treatment plant sampled.
1-1
-------
19. Virginia American Water Co.
Hopewell District
Hopewell, Virginia
Appomattox River
20.. Huntington Water Corp.
Huntington, West Virginia
Ohio River
21. Wheeling Water Department
Wheeling, West Virginia
Ohio River
Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Authority
Miami,.Florida
Ground
Preston Plant
23. Jacksonville Dept. of Public Works
•Jacksonville, Florida
Ground
Highlands Pumping Station
24. Atlanta Waterworks
Atlanta, Georgia
Chattahoochee River
Chattahoochee Plant .
25. Owensboro Municipal Utilities
Owensboro, Kentucky
Ground
26. Greenville Water Department
Greenville, Mississippi
Ground
Water Plant Well #2
27. Tennessee American Water Company
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Tennessee River
28. Memphis Light, Gas and Water Div.
Memphis, Tennessee
Ground
Malloy Plant .
29. Metropolitan Water & Sewage Dept.
Nashville, Tennessee
Cumberland River
30. Commissioner of Public Works
Charleston, South Carolina
Edisto River
Stoney Plant
Region V •-,
31. Cincinnati Water Works
Cincinnati, Ohio
Ohio River
32. Chicago Dept. of Water and Sewers
Chicago, Illinois
Lake Michigan
South District Water Filtration Plant
33. Clinton Public Water Supply
Clinton, Illinois
Ground
34. Indianapolis Water Company
Indianapolis, Indiana
White River and Wells
White River Plant
35. Whiting Water Department
Whiting, Indiana
Lake Michigan
36. Detroit Metro Water Department
Detroit, Michigan
Detroit River Intake at head of
Belle Isle
Waterworks Park .Plant
37a. Mt. Clemens Water Purification
Mt. Clemens, Michigan
Lake St. Clair
37b. Mt. Clemens Water Purification0
Mt. Clemens, Michigan
Lake St. Clair
38. St. Paul Water Department
St. Paul, Minnesota
Mississippi River
39. Cleveland Division of Water
Cleveland, Ohio
Lake Erie
Division Filtration Plant
40. City of Columbus
Columbus Ohio
Scioto River
Dublin Road Plant
GResampled after granular activated carbon was changed.
1-2
-------
41. Dayton Hater Works
Dayton, Ohio
Ground
Ottawa Plant
42. Indian Hill Water Supply
Cincinnati, Ohio
Ground
43. Piqua Water Supply
Piqua, Ohio
Swift Run Lake
44. Mahoning Valley Sanitary District
Youngstown, Ohio
Meander Creek Reservoir
45. Milwaukee Water Works
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Lake Michigan
Howard Avenue Purification Plant
46. Oshkosh Water Utility
Oshkosh, Wisconsin
Lake Winnebago
Region VI
47. Terrebonne P?^rish Waterworks
District #1
Houma, Louisiana
Bayoulafourche
48. Camden M-jnicipal Water Works
Camden, Arkansas
Ouachi-'ca River
49. Town: of Logansport Water System
Logansport, Louisiana
Sa'oine River
50. City of Albuquerque
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Ground
/
51. Oklahoma City Water Department
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Lake Hefner
Hefner Plant
52. Brownsville Public Utility Board
Brownsville, Texas
Rio Grande River
Plant #2
53. Dallas Water Utilities
Dallas, Texas
Elm Fork, Trinity River
Bachman Plant
54. San Antonio City Water Board
San Antonio, Texas
Ground
Region VII
55a. Ottumwa Water Works
Ottumwa, Iowa
Des Moines River
55b. Ottumwa Water Worksd
Ottumwa, Iowa
Des Moines River
56. Clarinda Iowa Water Works
Clarinda, Iowa
Nodaway River
57. Davenport Mater Company
Davenport, Iowa
Mississippi River
58. Topeka Public Water Supply
Topeka, Kansas
Kansas River
South Plant
59. Missouri Utility Company
Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Mississippi River
60. Kansas City Missouri Water Dept.
Kansas City, Missouri
Missouri River
61. St. Louis County Water Company
St. Louis, Missouri
Missouri River
Central Plant
62. Lincoln Municipal Water Supply
Lincoln, Nebraska
Ground
Region VIII
63. City Water Department
Grand Forks, North Dakota
Red Lake
Resampled
1-3
-------
74.
75.
64. Denver Water Board
Denver, Colorado
Marston Lake
Marston Plant
65. Pueblo Board of Waterworks
Pueblo, Colorado
Arkansas River
Gardner Plant
66. Huron Water Department
Huron, South Dakota
James River
67. Salt Lake Water Department
Salt Lake, Utah
Mountain Dell Reservoir
Region IX
68. City of Tucson Water and Sewers Dept.
Tucson, Arizona
Ground
Plant #1
69. City of Phoenix Water & Sewers
Department
Phoenix, Arizona
Salt and Verde Rivers
Verde Plant
70. Department of Supply & Purification
Coalinga, California
California Aqueduct
71. Contra Costa County Water Department
Concord, California
Contra Costa Canal and San Joaquin River
Bollman Plant
72. City of Dos Palos Water Department
Dos Palos, California
Delta-Mendota Canal
73. Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power
Los Angeles, California
Van Norman Reservoir
San Diego Water Utilities
San Diego, California
Colorado River Aqueduct
Miramar Plant
Deot.
San Francisco Water Department
San Francisco, California
San Andreas Reservoir
San Andreas Treatment Plant
Region X
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
Seattle Water Department
Seattle, Washington
Cedar River Impoundment
Cedar River System
Douglas Water System
Douglas, Alaska
'Douglas Reservoir
Idaho Falls Water Department
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Ground
City of Corvallis Utilities Div.
Corvallis, Oregon
Willamette River
Taylor Plant
Ilwaco Municipal Water Department
Ilwaco, Washington
Black Lake
1-4
-------
Table 1-2
NATIONAL ORGANICS RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY WATER QUALITY DATA
DATA FROM 80 UTILITIES FOR FOUR TRIHALOMETHANES, CARBON TETRACHLORIDE, AND 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Lawrence Water Works
Waterbury Bureau of Water.
(Morris Treatment Station)
Metropolitan District Commission
(Norumbego Treatment Station)
Boston, Massachusetts
Newport Dept. of Water
(South Pond Reservoir Treatment Plant #1)
Department of Water Resources
New York, New York
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Auth.
(Sergio Cuevas Water Treatment Plant)
Passa.ic Valley Water Commission
Little Falls, New Jersey
Toms River Water Company
Chloroform
yg/i
-------
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Buffalo Water Department.
Village of Rhinebeck Water Department
Philadelphia Water Department
(Torresdale Plant)
Wilmington Suburban Water Corp.
(Stanton Plant)
Claymont, Delaware
Artesian Water Company
(Llangolen Well Field Plant)
Washington Aqueduct
(Delacarlia Plant)
Baltimore City Bureau of Water Supply
(Montebello Plant #1.)
Western Pennsylvania Water Company
(Hays Mine Plant)
Strasburg .Borough Water System
Fairfax County Water Authority
(New Lorton Plant)
Virginia-American Water Company
Hopewell District
Chloroform
yg/1
NF
10
0.3
49
0.2
86
0.3
23
0.2
0.5
<0.2 -
41
NF
32
0.3
8
NF '
<0.1
<0.2
67
0.2
6
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
ug/1
NF
10
NF
11
NF
9
<0.4
11
NF
0.5
NF . •
.8
NF
11
NF
2
NF
NF
<0.4
6
NF
1
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
uq/1
NF
4
NF
1
NF
5
- NF
3
NF
1
NF
2
NF
2
NF
0.4
NF
NF
NF
<0.6
NF
0.8
Bromo-
form
' ug/1
NF
NF
NF
NF
HF
NF
NF
NF
NF
<1
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
<2
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
uQ/1
NF
<0.2
3
2
3
6
. NF
<0.4
HF
<0.2
NF
<0.3
NF
NF
NF
NF
• NP
NF
NF '
NF
NF
NF
Carbon
Tetra-
chloride
ug/l
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
<2
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
Non-
Volatile
Total Organics
Carbon
ug/i
2.6
1.7
3.5
1.6
2.6
1.-7
2. e
1.8
0. OS
0.2
1.8
1.2
i.e
1.2
o.s
0.8
0.2
0.05
4.7
2.7
4.2
0.2
-------
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Huntington Water Corp.
Wheeling Water Department
Miami-Oade Water and Sewer Authority
(Preston Plant)
Jacksonville Dept. of Public Works
(Highlands Pumping Station)
Atlanta Waterworks
(Chattahoochee Plant)
Owensboro Municipal Utilities
Greenville Water Department
Tennessee American Water Company
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Memphis Light, Gas and Water Div.
(Malloy Plant)
Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Dept.
(Lawrence Plant)
Commissioners of Public Works
(Stoney Plant)
Chloroform
ug/l
i
23
0.2
72
OF
311
fiF
9
<0. 2
36
NF
13
0.3
17
0.9
30
<0. 2
0.9
<0. 1
16
<0.2
195
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
UQ/.I
NF
16
NF
28
11F
73
NF
4
NF
10
UF
20
UF '
6
UF
9
NF
2
UF
5
UF
9
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
uQ/1
tJF
5
>;F
17
li?
35
A'F
2
11?
. 2
/;r"
17
tlF
3
/iff
0.7
/VF
1
HF
<0.4
/i'F
0.8
Bromo-
form
M9/1
/VF
NF
tfF
NF
/VF
3
fff
NF
NF
NF
NF
3
NF
<1
tfF
NF
/VF
NF
NF
NF
NF
0.8
1.2-
Dichloro-
ethane
uq/1
<0.3
<0.4
<0.3
<0.4
<0. 2
<0.2
NF
NF
-------
31.
32.
33.
34.
..
36.
37a.
37b.
38.
39.
40.
Utility Name C
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Cincinnati Water Works
Chicago Dept. of Water and Sewers
(South District Water Filt. Plant)
Clinton Public Water Supply
Indianapolis Water Company.
(White River Plant)
WhitinQ Wfltcr DGOSftincn t
Detroit Metro Water Department
(Water Park Plant)
Mt. Clemens Water Purification
Mt. Clemens Water Purification
(After replacement of granular not. carbon)
St. Paul Water Authority
Cleveland Division of Water
(Division Filtration Plant)
City of Columbus
.(Dublin Road Plant)
;hloroform
ug/1
0.5
45
<0.2/0.4
15
<0.2
4
0.1
31
7/7
j. rj
0.1
0.5
<0.2
12'
NF
11
0.9
6
<0.2
44
NF
18
0.1
134
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
ug/1
NF
13
HF/<0. 5
10
NF
0.5
NF
8
<0. 8
0.3
NF
9
NF
6
' NF
3
iVF
7
NF
9
NF
8
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
ug/1
IIF
4
HF/i;r
4
NF
NF
HF '
<2
_
KF
NF
!!F
3
NF
<2
NF
<2
NF
2
HF
4
NF
<0.4
Bromo-
form
ug/1
[IF
NF
I.'t/NF
NF
!IF
NF
IIF
NF
,.n
iVF
NF
:VF
NF
HF
NF
[IF
NF
NF
NF
[IF
NF ,
KF
NF
1,2-
Dichloro-
ethane
f/F
<0.4
flF/NF
<0.4
NF
NF
-------
41.
42.
' 43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.'
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Dayton Water Works
(Ottawa Plant)
Indian Hill Water Supply
Piqua Water Supply
Mahoning Valley Sanitary District
Youngstown, Ohio
Milwaukee Water Works
(Howard Avenue Purification Plant)
Oshkosh Water Utility
Terrebonne Parish Waterworks
District #1, Houma, Louisiana
Camden Municipal Water Works
Town of Logansport System
City of Albuquerque
Oklahoma City Water Department
(Hefner Plant)
Chloroform
u
-------
52..
53.
54.
55a.
55b.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
Brownsville Public Utility Board
(Plant #2)
Da ';las i-iater Utilities
(Bachnan Plant)
San Antonio City /later
Ottumwa Waterworks
Ott.uniwa Waterworks
Clarinda Iowa Water Works
Davenport Water Company
Topeka Public Water Supply
(South Plant)
Missouri Utility Company
Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Kansas City Mo. Water Department
St. Louis County Water Company
(Central Plant)
Lincoln Municipal Water Supply
Chloroform
ug/1
/VF
12
is'
I1F
0.2
<0.2
. . . 0.8
He ~
' 1
<0. 2
48
0 4
88
0.4
• 88
0.2
116
•NF
24
/VF
55
iff
• 4
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
uq/1
NF
37
NF
' ' 4
NF '
0.9
NF
' .' NF
. • //F
NF
/VF
19
' A'F
8
' <0.8 .
38
NF
21
. NF
8
A'F
13
A'F
6
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
NF
100
A'F
<2
NF
3
A'F
NF
NF
/VF
4
<0.6
A'F
19
A'F
2
A'F
2
A'F
3
A'F
4
Bromo-
form
/VF
92
NF
/VF
3
A'F
NF
A'F
NF .
A'F
NF
A'F
NF
A'F
5
NF
NF
NF
IIP
<2
1,2-
Dichloro- .
ethane
vq/1
/VF
NF
NF
A'F
• NF
NF
NF
NF
NF
<0.4
NF
5.2
0.3
/VF
f!F
0'.4
/VF
NF
Carbon
Tetra-
chloride
uq/1
NF
/•'F
NF
HP
NF .
A'F
NF
A'F
NF
A'F
NF
NF-
NF
NF'
3
NF
2
A'F
NF
NF
NF
NF .
Non-
Volatile
Total -Organics
Carbon
- 4. 7
3.1
2'. 9
c".5
2. 3
4.3
s'.o
0. C
4.4
2 '.2
3'. 6
2.4
1.9
2'. 6
2.4
1.4
-------
Utility Name
_j (Plant .'igrre When_Applicable)
53. City A'eter Department
Grand Forks, ,'iorth Dakota
64. Denver Water Board
(Marstori Plant)
65. Pueblo Board of Waterworks
(Gardner Plant) .
66. Huron Water Department
67. Salt Lake Water Department
63. City of Tucson Water & Sewer Dept.
(Plant =1)
69. City of Phoenix Water & Sewer Dept.
(Verde Plant)
70. Department of.Supply & Purification,
Coalinga, California
71. Contra Costa .County Water Dept.
(Bollman Plant, Concord, Calif.)
72. City of Dos Palos Water Dept.
73. Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power
74. San Diego Water Utilities Dept.
(Miramar Plant)
Chloroform
-------
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
30.
Utility Name
(Plant Name When Applicable)
San Francisco Water Department
(San Andreas Treatment Plant)
Seattle Water Department
(End of Dist. System)
Douglas Water System
Idaho Falls Water Department
Gity of Corvallis Utilities Div.
(Taylor Plant)
Ilwaco Municipal Water Department
RANGE
Chloroform
yg/1
NF
41
<0.2
15
NF
40
<0.2
2
NF
26
0.1
167
NF -0.9
<0.1 - 311
Bromo-
dichloro-
methane
uq/1
NF •
15
NF
0.9
NF
0.8
NF
3 .
NF
3
NF
35
NF - 0.8
NF - 116
Dibromo-
chloro-
methane
uq/1
tlF
4
NF
NF
HF
<0.4
NF
3
HF
NF
[IF
5
NF
NF - 100
Bromo-
form
uQ/1
','"
-------
Table 1-3
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS DETECTED IN SURVEY OF TEN CITIES
(Unless otherwise noted, all identifications and quantifications
were performed by volatile organic analysis (VOA))
Concentrations, ug/1
COMPOUNDS
1. Acetaldehyde (Ethanal)
2. Acetic acid, methyl ester
(Methyl acetate)
' 3. Acetophenone
4. Atrazine
5. Azulene
6. Benzaldehyde
7. Benzene
8. Benzoic acid
MIA
FL
d
d
0.1
SEA
WA
$.,<
d
OTT
IA
d
O.lc
d
0.1
15. Ob
PHI
PA
oV
1.0°
d
0.2
CIN
OH
d
d
0.3
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
d
LAW
MA
d
Gr F
ND
d
Tr P
LA
I
CO
Key
Combination vinyl chloride and cyanogen chloride
Liquid-liquid extraction
Carbon chloroform extract
Detected by 500-rr:l VOA but not quantified
Nomenclature: Chemical Abstracts; ( ) = common name
Cities: MIA = Miami, Fla.
SEA = Seattle, Wash.
OTT = Ottumwa, Iowa
PHI = Philadelphia, Pa.
CIN = Cincinnati, Ohio
TUC = Tucson, Arizona
NYC = New York, N.Y.
LAW = Lawrence, Mass.
Gr F = Grand Forks, N.D.
Tr P = Terrebonne Parish, La.
-------
COMPOUNDS
9. Bromochloromethane
10. Bromodichloromethane
11. Bromoethyne (Bromoacetylene)
12. Bromomethane
13. Bromotrichloroethene
14. 1-Butanol
15. Butene
16. 2-Butanone
17. 2-Butenal
18. t-Butyl toluene
19. 2-n-Butoxyethanol
20. Camphor
21. Carbon disulfide
22. Chloral (Trichloroacetaldehyde)
23. Chlorobenzene
24. Chloroethane
25. Chloroethene (Vinyl chloride)
MIA
FL
d
d
73.0
4.5C
d
d
d
d
d
0.5C
d
^
d
d
d
5.6
SEA
WA
d
4.0 •
O.lc
d
0.5C.
3.5C
d
d
OTT
IA
d
d
O.lc
d
PHI
PA
d
20.0
1.0C
d
0.01C
d
5.0C
d
0.1
d
d
d
0.27a
CIN'
OH
d
15.0
1.0C
d
d
d
d
O.lc
d
2.0C
d
o.i
0.5C
d
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
17.0
1.3C
d
d
0.02C
4.7
d
LAW
MA
1.8
0.6C
0.12
Gr F
ND
3.2
0.6C
d
d
0.01C
d
Tr P
LA
23.0
2.0C
1.0C
5.6
-------
Table 1-3
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS DETECTED IN SURVEY OF TEN CITIES
(Unless otherwise noted, all identifications and quantifications
were performed by volatile organic analysis (VOA))
Concentrations, ug/1
COMPOUNDS
1. Acetaldehyde (Ethanal)
2. Acetic acid, methyl ester
(Methyl acetate)
' 3. Acetophenone
4. Atrazine
5. Azulene
6. Benzaldehyde
7. Benzene
8. Benzoic acid
MIA
FL
d
d
0.1
SEA
WA
I,'
d
OTT
IA
d
O.lc
d
0.1
15.0b
PHI
PA .
Od,c
1.0C
d
0.2
CIN
OH
d
d
0.3
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
d
LAW
MA
d
Gr F
ND
d
Tr P
LA
I
CO
Key
Combination vinyl chloride and cyanogen chloride
Li quid-liquid extraction
Carbon chloroform extract
Detected by 500-nl VOA but not quantified
Nomenclature: Chemical Abstracts; ( ) = common name
Cities: MIA = Miami, Fla.
SEA = Seattle, Wash.
OTT = Ottumwa, Iowa
PHI = Philadelphia, Pa.
CIN = Cincinnati, Ohio
TUC = Tucson, Arizona
NYC = New York, N.Y.
LAW = Lawrence, Mass.
Gr F = Grand Forks, N.D.
Tr P = Terrebonne Parish, La.
-------
COMPOUNDS
9. Bromochloromethane
10. Bromodichloromethane
11. Bromoethyne (Bromoacetylene)
12; Bromomethane
13. Bromotrichloroethene
14. 1-Butanol
15. Butene
16. 2-Butanone
17. 2-Butenal
18. t-Butyltoluene
19. 2-n-Butoxyethanol
20. Camphor
21. Carbon disulfide
22. Chloral (Trichloroacetaldehyde)
23. Chlorobenzene
24. Chloroethane
25. Chloroethene (Vinyl chloride)
MIA
FL
d
d
73.0
4.5C
d
d
d
d
d
0.5C
d
?.o<
d
d
d
5.6
SEA
WA
d
4.0
0.1C
d
0.5C.
3.5C
d
d
OTT
IA
d
d
O.lc
d
PHI
PA
d
20.0
1.0G
d
0.01C
d
5.0C
d
0.1
d
d
d
0.27a
CIN
OH
d
15.0
1.0°
d
d
d
d
O.lc
d
2.0C
d
°-'c
0.5C
d
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
17.0
1.3C
d
d
0.02C
4.7
d
LAW
MA
1.8
0.6C
0.12
Gr F
ND
3.2
0.6C
d
d
0.01C
d
Tr P
LA
23.0
2.0C
1.0C
5.6
-------
I
tn
COMPOUNDS
26. Bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether
27. Chloroethyne (Chloroacetylene)
28. 1 ,2-Bis(2-Chloroethoxy)ethane
29. Chloromethane
30. 2-Chloropropane
31 . p-Chlorotoluene
32. Cyanogen chloride
33. Cyclohexanone
34. Cymene isomer
35. Dibromomethane
36. Dibromochlorome thane
37. 2,6,Di-t-butyl-p-benzoquinone
38. Di-t-butyl ketone
39. Di-n-butyl phthalate
40. 1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
41. 1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
42. 1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
MIA
FL
d
d
1.5Cd
d
0.1°
d
15. Oc
32.0
O.lc
5.0C
1.0C
d
0.5C
d
0.5C
d
SEA
WA
d
3.0
0.01C
OTT
IA
d
d
O.lc
O.lc
PHI
PA
0.5b
d
0.03b
d
d
0.5C
5.0
0.05C
d
d
d
CIN
OH
d
d
d
d
0.05b
3.0
d
d
d
d
TUC
AR
0.01C
NYC
NY
d
0.4C
LAW
MA
d
0.01C
0.02C
0.01C
d
d
Gr F
ND
d
O.lc
Tr P
LA
d
1.0C
0.02C
-------
I
Ov
COMPOUNDS
43. 1 ,1-Dichloroethane
44. 1 ,2-Dichloroethane
45. 1 ,1-Dichloroethene
(Vinylidene chloride)
46. cis 1 ,2-Dichloroethene
47. trans 1 ,2-Dichloroethene
48. Dichloroiodomethane
49. Dichloroethyne (Dichloroacetylene)
50. Dichlorofluoromethane
51. Dichloromethane
( Methyl ene chloride)
52. Dichloronitromethane
53. 2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid
(2,4-D)
54. Dieldrin
55. Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)
56. Diethyl malonate
57. Diethyl phthalate
58. Di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
59. Dimethyl ether (Methyl ether)
MIA
FL
d
d
d
0.1
d
16.0
d
1.0
d
d
d
d
0.002b
d
1.0C
30. Oc
SEA
WA
d
0.001b
0.01C
d
OTT
IA
d
0.002b
O.lc
PHI
PA
d
d
0.1
d
0.1
d
d
d
d
0.01C
0.5C
d
CIN
OH
d
d
d
0.1
d
d
d
d
d
0.001b
d
0.01C
().lc
d
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
d
0.1
0.01C
LAW
MA
d
d
d
1.6
0.04C
0.8C
Gr F
ND
d
0.1
0.04
j
Tr P
LA
d
d
0.04C
-------
COMPOUNDS
60. Dimethyl disul fide (2,3-Thiabutane)
61. 2,6-Dimethyl-4-heptanone
62. Di-m-octyl adipate
63. 1,4-Dioxane
64. Di-n-propyl phthalate
65. Ethanol
66. Ethyl benzene
67. 2-Ethylbutanal
68. p-Ethyl toluene
69. Fluorotrichloromethane
70. Formaldehyde, dimethyl acetal
( Di methoxymethane )
71. Formic acid; methyl ester (Methyl
formate)
72. Heptadecane
73. Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
74. Hexachloroethane
75. lodomethane (Methyl iodide)
76. Isoamyl chloride
77. Isophorone
MIA
FL
20. Ob
0.05C
d
d
d
0.5C,
0.07b
d
SEA
HA
d
0.05C
d
OTT
IA
d
d
d
PHI
PA
d
d
d
d
d
CIN
OH
d
d
d
0.02b
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
d
0.05C
d
0.01C
LAW
MA
0.01C
d
0.04C
d
Gr F
WO
d
0.02C
<0.01C
Tr P
LA
0.01C
I
--J
-------
I
CO
COMPOUNDS
.78. I sopr.opy.l benzene (Cumene)
79. Lindane (v-BHC)
30. Methanol
81. 3-Methylbutanal (Isovaleralde-
hyde)
82. 3-Methylbutanoic acid nitrile
(Isovaleronitrile)
83. . 3-Methyl-2-butanone
84. Methyl cyanide (Acetonitrile)
85. 2-Methyl-5-ethyl heptane
86. Methyl ethyl ma lei mi de
87. 5-Methylhexa-3-ene-2-one
88. 3-Methyl-3-pentanal
89. 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (Methyl
isobutyl ketone)
90. 2-Methylpropanal (Isobutyral-
dehyde)
91. 2-Methylpropanoic acid nitrile
(Isobutyronitrile)
92. 2-Methyl-2-propanol (t-Butyl
alcohol)
93. 2-Methylpropenal
MIA
FL
d
d
d
d
. d
d
. d
d
d
d
SEA
WA
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
OTT
IA
d
d
1.0C
d
PHI
PA
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
CIN
OH
O.C1C
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
TUC
AR
NYC
NY
d
0.02C
0.07C
LAW
MA
d
Gr F
NO
d
d
Tr P
LA
0.01C
0.01C
d
-------
COMPOUNDS
94. N-methyl pyrrole
95. Nicotine
96. Nitromethane
97. Nitrotrichloromethane
(Chloropicrin)
98. n-Nonane
99. n-Pentanal
100. Pentane
101. 2-Pentanone
102. Phenylacetic acid
103. Propanal (Propimaldehyde)
104. Propanoic acid nitrile
(Propionitrile)
105. 2-Propanone (Acetone)
106. Propenoic acid nitrile
(Acrylonitrile)
107. n-Propyl benzene
108. n-Propylcyclohexane
109. 2-Santalene
110. Styrene (Vinyl benzene)
MIA
FL
3.0b
d
d
0.4
d
d
d
d
d
d
0.05C
0.2C
SEA
WA
d
4.0b
d
1.0C
d
0.01C
OTT
IA
0.05C
0.5C
lie
d .
d
PHI
PA
d
d
2.0
d
d
d
d
CIN
OH
d
d
3.0
d
d
d
d
0.01C
TUC
AR
d
d
»
NYC
MY
0.02C
d
d
d
LAW
MA
d
d
Sr F
NO
d
d
d
d
Tr P
LA
d
d
d
-------
COMPOUNDS
TIT. a-Terpineol
112. Tetrachloroethene (Tetrachloro-
113. Tetrachloromethane (Carbon
tetrachloride)
114. 1 ,1 ,3,3-Tetrachloro-2-propanone
(Tetrachloroacetone)
115. Tetramethyl benzene isomer
116. Tetramethyltetrahydrofuran
isomer
117. Toluene
118. 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
propionic acid (Silvex)
119. Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
120. Tri-n-butyl phosphate
121. Trichlorobenzene isomer
122. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
123. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane
124. Jrichloroethene (Trichloro-
ethylene)
MIA
FL
O.lc
0.1
d
d
0.2C
0.2C
_
^
0.2b d
0.5C
d
d
0.2
SEA
WA
OTT
IA
0.5C
d
0.2
d
0.5C
d
d
0.1
PHI
PA
d
0.4
d
1.0C
d
0.7
d
d
d
0.5
CIN
OH
0.1C
0.3
d
d
0.5C
d
0.1
d
0.05C
d
d
0.1
TUC
AR
<0.01C
d
3.0C
1.5
'NYC
NY
0.05C
0.46
0.13
1.5
LAW
MA
0.07C
d
0.1
d
0.02b
d
d
Gr F
ND
0.2C
0.1
d
Tr P
LA
d '
d
-------
COMPOUNDS
125. Trichloromethane (Chloroform)
126. Trichlorotrifluoroethane
127. 1 ,3,5-Trimethyl-2,4,6-trioxo-
hexahydrotriazine
(Trimethyl isocyanurate)
128. s-Trioxane
129. Xylene
MIA
FL
d
301.0
SEA
WA
d
21.0
OTT
IA
d
1.0
PHI
PA
d
65.0
CIN
OH
d
38.0
0.02b
0.5C
TUC
AR
0.08
NYC
NY
44.0
d
LAW
MA
32.0
d
Gr F
ND
4.0.0
Tr P
LA
130.0
d
d
I
ro
-------
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED IN DRINKING MATER IN THE UNITED STATES
The following list of 253 compounds, was compiled from an extensive search of
the chemical literature and from EPA reports generated from the Agency's analytical
activities. These compounds were identified from only a few public water supplies
and do not constitute a definitive list of all compounds in all supplies. Because
of the restrictive nature of the analytical systems used, the list does not include
all compounds present in the water samples analyzed. These identifications repre-
sent the result of single or duplicate "grab" samples and, consequently, cannot be
used to conclude continuous occurrence. Likewise, fluctuations in concentrations
with time cannot be determined unequivocally from these same samples.
This list was compiled from several sources. The nomenclature assigned by
each source was used despite lack of uniformity. Similarly, the concentrations
listed are those reported. In most cases, these concentration values are deter-
| mined by extrapolation from the extracted sample to the original volume of water.
i These values must be considered minimum concentrations because the extrapolations
did not usually take into account recovery efficiencies. In cases of quantification
by more than one analyst, the highest reported concentration was used.
•j This list of organics identified from potable water is being continuously
! updated, and information concerning the chemical properties and toxicity of these
i compounds is being assembled and evaluated.
II-l
-------
Table II
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED IN DRINKING WATER IN THE UNITED STATES
Highest Concentration
Reported3
Acenaphthylene
Acetaldehyde . 0.1
Acetic acid :
Acetone 1.0
Acetophenone
Acetylenebromide
Acetylenechloride
Acetylene dichloride
Alachlor (l-chloro-21 ,6'-diethyl-N-
(methoxymethyl) acetanilide) 1.7
Alachlor (Z-chloro-21 ,6'-diethy1-N-
(methoxymethyl ) acetanilide 2.9
Aldrin
Atrazine 5.4
Barbital
Behenic acid, methyl ester
Benzaldehyde
Benzene 10.0
Benzene sulfonic acid
Benzoic acid .. • 15.0
Benzopyrene
Benzothiazole
Benzothiophene
Benzyl butyl phthalate 1.8
Bladex
Borneol
Bromobenzene
Bromochl orobenzene
Bromodichloromethane 116.0
Bromoform 42.0
Bromome thane
Bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butachlor 0.06
Butanal :
t-Butyl alcohol . 0,01
Butyl benzene
Butyl bromide
Butyl octyl maleate
Camphor 0.5
e-Caprolactam
Carbon dioxide <5.0
Concentration equal to or greater than reported data.
See text on previous page for explanation of concentration data.
II-2
-------
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride 5.0
Chlordan(e) <0.1
Chlordene 0.1
Chlorobenzene <5.0
Chlorodibromomethane 100.0
Chloroethane
1,2-bis-Chloroethoxy ethane 0.03
Chloroethoxy ether
Bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 0.42
2-Chloroethyl methyl ether
i tris(Chloroethyl)phosphate
| Chloroform 366.0
i Chlorohydroxybenzophenone
j Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether . 1.58
Chloromethyl ethyl ether
m-Chloronitrobenzene
2-Chloropropane
1-Chloropropene <1.0
3-Chlorophyridine
j p-Chlorotoluene 1.5
i o-Cresol
| Crotonaldehyde 5.0
i Cyanogen chloride 0.1
! Cycloheptanone
'. Cyclohexanone
I Cyclopentanone
) Cymene isomer 0.1
!
| DDE 0.05
DDT
: n-Decane • 2.4
• Decane, branched isomer
i Deethyl atrazine 0.8
i Dibromobenzene
; Dibromomethane
; Dibromodichloroethane isomer 0.63
i 2,4-Di-t-butyl-p-benzoquinone 0.23
i 2,6-Di-t-butyl-p-benzoquinone 0.25
j Dibutyl phthalate 5.0
I Dichloroacetonitrile
o-Dichlorobenzene 1.0
i m-Dichlorobenzene <3.0
; p-Dichlorobenzene 1.0
.' Dichlorodifluoroethane
| 1,1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane 8.0
! 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.1
1,2-Dichloroethylene
cis 1,2-Dichloroethylene 16.0
i trans 1,2-Dichloroethylene 1.0
: l,l-Dichloro-2-hexanone <1.0
1 Dichloroiodomethane 0.5
II-3
-------
2,4-Dichlorophenol 36.0
1,2-Dichloropropane <1-0
1,3-Dichloropropene <1-0
Dicyclopentadiene
Dieldrin 8.0
1,4-Diethyl benzene 1.0
Di (2-ethylhexyl) adipate 0.31
Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 30.0
Diethyl malonate O.OT
Diethyl phthalate 1.0
Dihexyl phthalate 0.16
Dihydrocarvone 0.14
Diisobutyl carbinol
Diisobutyl phthalate 0.59
1,2-Dimethoxy benzene
Dimethoxymethane
Dimethyl benzene
Dimethyl disulfide
Dimethyl ether
1,3-Dimethylnaphthalene
2,4-Dimethyl phenol
Dimethyl phthalate 0.82
Dimethyl sulfoxide
4,6-Dinitro-2-aminophenol
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Dioctyl adipate 20.0
1,4-Dioxane
Diphenylhydrazine 1-0
Dipropyl phthalate 0.5
Docosane
n-Dodecane 0-4
Eicosane
Endrin 0.08
Ethanol 5.0
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl amine
Ethyl benzene
Ethyl ether
2-Ethyl-n-hexane
cis 2-Ethyl-4-methyl-l,3-dioxolane
trans 2-Ethyl-4-methyl-l,3-dioxolane
o-Ethyltoluene 0.04
m-Ethyl toluene 0.05
p-Ethyl toluene 0.05
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
1,2,3,4,5,7,7-Heptachloronorbornene 0.07
Heptachloronorbornene isomer
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexach1oro-l,3-butadiene 0.07
Hexachlorocyclohexane 0.1
II-4
-------
Hexachloroethane . 4.4
Hexachlorophene 0.01
Hexadecane
2-Hydroxyadiponitrile
Indene
Isoborneol
Isocyanic acid
Isodecane 5.0
Isophorone 9.5
1-Isopropenyl-4-isopropylbenzene
Isopropanol
Isopropyl benzene
Lignorceric acid, methyl ester
Limonene 0.03
p-Menth-l-en-8-ol 0.5
Methane
Methanol
2-Methoxy biphenyl
o-Methoxyphenol
Methyl acetate
Methyl benzoate <0.01
Methyl benzothiazole
2-Methyl biphenyl
2-Methyl butanal
3-Methyl butanal
2-Methyl-2-butanol
3-Methyl-2-butanone
2-Methyl butyl nitrile
3-Methyl butyl nitrile
Methyl chloride , • '• '
Methylene chloride <5.0
Methyl ether
Methyl ethyl benzene
Methyl ethyl ketone
2-Methyl-5-ethyl-pyridine
Methyl formate
Methylidene *
Methyl methacrylate <1.0
Methyl naphthalene
Methyl pa Imitate
3-Methyl-3-pentana1 1.0
Methyl phenyl carbinol
2-Methylpropanal
2-Methyl propyl nitrile
Methyl stearate
Naphthalene 1.0
Nicotine 3.3
-------
Nitrobenzene
Nitromethane
Ni trotri chloromethane
n-Nonane
Octadecane
Octane
Octyl chloride
Pentachlorobiphenyl
Pentachloroethane
Pentachlorophenol
Pentachlorophenyl methyl ether
n-Pentadecane
n-Pentanal
Pentane
Pentanol
2-Pentanone
Phenol
Phenylacetic acid
Phenyl benzoate
Phthalic anhydride
Pi peri dine
Propanal
Propanol
Propazine
Propylamine
n-Propylbenzene
n-Propylcyclohexanone
2-Santalene
Simazine
1,1,3,3-Tetrachloroacetone
Tetrachlorobiphenyl (isomer)
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol (isomer)
1,1,3,3-Tetrachloro-2-propanone
n-Tetradecane
Tetramethyl benzene
Tetramethyltetrahydrofuran
Thiomethylbenzothiazole
Toluene
Tri-n-butyl phosphate
Tri chloroacetaldehyde
Trichlorobenzene
Trichlorobiphenyl (isomer)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Tri chlorof1uoromethane
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
1,1,1-Trichloropropane
3.0
1.4
<0.1
0.1
0.5
1.0
0.1
4.0
1.0
<5.0
0.2
0.01
<5.0
0.5
0.12
<1.0
0.5
11.0
0.5
5.0
1.0
8.5
II-6
-------
1,2,3-Trichloropropane <0.2
n-Tridecane 0.30
Trimethyl benzene (isomer) 6.1
3,5,5-Trimethyl-bicyclo(4,l,0)heptene-2-one
Trimethyl isocyanurate 0.02
l,3,5-Trimethyl-2,4,6-trioxo-hexahydrotriazine
Triphenyl phosphate 0.12
n-Undecane 0.02
Undecane branched isomer
Vinyl benzene <1.0
Vinyl chloride 10.0
o-Xylene <5.0
m-Xylene <5.0
p-Xylene . <5.0
11-7
-------
Table III
ANALYSIS OF RADIOACTIVITY IN INTERSTATE CARRIER WATER SUPPLIES
Indicated Activity In pCi/1 (a)
Sample Code & Gross Beta (b)
Location Date Collected Mg/1 Date Counted
#16532 IW-23 96.0 1.2 ± 36%
Springfield, MA 1/2/75 1/10/75
#21620 IW-108 182.2 4.9 ± 24%
Melbourne, FL 12/27/74 - 1/29/75
1/9/75
#26523 IW-150 253.0 2.1 ± 59%
Wood River 1/9/75 1/29/75
Madison, IL
#26525 IW-236 308.0 3.3 ± 34%
Fairport Harbor, 1/21/75 2/3/75
OH
#26527 IW-237 278.0 2.6 ± 48%
Ashtabula, OH 1/22/75 2/3/75
#11040 IW-271 256.0 2.1 ± 56%
Conneaut, OH 1/24/75 2/3/75
(a) The error expressed is the percentage relative to 2-sigma
(b) The minimum detectable limit of gross beta is 1.0 pCi/1.
(c) The minimum detectable limit of gross alpha is 2.0 pCi/1.
(d) Indicates specific gamma activity not detectable.
(e) Special study.
(f) Community Water Supply sample.
Gross Alpha (c) qn ??fi
Date Counted *uSr °Ra
< 2.0
1/10/75
< 2.0
1/29/75
< 2.0
1/29/75
< 2.0
2/3/75
< 2.0
2/3/75
< 2.0
2/3/75
counting error.
Specific
Gamma Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Location
#26529
Lorain, OH
#31157 (e) (f)
Miami, FL
#31113 (e) (f)
San Juan, PR
#16535
Springfield, MA
#31184 (e) (f)
Chicago, IL
« #31161 (e) (f)
~ Jacksonville, FL
#31129 (ej (f)
Philadelphia, PA
#31139 (e) (f)
New Castle, DE
#31142 (e) (f)
Stariton, DE
#31179 (e) (f)
Clinton, IL
#31181 (e) (f)
Mt. Clemens, MI
#26212 (f)
Baltimore, MD .
Sample Code &
Date Collected
IW-272
1/24/75
IW-290
1/20/75
IW-291
1/30/75
IW-344
1/30/75
IW-363
2/4/75
IW-364
2/3/75
IW-386
2/3/75
IW-387
2/5/75
IW-388
2/6/75
IW-389
2/5/75
IW-390
2/3/75
IW-411
2/3/75
Mq/1
316.0
344.0
376.6
70.0
136.0
250.0
245.0
88.0
397.0
172.0
226.0
184.0
Gross Beta
Date Counted
4.2 ± 31%
2/3/75
1.7 ± 63%
2/6/75
4.3 ± 33%
2/6/75
1.9 ± 46%
2/14/75
2.2 ± 55%
2/14/75
1.6 ± 61%
2/14/75
2.9 ± 38%
2/18/75
5.2 ±22%
2/18/75
1.5 ± 71%
2/14/75
3.6 ± 32%
2/18/75
4.4 ± 29%
2/18/75
1.9 ± 55%
2/18/75
Gross Alpha
Date Counted
< 2.0
2/3/75
< 2.0
2/6/75
< 2.0
2/6/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
< 2.0
2/18/75
< 2.0
2/18/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
< 2.0
2/18/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
< 2.0
2/14/75
90Sr
< 0.5
3/3/75
0.7 ± 73%
3/3/75
: 0.9 ± 33%
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
1.3 ± 64%
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
0.58 ± 89%
3/3/75
226Ra
0.50 ± 5%
3/18/75
0.10 ± 15%
3/18/75
< 0.1
3/18/75
0.37 ± 6%
3/18/75
0.13 ± 12%
3/18/75
0.61 ± 5%
3/18/75
< 0.1
3/18/75
0.27 ± 7%
3/18/75
0.15 ± 12%
3/18/75
Specific
Gamma Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Location
#31163 (e) (f)
Chattanooga, TN
#31133 (e) (f)
Baltimore, MD
#26215
Baltimore, MD
#31131 (e) (f)
Annandale, VA
#26538
Youngs town, OH
~ #31135 (e) (f)
« Washington, DC
°° #31191 (e) (f)
Youngstown, OH
#31187 (e) (f)
Cincinnati, OH
#31165 (e) (f)
Atlanta, GA
#31115 (e) (f)
Toms River, NJ
#26250 (e) (f)
Pittsburgh, PA
#26250 (e) (f)
Pittsburgh, PA
Sample Code &
Date Collected
IW-419
2/10/75
IW-240
2/11/75
IW-421
2/6/75
IW-426
2/10/75
IW-427
2/12/75
IW-431
2/T3/75
IW-432
2/13/75
IW-433
2/11/75
IW-434
2/13/75
IW-444
2/18/75
IW-445-A
2/17/75
IW-445-B
2/17/75
Mg/1
192.0
202.0
218.0
228.0
578.0
252.0
254.0
54.0
78.0
93.0
246.0
224.8
Gross Beta
Date Counted
2.9 ± 37%
2/20/75
2.9 ± 43%
2/21/75
1.7 ± 61%
2/21/75
3.9 ± 34%
2/20/75
3.3 ± 37%
2/21/75
1.9 ± 61%
2/21/75
3.9 ± 30%
2/21/75
2.2 ± 51%
2/21/75
2.3 + 39%
2/21/75
8.5 + 17%
2/24/75
3.2 ± 40%
2/25/75
2.6 ± 41%
2/25/75
Gross Alpha
Date Counted
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
< 2.0
2/21/75
5.5 ± 25%
2/24/75
< 2.0
2/24/75
< 2.0
2/24/75
90Sr
< 0.5
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
0.6 ± 52%
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
0.6 ± 33%
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
< 0.5
3/3/75
226Ra
0.10 i 14%
3/20/75
0.10 ± 12%
3/20/75
0.13 ± 15%
3/20/75
< 0.1
3/26/75
0.18 ± 11%
3/26/75
0.10 ± 15%
3/26/75
< 0.1
3/26/75
1.9 ± 2%
3/26/75
Specific
Gamma Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Sample Code &
Location Date Collected Mg/1
=31167 (e) (f)
Memphis, TN
=31102 (e) (f)
Lawrence, MA
#31195 (e) (f)
St. Paul, MN
#31143 (e) (f)
Huntington, WV
#31197 (e) (f)
Indianapolis, IN
=31104 (e) (f)
Boston, MA
#? (sheet torn
up)
Indian Hill, OH
#31199 (e) (f)
Whiting, IN
#31146 (e) (f)
Wheeling, WV
#31169 (e) (f)
Nashville, TN
#31117 (e) (f)
Little Falls, NJ
#31201 (e) (f)
Columbus, OH
IW-451
2/20/75
IW-455
2/19/75
IW-458
2/21/75
IW-459
2/24/75
IW-481
2/25/75
IW-482
2/26/75
IW-483
2/19/75
IW-484
2/27/75
IW-510
2/25/75
IW-511
3/3/75
IW-546
3/4/75
IW-559
3/3/75
136.0
166.0
144.0
8.0
300.0
70.0
472.0
192.0
286.0
334.0
190.0
284.0
Gross Beta
Date Counted
1.5 ± 611
3/5/75
2.1 ± 49%
3/5/75
2.8 ± 67%
3/5/75
2.1 ± 41%
3/5/75
4.6 ± 28%
3/5/75
1.9 ± 46%
3/5/75
1.7 ± 73%
3/5/75
2.4 ± 42%
3/4/75
2.4 ± 48% .
3/10/75
2.2 ± 48%
3/10/75
1.8 ± 50%
3/10/75
4.0 ± 30%
3/14/75
Gross Alpha
Date Counted
< 2.0
3/5/75
< 2.0
3/5/75
< 2.0
. 3/4/75
< 2.0
3/4/75
< 2.0
3/5/75
< 2.0
3/4/75
< 2.0
3/4/75
< 2.0
3/4/75
< 2.0
3/10/75
< 2.0
3/10/75
< 2.0
3/10/75
< 2.0
3/14/75
9°Sr
< 0.5
3/5/75
< 0.5
4/16/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
0.7 ± 29%
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
0.8 ± 52%
5/21/75
< 0.5
3/31/75
226Ra
0.32 ± 7%
3/27/75
< 0.1
5/8/75
0.11 ± 15%
4/1/75
0.14 ± 10%
4/1/75
9.24 ± 8%
4/1/75
0.11 ± 14%
4/1/75
0.28 ± 7%
3/27/75
9.12 ± 13%
4/1/75
9.10 ± 14%
4/1/75
< Q.I
4/1/75
1.3 ± 3%
6/3/75
0.13 ± 12%
4/14/75
Specific
Gamma Activity
(d)
(d)
- (d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Location
-31200 (e) (f)
Cleveland, OH
=31143 'e) (f)
Pittsburgh, PA
=31171 (e) (f)
Owens bo ro, KY
=31106 (e) (f)
Newport, RI
=31214 (e) (f)
r-'ilwaukee, WI
=31212 (e) (f)
Oshkosh, WI
=31149 (e) (f)
Strasburg, PA
=31173 (e) (f)
Greenville, MS
=31120 (e) (f)
Buffalo, NY
=26542
Marietta, OH
=21103 (e) (f)
Water bury, CT
=31205 (e) (f)
Pigua, OH
Sample Code &
Date Collected
IW-560
3/5/75
IW-581
3/4/75
IW-582
3/10/75
IW-589
3/11/75
IW-600
3/11/75
IW-607
3/12/75
IW-611
3/11/75
IW-615
3/17/75
IW-616
3/18/75
IW-624
3/17/75
IW-625
3/18/75
IW-626
3/18/75
Mg'/l
176.0
266.0
1514.0
374.0
182.0
262.9
94.0
220.0
232.0
350.8
56.0
82.0
Gross Beta
Date Counted
2.7 ± 38%
3/14/75
2.4 ± 47%
3/14/75
2.4 ± 44%
3/18/75
5.8 ± 24%
3/18/75
3.6 ± 33%
3/21/75
2.1 ± 50%
3/21/75
3.5 ± 28%
3/21/75
1.7 ± 52%
3/21/75
2. 8 ± 39%
3/26/75
2.4 ± 46%
3/26/75
1.6 ±55%
3/26/75
1.9 ± 44%
3/26/75
Gross Alpha
Date Counted
< 2.0
3/14/75
< 2.0
3/14/75
< 2.0
3/18/75
< 2.0
3/18/75
< 2.0
3/21/75
< 2.0
3/21/75
< 2.0
3/21/75
< 2.0
3/21/75
< 2.0
3/26/75
< 2.0
3/26/75
< 2.0
.3/26/75
< 2.0
3/26/75
90Sr
0.6 _ 27%
4/16/75
< 0.5
4/16/75
< 0.5
4/16/75
0.6 ± 27%
4/16/75
0.9 ± 36%
4/16/75
0.8 ± 53%
4/21/75
< 0.5
4/21/75
< 0.5
4/21/75
1.4 ± 29%
4/21/75
1.0 ± 49%
4/21/75
< 0.5
4/21/75
226Ra
0.14 ± 12%
4/14/75
0.11 ± 14%
4/14/75
0.19 ± 8%
4/14/75
0.10 ± 16%
4/14/75
0.10 ± 16%
4/14/75
0.19 ± 10%
4/14/75
0.92 ±4%
4/14/75
< 0.1
4/14/75
0.13 ± 13%
4/17/75
< 0.1
5/8/75
0.10 ± 16%
5/8/75
Specific
Gamma Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d).
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Location
Sample Code &
Date Collected
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Gross Beta
Mg/1 Date Counted
Gross Alpha
Date Counted
90
Sr
226
Ra
Specific
Gamma Activity
#31208 (e) (f)
Dayton, OH
#31122 (e) (f)
Rhinebeck, NY
#31203
Columbus, OH
#31125 (e).(f)
Tarreytown, NY
#31175 (e) (f)
Charleston, SC
#31209 (e) (f)
Detroit, MI
#31137
Hopewel1, VA
IW-627
3/19/75
IW-638
3/25/75
IW-639
No date
IW-640
3/26/75
IW-641
3/27/75
IW-713
3/25/75
IW-1004
4/28/75
550.0 2.9 ± 44%
4/11/75.
356.0 8.1 ± 37%
4/22/75
340.0 1.8 ± 69%
4/22/75
228.0 3.0 ± 41%
4/22/75
90.0 1.1 ± 73%
4/21/75
318.0 2.4 ± 51%
4/22/75
94.0 1.8 ± 52%
5/12/75
< 2.0
4/10/75
< 2.0
4/22/75
< 2.0
4/22/75
< 2.0
4/22/75
< 2.0
4/22/75
< 2.0
4/22/75
< 2.0
5/9/75
0.6 ± 81%
4/21/75
< 0.5
5/19/75
0.5 ± 65%
5/14/75
1.4 ± 50%
4/21/75
1.0 ± 31%
4/21/75
0.6 ± 44%
5/19/75
0.20 ± 10%
5/8/75
0.10 ± 13%
5/8/75
< 0.1
5/8/75
0.28 ± 7%'
5/8/75
< 0.1
5/8/75
0.10 ± 12%
6/5/75
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION MONITORING SYSTEM SURVEY (1974)
The Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS), which began
in July 1973, was developed from previously operating radiation monitoring net-
works to form a single monitoring system more responsive to current and projected
sources of environmental radiation.
The ERAMS Drinking Water Component is an expansion of the previous Tritium
Surveillance System which was operated by the Office of Radiation Programs from
1970 through June 1973. The Drinking Water Component consists of 77 quarterly
drinking water samples taken from major population centers and selected nuclear
facility environs. Tritium, a long-lived (half-life of 12.3 years) isotope of
hydrogen (hydrogen-3), is analyzed on a quarterly basis with grab samples. Tritium
is produced in nuclear power production and nuclear weapons testing, and naturally
by cosmic radiation. Because it is chemically similar to hydrogen, tritium readily
enters the body in water and is incorporated into living tissue.
The following table presents the tritium concentrations in drinking water at
the Drinking Water Component stations for 1974. The average tritium concentration
was 0.3 nCi/liter.
IV-1
-------
Table IV
ERAMS DRINKING WATER COMPONENT, 1974
Location
Ala:
Alaska
Ark:
Calif:
C.Z.:
Colo:
Conn:
Del:
D.C.:
Fla:
Ga:
Hawaii
Idaho:
111:
Iowa:
Kans:
La:
Ma i ne :
Md:
Mass:
Hnthan
Montgomery
Muscle Shoals-
: Anchorage
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Platteville
Wilmington
Idaho Falls----
Cedar Rapids —
New Orleans
nuyub La
Tritium concentration9 (nCi/liter ± 2o)b
Jan-Mar
0
0
0
NS
.5
0
.2
0
.5
.5
.9
0
.3
0
0
0
NS
3.1 ± 0.3
0
.3
.3
1.0
0
NS
0
.2
.2
0
0
0
i
April-June
0
.2
.3
0
.5
0
.2
0
0
.5
1.0
0
0
.2
0
0
0
fi 8 + 0 3
0
0
.3
.6
0
NS
0
0
0
•MS
0
.2
n
July-Sept
0
0
.3
.5
.5
0
.2
0
0
.4
.9
.2
.3
0
0
0
NS
3.0
0
NS
.6
0
o
.3
.3
.3
0
.3
•3
.2
NK
Oct-Dec
0
0
.2
.4
.3
0
0
0
0
.6
.6
.2
.3
0
0
0
0
2.9
0
.2
.3
.2
0
.5
0
.3
.2
.5
.3
0
A
IV-2
-------
Location
Mich:
M1nn:
Miss:
Ho:
Mont:
Nebr:
Nev:
N.H.:
N.J.:
N.Mex:
N.Y.:
N.C.:
N.Dak:
Ohio:
Ok1, a:
Oreg:
Pa:
P.R.:
D T •
Grand Rapids---
Minneapdlis
Jefferson City-
Qan^a Fo --__..- -
Rnffaln
Pharl ntfp ---
Wilmington
East Liverpool-
Painesville
Oklahoma City—
Port 1 anH
Harrisburg-- —
Pr-ni/i Honro__
Tritium concentration3 (nCi/liter t 2o)
Jan-Mar
.4
• 3
.4
0
0
0
.3
.2
.8
0
0
0
.5
0
.3
.3
.6
0
0
.5
0
.4
0
NS
0
0
0
0
.4
0
9
April -June
.4
0
•3
0
0
.4
.5
.2
.7
.2
NS
NS
NS
.3
.2
NS
.6
.7
0
.5
.3
•3
.3
NS
0
. 0
0
.2
.2
0
n
July-Sept
.4
.3
.5
0
0
0
.4
.2
.6
.2
.2
0
.5
0
.2
.3
.5
.3
.2
.7
.2
.4
.3
NS
.2
0
.2
.3
.3
0
n
Oct-Dec
.2
.2
.5
0
.2
,0
.4
0
.7
.3
0
0
0
.3
.5
0
.7
.2
.2
.4
.2
.3
.5
NS
0
.3
.7
.3
.3
0
n
IV-3
-------
Location
Tritium concentration3 (nCi/liter ± 2o)
Jan-Mar
April-June
July-Sept
Oct-Dec
S.C.: Anderson------- .3
Columbia 0
Hartsville 0
Seneca .2
Tenn: Chattanooga .5
Knoxville .4
Tex: Austin - 0
Va: Doswell—- 0
Lynchburg 0
Norfolk .2
Wash: Richland NS
Seattle .2
Wise: Genoa 0
Madison 0
.2
0
0
.4
.6
.4
0
0
.2
.5
0
0
0
0
.3
.4
I
.3
.4
0
0
0
n
U
.4
0
NS
0
.4
.3
0 .
.3
0
0
0
.2
.2
.2
.5
.4
0
0
Average
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
The minimum detection limit for allsamples was 0.20 nCi/liter. All values
equal to or less than 0.20 nCi/liter before rounding have been reported as
zero.
t>The 2o error for all samples is 0.20 nCi/liter unless otherwise noted.
NS, no sample.
IV-4
-------
Table V
ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR VOLATILE ORGANICS IN REGION V SURVEY
(micrograms per liter)
R = Raw Water F = Finished Wate
City
SURFACE SOURCE
Cairo, 111.
Carlyle, 111.
Chicago, 111.3
Chester, 111.
Danville, 111.
Fairfield, 111.
Kankakee, 111.
Mt. Carmel, 111.
Newton , 111.
Quincy, 111.
Rock Island, 111.
Royal ton, 111.
Streator, 111.
Bedford, Ind.
Bloomington, Ind.
Evansville, Ind.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Gary, Ind.
Hammond, Ind.
Indianapolis, Ind.a
Kokomo, Ind.
Lacayette, Ind.
CHC1.
R 3F
2
<1
<1
5
6
10
<1
<1
<1
<1
94
<1
<1
5
<]
<1
4
<1
<1
<1
9
<1
14
48
7
182
16
47
52
52
4
58
79
68
35
84
19
29
29
7
4
19
30
5
BrCHCl,
R r
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
3
<1
<1
<1
<1
11
<1
<1
<1
<]
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
11
20
3.4
17
6
16
10
15
5
13
8.3
29
14
12
5
12
0.7
5
<0.5
6
11
1
Br,CHCl
RZ F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
4
2
<1
1.1
1
1.4
1.1
1
4
0.5
0.4
6
1.7
0.8
0.5
1.7
0.4
1
<0.5
0.5
1.4
0.3
Br-CH
R 3 F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
0.8
0.6
<1
<0.3
0.7
<0.3
<0.2
<0.2
1.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
1.4
0.8
<0.3
1
1
<0.5
<0.5
0.6
0.3
0.6
CC1.
R T
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
<0.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
2
1
1
0.9
1
1
1
0.5
<1
CH2C12
R * r
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<-l
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<0.5
<0.2
0
<0.5
<]
<0.5
<0.5
2.6
<0.5
<1
<1
<0.5
0.5
--0.5
0.5
0.5
1
<0.5
<0.5
2
0.5
<0.5
C2H C12
R* * F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
<}
<]
<1
4
<1
<1
3
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<2
<2
<1
<1
<2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<2
21
<2
<2
<1
<1
<1
Also sampled in the National Organics Reconnaissance Survey
V-l
-------
City
CHC1,
R JF
SURFACE SOURCE (Continued)
Logansport, Ind.
Michigan City, Ind.
Mt. Vernon, Ind.
Muncie, Ind.
New Albany, Ind.
Terre Haute, Ind.
Whiting, Ind.a
Bay City, Mich.
Bessemer Township, Mich
Cadillac, Mich.
Detroit, Mich.3
Dundee, Mich.
Grand Rapids, Mich.
Menominee, Mich.
Mt. Clemens, Mich.a
Sault St. Maria, Mich.
Wyandotte, Mich.
Breckenridge, Minn.
Crookston, Minn.
Duluth, Minn.
East Grand Forks, Minn.
Fainuount, Minn.
Granite Falls, Minn.
International Falls,
Minn.
Minneapolis, Minn.
<1
<1
<1
<1
3
4
<1
<1
7
<1
<1
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
.I
9
5
<1
<1
7
5
18
31
41
5
<1
17
312
47
5
170
24
42
10
27
14
128
7
26
22
200
5
26
8
BrCHCl,
R FZ
<1
<1
<1
<1
.4
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1
1.2
4
9
17
15
5
<0.5
19
4
8
6
26
10
5
6
<0.5
7
15
0.8
1.5
0.8
31
-0.5
.3
<0.5
Br,CHCl
R2 F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
-1
<1
<1
<0.1
1
1.2
1
1.4
6
<0.5
13
<0.2
0.4
2
2
1
.6
1.3
<0.5
1
<0.5
<0.2
<0.5
.0.2
0.7
-0.5
<0.5
<0.2
Br,,CH
R J F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
-------
City
Oslo, Minn.
St. Cloud, Minn.
St. Paul, Minn.3
Berea, Ohio
Bowling Green, Ohio
finrinnaH Ohio3
Vslllv«IIIIIQLI ) wll 1 U
Cleveland, Ohio3
Columbus, Ohio3
Defiance, Ohio
East Liverpool, Ohio
Fremont, Ohio
Piqua, Ohio3
Portsmouth, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Warren, Ohio
Green Bay, Wise.
Kenosha, Wise.
Manitowoc, Wise.
Marinette, Wise.
Milwaukee. Wise.3
Oshkosh, Wise.3
Two Rivers, Wise.
GROUND WATER SOURCE
Galesburg, 111.
Peoria, 111.
Morocco, Ind.
CHC1,
R 3F
3
<1
4
<1
<1
A
t
,CHC1
RZ F
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
1 4
1 • "
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
.7
<1
-------
City
South Bend, Ind.
Jackson, Mich.
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Lansing, Mich.
Mt. Pleasant, Mich.
waterford Township, Mich
Mankato, Minn.
Richfield, Minn.
Willmar, Minn.
Black River Falls, Wise.
Eau Claire, Wise.
Mean
Median
CHC1,
R JF
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
11
< 1
4
10
11
<1
10
<1
2
6
50
45
20
BrCHCl,
R r
-------
APPENDIX VI
SURVEYS FOR PESTICIDES, PCBs, AND PHTHALATES IN REGION V
-------
Table VI
REGION V SURVEY FOR PESTICIDES - POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS3 - PHTHALATES
Concentration in nanograms per liter R = Raw Uater F = Finished Water
City
Bedford, Ind. R
F
Ft. Wayne, Ind. R
F
Gary, Ind. R
F
Haimond, Ind. R
F
Indianapolis, R
Ind. F
Kokomo, Ind. R
F
Lafayette, Ind. R
F
Logans port, Ind. R
F
Michigan City, R
Ind. F
Morocco, Ind. R
F
Muncie, Ind. R
F
Mt. Vernon, Ind. R
F
New Albany, Ind. R
F
South Bend, Ind. R
F
Cairo, 111. R
F
Carlyle, 111. R
F
Chester, 111. R
F
" Galesburg, 111. R
-: F
Kankakee, 111. R
F
Diethylhexyl
. Phthalate
1000 -
4000
17000 -'
5000
3000
4000
2000
" 1000
3000
3000
DDT
14
6
32
16
14
6
6
8
68
Dieldrin
8
6
7
3
16
7
4
7
4
Treflan
10
Hexachloro-
benzene
10
4
_
Aldrin
10
4
Zytron
40
Lindane
2,4-D(IP)
2,4-D-isopro-
pyl ester
50
Gairana
Chlor-
dane
4
Total
Value i
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
4
1
1
4
T
1
1
All concentration values not reported were below the detection limits.
levels of 200 ng/1, no polychlorinated biphenyls were detected.
. . VI-1
Using analytic techniques sensitive to
-------
City
Mt. Carmel, 111. R
F
Peoria, 111. R
F
Streator, 111. R
F
Rock Island, R
111. F
Bay City, Mich. R
F
Bessemer Twp. , R
Mich. F
Cadillac, Mich. R
F
Detroit, Mich. R
F
Dundee, Mich. R
F
Jackson, Mich. R
F
Mt. Pleasant, R
Mich. F
Sault St. Marie, R
Mich. F
Wyandotte, Mich. R
F
Crookston, Minn. R
F
Duluth, Minn. R
F
East Grand R
Forst, Mich. F
Fairmont, Minn. R
F
Minneapolis, R
Minn. F
Oslo, Minn. R
F
Diethylhexyl
Phthalate
1000
1000
1000
2500
1000
1000
1000
2000
2000
1000
1000
6000
DDT
12
4
4
6
Dieldrin
11
6
3
5
Treflan
28
50
7
Hexachloro-
benzene
••
6
6
6 .
Al dri n
6
Zytron
•
Lindane
4
2,4-D(IP)
2,4-D-isopro-
pyl ester
Gamma
Chlor-
" dane
Total
Value i
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
. 1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
VI-2
-------
City
Richfield, Minn R
F
St. Cloud, Minn. R
F
Berrea, Ohio R
F
Cincinnati, Ohio R
. F
Cleveland, Ohio R
F
Columbus, Ohio R
F
East Liverpool, R
Ohio F
Portsmouth, Ohio R
F
Toledo, Ohio R
F
Green Bay, Wise. R
F
Kenosha, Wise. R
F
Marinette, Wise. R
F
Milwaukee, Wise. R
F
Oshkosh, Wise. R
F
Two Rivers, R
Wise. F
Total i Values
Diethylhexyl
Phthalate
2000
2000
4000
2000
2000
17000
1000
2000
1000
1000
4000
2000
2000
1000
1000
12000
1000
6000
40
DDT
8
10
15
Dieldrin
3
14
Treflan
4
texachloro-
benzene
5
Aldrin
6
4
Zytron
1
Undane
1
2,4-D(IP)
2,4-D-1sopro-
oyl ester
_,'
1
Gamma
Chlor-
dane
1
Total
Value f
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. 1
1
1
1
1
1
86
VI-3
-------
SELECTED REFERENCES
ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS
Activated Carbon in Water Treatment, University of Reading Conference.
The Water Research Association, Medmenham, Marlow, Buckinghamshire, SL7
2ND, United Kingdom. April 3-5, 1973.
Bellar, T. A. and Lichtenberg, J. J. 1974. "Determining Volatile Organics
at the vig/1 Level in Water by Gas Chromatography." Journal of American
Wa te r Up He s Ass oc i a t i on. 66:739-744, December 1974.
Bellar, T. A., Lichtenberg, J. J. and Kroner, R. C. 1974. "The Occurrence
of Organohalides in Chlorinated Drinking Water." JAWWA. 66:703.
Buelow, R. W., Carswell, J. K. and Symons, J. M. 1973. "An Improved Method for
Determining Organics by Activated Carbon Adsorption and Solvent Extraction
(Parts I and II)." JAWWA. 65:57-72, 195-199.
Bunn, W. W., Haas, B. B., Deane, E. R., Klopfer, R. D., 1975. "Formation
of Trihalomethanes by Chlorination of Surface Water." Accepted for
publication, Environmental Letters.
Burnham, A. K., Calder, G. V., Fritz, J. S., Junk, G. A., Svec, H. J. ;
and Willis, R. 1972. "Identification and Estimation of Neutral Organic
Contaminants in Potable Water." Anal. Chem. 44(1):139-41.
Burnham, A. K., Calder, G. V., Fritz, J. S., Junk, G. A., Svec, H. J. and
Vick, R. 1973. "Trace Organics in Water: Their Isolation and Identification."
JAWWA. 65(11):722-25.
Deinzer, M., Melton, R., Mitchell, D., Kopfler, F. and Coleman, E. 1974.
"Trace Organic Contaminants in Drinking Water; Their Concentration by Reverse
Osmosis." Presented to Division of Environmental Chemistry. A.C.S., Los
Angeles, Cal.
Dressman, R. C. and McFarren, E. F. 1974. "Detection and Measurement of Bis-
(2-chloro) Ethers and Dieldrin by Gas Chromatography." Second Annual
Water Quality Conference of American Water Works Association, Dallas,
Texas. December.
Dressman, R. C. and McFarren, E. F. In preparation. Improved Methodology
for the Gas Chromatographic Detection and Measurement of Vinyl Chloride
in Water -- Application to Pilot Plant and Field Studies of Polyvinyl"
Chloride (PVC) Pipe as a Source of Vinyl Chloride Contamination.
VII-1
-------
Dostal, K. A., Pierson, R. C., Hager, D. G. and Robeck, G. G. 1965. "Carbon
Bed Design Criteria Study at Nitro, West Virginia." JAWWA. 57(5):663-
674.
Dowling, W. T. 1974. "Chlorine: Dioxide in Potable Water Treatment."
Water Treatment and Examination. 23(Part 2):190-204.
Dowty, B. Carlisle, D. and Laseter, John L. 1975. "Halogenated Hydro-
carbons in New Orleans Water and Blood Plasma." Science. 187(4171):75-
77.
Dunham, Lucia 0., O'Gara, Roger W. and Taylor, Floyd B. 1967. "Studies on
Pollutants from Processed Water: Collection from Three Stations and
Biologic Testing for Toxicity and Carcinogenesis." Amer. J. Public
Health. 57(12):2178-85.
Friloux, James (Acting Chief). 1971. Petrochemical Wastes as a Water
Pollution Problem in the Lower Mississippi River. Lower Mississippi Basin Office,
Water Quality Office, EPA, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Submitted to Senate
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, New Orleans, Louisiana -
April 5, 1971.
Georlitz, D. T. and Lower, W. L. Determination of Phenoxy Acid Herbicides
in Water by Electron Capture and Micro Coulometric Gas Chromatography.
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1817C, U.S. Government Printing
Office.
Gleason, Marion N., Gosselin, Robert E., Hodge, Harold C. and Smith,
Roger P. 1969. Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products: Acute Poisoning.
3d ed. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, Co.
Gomel la, Cyril. 1972. "Ozone Practices in France." JAWWA. 64:39-45.
Hueper, W. C. and Payne, W. W. 1963. "Carcinogenic Effects of Raw and Finished
Water Supplies." Amer. J. Clin. Path. 39(5):475-81.
Hueper, W. C. and Ruchoft, C. C. 1954. "Carcinogenic Studies on Adsorbates
of Industrially Polluted Raw and Finished Water Supplies." Arch. Ind.
Hyg. Occup. Med. 9:488-95.
Kleopfer, Robert D: and Fairless, Billy J. 1972. "Characterization of
Organic Components in Municipal Water Supply." Environ. Sci. and Tech.
6:1036.
Love, 0. T., Jr., Carswell, J. K., Stevens, A. A., Sbrg, T. J., Logsdon, ,1
G. S. and Symons, J. M. 1975. "Preliminary Results of Pilot Plants 1
to Remove Water Contaminants." Preliminary Assessment of Suspected Carcinogens {
in Drinking Water - Interim Report to Congress. Appendix VI. USEPA Report.
Washington, DC. June 1975.
VII-2
-------
Love, 0. T., Jr., Robeck, G. G., Symons, J. M. and Buelow, R. W. 1974.
"Experience with Activated Carbon in the USA. Papers and Proceedings
of a Water Research Association Conference, University of Reading. The
Water Research Association, Medmenham, Marlow, United Kingdom. April 3-5,
1973. pp. 279-312 and 373,74.
Medlar, Steven J. 1975. "Operating Experience with Activated Granular
Carbon." Water and Sewage Works, pp. 70-73.
Murphy, S. D. 1975. A Report - Assessment of Health Risk from Organics in
Drinking Water by an Ad Hoc Study Group to the Hazardous Materials Advisory
Committee, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. April 30.
Mimeo, 59 pp., plus attachments.
National Academy of Sciences. 1975. Principles for Evaluating Chemicals
in the Environment. Washington, DC.
New Orleans Area Water Supply Study. Draft Analytical Report Lower Missis-
sippi River Facility, Slide!!, Louisiana, November 1974.
"Organic Contaminants in Drinking Water." 1974. Willing Water. 18(12):2-4.
"Organochlorine Pesticides in Water." 1974. Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
American Society for Testing Materials.
Robeck, G. G. 1972. "Purification of Drinking Water to Remove Pesticides and
Other Poisonous Chemicals: American Practice." International Water Supply
Association. Proceedings of 9th Congress, p. K 1-4.
Robeck, G. G., Dostal, K. A., Cohen, J. and Kreissl, J. F. 1965. "Effec-
tiveness of Water Treatment Processes in Pesticide Removal." JAWWA. (57):
181-199.
Rook, J. J. 1974. "Formation of Haloforms During Chlorination of Natural
Waters." Water Treatment and Examination. 23(Part 2):234.
Rook, J. J. 1975. "Formation and Occurrence of Chlorinated Organics in
Drinking Water." 95th Annual Conference of the American Water Works
Association. June 8-13, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Saunders, R. A., Blackly, C. H., Kovacina, T. A., Lamontagne, R. A.,
Swinnerton, J. W. and Saalfeld, F. E. Identification of Volatile Organic
Contaminants in Washington, DC Municipal Water. Naval Research Laboratory,
Washington, DC, 20375.
Schafer, M. L., Peeler, J. J., Gardner, W. S. and Campbell, J. E. 1969.
"Pesticides in Drinking Water: Water from the Mississippi and Missouri
Rivers." Env. Sci. Tech. 3(12):1261.
Scheiman, M. A., Saunders, R. A. and Saalfeld, F. E. 1974. Organic Con-
taminants in the District of Columbia Water Supply. Chemistry Division,
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC. Submitted to J. of Biomedical
Mass Spectrometry.
VII-3
-------
Schuliger, W. G. and MacGrum, J. M. 1974. "Granular Activated Carbon
Reactivation System Design and Operating Conditions." Water-1974:I.
Industrial Waste Treatment. AIChE Symposium Series. No. 144, Vol. 70.
Sommerville, R. C. and Rempel, G. 1972. "Ozone for Supplementary Water
Treatment." JAWWA. 64(6):377.
Stevens, A. A., Slocum, C. 0., Seeger, D. R. and Robeck, G. G. 1975.
"Chlorination of Organics in Drinking Water." Conference on the Envi-
ronmental Impact of Water Chlorination, Oct. 22-24, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Stevens, A. A. and Symons, J. M. 1975. "Analytical Considerations for
Halogenated Organic Removal Studies." Proceedings AWWA Water Quality
Technology Conference, December 2-3, Dallas, Texas, pp. XXVI-1.
Stevens, A. A. and Symons, J. M. 1974. "Measurement of Organics in Drinking
Water." Proceedings AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado,
pp. XXIII-l-XXIII-25.
Symons, J. M., Bellar. T. A., Carswell, J. K., DeMarco, J., Kropp, K. L.s
Robeck, G. G., Seeger, D. R., Slocum, C. J., Smith, B. L. and Stevens, A. A.
1975. "National Organics Reconnaissance Survey for Halogenated Organics
in Drinking Water." Water Supply Research Laboratory and Methods Develop-
ment and Quality Assurance Laboratory, National Environmental Research
Center, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio. JAWWA. 67(ll):634-647.
Tardiff, R. G., Craun, G. F., McCabe, J. J. and Bertozzi, P. E.
"Health Effects Caused by Exposure to Contaminants." Preliminary Assess-
ment of Suspected Carcinogens in Drinking Water - Interim Report to Con-
gress, Appendix Vlf!Washington, DC.June 1975.
Tardiff, Robert G. and Deinzer, M. 1973. "Toxicity of Organic Compounds in
Drinking Water." Proceedings of 15th Water Quality Conference. Feb. 7-8,
1973, University of Illinois, pp. 23-37.
USEPA Report. 1971. Advanced Wastewater Treatment as Practiced at South
Tahee. Project 17010 ELQ. NTIS PB 204 525.
USEPA Report. Industrial Pollution of the Lower Mississippi River in
Louisiana. Surveillance and Analysis Division, Region VI, Dallas, Texas.
April 1972.
USEPA Report. Method for Organophosphorous Pesticides in Industrial
Effluents. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, AppendTx A.
Methods Development and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio. November 1973.
USEPA Report. Method for Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Industrial
Effluents. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, Appendix A.
Methods Development and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory. Cincinnati,
Ohio, November 1973. '
Dostal, K. A.,
VII-4
-------
U. S. Department of Interior. 1970. Progress Report: Identification of
Hazardous Materials, Lower Mississippi River Basin, Federal Water Quality
Administration,Lower Mississippi River Basin Field Station.
INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS
Buelow, R. W., Kropp, K. L., Withered, J. and Symons, J. M., 1975. "Nitrate
Removal by Anion - Exchange Resins." JAMA. 67(9):528-534.
Caldwell, J. S., Lishka, R. J. and McFarren, E. F., 1973. "Evaluation
of Low-Cost Arsenic and Selenium Determination at Microgram-per-Liter
Levels." JAWWA. 63:731.
Craun, G. F., and McCabe, L. J. "Overview of Problems Associated with
Inorganic Contaminants in Drinking Water." Proceedings National Symposium
on the State of America's Drinking Water. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
In press.
Feinglass, E. J., 1973. "Arsenic Intoxication from Well Water in the
United States." New England J. Med. 288, 828; Federal Register. 40(51):
11990-11998. March 14, 1975. ;
Gulledge, J. H. and O'Connor, J. T. 1973. "Removal of As (V) from Water by
Adsorption on Aluminum and Ferric Hydroxides." JAWWA. 65:548.
Hertsch, F. F. and Maddox, F. D., 1971. "Fludridation Practice in Wisconsin."
JAWWA. 63:778-782.
IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to
Man. Some Inorganic and Organometanic Compounds, Volume 2, 1973. Ifii
national Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.~
Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards, Federal Register. 40(51, Part II):
11190-11198. March 1975.
Kopp, J. F. and Kroner, R. C. Trace Metals in Waters of the U.S.,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Kopp, J. F., Longbottom, M.C. and Lobring, L. B. 1972. "Cold Vapor Method
for Determining Mercury." JAWWA. 64(20).
Logsdon, G. S., Sorg, T. J. and Symons, J. M. 1974. "Removal of Heavy
Metals by Conventional Treatment." Proceedings 16th Water Quality Confer-
ence Trace Metals in Water Supplies: Occurrence, Significance and Control.
University of Illinois Bulletin.. 71(108)111-133.
Logsdon, G. S. and Symons, J. M. 1973. "Mercury Removal by Conventional Water
Treatment Techniques." JAWWA. 65(8)554-562.
Logsdon, G. S. and Symons, J. M. 1973. "Removal of Heavy Metals by
Conventional Treatment." Traces of Heavy Metals in Water, Removal and
Monitoring. Sabadell, J. E., USEPA Report #092/9-74-001.Region II,
New York, NY. pp. 225-256.
VII-5
-------
Logsdon, G. S. and Symons, J. M. 1974. "Removal of Trace Inorganics by
Drinking Water Treatment'Unit Processes." Vlater-1973. American Institute
of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series. 70:367-377.
McCabe, L. J., Symons, J. M., Lee, R. D. and Robeck, G. G. 1970. "Survey
of Community Water Supply Systems." JAWWA. 62(11)-.670-687.
McCabe, L. J. 1974. "Problem of Trace Metals in Water Supplies - An
Overview." Proceedings'16th Water Quality Conference, University of
Illinois.
'i
National Academy of Sciences. Medical and Biologic Effects of Environmental
Pollutants. Chromium (ISBN 0-309-02217-7) 1974; Nickel (ISBN 0-309-
02314-9) 1975.;,
Schmidt, A. M. "Selenium in Animal Feed." Federal Register. 39(5):1355-
1358. January 1975.
Shen, Y. S. 1973. "Study of Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water." JAWWA.
65(543).
Technicon Instrument Corp. 1972. Cyanide in Water and Wastewater,
Industrial Method. Tarrytown, New York, No. 119-71W.
Tseng, W. P., Chu, H. M., How, S. W., Forg, J. M., Lin, C. S. and Yels.
1968. "Prevalence of Skin Cancer in an Endemic Area of Chronic Arsenicism
in Taiwan." J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 40:454-463.
USEPA Report. 1973. Chemical Analysis of Interstate Carrier Water Supply
Systems.
ASBESTOS
American Water Works Association Research Foundation. 1974. "A Study of the
Problem of Asbestos in Water." JAWWA. 66(9)Part 2.
Chatfield, E. J. and Pull en, H. 1974. "Measuring Asbestos in the Environ-
ment." Canadian Research and Development. 7(6):23.
Cook, Philip M. 1974., "Semi-quantitative Determination of Aspestiform
Amphibole Mineral Concentrations in Western Lake Superior Water Samples."
Proceedings of 23rd Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis.
Denver, Colorado. ~'
Cook, Philip M., Glass,, G. E. and Tucker, J. H. 1974. "Asbestiform Amphi-
bole Minerals: Detection and Measurement of High Concentrations in Munici-
pal Water Supplies." Science. 185(853-855).
Environmental Health Perspectives. Vol. 9. December 1974.
Fairless, B. "Asbestos Fiber Concentrations in the Drinking Water of
Communities Using the Western Arm of Lake Superior as a Potable. Water
VII-6
-------
Source." USEPA, Surveillance and Analysis Laboratory, Region V, Chicago,
Illinois. 17 pp. Mimeo.
Letter dated January 31, 1974, from Train to Castleman.
Levy, B. S., Sigurdson, E., Mandel, J., Laudori, E. and Pearson, J.
Incidence of Gastrointestinal Cancer Among Residents of Duluth, Minnesota,
1969-1972.In press.
Logsdon, 6. S. and Symons, J. M. 1974. "Removal of Asbestiform Fibers by
Water Filtration." American Water Works Association Annual Conference.
McFarren, E. F., Millette, J. R. and Lishka, R. J. "Asbestos Analysis by
Electron Microscope." Proceedings AWWA Water Quality Conference, Dallas,
Texas. December 1974. In press.
Masson, T. J., McKay, D/W. and Miller, R. W. 1974. "Asbestos-like Fibers
in Duluth Water Supply." Journal American Medical Assn. 228(8):1019-1020.
USEPA Report. 1975. Direct Filtration of Lake Superior Water for Asbesti-
form Fiber Removal. EPA-670/2-75-050 a-g.
RADIONUCLIDES
Straub, C. P. 1973. Radium-226 and Water Supplies: Cost-Benefit-Risk
Appraisal. Unpublished report.
Tsivoglou, E. C. and O'Connell, R. L., Waste Guide for the Uranium
Milling Industry. DREW, USPHS, DWSPC, RATSEC, Technical Report, W63-12.
ECONOMICS OF WATER TREATMENT
Clark, Robert M. "Cost and Pricing Relationships for Water Supply."
Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division of ASCE. Accepted for
publication.
Clark, Robert M. and Goddard, Haynes C. 1974. Pricing for Water
Supply: Its Impact on Systems Management. Environmental Health
Effects Research Series, National Environmental Research Center, Office
of Research and Development, USEPA. EPA-670/1-74-001.
The Cost of Water Treatment by Coagulation, Sedimentation, and Rapid
Sand Filtration.(Part 1 of a Report for U.S. Public Health Service.)
1966. Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, Technical Services
Branch, Louis Koenig Research. San Antonio, Texas. Contract No. PH 86-
65-120. January.
Dostal, K. A., Harrington, J. J. Clark, R. and Robeck, G. 1966. "Development
of Optimization Models for Carbon Bed Design." JAWWA. 58:1170-1186.
David Volkert and Associates. Monograph of the Effectiveness and Cost of
Water Treatment Processes for the Removal of Specific Contaminants,
Vol. 1.T974~.EPA Contract No. 68-01-1833.
VII-7
-------
LIST OF PRIMARY CONTRIBUTORS
The report was compiled by Cynthia C. Kelly of the Office of Toxic
Substances, with the assistance of the staff of that office. The
following list indicates those persons who were primary contributors
to the Report. Unless otherwise indicated, the offices named are
located in Washington, D.C.
CHARACTER AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION OF DRINKING WATER
National Organics Reconnaissance
Survey
Region V Organics Survey
Assessment of General Organics
Parameters
Inventory of Organics Identified
in Drinking Water
Investigations of Pesticides
Drinking Water
Analyses for Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs)
Studies of Leaching from
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Water Pipes
Detection of Nitrosamines in
Drinking Water
Surveillance for Inorganic
Contaminants in Drinking Water
Occurrence of Radioactivity
in Drinking Water
Dr. James M. Symons,
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory (MERL),
Cincinnati, Ohio
Mr. Joseph F. Harrison,
Region V Office,
Chicago, Illinois
Dr. James M. Symons (MERL)
Dr. Robert G. Tardiff,
Health Effects Research Laboratory
(HERL),
Cincinnati, Ohio
Mr. Earl F. McFarren (MERL)
Mr. Joseph F. Harrison (Region V)
Dr. Gunter Zweig,
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)
Dr. Edgar A. Jeffrey,
Office of Water Supply (OWS)
Mr. Earl F. McFarren (MERL)
Mr. Earl F. McFarren (MERL)
Mr. Ronald C. Dressman (MERL)
Mr. Gunther F. Craun (HERL)
Mr. Gunther F. Craun (HERL)
Mr. Floyd L. Galpin,
Office of Radiation Programs (ORP)
VIII-1
-------
Survey of Rural Drinking Water
Supplies
Asbestos Fibers in Drinking
Water Supplies
Mr. Earl F. McFarren (MERL)
Mr. Earl F. McFarren (MERL)
Dr. Gary S. Logsdon (MERL)
Dr. Robert Carton,
Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
HEALTH EFFECTS OF DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS
Review of Drinking Water
Contaminants by the National
Academy of Sciences
Development of Quality Criteria
for Water
Other Investigations of the Health
Effects of Organics
Epidemiological Studies
Evaluation of Health Risks
from Inorganics
Estimation of Risk from Radiation
Assessment of Effects of Oral
Ingestion of Asbestos
Dr. Edgar A. Jeffrey (OWS)
Dr. Leonard J. Guarraia (OWS)
»'•"
Dr. Robert G. Tardiff (HERL)
Mr. Lei and J. McCabe (HERL)
Mr. Gunter F. Craun (MERL)
Dr. William A. Mills (ORP)
Mr. Lei and J. McCabe (HERL)
Dr. Barry S. Levy,
Minnesota, Department of Health,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
Industrial Sources
Discharges from Municipal Waste
Treatment Facilities
Chlorination of Drinking Water
Contamination by Agricultural
Chemicals
s
Other Non-Point Sources of Organics
Various Land Disposal Practices
and Water Contamination
Mr. John P. Lehman,
Office of Solid Waste Management
Programs (OSWMP)
Mr. Thomas E. Kopp (OTS)
Mr. Thomas E. Kopp (OTS)
Mr. Alan A. Stevens (MERL)
Mr. Thomas E. Kopp (OTS)
Dr. Gunter Zweig (OPP)
Mr. Thomas E. Kopp (OTS)
Mr. John P. Lehman (OSWMP)
VIII-2
-------
TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROLLING CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING WATER
Dr. James M. Symons (MERL)
Dr. Gary S. Logsdon (MERL)
Dr. 0. Thomas Love, Jr. (MERL)
Mr. Thomas J. Sorg (MERL)
Mr. J. Keith Carswell (MERL)
Mr. Jack DeMarco (MERL)
Dr. William A. Mills (ORP)
COST OF TREATMENT TO REMOVE CARCINOGENS
Dr. James M. Symons (MERL)
Mr. 0. Thomas Love, Jr. (MERL)
Dr. Gary S. Logsdon (MERL)
Mr. Thomas J. Sorg (MERL)
Mr. Robert M. Clark (MERL)
Mr. Robert A. Brown (OWS)
Dr. William A. Mills (ORP)
APPENDICES
Appendix I - National Organics
Reconnaissance Survey
Appendix II - Organic Compounds
Identified in Drinking Water in
the United States
Appendix III - Analyses of
Radioactivity in Interstate
Carrier Water Supply
Appendix IV - Environmental
Radiation Monitoring System
Survey (1974)
Appendix V - Organics Survey
Performed by Region V
Appendix VI - Region V Survey for
Pesticides, Polychlorinated
Biphenyls, and Phthalates
Appendix VII - Selected Readings
Appendix VIII - List of Primary
Contributors
Dr. James M. Symons (MERL)
Dr. Robert G. Tardiff (HERL)
Dr. Robert G. Tardiff (HERL)
Mr. Floyd L. Gal pin (ORP)
Mr. Floyd L. Gal pin (ORP)
Mr. Joseph F. Harrison (Region V)
Mr. Joseph F. Harrison (Region V)
Dr. James M. Symons (MERL)
VIII-3
------- |