JanuaryMarch 2010 volume 20, number 1 traditional DBPs emerging DBPs health effects DBP regulations case studies historical perspective
Disinfection
By-Products
FEATURES
DEPARTMENTS
Foundation Contacts
73
Case Studies and Value of Research
In addition to highlighting research funded
by The Foundation over the years, six case
studies are presented that illustrate how the
research findings from different projects
have successfully been used by utilities to
optimize their treatment processes and
minimize DBP formation during treatment
and in the distribution system. These case
studies are as follows:
Foundation DBP ResearchChloramine
Perspective
Andrej Wilczak, San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission, California
5
How Foundation Research on Nitrosamines
has Benefited the Water Industry
Stuart W. Krasner, Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California
10
DBP Minimization Strategies
Michael Hotaling, Newport News, Virginia
40
Bromate Minimization Strategies
Richard Talley, City of Fort Worth, Texas
41
Localized Treatment for DBPs
Mao Fang and Laura Jacobson, Las Vegas
Valley Water District, Nevada
58
Application of Storage Facility Modeling to
Improve Mixing and Reduce Water Age
David J. Hartman and Jeff Swertfeger,
Greater Cincinnati Water Works, Ohio
68
VIEWPOINT
David E. Rager
Chair, Board of Trustees
Historical Perspective
Introduction
Historical Perspective
Historical Perspective
Historical Perspective
Recent reports on emerging DBPs provided guidance on how to minimize regulated halogenated DBPs,
nitrosamines, and other potential DBPs:
Thanks to increased understanding of the factors contributing to their formation, we can better optimize water
treatment; e.g., in terms of the sequence of the disinfectants, the importance of providing efficient mixing, and
contact time. The work on nitrosamines allowed SFPUC to focus the monitoring program on N-nitrosodimethylamine
and confirm that treatment is optimized to minimize formation of this DBP. Several of these reports are referenced on
the SFPUC Website.
Finally, health effects research conducted by scientists funded by the Foundation provided valuable background
information on health effects issues of DBPs:
These reports were helpful to better understand the relative significance of DBPs. SFPUC has utilized this research in
addressing questions from the public regarding DBPs and referenced these reports in questions and answers regarding
DBP health effects on the SFPUC Website.
Regulations Summary
Regulations Summary
Regulations Summary
10
Nitrosamines are just one of many emerging classes of nitrogenous disinfection by-products (N-DBPs) of concern.
In another report, Occurrence and Formation of Nitrogenous Disinfection By-Products (2009, order#91250/
project#3014), model compounds and natural organic matter (NOM) were examined as sources of precursors for
NDMA and other N-DBPs. Although carbon-rich NOM fractions can be an important source of precursors for regulated
DBPs (trihalomethanes [THMs] and haloacetic acids [HAAs]), this study demonstrated that it was certain nitrogen-rich
NOM isolates that were important sources of N-DBP precursors. Although algae and treated wastewater were both
found to be sources of precursors for many emerging N-DBPs, treated wastewater was the major source of NDMA
precursors. An important aspect in this project was to show how to best balance the control of regulated DBPs and that
of emerging N-DBPs.
Ongoing research funded by the Foundation continue to provide state-of-the-art information for the water industry.
Currently, researchers have focused on several nitrosamines in water. Project#4089, Method Development for
Disinfection By-Products Associated With Bladder Cancer, will examine if there are unidentified DBPs (e.g.,
nitrosamines from alkaloidal material) that may better explain the cancer risk associated with chlorinated drinking water
in epidemiology studies. Another project#4209, Development and Application of a Total Nitrosamine Assay for
Disinfected Waters, will develop a method to measure the total amount of nitrosamines in water instead of just one
associated with the few chemicals typically measured.
Because DBP FP tests do not provide a true indication of the likely amount of DBPs formed during actual drinking water
treatment, a new project#4180, Development of a Protocol to Predict the Formation of Nitrosamines While
Minimizing the Formation of Regulated DBPs, is developing a bench-scale test to simulate nitrosamine formation
in a distribution system (a simulated distribution system [SDS] test). Moreover, this project is examining the formation
and control of regulated and other emerging DBPs during these tests. As more utilities consider a switch to chloramines
or the use of water from impaired watersheds, this SDS test will provide utilities with a new tool to access how best to
meet existing DBP regulations and that of emerging DBPs that may be regulated in the future.
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) and other utilities have benefited immensely
from the Foundation-supported research on nitrosamines. This research has resulted in many utilities, including
Metropolitan, conducting internal studies to better understand the source of NDMA precursors in their waters and
the most cost-effective means of controlling NDMA formation. Although Metropolitan found that their watershed
is impacted to some extent by treated wastewater, the pre-oxidation (e.g., ozone) step was found to destroy NDMA
precursors. At Metropolitan plants, a major source of NDMA precursors was associated with the amine-based
polymer they use. So Metropolitan is examining means of achieving their treatment objectives with a lower polymer
dose and more coagulant. Information from Foundation studies is providing insights on how best to meet potential
future regulatory issues.
Although the UCMR2 will provide the USEPA and stakeholders with a tremendous amount of occurrence data on
NDMA and other nitrosamines, it is well-crafted studies conducted for the Foundation that will provide the water
industry with the type of scientific information upon which a regulation on nitrosamines can be constructed based
on sound science. Metropolitan looks forward to participating in and following up on new Foundation studies that
allow them to best manage their resources to produce water that minimizes the formation of nitrosamines and other
emerging DBPs of health concern.
11
Traditional DBPs
Traditional disinfection by-products (DBPs)
include chlorinated and brominated
trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic
acids (HAAs), bromate, chlorite, and
chlorate. Although occurrence of hundreds
of DBPs in drinking water has been
reported in the scientific literature, only 11
are currently regulated: 4 THMs, 5 HAAs,
bromate, and chlorite. U.S. regulations have
established maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs) for these DBPs to limit consumer
exposure and protect public health. The
current MCLs for total THMs and HAA5
in drinking water are 80g/L and 60g/L,
respectively. The MCL for bromate is
10g/L and 1 mg/L for chlorite. No MCL
has been established for the four remaining
HAAs and chlorate.
THMs and HAAs
13
15
16
17
18
Occurrence
19
20
21
order#90744/project#816) addressed
(1) the breakthrough characteristics of
the naturally occurring DBP precursors,
(2) GAC contactor operation, and (3)
the type of pretreatment before the
adsorption process. The study found that
the breakthrough of DOC during GAC
adsorption was a conservative indicator for
the breakthrough of DBP precursors. The
higher the humic fraction, the more DBPs
were produced. The study also showed that
the humic fraction exhibits a higher affinity
for GAC rather than the nonhumic fraction.
Although the breakthrough of precursors
could be delayed with a longer EBCT, the
water throughput (or the number of bed
volumes treated) was not affected by EBCTs
between 10 and 20 minutes. Thus, a shorter
EBCT within this range might be more
desirable to reduce the capital cost of GAC
contactors. However, utilities should note
that a shorter EBCT would require more
frequent GAC replacement or regeneration.
When operating multiple GAC contactors
in parallel, blending the effluents from
the contactors could significantly prolong
the breakthrough and substantially lower
the operational costs, according to the
experiments and modeling results in this
study. This finding was corroborated
by the report, DBP Control in High
Bromide Water While Using Free Chlorine
During Distribution (2006, order#91119/
project#3075).
The experimental results presented in
Removal of DBP Precursors by GAC
Adsorption indicated that with additional
optimized coagulation pretreatment, the
GAC run time could increase by 129148%.
It should be noted, however, that the
coagulation dosage evaluated in this study
was significantly higher than the dosage
required for enhanced coagulation.
DBP Formation Control by Modified
23
24
Membrane Filtration
for Precursor Removal
Membranes are utilized for DBP precursor
removal partly due to their size exclusion
property. The molecular weight cutoff
(MWCO, Dalton) of a membrane is
generally the starting criterion for
selection of membranes for NOM removal.
Evaluation of Ultrafiltration Membrane
Pretreatment and Nanofiltration of
Surface Waters (1994, order#90639/
project#601) tested three groups of
membranes for DBP precursor removal
with three surface source waters at pilot
scale. These membranes were one hollowfiber UF membrane (100,000 MWCO), two
hollow-fiber NF membranes (400600 and
600800 MWCO), and two spiral-wound
NF membranes (200300 MWCO). The
UF membrane removed less than 22% of
TOC and UV254 and less than 7% of THM
precursors based on 7-day simulated
distribution system (SDS) tests. In
comparison, the NF membranes removed
5583% of TOC, 7197% of UV254, and 3194
percent of 7-day SDS THM precursors. The
spiral-wound NF membranes removed
slightly more TOC, UV254, and 7-day SDS
THM precursors than the hollow-fiber NF
membrane with 400600 MWCO.
Additional membrane selection criteria
and membrane fouling by NOM were
examined in the report, NOM Rejection by,
and Fouling of, NF and UF Membranes
(2001, order#90837/project#390). The
report provides the following guidelines for
membrane selection and operation:
1. Choose between UF and NF membranes.
UF membranes are primarily for
microbial removal and achieve modest
NOM removal, whereas NF membranes
significantly remove NOM.
25
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
37
38
39
0.140
0.120
Intermediate Chlorination
Chloramination
Ozone
TTHM, mg/L
0.100
0.080
0.060
0.040
0.020
0.000
D-81
D-83
J-86
J-88
Moving Avg.
J-90
J-92
J-94
J-96
F-98
M-00
Quarterly Compliance Samples
1979 TTHM Limit
D/DBP Stage 1
M-02
M-04
M-06
D-07
(TTHM) concentration and subsequent treatment choices made to reduce those levels.
After the initial maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 100g/L for TTHM became effective in the early 1980s, raw
water chlorination was no longer a viable strategy. Several Water Research Foundation projects had shown that it was
possible to reduce TTHM concentration by removing precursors prior to the application of chlorine, so the application
point for chlorine addition was relocated from the raw water to the filter influent (post coagulation and settling).
The intermediate chlorination strategy was successful in keeping Waterworks narrowly in compliance with the TTHM
MCL, but the promulgation of the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products Rule (DBPR) in 1998 necessitated
further changes. Again, Foundation research was key in leading Waterworks to the use of chloramination, wherein
ammonia is added to the process to react with free chlorine to form monochloramine. Foundation research, together
with pilot testing, gave Waterworks confidence the chloramination would insure compliance with Stage 1 by providing:
Knowledge of the formation rates of TTHMs and 5 haloacetic acids (HAAs) while in contact with free chlorine.
At the time, the Agreement-in-Principle set a placeholder MCL of 40 and 30g/L on an annual average for TTHM and
HAA5, respectively. While chloramination was adequate to meet the 80/60 limit of Stage 1, it would be unable to meet
a potential 40/30 limit for Stage 2.
40
Research had shown that ozone had the potential to effectively kill Giardia and viruses more effectively than chlorine,
without producing regulated chlorinated DBPs. Ozone would allow Waterworks to meet the future 40/30 standard
and as it turned out, the final Stage 2 as promulgated in 2006. Foundation work was also instrumental in convincing
Waterworks that it would have no trouble meeting a bromate standard of 10g/L, also regulated by Stage 1, while
using ozone. The research showed that while employing intermediate ozonation at a pH of approximately 6.2, bromate
formation is virtually nonexistent, regardless of bromide levels.
Waterworks has spent millions of dollars to comply with the DBP rules over the last thirty years. Waterworks
investment in Foundation funding has been repaid handsomely by allowing the implementation of successful
technologies and avoiding any negative simultaneous compliance issues at the same time.
7.7 to 8.5
100 to 130 mg/L
120 to 160 mg/L
2 to 10 NTU
4 to 6 mg/L
0.100 to 0.220 mg/L
41
The ozonation process was successfully implemented to provide primary disinfection for Giardia and viruses and to
control tastes and odors. Raw water ozonation has also shown to provide microflocculation benefits, including lower
ferric sulfate and lime use and improved filtered water quality. Approximately 2.5 mg/L ozone is typically required to
meet disinfection requirements. Ozone residuals are maintained to achieve a City disinfection inactivation ratio goal of
1.5. The raw water bromide levels, coupled with relatively high pH, are in a range that could lead to excessive bromate
formation following ozonation.
The City did not monitor bromate at the Eagle Mountain WTP until the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products
Rule (DBPR) was finalized in 1999. At that time, the City began monitoring the treated water for bromate and found
that levels near or slightly exceeding the 10g/L were being produced.
Findings from the report, Strategies to Control Bromate and Bromide (1999, order#90751/project#156) proved to
be very useful in selecting the best strategy to minimize bromate formation. That study showed that ammonia addition
prior to ozonation could reduce the formation of bromate by the formation of bromamines. Bromamines would be less
reactive to the ozone and not form as much bromate.
As a result of examining the Foundation study, the City began feeding ammonia gas into the raw water, upstream of
the ozone contact basins. It was determined that an ammonia dose of approximately 0.1 to 0.12 mg/L limits bromate
formation in the treated water to levels typically below the detection limit of 5g/L when the ozone dose is maintained
at approximately 2.5 mg/L and the raw water pH is approximately 8.0.
Using a low dose of ammonia in the raw water has enabled the Eagle Mountain WTP to control bromate
formation and meet the regulatory limit of 10g/L. However, the bromide levels have been consistently above
0.200 mg/L for the past two years requiring the plant staff to closely monitor the ozonation process to keep
bromate levels below the regulatory limit.
42
Emerging DBPs
In the last decade, a large number of U.S.
drinking water utilities already have or are
considering switching from chlorine to
alternative disinfectants (ozone, chlorine
dioxide, and chloramine) to comply with
stricter regulations for trihalomethanes
(THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs). These
alternative disinfectants may minimize the
formation of the regulated DBPs (THMs
and HAA5), but there is increased evidence
that they may favor the formation of other
DBP species of toxicological concern.
In recent years, nitrogenous and iodinated
DBPs (N-DBPs and I-DBPs, respectively)
have gained increased attention because
of their potential health effects. Results
from numerous studies, using cytotoxicity
and genotoxicity assays, show that several
N-DBPs (haloacetonitriles, haloacetamides,
and halonitromethanes) are 12 orders
of magnitude more toxic than the
regulated THMs and HAAs. Although
results of these assays for nitrosamines
are not yet available, previous studies
have indicated that they are extremely
carcinogenic. The USEPA estimates that a
drinking water concentration of 0.7 ng/L
for N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) is
associated with 10-6 lifetime cancer risk
levels. No U.S. federal regulatory limit
has been established for NDMA and only
California and Massachusetts have set a
10 ng/L notification level. Iodinated DBPs
such as iodoacids have been reported in
some chloraminated drinking water and
are believed to be highly cytotoxic (e.g.,
iodoacetic acid is more than 250 times more
cytotoxic than chloroacetic acid, which is
one of the regulated HAAs).
A comprehensive review on the formation,
occurrence, and health effects of both
regulated and unregulated DBPs will be
43
44
45
47
48
49
50
51
53
54
55
56
57
The treatment targets local areas where the distribution system may have a greater potential to form high DBPs.
The treatment facilities are installed within the water distribution network.
The treated water needs to meet local hydraulic conditions and operating criteria for water distribution.
Treated water may be mixed with the non-treated water after DBP treatment.
From 2004 to 2007, the LVVWD actively participated in a Water Research Foundation tailored collaboration project,
entitled Localized Treatment for Disinfection By-Products (2009, order#91254/project#3103). A pilot-scale study
of three different localized treatment technologies (air stripping, granular activated carbon, and biological activated
carbon) for reduction of DBPs was conducted. The project demonstrated that localized treatment of DBPs is a viable
approach to meeting the Stage 2 DBPR.
As a result of this project, the LVVWD focused on air stripping as the most cost effective technology for the LVVWD to
use in its water distribution system where HAA5 treatment was not required. The pilot testing results for air stripping
technology indicated that:
58
Air stripping was effective for TTHM removal (75 to 85%) at air-to-water ratios of 40 to 45:1.
Air stripping did not remove a significant amount of chlorine (less than 10%).
After air stripping treatment to reduce TTHM, TTHM will continue to form at about the same rate as before
treatment.
This study enabled the development of a conceptual design for a full-scale air stripping plant at a remote reservoir.
The conceptual design identified the following issues:
Noise reduction measures would be required for the commercially available water pumps and air blowers to
minimize impacts to adjacent residents.
The height of the air strippers would need to be restricted to avoid visual impacts to adjacent residents.
Available low-profile air strippers would meet height restrictions, but would also be limited in flow capacity for
treatment.
A large space would be required to accommodate multiple low-profile air stripping units.
To identify other improvement options and further reduce implementation costs, the LVVWD researched fine-bubble
aeration technology as an alternative to air stripping using a model based on Henrys Law. The model results were also
well represented by the extended curve of air to water ratios versus TTHM removal derived by the Foundation project.
The benefits of using fine bubble aeration included no pumping requirements, energy efficient blowers, and reduced
space for equipment.
The design of a full-scale fine-bubble aeration treatment installation was recently completed and is currently under
construction at the Alta Reservoir site. The LVVWD performed worst-case air emission calculations of volatile organic
compounds to demonstrate air quality compliance. The treatment plant aims at 40% of TTHM removal during high
water age winter months when approximately 5 million gallons per day (mgd) of water is treated. It is also estimated
that over 20% of TTHM removal is achieved during low water age summer months when approximately 10 mgd of
water is treated. The total construction cost for this project is approximately $1.8 million. Construction is scheduled
to be completed in March 2010.
After the fine-bubble aeration system is installed and operational, field testing will be carried out to investigate TTHM
removal efficiency and reformation potential, to monitor water quality parameters such as temperature and chlorine,
and to study effects of varying air-to-water (A/W) ratios and other design considerations. Effects of reservoir aeration
on water mixing and the potential impact to pumping operations will also be evaluated. The field data will be used to
calibrate the aeration model and the distribution system TTHM model. The LVVWD long-term TTHM control plan will
be updated on an ongoing basis to ensure compliance with the Stage 2 DBPR.
59
61
62
63
64
65
66
Subscribers may
download free copies
of most Foundation
reports from the
Web site at www.
WaterResearch
Foundation.org. They
may also request free
printed reports by
contacting Foundation
Customer Service by
telephone at
+1 888.844.5082 or
by e-mail to rfreports@
WaterResearch
Foundation.org.
67
68
The HydroTank model showed that modifying the riser with a restrictor plate to a 2-foot diameter (the same
diameter as the pipe leading to the tank) would provide a good mixing pattern and that complete mixing should
be achieved in 8.2 hours, which is a typical fill cycle for this tank. This is in comparison to over 20 hours required
for the 5-foot inlet. In addition, an evaluation of the historical pressure loss over a variety of operating conditions
indicated that a reduction in inlet diameter to 2 feet would not have much difference on headloss largely because
the pipe leading to the tank already had a 2-foot diameter.
The reduction of the inlet diameter was then included in a planned tank renovation project. This project also
included the installation of sampling taps at the 25, 50, and 75% elevations as well as the continuous monitor
on the common inlet/outlet. Figure 1 is a photo of the modification that was made to the tank inlet reducing the
opening from 5 feet to 2 feet in diameter.
In the three years subsequent to the inlet riser modification, the steep drops in chlorine levels that were once
commonplace do not occur anymore. The chlorine levels observed in the tank effluent are remarkably stable over
the operational cycle. In addition, water quality measurements taken at the newly installed sample taps show
there is very little variation in the water quality and temperature, thereby, indicating a well-mixed tank.
Additional software called CompTank was also included in Water Quality Modeling of Distribution System
Storage Facilities. GCWW compared the chlorine levels observed with those predicted from an ideally mixed
tank. The observed levels that GCWW sees is very close to those predicted by CompTank indicating that the
mixing achieved after the inlet modification is very close to the mixing predicted in an ideal tank.
In conclusion, tank mixing and turnover can be a significant area for improvement and should be considered by
any utility who wishes to reduce water age, improve disinfection residual, and reduce DBPs. Utilizing tools like
those developed for and included with Water Quality Modeling of Distribution System Storage Facilities
are extremely powerful, easy to use, and can be used by utility designers and engineers to evaluate the design of
existing and planned storage facilities to optimize mixing and reduce water age.
Figure 1: Photo of restrictor plate modification installed on riser pipe opening into bottom of tank bowl.
69
Acronyms
A
A+N
A/W
AWWA
AwwaRF
B
BAA
BAC
BAN
BCAA
BDCM
Bro3-
BY
bromoacetic acid
biological active carbon
bromoacetonitrile
bromochloroacetic acid
bromodichloromethane
bromate
bromate yield
C
CAA
CaOCl2
CCL3
CDBAA
CDBM
CDC
CFD
CFE
CHO
Cl2/DOC
Cl2/N
70
chloroacetic acid
calcium hypochlorite
Contaminant Candidate List 3
chlorodibromoacetic acid
chlorodibromomethane
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
computational fluid dynamics
combined filter effluent
Chinese hamster ovary
chlorine/dissolved organic
carbon ratio
chlorine/nitrogen ratio
Cl3AA
ClO2
ClO2-
ClO3-
CMSFIA
CMSGC
CNCl
CNX
CPDB
CT
trichloroacetic acid
chlorine dioxide
chlorite
chlorate
capillary membrane sampling
flow injection analysis
capillary membrane sampling gas
chromatography
cyanogen chloride
cyanogen halides
carcinogen potency database
concentration of disinfectant
in mg/L multiplied by time in
minute
D
DAS
DBAN
DBCM
DBP
DBPR
DCAA
DCAN
DCBQ
D/DBP
DMA
DO
DOC
DOM
DON
DPD
DXAA
Differential absorbance
spectroscopy
dibromoacetonitrile
dibromochloromethane
disinfection by-product
Disinfectants/Disinfection ByProducts Rule
dichloroacetic acid
dichloroacetonitrile
2,6-dichloro-1,4-benzoquinone
disinfectants/disinfection byproduct
dimethylamine
dissolved oxygen
dissolved organic carbon
dissolved organic matter
dissolved organic nitrogen
N,N-diethyl-p-phenylenediamine
dihalogenated acetic acids
Acronyms
E
EBCT
empty-bed contact time
ESIFAIMSMS electrospray ionizationhigh
field asymmetric waveform ion
mobility spectrometrymass
spectrometry
ESWTR
Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule
F
FACA
Fe(OH)3
Fe
Fe2+
Fe3+
FIA
Foundation
FP
GC/MS
GCWW
H
H2O2
HAA
HAAFP
HAN
HIOP
HNM
hydroxyl radical
heterotrophic plate count
I
IAA
IA
IC
ICR
I-DBPs
I-/DOC
IDSE
IESWTR
IOCO
IOCS
I-THMs
iodoacetic acid
iodinated acid
ion chromatography
Information Collection Rule
iodinated disinfection byproducts
iodide to DOC ratio
initial distribution system
evaluation
Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule
iron-oxide-coated-olivine
iron-oxide-coated sand
iodinated trihalomethanes
G
g/L
GAC
GC/ECD
HO
HPC
hydrogen peroxide
haloacetic acid
haloacetic acid formation
potential
haloacetonitriles
heated iron oxide particle
halonitromethane
JAWWA
Journal AWWA
L
LC/MS
LOAEL
LRAA
LT2ESWTR
LVVWD
liquid chromatography/tandem
mass spectrometry method
lowest observed adverse effect
level
locational running annual
averages
Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule
Las Vegas Valley Water District
71
Acronyms
M
MCL
MCLG
M/DBP
Metropolitan
mg/L
mgd
MRDL
MRL
MWCO
O
maximum contaminant level
maximum contaminant level goal
microbial/disinfection byproduct
Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California
milligrams per liter
million gallons per day
maximum residual disinfectant
level
minimum reporting level
molecular weight cutoff
N
N2H4
NaOCl
NBDPS
N-DBPs
NDEA
NDMA
NDPA
NF
ng/L
NH3
NH3-N
NH4+
NH4Cl
nm
NMOR
NOM
NTU
hydrazine
sodium hypochlorite
National Birth Defects Prevention
Study
nitrogenous disinfection byproducts
Nnitrosodiethylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodipropylamine
nanofiltration
nanograms per liter
ammonia
nitrogen ammonia
ammonium
ammonium chloride
nanometer
N-Nitrosomorpholine
natural organic matter
nephelometric turbidity unit
O3+ H2O2
OCl-
OEHHA
OPTGC
P
PAC
PAH
PCIC
PHG
pHPZC
polyDADMAC
Q
QSTR
quantitative structure-toxicity
relationships
R
RO
RSD
RSSCT
reverse osmosis
relative standard deviation
rapid small-scale column testing
S
SCADA
SCGE
SDS
SDWA
SFPUC
SOC
SUVA
72
ozone/PEROXONE
hypochlorite ion
Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment
online monitoring purge and trap
gas chromatography
Acronyms
T
TCAA
TCAN
TCNM
THM
THMFP
TOBr
TOC
TOCl
TOI
TOX
TRIN
TTHM
TXAA
U
trichloroacetic acid
trichloroacetonitrile
trichloronitromethane (also
known as chloropicrin)
trihalomethane
trihalomethane formation
potential
total organic bromine
total organic carbon
total organic chloride
total organic iodine
total organic halogen
total reduced inorganic nitrogen
total trihalomethane
trihalogenated acetic acid
UCMR2
UF
UFC
USEPA
UTOX
UV
UVA
Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule 2
ultrafiltration
uniform formation condition
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
unknown total organic halogen
ultraviolet
ultraviolet absorbance
V
VOC
W
Waterworks
WTP
Foundation Contacts
Customer Service
Phone: +1 888.844.5082 or +1 303.347.6121
Fax: +1 303.730.0851
E-mail: rfreports@WaterResearchFoundation.org
Editorial Questions
Phone: +1 303.347.6111
E-mail: editor@WaterResearchFoundation.org
Order Drinking Water Research
Phone: +1 303.347.6248
E-mail: tfreeman@WaterResearchFoundation.org
Address/Phone Changes
Phone: +1 303.347.6243
E-mail: emahoney@WaterResearchFoundation.org
73
Ground-Breaking Research
Disinfection By-Products have plagued the drinking water industry since the 1970s. Your subscription
to the Water Research Foundation allows us to deliver credible research that helps water utilities
monitor and control DBPs. Some of this research is shown below: