WHO Guidelines For Water

Guidelines for
Drinking-water Quality
FIRST ADDENDUM TO THIRD EDITION
WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
World Health Organization.
Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Vol. 1, Recommendations:
addendum. - 3rd ed.
l.Potable water- standards 2.Water- standards 3.Water quality-

standards 4.Guidelines !.Title.
ISBN 92 4 154674 3 (NLM Classification: WA 675)
© World Health Organization 2006
All rights reserved. Pubhcatwns of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press, World
Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel: +41 22 791 2476; fax: +41 22 791
4857; email: bookorders@who.int). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications
-whether for sale or for noncommercial distributiOn- should be addressed to WHO Press, at the above
address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; emaii: permissions@who.int).
The designations employed and the presentation of the material m this publication do not imply the expres-
sion of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the 'A'orld Health Orgamzatwn concerning the leg<~l status
of any country, terntory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or
boundaries. Dotted line> on maps represent approximate border hnes for which there may not yet be full
agreement.
The mention of specific compames or of certain manufacturers' products does not imply that they are
endorsed or recommended by the World Health OrganizatiOn in preference to others of a similar nature
that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distmguished
by initial capital letters.
All reasonable precautions have been taken by WHO to verify the information contained in this publica-
tion. However, the published matenal is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either express or
implied. The responsibility for the mterpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event
shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use.
Typeset in China, Hong Kong SpeCial Admmistrative Regwn

Pnnted in Singapore
Contents
Preface V
Acknowledgements Vll
Acronyms and abbreviations used in text lX
Changes to Table of contents
Changes to Preface 3
Changes to Acronyms and abbreviations used in text 4
Changes to Chapter 1: Introduction 5
Changes to Chapter 2: The Guidelines: a framework for safe drinking-water 6
Changes to Chapter 4: Water safety plans 8
Changes to Chapter 6: Application of the Guidelines in specific circumstances 11
Changes to Chapter 7: Microbial aspects 12
Changes to Chapter 8: Chemical aspects 16
Changes to Chapter 9: Radiological aspects 32
Changes to Chapter 12: Chemical fact sheets 35
Changes to Annex 1: Bibliography 57
Changes to Annex 2: Contributors to the development of the Third Edition

of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality 58
Changes to Annex 3: Default assumptions 65
Changes to Annex 4: Chemical summary tables 66
Changes to Index 68
iii
Preface
A ccess to safe drinking-water is essential to health, a basic human right and a com-
ponent of effective policy for health protection.
The importance of water, sanitation and hygiene for health and development has
been reflected in the outcomes of a series of international policy forums. These have
included health-oriented conferences such as the International Conference on
Primary Health Care, held in Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan (former Soviet Union), in 1978.
They have also included water-oriented conferences such as the 1977 World Water
Conference in Mar del Plata, Argentina, which launched the water supply and sanita-
tion decade of 1981-1990, as well as the Millennium Development Goals adopted by
the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) in 2000 and the outcome of the
Johannesburg World Summit for Sustainable Development in 2002. Most recently, the
UN General Assembly declared the period from 2005 to 2015 as the International
Decade for Action, "Water for Life."
Access to safe drinking-water is important as a health and development issue at
national, regional and local levels. In some regions, it has been shown that investments
in water supply and sanitation can yield a net economic benefit, since the reductions
in adverse health effects and health care costs outweigh the costs of undertaking the
interventions. This is true for major water supply infrastructure investments through
to water treatment in the home. Experience has also shown that interventions in
improving access to safe water favour the poor in particular, whether in rural or urban
areas, and can be an effective part of poverty alleviation strategies.
In 1983-1984 and in 1993-1997, the World Health Organization (WHO) published
the first and second editions of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality in three
volumes as successors to previous WHO International Standards. In 1995, the
decision was made to pursue the further development of the Guidelines through a
process of rolling revision. This led to the publication of addenda to the second edition
of the Guidelines, on chemical and microbial aspects, in 1998, 1999 and 2002; the
publication of a text on Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water; and the preparation of expert
reviews on key issues preparatory to the development of a third edition of the
Guidelines.
V
GUIDELINES FOR DRINKING-WATER QUALITY: FIRST ADDENDUM TO THIRD EDITION
In 2000, a detailed plan of work was agreed upon for development of the third
edition of the Guidelines. As with previous editions, this work was shared between
WHO Headquarters and the WHO Regional Office for Europe (EURO). Leading the
process of the development of the third edition were the Programme on Water, San-
itation and Health within Headquarters and the European Centre for Environment
and Health, Rome, within EURO. Within WHO Headquarters, the Programme on
Chemical Safety provided inputs on some chemical hazards, and the Programme on
Radiological Safety contributed to the section dealing with radiological aspects. All
six WHO Regional Offices participated in the process.
The revised Volume 1 of the Guidelines, published in 2004, is accompanied by a
series of publications providing information on the assessment and management of
risks associated with microbial hazards and by internationally peer-reviewed risk
assessments for specific chemicals. These replace the corresponding parts of the pre-
vious Volume 2. Volume 3 provides guidance on good practice in surveillance, mon-
itoring and assessment of drinking-water quality in community supplies. The
Guidelines are also accompanied by other publications explaining the scientific basis
of their development and providing guidance on good practice in implementation.
Volume 1 of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality explains requirements to
ensure drinking-water safety, including minimum procedures and specific guideline
values, and how those requirements are intended to be used. It also describes the
approaches used in deriving the guidelines, including guideline values. It includes fact
sheets on significant microbial and chemical hazards. The development of the third
edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality includes a substantive revision of
approaches to ensuring microbial safety. This takes account of important develop-
ments in microbial risk assessment and its linkages to risk management. The devel-
opment of this orientation and content was led over an extended period by Dr Arie
Havelaar (RIVM, Netherlands) and Dr Jamie Bartram (WHO).
The contents of this addendum to Volume 1 of the Guidelines amend and super-
sede the corresponding sections of Volume 1 of the Guidelines.
The third edition of these Guidelines, including these amendments, supersedes
previous editions (1983-1984, 1993-1997 and addenda in 1998, 1999 and 2002) and
previous International Standards (1958, 1963 and 1971). The Guidelines are recog-
nized as representing the position of the UN system on issues of drinking-water
quality and health by "UN-Water," the body that coordinates among the 24 UN agen-
cies and programmes concerned with water issues.
The Guideli11es for Drinking-water Quality are kept up to date through a process of
rolling revision, which leads to periodic release of documents that may add to or
supersede information in this volume.
The Guidelines are addressed primarily to water and health regulators, policy-
makers and their advisors, to assist in the development of national standards. The
Guidelines and associated documents are also used by many others as a source of
information on water quality and health and on effective management approaches.
vi
Acknowledgements
T he preparation of the third edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality

(GDWQ) and supporting documentation covered a period of eight years and
involved the participation of over 490 experts from 90 developing and developed
countries. The contributions of all who participated in the preparation and finaliza-
tion of the third edition and of this addendum, including those individuals listed in
Annex 2 of the third edition and in Changes to Annex 2 in this addendum, are grate-
fully acknowledged.
The work of the following working group coordinators was crucial in the devel-
opment of this addendum to the third edition:
Dr I. Chorus, Federal Environment Agency, Germany (Resource and source

protection)
Dr J. Cotruvo, J. Cotruvo Associates, USA (Materials and chemicals used in the pro-
duction and distribution of drinking-water)
Dr D. Cunliffe, Environmental Health Service, Australia (Public health aspects)
Dr A.M. de Roda Husman, National Institute of Public Health and the Environ-
ment (RIVM), The Netherlands (Risk assessment)
Mr J.K. Fawell, United Kingdom (Naturally occurring and industrial contaminants)
Ms M. Giddings, Health Canada (Disinfectants and disinfection by-products)
Dr G. Howard, DFID Bangladesh, Bangladesh (Surveillance and monitoring)
Mr P. Jackson, WRc-NSF Ltd, United Kingdom (Chemicals- Practical aspects)
Dr S. Kumar, University of Malaya, Malaysia (Parasitological aspects)
Dr J. Latorre Montero, Universidad del Valle, Colombia (Microbial treatment)
Professor Y. Magara, Hokkaido University, Japan (Analytical achievability)
Dr E. Ohanian, Environmental Protection Agency, USA (Disinfectants and disin-
fection by-products)
Professor M. Sobsey, University of North Carolina, USA (Risk management)
The draft text was discussed at the Working Group Meeting for the first addendum
to the third edition of the GDWQ, held on 17-21 May 2004. The final version of the
vii
document takes into consideration comments from both peer rev1ewers and the
public. The input of those who provided comments and of participants in the meeting
is gratefully acknowledged.
The WHO coordinator was Dr J. Bartram, Coordinator, Programme on Water, San-
itation and Health, WHO Headquarters. Ms C. Vickers provided a liaison with the
Programme on Chemical Safety, WHO Headquarters. Mr Robert Bos, Programme on
Water, Sanitation and Health, WHO Headquarters, provided input on pesticides
added to drinking-water for public health purposes.
Ms Penny Ward provided invaluable administrative support at the Working Group
Meeting and throughout the review and publication process. Ms Marla Sheffer of
Ottawa, Canada, was responsible for the scientific editing of the document.
Many individuals from various countries contributed to the development of the
GDWQ. The efforts of all who contributed to the preparation of this document and
in particular those who provided peer or public domain review comment are greatly
appreciated.
viii
Acronyms and abbreviations
used in text
AAS atomic absorption spectrometry

ADI acceptable daily intake
AES atomic emission spectrometry
BDCM bromodichloromethane
BMD benchmark dose
BMDLIO lower-bound confidence limit on the benchmark dose associated with a
10% increase in response over background
CAS Chemical Abstracts Service
CICAD Concise International Chemical Assessment Document
CSAF chemical-specific adjustment factor
DBCM dibromochloromethane
DBP disinfection by-product
DCA dichloroacetic acid
DNA deoxyribonucleic acid
ECD electron capture detector
FAAS flame atomic absorption spectrometry
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FID flame ionization detector
GAC granular activated carbon
GC gas chromatography
HAA haloacetic acid
IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer
ICP inductively coupled plasma
JECFA Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives
JMPR Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues
LOAEL lowest -observed -adverse-effect level
MS mass spectrometry
MTBE methyl tertiary-butyl ether
NOAEL no-observed-adverse-effect level
NOEL no-observed-effect level
ix
NTP National Toxicology Program (USA)

PAC powdered activated carbon
PBPK physiologically based pharmacokinetic
PTWI provisional tolerable weekly intake
RDL reference dose level
TDI tolerable daily intake
THM trihalomethane
TOX organohalogen
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons
USA United States of America
WHO World Health Organization
WHO PES World Health Organization Pesticide Evaluation Scheme
WSP water safety plan
X
Changes to Table of contents
Page iii
};> Replace section "1.16" with section "1.1"
Pagev
};> Delete section 4.4.4
};> In chapter 6 heading, replace "guidelines" with "Guidelines"
Page vi
};> Insert the following new sections below section 7.5:
7.6 Identifying local actions in response to microbial water quality problems and
emergencies
7.6.1 Boil water and water avoidance advisories
7.6.2 Actions following an incident
Page vii
};> Insert the following new sections below section 8.5.6:
8.6 Identifying local actions in response to chemical water quality problems and
emergencies
8.6.1 Trigger for action
8.6.2 Investigating the situation
8.6.3 Talking to the right people
8.6.4 Informing the public
8.6.5 Evaluating the significance to public health and individuals
8.6.6 Determining appropriate action
8.6.7 Consumer acceptability
8.6.8 Ensuring remedial action, preventing recurrence and updating the
water safety plan
8.6.9 Mixtures
8.6.1 0 Water avoidance advisories
Page viii
? Delete section 9.6.2
Page xi
? Insert the following below section 12.54:
12.54( a) 1,4-Dioxane
? In section 12.66, replace "ibromoacetonitrile" with "dibromoacetonitrile"
12.84(a) Methyl tertiary-butyl ether
Page xii
12.99(a) Petroleum products
Page xiii
? Delete "Annex 3 Default assumptions"
2
Changes to Preface
Pagexv
);;>- In the second paragraph, replace "Millennium Declaration goals" with "Millen-
nium Development Goals"
Page xvii
);;>- In the second last bullet item, amend the second sentence as follows:
These include fluoride, arsenic and nitrate.
3
Changes to Acronyms and
abbreviations used in text
Pagexx
~ Insert below DBP:
DCA dichloroacetic acid
Page xxii
~ Insert below MS:
MTBE methyl tertiary-butyl ether
Page xxiii
~ Insert below TID:
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons
4
Changes to Chapter 1:
Introduction
Page2
? In Section 1.1, fourth paragraph, delete the sentence:
Neither the minimum safe practices nor the numeric guideline values are mandatory
limits.
? Amend the subsequent sentence to read as follows:
In order to define mandatory limits, it is preferable to consider the guidelines in the

context of local or national environmental, social, economic and cultural conditions.
Page 18
? In section 1.3 heading, replace "guidelines" with "Guidelines"
Page 20
? Replace "Arsenic in Drinking-water: Assessing and managing health risks" with:

"Arsenic in Drinking-water: Assessing and Managing Health Risks"
5
The Guidelines: a framework
for safe drinking-water
Pages 30-31
:;;.. Delete paragraph 5 in section 2.2.2 (from "The exceedance of a guideline value"
to "is considered in more detail in section 6.2.")
Page 34
:;;.. Add the following text at the end of section 2.3.2:
In order to account for the variations in exposure from different sources in differ-
ent parts of the world, default values, generally between 10% and 80%, are used to
make an allocation of the tolerable daily intake (TDI) to drinking-water in setting
guideline values for many chemicals. Where relevant exposure data are available,
authorities are encouraged to develop context-specific guideline values that are tai-
lored to local circumstances and conditions. For example, in areas where the intake
of a particular contaminant in drinking-water is known to be much greater than that
from other sources (e.g., air and food), it may be appropriate to allocate a greater pro-
portion of the TDI to drinking-water to derive a guideline value more suited to the
local conditions.
Volatile substances in water may be released to the atmosphere in showering and
through a range of other household activities. Under such circumstances, inhalation
may become a significant route of exposure. Some substances may also be absorbed
through the skin during bathing, but this is not usually a major source of uptake. In
some parts of the world, houses have a low rate of ventilation, and authorities may
wish to take inhalation exposure into account in adapting the guidelines to local con-
ditions, although other uncertainty factors used in the quantitative assessments may
render this unnecessary. For those substances that are particularly volatile, such as
chloroform, the correction factor would be approximately equivalent to a doubling of
exposure. Where such exposure is shown to be important for a particular substance
(i.e., high volatility, low ventilation rates and high rates of showering/bathing), it may
be appropriate to adjust the guideline value accordingly (e.g., halve the guideline value
to account for an approximate doubling of exposure).
6
>- In the second paragraph of section 2.4, first bullet point, replace "microbiologi-
cally'' with "microbially" (twice)
Page 35
>- In the third paragraph under section 2.4.2, amend the second sentence as follows:
These include fluoride, arsenic and nitrate.
Page 36
>- In the paragraph beginning "Additional information on the hazards and risks,"
replace "www.epa.gov/waterscience" with "http://www.epa.gov/waterscience"
7
Water safety plans
Page 49
:J;;.> Insert the following after ''A WSP has three key components" (first line of first
paragraph):
(Figure 4.1)
Page 50
:J;;.> In the fourth box of Figure 4.1, replace "existing proposed" with "existing or
proposed"
:J;;.> Revise the text following the bottom five arrows on Figure 4.1 as follows:
See section 4.3

See section 4.4
See section 4.4, Piped distribution
See section 4.5, Community+ household
See section 4.6
Page 59
:J;;.> In the first sentence of the paragraph beginning "Retention of water m

reservoirs;' add a comma after "disinfection" and correct the spelling of
"opportunities"
Page 62
:J;;.> Replace "Safe, Piped Water" (second line before Hazard identification heading)
with "Safe Piped Water"
Page 64
:J;;.> Replace "Safe, Piped Water" (second line before section 4.1.6) with "Safe Piped
Water"
8
Page 69
);;>- Insert a new bullet point immediately below the bullet point beginning "Chlo-
rine residual monitoring" in section 4.2.2:
Oxidation-reduction potential ( ORP, or redox potential) measurement can

also be used in the operational monitoring of disinfection efficacy. It is pos-
sible to define a minimum level of ORP necessary to ensure effective disin-
fection. This value has to be determined on a case-by-case basis; universal
values cannot be recommended. Further research and evaluation of ORP as
an operational monitoring technique are highly desirable.
);;>- Replace "Safe, Piped Water" (last line on page) with "Safe Piped Water"
Page 70
);;>- In Table 4.4, insert the following entry in the column headed "Operational
parameter" below the entry "Disinfectant residual":
Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)
);;>- Add a checkmark (.f) in the column headed "Disinfection" next to the new entry
Page 72
);;>- Add the following text at the end of the first paragraph on the page (beginning
"For microbial verification"):
Trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs) are the most common DBPs
and occur at among the highest concentrations in drinking-water. Under many cir-
cumstances, they can serve as a suitable measure that will reflect the concentration of
a wide range of related chlorinated DBPs.
Page 79
);;>- Delete the following text from the top of the page (middle of the second para-
graph of section 4.4.3) to the end of section 4.4.3:
During an emergency in which there is evidence of faecal contamination of the drink-

ing-water supply ... In an emergency situation, the public health authorities should
be consulted about appropriate action.
);;>- Replace the above deleted text with the following:
Response plans for emergencies and unforeseen events involving microorganisms or

chemicals should also include the basis for issuing boil water and water avoidance
advisories. The objective of the advisory should be taken in the public interest, and
9
the advisory will typically be managed by public health authorities. A decision to close
a drinking-water supply carries an obligation to provide an alternative safe supply and
is very rarely justifiable because of the adverse effects, especially to health, of restrict-
ing access to water. Specific actions in the event of a guideline exceedance or an emer-
gency are discussed in section 7.6 (microbial hazards) and section 8.6 (chemical
hazards). "Practice" emergencies are an important part of the maintenance of readi-
ness for emergencies. They help to determine the potential actions that can be taken
in different circumstances for a specific water supply. Actions in the case of emergen-
cies are considered further in sections 6.2, 7.6 and 8.6.
;..- Delete section 4.4.4.
Page 82
;..- In line 5, replace "see sections 4.4.2, 4.4.3 and 4.4.4" with "see sections 4.4.2 and
4.4.3"
10
Application of the Guidelines
in specific circumstances
Page 107
::.-- Add the following sentence at the end of the third paragraph under section 6.2.3
(beginning "Drinking-water should be disinfected in emergency situations"):
Local actions that should be considered in response to microbial water quality prob-
lems and emergencies are further discussed in section 7.6.
Page 108
::.-- Add the following sentence at the end of the first paragraph under section 6.2.5
(beginning "Many chemicals in drinking-water are of concern"):
Local actions that can be considered in the event of a short-term guideline exceedance
or emergency are discussed in section 8.6.
Page Ill
::.-- Replace the second sentence in the fifth paragraph of section 6.4 (beginning
"In applying the Guidelines to desalinated water supply systems") with the
following:
These differences include the factors described below.
11
Microbial aspects
Page 128
> Insert the following text at the end of the third paragraph (beginning "It is rarely
possible or appropriate") under the heading Exposure assessment in section
7.2.2:
(see also the supporting document Water Treatment and Pathogen Control; section
1.3).
Page 131
> Insert the following text at the end of the second paragraph in section 7.2.3
(beginning "Performance targets are most frequently applied"):
(see also the supporting document Water Treatment and Pathogen Control; section
1.3).
Page 144
> Insert the following sections below Table 7.8:
7.6 Identifying local actions in response to microbial water quality

problems and emergencies
During an emergency in which there is evidence of faecal contamination of the drink-
ing-water supply, it may be necessary either to modify the treatment of existing
sources or to temporarily use alternative sources of drinking-water. It may be neces-
sary to increase disinfection at source, following treatment or during distribution.
If microbial quality cannot be maintained, it may be necessary to advise consumers
to boil the water during the emergency (see section 7.6.1). Initiating superchlorina-
tion and undertaking immediate corrective measures may be preferable where the
speed of response is sufficient to prevent significant quantities of contaminated water
reaching consumers.
During outbreaks of potentially waterborne disease or when faecal contamination
of a drinking-water supply is detected, the concentration of free chlorine should be
12
increased to greater than 0.5 mg/litre throughout the system as a minimum immedi-
ate response. It is most important that decisions are taken in consultation with public
health authorities and, where appropriate, civil authorities (see also section 8.6).
7.6.1 Boil water and water avoidance advisories

Water suppliers in conjunction with public health authorities should develop proto-
cols for boil water orders and water avoidance advisories. Protocols should be pre-
pared prior to the occurrence of incidents and incorporated within management
plans. Decisions to issue advisories are often made within a short period of time, and
developing responses during an event can complicate decision-making, compromise
communication and undermine public confidence.
In addition to the information discussed in section 4.4.3, the protocols should deal
with:
-criteria for issuing and rescinding advisories;

-information to be provided to the general public and specific groups; and
-activities impacted by the advisory.
Protocols should identify mechanisms for the communication of boil water and
water avoidance advisories. The mechanisms may vary, depending on the nature of
the supply and the size of the community affected, and could include:
-media releases through television, radio and newspapers;

-telephone, e-mail and fax contact of specific facilities, community groups and
local authorities;
-posting of notices in conspicuous locations;
-personal delivery; and
-mail delivery.
The methods chosen should provide a reasonable surety that all of those impacted by
the advisory, including residents, workers and travellers, are notified as soon as
possible.
Boil water advisories should indicate that the water can be made safe by bringing
it to a rolling boil. After boiling, the water should be allowed to cool down on its own
without the addition of ice. This procedure is effective at all altitudes and with turbid
water.
The types of event that should lead to consideration of boil water advisories
include:
-substantial deterioration in source water quality;

-major failures associated with treatment processes or the integrity of distribu-
tion systems;
-inadequate disinfection;
-detection of pathogens or faecal indicators in drinking-water; and
13
-epidemiological evidence suggesting that drinking-water is responsible for an

outbreak of illness.
Boil water advisories are a serious measure that can have substantial adverse con-
sequences. Advice to boil water can have negative public health consequences through
scalding and increased anxiety, even after the advice is rescinded. In addition, not all
consumers will follow the advice issued, even at the outset; if boil water advisories are
issued frequently or are left in place for long periods, compliance will decrease. Hence,
advisories should be issued only after careful consideration of all available informa-
tion by the public health authority and the incident response team and conclusion
that there is an ongoing risk to public health that outweighs any risk from the advice
to boil water. For example, where microbial contamination is detected in samples of
drinking-water, factors that should be considered in evaluating the need for an advi-
sory include:
-reliability and accuracy of results;

-vulnerability of source water to contamination;
-evidence of deterioration in source water quality;
-source water monitoring results;
-results from operational monitoring of treatment and disinfection processes;
-disinfectant residuals; and
-physical integrity of the distribution system.
The available information should be reviewed to determine the likely source of the
contamination and the likelihood of recurrence or persistence.
When issued, a boil water advisory should be clear and easily understood by recip-
ients, or it may be ignored. Advisories should normally include a description of the
problem, potential health risks and symptoms, activities that are impacted, investiga-
tive actions and corrective measures that have been initiated, as well as the expected
time to resolve the problem. If the advisory is related to an outbreak of illness, spe-
cific information should be provided on the nature of the outbreak, the illness and
the public health response.
Boil water advisories should identify both affected and unaffected uses of drink-
ing-water supplies. Generally, the advisory will indicate that unboiled water should
not be used for drinking, preparing cold drinks, making ice, preparing or washing
food or brushing teeth. Unless heavily contaminated, unboiled water will generally be
safe for bathing (providing swallowing of water is avoided) and washing clothes. A
boil water advisory could include specific advice for vulnerable groups, such as preg-
nant women and those who might be immunocompromised.
Specific advice should also be provided to facilities such as dental clinics, dialysis
centres, doctors' offices, hospitals and other health care facilities, child care facilities,
schools, food suppliers and manufacturers, hotels, restaurants and operators of public
swimming pools and spas.
14
Provision of alternative supplies of drinking-water, such as bottled water or bulk

water, should be considered when temporary boil water or water avoidance advisories
are in place. The protocols should identify sources of alternative supplies and mech-
anisms for delivery.
Protocols should include criteria for rescinding boil water and water avoidance
advisories. Depending on the reason for issuing the advisory, the criteria could include
one or more of the following:
-evidence that source water quality has returned to normal;

-correction of failures associated with treatment processes or distribution
systems;
-correction of faults in disinfection processes and restoration of normal disin-
fectant residuals;
-where detection of microbial contamination in drinking-water initiated the
advisory, evidence that this contamination has been removed or inactivated;
-evidence that sufficient mains flushing or water displacement has removed
potentially contaminated water and biofilms; and/or
-epidemiological evidence indicating that an outbreak has concluded.
When boil water and water avoidance advisories are rescinded, information should
be provided through similar channels and to the same groups that received the orig-
inal advice. In addition, operators/managers or occupants of large buildings and
buildings with storage tanks should be advised of the need to ensure that storages and
extensive internal distribution systems are thoroughly flushed before normal uses are
restored.
Water avoidance advisories, which share many features with boil water advisories
but are less common, are applied when the parameter of concern, primarily chemi-
cal contaminants, is not susceptible to boiling (see section 8.6).
7.6.2 Actions following an incident

It is important that any incident be properly investigated and remedial action insti-
gated to prevent its recurrence. The WSP will require revision to take into account the
experience gained, and the findings may also be of importance in informing actions
regarding other water supplies to prevent a similar event from occurring elsewhere.
Where appropriate, epidemiological investigations by the health authority will also
help to inform actions for the future.
15
Chemical aspects
Page 150
)» Replace "(see Annex 3)" on lines 1 and 3 with "(see below)"
Pages 151-152
)» Replace the subsection "Allocation of intake" in section 8.2.2 with the following:
Allocation of intake
Drinking-water is not usually the sole source of human exposure to the substances
for which guideline values have been set. In many cases, the intake of chemical con-
taminants from drinking-water is small in comparison with that from other sources,
such as food, air and consumer products. Some consideration is therefore needed as
to the proportion of the TDI that may be allowed from different sources in develop-
ing guidelines and risk management strategies. This approach ensures that total daily
intake from all sources (including drinking-water containing concentrations of the
substance at or near the guideline value) does not exceed the TDI.
Wherever possible, data concerning the proportion of total intake normally
ingested in drinking-water (based on mean levels in food, air and drinking-water) or
intakes estimated on the basis of consideration of physical and chemical properties
were used in the derivation of the guideline values. In developing guideline values that
can be applied throughout the world, it is difficult to obtain such data, which are
highly variable for many chemicals. Where appropriate information is not available,
values are applied that reflect the likely contribution from water for various chemi-
cals. The values generally vary from 10% for substances for which exposure from food
is probably the major source to 80% for substances for which exposure is primarily
through drinking-water. Although the values chosen are, in most cases, sufficient to
account for additional routes of intake (i.e., inhalation and dermal absorption) of con-
taminants in water, under certain circumstances, authorities may wish to take inhala-
tion and dermal exposure into account in adapting the guidelines to local conditions
(see section 2.3.2).
16
Where locally relevant exposure data are available, authorities are encouraged to
develop context-specific guideline values that are tailored to local circumstances and
conditions. For example, in areas where the intake of a particular contaminant in
drinking-water is known to be much greater than that from other sources (e.g., air
and food), it may be appropriate to allocate a greater proportion of the TDI to drink-
ing-water to derive a guideline value more suited to the local conditions.
Page 152
);-> Insert the following new subsection in section 8.2.2, immediately above the sub-
section "Significant figures":
Default assumptions
There is variation in both the volume of water consumed by, and the body weight of,
consumers. It is, therefore, necessary to apply some assumptions in order to deter-
mine a guideline value. The default assumption for consumption by an adult is 2 litres
of water per day, while the default assumption for body weight is 60 kg. It is recog-
nized that water intake can vary significantly in different parts of the world, particu-
larly where consumers are involved in manual labour in hot climates. In the case of a
few parameters, such as fluoride, local adjustment may be needed in setting local stan-
dards. For most other substances, the drinking-water intake range is very small
(perhaps a factor of 2-4) compared with the much larger range in the toxicological
uncertainty factors. In some cases, the guideline value is based on children, where they
are considered to be particularly vulnerable to a particular substance. In this event, a
default intake of 1 litre is assumed for a body weight of 10kg; where the most vul-
nerable group is considered to be bottle-fed infants, an intake of 0.75litre is assumed
for a body weight of 5 kg.
Pages 152-154
);-> Replace section 8.2.3 with the following:
8.2.3 Alternative approaches

Alternative approaches being considered in the derivation of TDis for threshold effects
include the benchmark dose (BMD) and chemical-specific adjustment factors
(CSAFs). The BMD is the lower confidence limit of the dose that produces a small
increase in the level of adverse effects (e.g., 5% or 10%), to which uncertainty factors
can be applied to develop a tolerable intake. The BMD has a number of advantages
over the NOAEL, including the fact that it is derived on the basis of data from the
entire dose-response curve for the critical effect rather than from the single dose
group at the NOAEL (IPCS, 1994). CSAFs, which were previously called "data-derived
uncertainty factors," are derived from quantitative toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic
data and replace the default values for extrapolation between species and between
17
routes of exposure. As such, they reduce reliance on empirical mathematical model-

ling (IPCS, 2001 ).
Page 154
:;... Replace section 8.2.4 with the following:
8.2.4 Non-threshold chemicals

In the case of compounds considered to be genotoxic carcinogens, guideline values
were normally determined using a mathematical model. Although several models
exist, the linearized multistage model was generally adopted. Other models were con-
sidered more appropriate in a few cases. These models compute an estimate of risk at
a particular level of exposure, along with upper and lower bounds of confidence on
the calculation, which may include zero at the lower bound. Guideline values are con-
servatively presented as the concentrations in drinking-water associated with an esti-
mated upper-bound excess lifetime cancer risk of 10-5 (or one additional cancer per
100 000 of the population ingesting drinking-water containing the substance at the
guideline value for 70 years). This value does not equate to the number of cases of
cancer that will be caused by exposure to the substance at this level. It is the maximum
potential risk, taking into account large uncertainties. It is highly probable that the
actual level of risk is less than this, but risks at low levels of exposure cannot be exper-
imentally verified. Member States may consider that a different level of risk is more
appropriate to their circumstances, and values relating to risks of 10-4 or 10-6 may be
determined by respectively multiplying or dividing the guideline value by 10.
The mathematical models used for deriving guideline values for non-threshold
chemicals cannot be verified experimentally, and they do not usually take into account
a number of biologically important considerations, such as pharmacokinetics, DNA
repair or protection by the immune system. They also assume the validity of a linear
extrapolation of very high dose exposures in test animals to very low dose exposures
in humans. As a consequence, the models used are conservative (i.e., err on the side
of caution). The guideline values derived using these models should be interpreted
differently from TDI-derived values because of the lack of precision of the models.
Moderate short-term exposure to levels exceeding the guideline value for non-thresh-
old chemicals does not significantly affect the risk.
Page 160
:;... In Table 8.7, add the following entry to column 1, immediately below
"Dichloromethane":
1,4-Dioxane
:;... Insert "+++" under the column heading "GC/MS" for the above new entry
18
Page 166
y Insert the following text immediately following the first paragraph under section
8.4 (beginning "As noted above, where a health-based guideline value"):
Collection, treatment, storage and distribution of drinking-water involve deliber-

ate additions of numerous chemicals to improve the safety and quality of the finished
drinking-water for consumers (direct additives). In addition, water is in constant
contact with pipes, valves, taps and tank surfaces, all of which have the potential to
impart additional chemicals to the water (indirect additives). The chemicals used in
water treatment or from materials in contact with drinking-water are discussed in
more detail in section 8.5.4.
Page 180
y Insert the following new subsection at the end of section 8.4.12:
Removing DBPs prior to distribution

It is technically feasible to remove DBPs prior to distribution; however, this is the least
attractive option for controlling DBP concentrations. Feasible processes include air
stripping to remove volatile DBPs such as THMs or adsorption onto activated carbon.
These processes would need to be followed by a further disinfection step to guard
against microbial contamination and to ensure a residual concentration of disinfec-
tant within distribution.
Page 187
y In Table 8.20, insert the following below "Dichloroethane, 1,1-":
Dichloroethene, 1,1- Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

those at which toxic effects may occur
y In Table 8.20, insert the following below "Hexachlorobenzene":
Methyl tertiary-butyl Any guideline that would be derived would be significantly

ether (MTBE) higher than concentrations at which MTBE would be
detected by odour
y In Table 8.20, insert the following below "Monochlorobenzene":
Petroleum products Taste and odour will in most cases be detectable at

concentrations below those concentrations of concern
for health, particularly with short-term exposure
19
Page 188
>- In Table 8.21, replace the "Mercury" entry as follows:
Mercury 0.006 For inorganic mercury
>- In Table 8.21, delete the "Dichloroethene, 1,1-" entry
>- In Table 8.21, insert the following below "Dichloromethane":
Dioxane, 1,4- SOb
>- In Table 8.21, revise the "Trichloroethene" entry as follows:
Trichloroethene 20 (P)
Pages 188-189
>- Replace the first and second paragraphs under section 8.5.4 (beginning "Chem-
icals are used in water treatment and may give rise" and ending "and to control
the formation of DBPs") with the following:
Chemicals used in water treatment and chemicals arising from materials in contact
with water may give rise to contaminants in the final water.
Some substances are deliberately added to water in the course of treatment (direct
additives), some of which may be inadvertently retained in the finished water (e.g.,
salts, coagulant polymer residues or monomers). Chloramine and chlorine disinfec-
tant residuals, for example, are deliberate additives, and their presence confers a
benefit. Others, such as DBPs, are generated during chemical interactions between dis-
infectant chemicals and substances normally in water (see Table 8.25). Chlorination
by-products and other DBPs may also occur in swimming pools, from which expo-
sure by inhalation and skin absorption will be of greater importance (WHO, 2000).
Other chemicals, such as lead or copper from pipes or brass taps and chemicals
leaching from coatings, may be taken up from contact with surfaces during treatment
or distribution (indirect additives).
Some chemicals used in water treatment (e.g., fluoride) or in materials in contact
with drinking-water (e.g., styrene) have other principal sources and are therefore dis-
cussed in detail in other sections of this chapter.
Many of these additives, both direct and indirect, are components of processes for
producing safe drinking-water. The approach to monitoring and management is
preferably through control of the material or chemical. It is important to optimize
treatment processes and to ensure that such processes remain optimized in order to
control residuals of chemicals used in treatment and to control the formation ofDBPs.
Inadvertent contamination caused by poor quality materials is best controlled by
applying specifications governing the composition of the products themselves rather
than by setting limits on the quality of finished water, whereas contamination due to
20
the inappropriate use of additives can be addressed by guidance on use. Similarly, reg-
ulations on the quality of pipe can avoid possible contamination of water by leach-
able materials. Control of contamination from in situ applied coatings requires
suitable codes of practice on their application in addition to controls on the compo-
sition of materials.
Numerous national and third-party evaluation and approval systems for additives
exist throughout the world; however, many countries do not have or operate such
systems. Governments and other organizations should consider establishing or adapt-
ing additive management systems and setting product quality standards and guidance
on use that would apply to determining acceptable water contact products. Ideally,
harmonized standards between countries or reciprocal recognition would reduce costs
and increase access to such standards (see also section 1.2.9).
Page 189
};;.> In Table 8.22, add the following entry immediately below "Cypermethrin":
Deltamethrin Unlikely to occur in drinking-water
Page 190
};;.> Insert the following new subsections at the end of section 8.5.4:
Indicator substances for monitoring chlorination by-products

Although guidelines have been established for a number of chlorination by-products,
data from drinking-water supplies indicate that THMs and HAAs are adequate as
indicators of the majority of chlorination by-products. The most appropriate means
of controlling chlorination by-products is to remove the organic precursors, which
are largely of natural origin. Measurement of THMs and, if appropriate, HAAs (e.g.,
where water is chlorinated at a low pH) can be used to optimize treatment efficiency
and to establish the boundaries of other operational parameters that can be used to
monitor treatment performance. In these circumstances, monitoring frequencies of
other chlorination by-products can be reduced. Although total organohalogen (TOX)
does not correlate well with either THMs or HAAs, it does correlate with total chlo-
rination by-products and may be another potential indicator.
In all circumstances, disinfection efficiency should not be compromised in trying
to meet guidelines for DBPs, including chlorination by-products, or in trying to
reduce concentrations of these substances.
Contaminants from storage and generation of hypochlorite solutions

Sodium hypochlorite solutions slowly decompose - more rapidly at warmer temper-
atures - to produce chlorate and chlorite ions. As the solution ages and the available
chlorine concentration decreases, it is necessary to dose more product to achieve the
21
desired residual chlorine concentration, with a consequent increase in the amounts

of chlorate and chlorite added to the treated water. The decomposition of solid
calcium hypochlorite is much slower, and consequently contamination is less likely to
be significant. However, if calcium hypochlorite solutions are prepared and stored
before use, then decomposition to form chlorate and chlorite would also occur.
Sodium hypochlorite is manufactured by electrolysing sodium chloride, which nat-
urally contains small concentrations of sodium bromide. This results in the presence
of bromate in the sodium hypochlorite solution. This will contribute bromate to the
treated water. The quality and acceptability of sodium hypochlorite will partly be a
function of the bromate residue concentration. Industrial-grade product may not be
acceptable for drinking-water applications. The sodium bromide present in sodium
chloride will also be oxidized to form bromate in systems using on-site electrochem-
ical generation of hypochlorite.
Contaminants from use of ozone and chlorine dioxide

The use of ozone can lead to elevated bromate concentrations through oxidation of
bromide present in the water. As a general rule, the higher the water bromide con-
centration, the more bromate is produced.
Chlorine dioxide solutions can contain chlorate as a result of reactions that
compete with the desired reaction for generation of chlorine dioxide. Chlorite ion is
an inevitable decomposition product from the use of chlorine dioxide; typically,
60-70% of the applied dose is converted to chlorite in the treated water.
Page 192
>- Insert the following paragraph immediately following the paragraph beginning
"As for the other groups of chemicals discussed in this chapter" in section 8.5.5:
In addition to the use of larvicides approved for drinking-water application to

control disease vector insects, other control measures should also be considered. For
example, the stocking of fish of appropriate varieties (e.g., larvae-eating mosquitofish)
in water bodies may adequately control infestations and breeding of mosquitoes in
those bodies. Other mosquito breeding areas where water collects should be managed
by draining, especially after rainfall.
Page 193
>- In Table 8.26, insert the following below "Bromochloroacetonitrile":
Chloral hydrate Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

(trichloroacetaldehyde) those at which toxic effects may occur
22
~ In Table 8.26, insert the following below "Dichlorophenol, 2,4-":
Formaldehyde Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

Page 194
~ In Table 8.27, delete the "Chloral hydrate (trichloroacetaldehyde)" entry
~ In Table 8.27, revise the "Chloroform" entry as follows:
Chloroform 300
~ In Table 8.27, revise the "Dichloroacetate" entry as follows:
Dichloroacetate sob (T,D)

~ In Table 8.27, delete the "Formaldehyde" entry
~ In Table 8.27, revise the "Nickel" entry as follows:
Nickel 70
Page 195
~ In Table 8.28, insert the following below "DDT and metabolites":
Permethrin 300
~ In Table 8.28, revise footnote a as follows:
' Only pyriproxyfen is recommended by WHO for addition to water for public health
purposes. Permethrin is not recommended by WHO for this purpose, as part of its
policy to exclude the use of any pyrethroids for larviciding of mosquito vectors of
human disease. This policy is based on concern over the possible accelerated devel-
opment of vector resistance to synthetic pyrethroids, which, in their application to
insecticide-treated mosquito nets, are crucial in the current global anti-malaria
strategy.
Page 196
~ Insert the following text at the end of chapter 8:
8.6 Identifying local actions in response to chemical water quality

problems and emergencies
It is difficult to give comprehensive guidance concerning emergencies in which chem-
icals cause massive contamination of the drinking-water supply, caused either by acci-
dent or by deliberate action. Most of the guideline values recommended in these
Guidelines (see section 8.5 and annex 4) relate to a level of exposure that is regarded
23
as tolerable throughout life. Acute toxic effects are considered for a limited number
of chemicals. The length of time for which exposure to a chemical far in excess of the
guideline value would have adverse effects on health will depend upon factors that
vary from contaminant to contaminant. In an emergency situation, the public health
authorities should be consulted about appropriate action.
The exceedance of a guideline value may not result in a significant or increased risk
to health. Therefore, deviations above the guideline values in either the short or long
term may not mean that the water is unsuitable for consumption. The amount by
which, and the period for which, any guideline value can be exceeded without affect-
ing public health depends upon the specific substance involved. However, exceedance
should be a signal:
-as a minimum, to investigate the cause with a view to taking remedial action as
necessary; and
-to consult the authority responsible for public health for advice on suitable
action, taking into account the intake of the substance from sources other than
drinking-water, the toxicity of the substance, the likelihood and nature of any
adverse effects and the practicality of remedial measures.
If a guideline value is to be exceeded by a significant amount or for more than a

few days, it may be necessary to act rapidly so as to ensure that health protective action
is taken and to inform consumers of the situation so that they can act appropriately.
The primary aim with regard to chemical contaminants when a guideline is
exceeded or in an emergency is to prevent exposure of the population to toxic con-
centrations of pollutants. However, in applying the Guidelines under such circum-
stances, an important consideration is that, unless there are appropriate alternative
supplies of drinking-water available, maintenance of adequate quantities of water is
a high priority. In the case of an incident in which chemical contaminants are spilt
into a source water and enter a drinking-water supply or enter a supply through treat-
ment or during distribution, the primary aim is to minimize the risk of adverse effects
without unnecessarily disrupting the use of the water supply.
This section of the Guidelines can be used to assist evaluation of the risks associ-
ated with a particular situation and- especially if a guideline value exists or an author-
itative risk assessment is available from an alternative source - support appropriate
decision-making on short- and medium-term actions. The approaches proposed
provide a basis for discussion between various authorities and for judging the urgency
of taking further action.
Normally, a specific review of the situation will be required and should call on suit-
able expertise. It is important to take local circumstances into account, including the
availability of alternative water supplies and exposure to the contaminant from other
sources, such as food. It is also important to consider what water treatment is applied
and/or available and whether this will reduce the concentration of the substance.
24
Where the nature of contamination is unknown, expert opinion should be sought

as quickly as possible to identify the contaminants and to determine what actions can
be taken to:
-prevent the contaminants from entering the supply; and/or

-minimize the exposure of the population and so minimize any potential for
adverse effects.
A WSP should include planning for response to both predictable events and unde-
fined "emergencies." Such planning facilitates rapid and appropriate response to
events when they occur (see section 4.4).
Consideration of emergency planning and planning for response to incidents in
which a guideline value is exceeded, covering both microbial and chemical contami-
nants, is discussed in section 4.4. Broader discussion of actions in emergency situa-
tions can be found in section 6.2 and, for microbial contamination, section 7.6.
8.6.1 Trigger for action

Triggers for action may include:
-detection of a spill by, or reporting of a spill to, the drinking-water supplier;

-an alarm raised by the observation of items, such as chemical drums, adjacent
to a vulnerable part of the drinking-water supply;
-the detection of a substance in the water;
- a sudden change to water treatment; or
-consumer complaints (e.g., an unusual odour, taste or discoloration).
8.6.2 Investigating the situation

Each incident is unique, and it is therefore important to determine associated facts,
including what the contaminant is; what the likely concentration is, and by how much
the guideline has been exceeded, if at all; and the potential duration of the incident.
These are important in determining the actions to be taken.
8.6.3 Talking to the right people

In any emergency, it is important that there be good communication between the
various authorities, particularly the water supplier and health authorities. It will
usually be the health authorities that make the final decisions, but knowledge of the
water supply and the nature of the supply is vital in making the most appropriate
decisions. In addition, timely and clear communication with consumers is a vital part
of successfully handling drinking-water problems and emergencies.
Liaison with key authorities is discussed in section 4.4. It is particularly important
to inform the public health authority of any exceedance or likely exceedance of a
guideline value or other conditions likely to affect human health and to ensure that
25
the public health authority is involved in decision-making. In the event of actions that
require all consumers to be informed or where the provision of temporary supplies
of drinking-water is appropriate, civil authorities should also be involved. Planning
for these actions is an important part of the development of WSPs. Involving the
public health authorities at an early stage enables them to obtain specialist informa-
tion and to make the appropriate staff available.
8.6.4 Informing the public

Consumers may be aware of a potential problem with the safety of their drinking-
water because of media coverage, their own senses or informal networks. Lack of con-
fidence in the drinking-water or the authorities may drive consumers to alternative,
potentially less safe sources. Not only do consumers have a right to information on
the safety of their drinking-water, but they have an important role to play in assist-
ing the authorities in an incident by their own actions and by carrying out the nec-
essary measures at the household level. Trust and goodwill from consumers are
extremely important in both the short and long term.
The health authorities should be involved whenever a decision to inform the public
of health-based concerns or advice to adopt health protection measures such as
boiling of water may be required. Such guidance needs to be both timely and clear.
8.6.5 Evaluating the significance to public health and individuals

In assessing the significance of an exceedance of a guideline value, account should be
taken of:
-information underpinning the guideline value derivation;

-local exposure to the substance of concern through other routes (e.g., food);
-any sensitive subpopulations; and
-locally relevant protective measures to prevent the chemical from entering the
source water or supply in the case of a spill.
Information underpinning guideline value derivation

The derivation of guideline values for chemical contaminants is described in section
8.2.
Most guideline values are derived by calculating a TDI or using an existing TDI or
ADI. A proportion of the TDI or ADI is then allocated to drinking-water to make
allowance for exposure from other sources, particularly food. This allocation is often
10%, but it may be as low as 1o/o or as high as 80%. In many circumstances, a review
oflikely local sources of exposure may identify that sources other than drinking-water
are less significant than assumed and that a larger proportion of total exposure
can be safely allocated to drinking-water. The summary statements in chapter 12
and background documents on all chemicals addressed in these Guidelines
26
(http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/en/#V) provide further

information on likely sources of the chemicals concerned, including their allocation
factors. When rapid decision-making is required for such chemicals, it is possible to
allow 100% of the TDI to come from drinking-water for a short period (e.g., a few
days) while undertaking a more substantive review. In the event that there is signifi-
cant exposure from other sources or exposure is likely to be for more than a few days,
then it is possible to allocate more than the allocation used in the guideline value der-
ivation, but no more than 100%.
In some cases, the guideline value is derived from epidemiological or clinical studies
in humans. In most cases (e.g., benzene, barium), these relate to long-term exposure,
and short-term exposure to concentrations higher than the guideline value are
unlikely to be of significant concern; however, it is important to seek expert advice.
In other cases of guidelines derived from epidemiological studies, the associated health
effects are acute in nature (e.g., nitrate/nitrite, copper):
• The guideline value (SOmg/litre) for nitrate is based on the occurrence of

methaemoglobinaemia, or blue-baby syndrome, in bottle-fed infants. This
outcome is complicated by the presence of microbial contamination, which can
increase the risk to this group significantly. Methaemoglobinaemia has rarely been
associated with nitrate in the absence of faecal contamination of the drinking-
water. As a short-term measure, water should not be used for bottle-fed infants
when nitrate levels are above 100mg/litre; however, it may be used if medical
authorities are increasingly vigilant when the nitrate concentration is between 50
and 100mg/litre, provided that the water is known and is confirmed to be micro-
bially safe. The guideline value for nitrate relates to a specific and vulnerable sub-
group (i.e., bottle-fed infants), and therefore the guideline will be more than
adequately protective for older children and adults.
• The guideline value for copper is also based on short-term exposure but is intended
to protect against direct gastric irritation, which is a concentration-dependent phe-
nomenon. The guideline value may be exceeded, but there will be an increasing
risk of consumers suffering from gastrointestinal irritation as the concentration
increases above the guideline value. The occurrence of such irritation can be
assessed in exposed populations.
In some cases, the guideline value is derived from a cancer risk estimate derived
from studies in laboratory animals. In these cases, short-term (a few months to a year)
exposure to concentrations up to 10 times the guideline value would result in only a
small increase in estimated risk of cancer. Because the estimate of risk varies over a
wide range, there may be no, or a very small, increase in risk. In such a circumstance,
accepting a 10-fold increase in the guideline value for a short period would have no
discernible impact on the risk over a lifetime. However, care would be needed to deter-
mine whether other toxicological end-points more relevant for short-term exposure,
such as neurotoxicity, would become significant.
27
Assessing locally relevant sources of the substance of concern through other

routes of exposure
The most useful sources of information regarding local exposure to substances
through food and, to a lesser extent, air and other environmental routes are usually
government departments dealing with food and environmental pollution. Other
sources may include universities. In the absence of specific data, the Guidelines back-
ground documents consider the sources of exposure and give a generic assessment
that can be used to make a local evaluation as to the potential use of a chemical and
whether this would be likely to enter the food-chain. Further information is available
in Chemical Safety of Drinking-water: Assessing Priorities for Risk Management (see
section 1.3).
Sensitive subpopulations
In some cases, there may be a specific subpopulation that is at greater risk from a sub-
stance than the rest of the population. These usually relate to high exposure (e.g.,
bottle-fed infants) or a particular sensitivity (e.g., fetal haemoglobin and
nitrate/nitrite). However, some genetic subpopulations may show greater sensitivity
to particular toxicity (e.g., glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase-deficient groups and
oxidative stress on red blood cells). If the potential exposure from drinking-water in
an incident is greater than the TDI or exposure is likely to be extended beyond a few
days, then this would require consideration in conjunction with health authorities. In
such circumstances, it may be possible to target action to avoid exposure at the spe-
cific group concerned, such as supplying bottled water for bottle-fed infants.
Specific mitigation measures affecting risk assessment

Such measures relate to actions taken locally or on a household basis that can impact
on the presence of a particular contaminant. For example, the presence of a substance
that is volatile or heat labile will be affected by heating the water for cooking or the
preparation of beverages. Where such measures are routinely undertaken by the
exposed population, the risk assessment may be modified accordingly. Alternatively,
such steps can be used on a household basis to reduce exposure and allow the con-
tinued use of the supply without interruption.
8.6.6 Determining appropriate action

Determining appropriate action means that various risks will need to be balanced.
The interruption of water supply to consumers is a serious step and can lead to risks
associated with contamination of drinking-water stored in the household with
pathogens and limiting use for purposes of hygiene and health protection. Issuing a
"do not drink" notice may allow the use of the supply for hygiene purposes such as
showering or bathing, but creates pressure on consumers and authorities to provide
a safe alternative for drinking and cooking. In some cases, this option will be expen-
sive and could divert resources from other more important issues. Appropriate action
28
will always be decided on a case-by-case basis in conjunction with other authorities,

including the health protection and civil authorities, who may be required to partic-
ipate in informing consumers, delivering alternative supplies or supervising the col-
lection of water from bowsers and tankers. Responding to a potential risk to health
from a chemical contaminant should not lead to an increase in overall health risk from
disruption of supply, microbial contaminants or other chemical contaminants.
8.6.7 Consumer acceptability

Even though, in an emergency, supplying water that contains a substance present at
higher concentrations than would normally be desirable may not result in an undue
risk to health, the water may not be acceptable to consumers. A number of substances
that can contaminate drinking-water supplies as a consequence of spills can give rise
to severe problems with taste and/or odour. Under these circumstances, drinking-
water may become so unpalatable as to render the water undrinkable or to cause con-
sumers to turn to alternative drinking-water sources that may present a greater risk
to health. In addition, water that is clearly contaminated may cause some consumers
to feel unwell due to a perception of poor water quality. Consumer acceptability may
be the most important factor in determining the advice given to consumers about
whether or not the water should be used for drinking or cooking.
8.6.8 Ensuring remedial action, preventing recurrence and updating the water
safety plan
The recording of an incident, the decisions taken and the reasons for them are essen-
tial parts of handling an incident. The WSP, as discussed in chapter 4, should be
updated in the light of experience. This would include making sure that problem areas
identified during an incident are corrected. Where possible, it would also mean that
the cause of the incident is dealt with to prevent its recurrence. For example, if the
incident has arisen as a consequence of a spill from industry, the source of the spill
can be advised as to how to prevent another spill and the information passed on to
other similar industrial establishments.
8.6.9 Mixtures
A spill may contain more than one contaminant of potential health concern (see
section 8.2.9). Under these circumstances, it will be important to determine whether
the substances present interact. Where the substances have a similar mechanism/mode
of action, it is appropriate to consider them as additive. This may be particularly true
of some pesticides, such as atrazine and simazine. In these circumstances, appropri-
ate action must take local circumstances into consideration. Specialist advice should
generally be sought.
29
8.6.1 0 Water avoidance advisories

Water avoidance advisories share many features with boil water advisories (see section
7.6.1 ), but are less common. Like boil water advisories, they are a serious measure that
should be instituted only when there is evidence that an advisory is necessary to reduce
a substantial public health risk. In cases where alternative sources of water are rec-
ommended, particular consideration should be given to the potential for microbial
hazards in those alternative sources. Water avoidance advisories are applied when the
parameter of concern is not susceptible to boiling or when risks from dermal contact
or inhalation of the contaminant are also significant. Water avoidance advisories may
also be issued when an unknown agent or chemical substance is detected in the dis-
tribution system. It is important that the water avoidance advisories include the infor-
mation that boiling is ineffective and/or insufficient to reduce the risk.
As with the case of boil water advisories, water suppliers in conjunction with public
health authorities should develop protocols for water avoidance advisories. Protocols
should be prepared before any incident occurs and incorporated within WSPs.
Decisions to issue advisories are often made within a short period of time, and
developing responses during an event can complicate decision-making, compromise
communication and undermine public confidence.
In addition to the information discussed in section 4.4.3, the protocols should
provide information to the general public and specific groups on the following:
-criteria for issuing and rescinding advisories;

-activities impacted by the advisory; and
-alternative sources of safe water for drinking and other domestic uses.
Protocols should identify mechanisms for the communication of water avoidance

advisories. The mechanisms may vary, depending on the nature of the supply and the
size of the community affected, and could include:
-media releases through television, radio and newspapers;

-telephone, e-mail and fax contact of specific facilities, community groups and
local authorities;
-posting of notices in conspicuous locations;
-personal delivery; and
-mail delivery.
The methods chosen should provide a reasonable assurance that all of those impacted
by the advisory, including residents, workers and travellers, are notified as soon as
possible.
The issuing of a water avoidance advisory may be necessary, for example, follow-
ing contamination- e.g., chemical, radiological or microbial- as a result of acciden-
tal, natural or malicious origin that leads to:
30
- a significant exceedance of a guideline value, which may pose a threat to health

from short-term exposure;
-concentrations of a chemical with no guideline value that may pose a threat to
health from short-term exposure; and
-significant odour or taste that has no identified source or that will give rise to
significant public anxiety.
When issued, water avoidance advisories should provide information on the same
issues included in boil water advisories (see section 7.6.1 ), although recommendations
relating to affected uses and users will vary, depending on the nature of the problem.
For example, for elevated concentrations of contaminants that are of concern only
from a drinking or cooking perspective, the public could be advised to avoid using
the water for drinking, food preparation, preparing cold drinks, making ice and
hygienic uses such as tooth brushing. Where the advisory applies to elevated levels of
chemicals that can cause skin or eye irritation or gastrointestinal upsets, the public
could be advised not to use the water for drinking, cooking, tooth brushing or
bathing/showering. Alternatively, specific water avoidance advice might be issued
where the contamination might affect subgroups of the population - for example,
pregnant women or bottle-fed infants.
As for boil water advisories, specific advice may need to be issued for dentists,
doctors, hospitals and other health care facilities, child care facilities, schools, food
suppliers and manufacturers, hotels, restaurants and operators of public swimming
pools.
Water avoidance advisories do not equate to cessation of supply; water will gener-
ally be suitable for flushing toilets and other uses, such as clothes washing. However,
suitable alternative supplies of drinking-water, such as bottled water and/or carted or
tankered water, will be required for drinking and other domestic uses.
Criteria for rescinding water avoidance advisories will generally be based on evi-
dence that the source of elevated concentrations of hazardous contaminants has been
removed, that distribution systems have been appropriately flushed and that the water
is safe for drinking and other uses. In buildings, the flushing would extend to stor-
ages and internal plumbing systems.
31
Radiological aspects
Page 198
>- Replace the partial paragraph above section 9.1, beginning "The additional risk
to health from exposure;' with the following:
The additional risk to health from exposure to an annual dose of 0.1 mSv associated
with the intake of radionuclides from drinking-water is considered to be low for the
following reasons:
• The nominal probability coefficient for radiation-induced stochastic health effects,

which include fatal cancer, non-fatal cancer and severe hereditary effects for the
whole population, is 7.3 x 10-2 /Sv (ICRP, 1991 ). Multiplying this by an RDL equal
to 0.1 mSv annual exposure via drinking-water gives an estimated upper-bound
lifetime risk of stochastic health effects of approximately 10-4 , which can be con-
sidered small in comparison with many other health risks. This reference risk esti-
mation for radionuclides is quite reliable due to the extensive scientific databases
that have included human population exposure data. As with chemical carcinogen
risk extrapolations, the lower-bound risk is zero.
• Background radiation exposures vary widely across the Earth, but the average is
about 2.4 mSv/year, with the highest local levels being up to 10 times higher without
any detected increased health risks from population studies; 0.1 mSv therefore rep-
resents a small addition to background levels.
Page 200
>- Add the following at the end of the second paragraph (beginning "There are large
local variations") of section 9.1:
(UNSCEAR, 2000).
32
Page 206
>- Replace the second sentence of the second paragraph (beginning "Underground
rock containing") in section 9.5.1 with the following:
Radon is readily released from surface water; consequently, groundwater has poten-
tially much higher concentrations of radon than surface water.
Pages 206-207
>- Replace the third paragraph (beginning "For assessing the dose from radon inges-
tion") of section 9.5.1 with the following:
In assessing the dose from radon ingestion, it is important that water processing tech-
nology that can remove radon be considered before consumption is taken into
account. Moreover, the use of radon-containing groundwater supplies not treated for
radon removal (usually by aeration) for general domestic purposes will increase the
levels of radon in the indoor air, thus increasing the dose from indoor inhalation. This
dose depends markedly on the forms of domestic usage and housing construction
(NCRP, 1989), because most of the indoor air radon usually enters from the founda-
tion of the house in contact with the ground rather than from the water. The amount
and form of water intake, other domestic usage of water and the construction of
houses vary widely throughout the world.
Page 207
>- Replace the second sentence of the first paragraph of section 9.5.3 (beginning
"Controls should be implemented") with the following:
Any new, especially public, drinking-water supply using groundwater should be tested
prior to being used for general consumption.
Page 208
>- Delete section 9.6.2 (Measuring potassium-40)
Page 209
>- Replace the first two paragraphs under section 9.6.4 ("Sampling") with the fol-
lowing:
New groundwater sources for public supplies should be sampled at least once to deter-
mine their suitability for drinking-water supply before design and construction to
characterize the radiological quality of the water supply and to assess any seasonal
variation in radionuclide concentrations. This should include analysis for radon and
radon daughters.
33
Once measurements indicate the normal range of the supply, then the sampling
frequency can be reduced to, for example, every 5 years. However, if sources of
potential radio nuclide contamination exist nearby (e.g., mining activity or nuclear
reactors), then sampling should be more frequent. Less significant surface and under-
ground drinking-water sources may be sampled less frequently.
34
Chemical fact sheets
Page 306
:...- In section 12.8, under "Occurrence," replace "rangey" with "range"
Page 309
:...- In section 12.10, replace the last sentence under "Toxicological review" with the
following:
IARC has concluded that atrazine is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity in humans
(Group 3).
Page 310
:...- In section 12.11, add the following row at the bottom of the table:
Additional comments The guideline value for barium is based on an epidemiological study
in which no adverse effects were observed, although the study
population was relatively small and the power of the study was
limited. As a consequence, an uncertainty factor of 10 was applied to
the level of barium in the drinking-water of the study population.
However, the level at which effects would be seen may be significantly
greater than this concentration, so the guideline value for barium may
be highly conservative and the margin of safety is likely to be high.
Page 315
:...- In section 12.15, in the table under "Provisional guideline value," delete "and
uncertainties in the toxicological data"
:...- In section 12.15, in the table under "Occurrence," add the following text at the
end:
; can also be formed in the electrolytic generation of chlorine and hypochlorite from
brine with a high level of bromide contamination
35
Pages 321-322
~ Replace section 12.20 with the following:
12.20 Chloral hydrate (trichloroacetaldehyde)

Chloral hydrate can be formed as a by-product of the chlorination of water contain-
ing organic precursor material, such as fulvic and humic acids. It has been found in
drinking-water at concentrations of up to 100 !lg/litre, but concentrations are usually
below 10 !lg/litre. Concentrations are generally higher in surface water than in
groundwater, and concentrations appear to increase during distribution.
Chloral hydrate is used as an intermediate in the production of insecticides, her-
bicides and hypnotic drugs. It has also been widely used as a sedative or hypnotic drug
in humans at oral doses of up to about 750-1000mg/day. Although intake from clin-
ical use is considerably higher than intake from drinking-water, clinical exposure is of
shorter-term duration.
No epidemiological or carcinogenic studies were found in humans that associated
exposure to chloral hydrate with cancer, despite the fact that chloral hydrate has been
used for many decades (and still is used) as a sedative and hypnotic drug in adults
and children (specifically for dental procedures). IARC classified chloral hydrate as
not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3), based on inadequate
evidence in humans and limited evidence in experimental animals. There is equivo-
cal evidence of genotoxicity for chloral hydrate.
A health-based value of 0.1 mg/litre (rounded figure) can be calculated on the basis
of a TDI of 0.0045 mg/kg of body weight per day derived based on an increased inci-
dence of liver histopathology observed in B6C3F1 mice in a 2-year drinking-water
study, allocating 80% of the TDI to drinking-water (because most exposure to chloral
hydrate is from drinking-water) and assuming a 60-kg adult consuming 2 litres of
water per day. However, because chloral hydrate usually occurs in drinking-water at
concentrations well below those at which toxic effects are observed, it is not consid-
ered necessary to derive a guideline value.
Chloral hydrate levels in drinking-water can be controlled by changes to disinfec-
tion practice (e.g., enhanced coagulation and softening to remove organic precursor
compounds, moving the point of disinfection to reduce the reaction between chlo-
rine and precursor compounds and using chloramines for residual disinfection
instead of chlorine) and by GAC treatment.
History of guideline development

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO International Standards for Drinking-water and the
first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, published in 1984, did not
refer to chloral hydrate. The 1993 Guidelines established a provisional health-based
guideline value of 0.01 mg/litre for chloral hydrate in drinking-water. The guideline
value was designated as provisional because of the limitations of the available data-
36
base, necessitating the use of an uncertainty factor of 10 000. This guideline value was
brought forward to the third edition of the Guidelines.
Assessment date
The risk assessment was conducted in 2004.
Principal references
IPCS (2000) Chloral hydrate. Geneva, World Health Organization, International Pro-
gramme on Chemical Safety (Concise International Chemical Assessment Docu-
ment 25).
IPCS (2000) Disinfectants and disinfectant by-products. Geneva, World Health Orga-
nization, International Programme on Chemical Safety (Environmental Health
Criteria 216).
WHO (2005) Chloral hydrate in drinking-water. Background dowment for development
of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Organization
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/49).
Page 326
>- In section 12.24, in the table under "Occurrence," add the following text at the
end: Chlorate can also form in hypochlorite solutions on storage.
Pages 349-350
>- Replace section 12.41 with the following:
12.41 Dichloroacetic acid

Chlorinated acetic acids, including dichloroacetic acid (DCA), are formed from
organic material during water chlorination. DCA has been used as a therapeutic agent
to treat lactic acidosis, diabetes and familial hyperlipidaemia in humans.
Provisional guideline 0.05 mg/litre

value The guideline value is designated as provisional because the data on
treatment are insufficient to ensure that the health-based value of
0.04 mg/litre is technically achievable in a wide range of
circumstances. Difficulties in meeting a guideline value must never be
a reason to compromise adequate disinfection.
Occurrence Found in groundwater and surface water distribution systems at

concentrations up to about 100 f.lg/litre, with mean concentrations
below 20 f.lg/litre
37
Basis of guideline Using the tumour prevalence data from male mice, the combined
derivation data for carcinomas and adenomas in male B6C3F1 mice exposed to
doses of 0, 8, 84, 168, 315 or 429 mg/kg of body weight per day for up
to 2 years were plotted using the US EPA's Benchmark Dose software
version 1.3.1. The slope factor of 0.0075 (mg/kg of body weight per
dayt' was derived from the BMDL 10 using a linear multistage model of
the dose-response data.
Lim1t of detection <0.1-0.4 11g/litre by GC with ECD; practical quantification level

1 11g/litre
Treatment achievability Concentrations may be reduced by installing or optimizing

coagulation to remove precursors and/or by controlling the pH during
chlorination.
Additional comments The concentration associated with a 10-s upper-bound excess lifetime
cancer risk is 40 11g/litre. However, it may not be possible to
adequately disinfect potable water and maintain DCA levels below 40
11g/litre, so the provisional guideline value of 50 11g/lltre is retained.
Toxicological review
IARC reclassified DCA as Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans) in 2002, based
on the absence of data on human carcinogenicity and sufficient evidence of its
carcinogenicity in experimental animals. This classification was based primarily on
findings of liver tumours in rats and mice. Genotoxicity data are considered to be
inconclusive, particularly at lower doses. Glycogen deposition, peroxisome prolifera-
tion, changes in signal transduction pathways and DNA hypomethylation have all
been observed following DCA exposure and have been hypothesized to be involved
in its carcinogenicity. However, the available data are not sufficient to establish a
cancer mode of action with reasonable certainty, especially at the very low exposure
levels expected to apply to humans ingesting chlorinated drinking-water. Recent data
suggest that there may be more than one mechanism leading to tumours, since altered
hepatic foci from treated mice were found to have three different types of cellular
characteristics.

refer to DCA. In the 1993 Guidelines, a provisional guideline value of 0.05 mg/litre
was derived for DCA; the guideline value was designated as provisional because the
data were insufficient to ensure that the value was technically achievable. This guide-
line value was brought forward to the third edition.
Assessment date
38
Principal reference
WHO (2005) Dichloroacetic acid in drinking-water. Background document for develop-
1/ICllt of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Orga-
nization (WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/121).
Pages 354-355
::.> Replace section 12.45 with the following:
12.45 1, 1-Dichloroethene
1,1-Dichloroethene, or vinylidene chloride, is used mainly as a monomer in the pro-
duction of polyvinylidene chloride co-polymers and as an intermediate in the syn-
thesis of other organic chemicals. It is an occasional contaminant of drinking-water,
usually being found together with other chlorinated hydrocarbons. There are no data
on levels in food, but levels in air are generally less than 40 ng/m 3 except at some man-
ufacturing sites. 1,1-Dichloroethene is detected in finished drinking-water taken from
groundwater sources at median concentrations of 0.28-1.2)lg/litre and in public
drinking-water supplies at concentrations ranging from ::::0.2 to 0.5)lg/litre.
1,1-Dichloroethene is a central nervous system depressant and may cause liver and
kidney toxicity in occupationally exposed humans. It causes liver and kidney damage
in laboratory animals. IARC has placed 1,1-dichloroethene in Group 3. It was found
to be genotoxic in a number of test systems in vitro but was not active in the domi-
nant lethal and micronucleus assays in vivo. It induced kidney tumours in mice in one
inhalation study but was reported not to be carcinogenic in a number of other studies,
including several in which it was given in drinking-water.
A health-based value of 140 )lg/litre (rounded value) can be derived from a TDI of
0.046 mg/kg of body weight, derived using the BMD approach from a study in which
the critical effect was minimal hepatocellular mid-zonal fatty change in female
rats. However, this value is significantly higher than the concentrations of 1,1-
dichloroethene normally found in drinking-water. It is therefore considered unneces-
sary to set a formal guideline value for 1,1-dichloroethene in drinking-water.

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO Intemational Standards for Drinking-water did not
refer to 1,1-dichloroethene. In the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water
Quality, published in 1984, a health-based guideline value of 0.0003 mg/litre was rec-
ommended for 1, 1-dichloroethene, while noting that the mathematical model appro-
priate to chemical carcinogens that was used in its derivation involved considerable
uncertainty. A health-based guideline value of 0.03 mg/litre for 1, 1-dichloroethene
was recommended in the 1993 Guidelines. This value was brought forward to the third
edition of the Guidelines.
39
Assessment date
IPCS (2003) 1,1-Dichloroethene (vinylidene chloride). Geneva, World Health Organi-
zation, International Programme on Chemical Safety (Concise International
Chemical Assessment Document 51).
WHO (2005) 1,1-Dichloroethene in drinking-water. Background dowment for develop-
ment of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Orga-
Page 366
~ Insert the following new section above section 12.55:
12.54(a) 1,4-Dioxane
l ,4- Dioxane is used as a stabilizer in chlorinated solvents and as a solvent for resins,
oils and waxes, for agricultural and biochemical intermediates and for adhesives,
sealants, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, rubber chemicals and surface coatings.
Guideline value 0.05 mg/litre (derived using TDI approach as well as linear multistage
modelling)
Occurrence Has been measured in surface water at concentrations up to

40 11g/litre and in groundwater at concentrations up to 80 11g/litre
TDI 1611g/kg of body weight, based on a NOAEL of 16 mg/kg of body

weight per day for hepatocellular tumours observed in a long-term
drinking-water study in rats, using an uncertainty factor of 1000 (1 00
for inter- and intraspecies variation and 10 for non-genotoxic
ea rei nogen icity)
Guideline derivation
• allocation to water 10% ofTDI
• weight 60-kg adult
• consumption 2 litres/day
Bas1s of guideline derivation Linear multistage model applied to data for hepatic
based on carcinogenicity tumours from drinking-water studies in rats
Limit of detection 0.1-50 11g/litre by GC/MS
Treatment achievability Not removed using conventional water treatment processes;

effectively removed by biological activated carbon treatment
Additional comments Similar guideline values were derived using the TDI approach
(assuming 1,4-dioxane is not genotoxic in humans at low doses) and
linear multistage modelling (because the compound clearly induces
multiple tumours in various organs).
40
1,4-Dioxane caused hepatic and nasal cavity tumours in rodents in most long-term
oral studies conducted. Tumours in peritoneum, skin and mammary gland were also
observed in rats given a high dose. Lung tumours were specifically detected after
intraperitoneal injection. Although cohort studies of workers did not reveal any ele-
vation in the incidence of death by cancer, a significant increase in the incidence of
liver cancer was found in a comparative mortality study. However, the evidence is
inadequate for human carcinogenicity assessment because of small samples or lack of
exposure data. A possibly weak genotoxic potential of 1,4-dioxane has been suggested.
IARC has classified 1,4-dioxane as Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans).

1,4-Dioxane was not referred to in the 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO International Stan-
dards for Drinking-water, the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality,
published in 1984, the second edition of the Guidelines, published in 1993, or the
third edition, published in 2004.
Assessment date
Principal reference
WHO (2005) 1,4-Dioxane in drinking-water. Background document for development
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/ 120 ).
Pages 377-378
:;... Replace section 12.64 with the following:
12.64 Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde occurs in industrial effluents and is emitted into air from plastic mate-
rials and resin glues. Formaldehyde in drinking-water results primarily from the oxi-
dation of natural organic matter during ozonation and chlorination. Concentrations
of up to 30 11g/litre have been found in ozonated drinking-water. Formaldehyde can
also be found in drinking-water as a result of release from polyacetal plastic fittings.
Formaldehyde's physicochemical properties suggest that it is unlikely to volatilize from
water, so exposure by inhalation during showering is expected to be low.
Rats and mice exposed to formaldehyde by inhalation exhibited an increased inci-
dence of carcinomas of the nasal cavity at doses that caused irritation of the nasal
epithelium. Ingestion of formaldehyde in drinking-water for 2 years caused stomach
irritation in rats. Papillomas of the stomach associated with severe tissue irritation
were observed in one study. IARC has classified formaldehyde in Group 2A (proba-
41
bly carcinogenic to humans). The weight of evidence indicates that formaldehyde is

not carcinogenic by the oral route.
Owing to formaldehyde's high reactivity, effects in the tissue of first contact fol-
lowing ingestion are more likely to be related to the concentration of the formalde-
hyde consumed than to its total intake. A tolerable concentration of 2.6 mg/litre for
ingested formaldehyde has been established based on a NOEL of 260mg/litre for
histopathological effects in the oral and gastric mucosa of rats administered formalde-
hyde in their drinking-water for 2 years, using an uncertainty factor of 100 (10 for
interspecies variation and 10 for intraspecies variation). In view of the significant dif-
ference between the expected concentrations of formaldehyde in drinking-water and
the tolerable concentration, it is not considered necessary to set a formal guideline
value for formaldehyde.

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO Intemational Standards for Drinking-water and the
refer to formaldehyde. The second edition of the Guidelines established a health-based
guideline value of 0.9 mg/litre for formaldehyde in drinking-water. This value was
brought forward to the third edition.
Assessment date
IPCS (2002) Formaldehyde. Geneva, World Health Organization, International Pro-
ment 40).
WHO (2005) Formaldehyde in drinking-water. Background document for development
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/48).
Pages 402-403
::» Replace section 12.82 with the following:
12.82 Mercury
Mercury is used in the electrolytic production of chlorine, in electrical appliances, in
dental amalgams and as a raw material for various mercury compounds. Methylation
of inorganic mercury has been shown to occur in fresh water and in seawater, although
almost all mercury in uncontaminated drinking-water is thought to be in the form of
Hg 2+. Thus, it is unlikely that there is any direct risk of the intake of organic mercury
compounds, especially of alkylmercurials, as a result of the ingestion of drinking-
water. However, there is a possibility that methylmercury will be converted into in or-
42
ganic mercury. Food is the main source of mercury in non-occupationally exposed

populations; the mean dietary intake of mercury in various countries ranges from 2
to 20 !lg/day per person.
Guideline value 0.006 mg/lltre for inorganic mercury
Occurrence Mercury is present in the inorganic form 1n surface water and

groundwater at concentrations usually below 0.5 f.tg/litre, although
local mineral deposits may produce higher levels in groundwater.
TDI 2 f.tg/kg of body weight for inorganic mercury based on a NOAEL of

0.23 mg/kg of body weight per day for kidney effects in a 26-week
study in rats and applying an uncertainty factor of 100 (for inter- and
intraspecies variation) after adjusting for 5 days/week dosing
Limit of detection 0.05 f.tg/litre by cold vapour AAS; 0.6 f.lg/litre by ICP; 5 f.lg/litre by FAAS
Treatment achievability lt should be possible to achieve a concentration below 1 f.lg/litre by

treatment of raw waters that are not grossly contaminated with
mercury using methods that include coagulation/sedimentation/
filtration, PAC and ion exchange.
Additional comments • A similar TDI may be obtained by applying an uncertainty factor of
1000 (an additional uncertainty factor of 10 for adjustment from a
LOA EL to a NOAEL) to the LOAEL for renal effects of 1.9 mg/kg of
body weight per day in a 2-year NTP study in rats.
• The new guideline value applies to inorganic mercury, which is the
form found in drinking-water, whereas the previous guideline value
applied to total (inorganic and organ1c) mercury.
The toxic effects of inorganic mercury compounds are seen mainly in the kidney in
both humans and laboratory animals following short- and long-term exposure. In
rats, effects include increased absolute and relative kidney weights, tubular necrosis,
proteinuria and hypoalbuminaemia. In humans, acute oral poisoning results prima-
rily in haemorrhagic gastritis and colitis; the ultimate damage is to the kidney. The
overall weight of evidence is that mercury(II) chloride has the potential to increase
the incidence of some benign tumours at sites where tissue damage is apparent and
that it possesses weak genotoxic activity but does not cause point mutations.

The 1958 and 1963 WHO International Standards for Drinking-water did not mention
mercury. Mercury was first mentioned in the 1971 International Standards, which
gave the tentative upper concentration limit for mercury as 0.001 mg/litre (total
mercury), based on health concerns. It was noted that this figure was related to levels
43
found in natural water. In the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality,
published in 1984, the guideline value of 0.001 mg/litre was retained for total mercury.
The 1993 Guidelines also retained the guideline value of 0.001 mg/litre for total
mercury, based on the PTWI for methylmercury established by JECFA in 1972 and
reaffirmed by JECFA in 1988. This value was brought forward to the third edition.
Assessment date
IPCS (2003) Elemental mercury and inorganic mercury compounds: human health
aspects. Geneva, World Health Organization, International Programme on Chem-
ical Safety (Concise International Chemical Assessment Document 50).
WHO (2005) Mercury in drinking-water. Background document for development of
WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Organization
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/10).
Page 405
);> Insert the following new section above section 12.85:
12.84(a) Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE)

The major use of MTBE is as a gasoline additive. Surface water can be contaminated
by gasoline spills; however, due to the high volatility of MTBE, most is lost to evapo-
ration. Spills and leaking storage tanks can cause more serious problems in ground-
water, where MTBE is more persistent. MTBE has been detected in groundwater and
drinking-water at concentrations in the ng/litre to 11g/litre range.
No human cancer studies have been published for either the general population or
occupationally exposed cohorts. There have been a number of human studies of neu-
rological and clinical effects of exposure to MTBE by inhalation, with mixed results.
In general, no objective changes could be seen at levels of MTBE normally found, even
in such microenvironments as gasoline filling stations.
The weight of evidence suggests that MTBE is not genotoxic. A large number of
studies using in vitro and in vivo mammalian and non-mammalian systems have been
conducted to assess the mutagenicity of MTBE, almost all of which have produced
negative results. These results suggest that the mechanism of action of MTBE is more
likely to be non-genotoxic than genotoxic, although no one mechanism appears to
explain all of the observed effects.
It has been concluded that MTBE should be considered a rodent carcinogen but
that it is not genotoxic, and the carcinogenic response is evident only at high levels of
exposure that also induce other adverse effects. The available data are therefore con-
sidered inconclusive and prohibit their use for human carcinogenic risk assessment.
A health-based guideline value has not been derived for MTBE, due to the fact that
44
any guideline value that would be derived would be significantly higher than the con-
centration at which it would be detected by odour ( 15 J..Lg/litre is the lowest level elic-
iting a response in a study using taste- and odour-sensitive participants).

MTBE was not evaluated in WHO Intemational Standards for Drinking-water or in
the first, second or third editions of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality.
Assessment date
IPCS (1998) Methyl tertiary-butyl ether. Geneva, World Health Organization, Inter-
national Programme on Chemical Safety (Environmental Health Criteria 206).
WHO (2005) Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) in drinking-water. Background doc-
ument for development of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva,
World Health Organization (WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/122).
Pages 415-417
~ Replace section 12.93 with the following:
12.93 Nickel
Nickel is used mainly in the production of stainless steel and nickel alloys. Food is the
dominant source of nickel exposure in the non-smoking, non-occupationally exposed
population; water is generally a minor contributor to the total daily oral intake.
However, where there is heavy pollution, where there are areas in which nickel that
naturally occurs in groundwater is mobilized or where there is use of certain types of
kettles, of non-resistant material in wells or of water that has come into contact
with nickel- or chromium-plated taps, the nickel contribution from water may be
significant.
Guideline value 0.07 mg/litre
Occurrence The concentration of nickel in drinking-water is normally less than

0.02 mg/litre, although nickel released from taps and fittings may
contribute up to 1 mg/litre.ln special cases of release from natural or
industrial nickel deposits in the ground, the nickel concentrations in
drinking-water may be h1gher.
TDI 1211g/kg of body weight, derived from a LOAEL established after oral
provocation of fasted patients with an empty stomach
Limit of detection 0.1 11g/litre by ICP-MS; O.S11g/litre by FAAS; 10 11g/litre by ICP-AES
45
Treatment achievability 20 11g/lltre should be achievable by conventional treatment, e.g.,

coagulation. Where naturally occurring nickel is mobilized in
groundwater, removal is by ion exchange or adsorption. Where nickel
leaches from alloys in contact with drinking-water or from chromium-
or nickel-plated taps, control is by appropriate control of materials in
contact with the drinking-water and flushing taps before using the
water.
Additional comments • Although the guideline value is close to the acute LOAEL, the
LOA EL is based on total exposure from drinking-water, and
absorption from drinking-water on an empty stomach is 10- to 40-
fold higher than absorption from food. Deriving the total
acceptable intake for oral challenge from stud1es using drinking-
water on an empty stomach in fasted patients can, therefore, be
considered a worst-case scenario.
• A general toxicity value of 130 11g/litre could be determined from a
well conducted two-generation study 1n rats. However, this general
toxicity value may not be sufficiently protective of individuals
sensitized to nickel, for whom a sufficiently high oral challenge has
been shown to elicit an eczematous reaction.
IARC concluded that inhaled nickel compounds are carcinogenic to humans (Group
1) and that metallic nickel is possibly carcinogenic (Group 2B). However, there is a
lack of evidence of a carcinogenic risk from oral exposure to nickel. In a well con-
ducted two-generation reproductive study in rats administered nickel by gavage, a
clear NOEL was observed for adult rats and their offspring for all the end-points
studied, including integrity and performance of male and female reproductive
systems, growth and development of offspring and post-implantation/perinatal
lethality. Allergic contact dermatitis is the most prevalent effect of nickel in the general
population.

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO International Standards for Drinking-water did not
refer to nickel. In the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, pub-
lished in 1984, it was concluded that the toxicological data available indicate that a
guideline value for nickel in drinking-water was not required. A health-based guide-
line value of 0.02 mg/litre was derived in the second edition of the Guidelines, pub-
lished in 1993, which should provide sufficient protection for individuals who are
sensitive to nickel. This guideline value was maintained in the addendum to the
second edition, published in 1998, because, on the basis of the available data, it was
considered to provide sufficient protection for individuals who are sensitive to nickel.
However, the guideline value was designated as provisional owing to uncertainties
46
about the effect level for perinatal mortality. This value was brought forward to the
third edition.
Assessment date
Principal reference
WHO (2005) Nickel zn drinking-water. Background document for development of
WHO Guideli11es for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Organization
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/55 ).
Pages 425-426
? Replace section 12.99 with the following:
12.99 Permethrin
Permethrin (CAS No. 52645-53-1) is a contact insecticide effective against a broad
range of pests in agriculture, forestry and public health. It has been used as a larvi-
cide to control aquatic invertebrates in water mains. Permethrin is photodegraded
both in water and on soil surfaces. In soil, permethrin is rapidly degraded by hydrol-
ysis and microbial action under aerobic conditions. Exposure of the general popula-
tion to permethrin is mainly via the diet.
Guideline value 0.3 mg/litre (when permethrin is used as a larvicide)

This guideline value is applicable where permethrin is applied directly
to water as a larvicide.ln other situations, it is not considered
necessary to derive a health-based guideline value (see Additional
comments below).
Occurrence Concentrations as high as 0.8 mg/litre have been recorded in surface

water; in the United Kingdom, levels in drinking-water are below 0.1
~g/litre, but no data were located from elsewhere.
ADI 0.05 mg/kg of body weight, established for technical-grade

permethrin with cis:trans ratios of 25:75 to 40:60 on the basis of a
NOAEL of 100 mg/kg, equivalent to 5 mg/kg of body weight per day, in
a 2-year study in rats, which was based on clinical signs and changes
in body and organ weights and blood chemistry at 500 mg/kg, and a
NOAEL of 5 mg/kg of body weight per day in a 1-year study in dogs,
based on reduced body weight at 100 mg/kg of body weight per day,
and applying an uncertainty factor of 100
Limit of detection 0.05 ~g/litre by gas-liquid chromatography with an ECD or FID
Treatment achievability Permethrin adsorbs to a wide range of matenals and is readily

removed by conventional treatment methods; neither cis- nor trans-
permethrin reacts with chlorine under normal disinfection conditions.
47
• allocation to water 20% (where permethrin is used as a larvicide in water)
• weight 60 kg
Additional comments • A health-based value of 20 11g/litre (rounded value) can be derived
by allocating 1% of the ADI to drinking-water, because there is
significant exposure to permethrin from food. However, because
permethrin usually occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well
below those at which toxic effects are observed, it is not
considered necessary to derive a health-based guideline value
where permethrin is not added directly to water as a larvicide.
• Adding permethrin directly to drinking-water for public health
purposes is not recommended by WHO, as part of its policy to
exclude the use of any pyrethroids for larviciding of mosquito
vectors of human disease. This policy is based on concern over the
possible accelerated development of vector resistance to synthetic
pyrethroids, which, in their application to insecticide-treated
mosquito nets, are crucial in the current global anti-malaria
strategy.
Technical-grade permethrin is of low acute toxicity. The cis isomer is considerably
more toxic than the trailS isomer. IARC has classified permethrin in Group 3 (not clas-
sifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans), as there are no human data and only
limited data from animal studies. Permethrin is not genotoxic. JMPR has concluded
that technical-grade permethrin is not a reproductive or developmental toxin.

The 1958 and 1963 WHO International Standards for Drinking-water did not refer to
permethrin, but the 1971 International Standards suggested that pesticide residues
that may occur in community water supplies make only a minimal contribution to
the total daily intake of pesticides for the population served. Permethrin was not eval-
uated in the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, published in
1984, but the second edition of the Guidelines (1993) established a health-based
guideline value of 0.02 mg/litre for permethrin in drinking-water, based on an ADI
established by JMPR in 1987 for 2:3 and 1:3 cis:trans-permethrin and recognizing
the significant exposure to permethrin from the environment. It was noted that if
permethrin is to be used as a larvicide for the control of mosquitoes and other insects
of health significance in drinking-water sources, the share of the ADI allocated to
drinking-water may be increased.
Assessment date
48
FAO/WHO (2000) Pesticide residues in food- 1999. Evaluations- 1999. Part II-
Toxicology. Geneva, World Health Organization, Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pes-
ticide Residues (WHO/PCS/00.4).
WHO (2005) Permethrin in drinking-water. Background document for development of
WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Organization
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/111).
Page 426
~ Insert the following new section above section 12.100:
12.99(a) Petroleum products

Petroleum products are used in large quantities, primarily as fuels. They are complex
mixtures of chemicals derived from crude oil by distillation and fractionation. They
consist primarily of a wide range of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons, many of
which are of extremely low solubility in water. Petroleum products are widely stored
and handled and are often spilt. The primary concern for drinking-water is the poten-
tial for spills into source water, penetration of distribution systems and contamina-
tion of drinking-water treatment works.
Exposure to the constituents of petroleum products through drinking-water is fre-
quently short term, as the result of an accidental spill or short-term incident. Such
incidents may lead to high concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH).
However, a number of the most soluble aromatic hydrocarbons will be detectable by
taste and/or odour at concentrations below those concentrations of concern for
health, particularly for short-term exposure. Substances such as the alkyl benzenes
and the alkyl naphthalenes have taste and odour thresholds of a few micrograms per
litre. In view of the above, it is not considered appropriate to set a formal health-based
guideline value for petroleum products in drinking-water.
In the event of a spill, it may be necessary to carry out a context -specific assess-
ment of the risk to health. The fact that petroleum products are complex mixtures of
many individual hydrocarbons is a complicating factor in determining the potential
risks to consumers. The traditional approach of evaluating individual chemicals in
assessing the risks from drinking-water is, therefore, largely inappropriate. In order to
overcome this difficulty, it is more practical to consider a series of hydrocarbon frac-
tions and to determine appropriate tolerable concentrations for those fractions. The
most widely accepted approach is that developed by the Total Petroleum Hydrocar-
bons Criteria Working Group in the USA, which divided TPH into a series of aliphatic
and aromatic fractions based on the number of carbon atoms and the boiling point,
to give equivalent carbon numbers.
This pragmatic approach provides a suitable basis for assessing the potential health
risks associated with larger-scale contamination of drinking-water by petroleum
49
products. The allocation of 10% of each of the reference doses, equivalent to TDis,
for the various fractions to drinking-water provides a conservative assessment of the
risks. Although the approach is based on the analysis of hydrocarbon fractions, most
are of low solubility, and the most soluble fractions, consisting largely of lower molec-
ular weight aromatic hydrocarbons, will be present in the greatest concentration.

first, second and third editions of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality did not
refer to petroleum products in general, although guideline values have been estab-
lished for individual petroleum hydrocarbons (e.g., benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene,
xylenes) and individual polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon contaminants of petroleum
products (e.g., benzo(a)pyrene).
Assessment date
Principal reference
WHO (2005) Petroleum products in drinking-water. Background dowment for devel-
opment of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Orga-
Pages 448-449
>- Replace section 12.119 with the following:
12.119 Trichloroethene
Trichloroethene is used primarily in metal degreasing. It is emitted mainly to the
atmosphere, but it may also be introduced into groundwater and, to a lesser extent,
surface water in industrial eft1uents. Poor handling as well as improper disposal of
trichloroethene in landfills have been the main causes of groundwater contamination.
It is expected that exposure to trichloroethene from air will be greater than that from
food or drinking-water, unless the drinking-water contains trichloroethene at levels
above about 10 !lg/litre.
Provisional guideline value 0.02 mg/litre

The guideline value is designated as provisional because of
deficiencies in the toxicological database.
Occurrence Due to its high volatility, concentrations are normally low (<1 f.tg/litre)
in surface water; concentrations may be higher (usually below
100 f.lg/litre) in groundwater systems where volatilization and
biodegradation are limited.
50
TDI 1.46!-lg/kg of body weight per day in a developmental toxicity study

in rats, based on a BMDL 10 (the lower 95% confidence limit
corresponding to a 1Oo/o increase 1n extra risk of fetal heart
malformations over background) of 0.146 mg/kg of body weight per
day and using an uncertainty factor of 100 for intra- and interspecies
variation
Limit of detection 0.01-3.0 11g/litre by purge and trap capillary GC with photoionization
detectors or with photoionization detectors and ECD in series;
0.5!-lg/litre by purge and trap capillary GC with MS; 0.0111g/litre by
liquid-liquid extraction and GC with ECD; practical quantification limit
considered to be achievable by most good laboratories is S!lg/litre
Treatment achievability 0.002 mg/litre should be achievable by air stripping, possibly in

combination with GAC adsorption
Additional comments • The guideline value is protective for both cancer and non-cancer
end-points.
• In countries with low rates of ventilation 1n houses and h1gh rates
of showering and bathing, authorities may wish to take the
additional exposures through the dermal and inhalation routes
into consideration 1n developing nat1onal standards from the
provisional guideline value.
Although trichloroethene appears to be weakly genotoxic in in vitro and in vil'o assays,
several of its metabolites are genotoxic, and some are established as known or likely
human carcinogens. In view of the sufficient weight of evidence of carcinogenicity in
two species of experimental animals with supporting human data, IARC classified
trichloroethene as Group 2A (probably carcinogenic to humans). Developmental
toxicity is considered to be the critical non-cancer effect, because of the low adverse
effect level, the severity of the end-point (heart malformations) and the presence of
evidence for similar effects (e.g., cardiac anomalies) from epidemiological studies.

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO International Standards for Drinki11g-water did not
refer to trichloroethene. In the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water
Quality, published in 1984, a tentative guideline value of 0.03 mg/litre was recom-
mended; the guideline was designated as tentative because, although carcinogenicity
was observed in one species only, the compound occurs relatively frequently in drink-
ing-water. The second edition of the Guidelines (1993) established a provisional
health-based guideline value of 0.07 mg/litre for trichloroethene. The value was
provisional because an uncertainty factor of 3000 was used in its derivation. This
guideline value was brought forward to the third edition.
51
Assessment date
Principal reference
WHO (2005) Trichloroethene in drinking-water. Background document for development
ofWHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Organization
(WHO/SDE/WSH/05.08/22).
Pages 451-454
y Replace section 12.121 with the following:
12.121 Trihalomethanes (bromoform, bromodichloromethane,

dibromochloromethane, chloroform)
Trihalomethanes (THMs) are formed in drinking-water primarily as a result of chlo-
rination of organic matter present naturally in raw water supplies. The rate and degree
of THM formation increase as a function of the chlorine and humic acid concentra-
tion, temperature, pH and bromide ion concentration. Chloroform is the most
common THM and the principal DBP in chlorinated drinking-water. In the presence
of bromides, brominated THMs are formed preferentially and chloroform concen-
trations decrease proportionally. It is assumed that most THMs present in water are
ultimately transferred to air as a result of their volatility. For chloroform, for example,
individuals may be exposed during showering to elevated concentrations from chlo-
rinated tap water. For the volatile THMs, approximately equal contributions to total
exposure come from four areas: ingestion of drinking-water, inhalation of indoor air
largely due to volatilization from drinking-water, inhalation and dermal exposure
during showering or bathing, and ingestion of food, with all but food exposure arising
primarily from drinking-water. Indoor air exposure to the volatile THMs is particu-
larly important in countries with low rates of ventilation in houses and high rates of
showering and bathing.
Guideline values
Chloroform 0.3 mg/1 it re
Bromoform 0.1 mg/litre
Dibromochloromethane 0.1 mg/litre

(DBCM)
Bromodichloromethane 0.06 mg/litre

(BDCM)
Occurrence THMs are not expected to be found in raw water (unless near a
pollution source) but are usually present in finished or chlorinated
water; concentrations are generally below 100 fig/litre. In most
circumstances, chloroform is the dom1nant compound.
52
TDis
Chloroform 15 Jlg/kg of body weight, derived from the lower 95% confidence limit
for the 5% incidence of hepatic cysts, generated by PBPK modelling, in
beagle dogs that ingested chloroform in toothpaste for 7.5 years,
using an uncertainty factor of 25 (1 0 for intraspecies differences 1n
toxicokinetics and tox1codynamics and 2.5 for differences in
interspecies toxicodynamics)
Bromoform 17.9 Jlg/kg of body weight, based on the absence of histopathological

lesions in the liver in a well conducted and well documented 90-day
study in rats, using an uncertainty factor of 1000 (1 00 for intra-
and interspecies variation and 10 for possible carcinogenicity and
short duration of exposure)
DBCM 21.4 ~Lg/kg of body weight, based on the absence of histopathological

effects in the liver in a well conducted and well documented 90-day
study in rats, using an uncertainty factor of 1000 (1 00 for intra- and
interspecies variation and 10 for the short duration of the study); an
additional uncertainty factor for potential carcinogenicity was not
applied because of the questions regarding mouse liver tumours from
corn oil vehicles and inconclusive evidence of genotoxicity
Bas1s of guideline Application of the llnearized multistage model for the observed
derivation for BDCM increases in incidence of kidney tumours in male mice observed in
an NTP bioassay, as these tumours y1eld the most protective value
Limit of detection 0.1-0.2 Jlg/litre (method detection limits) by purge-and-trap and

liquid-liquid extraction and direct aqueous injection in combination
with a chromatographic system; 0.1 Jlg/litre by GC with ECD;
2.2 Jlg/litre by GC/MS
Treatment achievability Concentrations of chloroform, bromoform, BDCM and DBCM in

drinking-water are generally below 0.05 mg/litre. Concentrations can
be reduced by changes to disinfection practice (e.g., reducing organic
THM precursors) or using air stripping.
• allocation to water 20% ofTDI for bromoform and DBCM
75% ofTDI for chloroform
Additional comments on For authorities wishing to establish a total THM standard to account
THMs for additive toxicity, the following fractionation approach could be
taken:
(bromoform + CoBCM + CsoCM + (chloroform ::; l

GVbromoform GVDBCM GVBDCM GVchloroform
where C =concentration and GV =guideline value.
it is emphasized that adequate disinfection should never be

compromised in attempting to meet guidelines forTHMs.
Nevertheless, in view of the potential link between adverse
reproductive outcomes and THMs, particularly brominated THMs, it is
recommended that THM levels in drinking-water be kept as low as
practicable.
53
Additional comments on • In countries with low rates of ventilation in houses and high rates
chloroform of showenng and bathing, the guideline value could be lowered to
account for the additional exposures from mhalation of indoor air
largely due to volatilization from drinking-water and inhalation
and dermal exposure during showering or bathing.
• The guideline value is based on the same study as in the third
edition; the increase in value is primarily a result of an Increase in
the allocation of exposure in drinking-water from 50% to 75% to
account for the fact that chloroform is used less now than it was 1n
1993 when the original guideline was developed.
Additional comments on • Although a health-based value of 21 11g/litre is denved, the

BDCM previous guideline of 60 11g/litre has been retained for two reasons:
1) both calculations were based on the same study, the only
differences being the model and model assumptions used to
derive the guideline value; there is therefore no scientific bas1s on
which to JUStify a change in the gu1dellne value; and 2) BDCM
concentrations below 50 11g/litre may be difficult to achieve using
currently available technology without compromising the
effectiveness of disinfection.
• As with chloroform, countries with low rates of ventilation and
high rates of showering and bathing may wish to lower the
guideline value to account for dermal and inhalation exposures,
although, as noted above, concentrations below 50 11g/litre may be
difficult to achieve using currently available technology without
compromising the effectiveness of d1s1nfection.
Chloroform
The weight of evidence for genotoxicity of chloroform is considered negative. IARC
has classified chloroform as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) based on
limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but sufficient evidence of carcino-
genicity in experimental animals. The weight of evidence for liver tumours in mice is
consistent with a threshold mechanism of induction. Although it is plausible that
kidney tumours in"rats may similarly be associated with a threshold mechanism, there
are some limitations of the database in this regard. The most universally observed
toxic effect of chloroform is damage to the centrilobular region of the liver. The sever-
ity of these effects per unit dose administered depends on the species, vehicle and
method by which the chloroform is administered.
Bromoform
In an NTP bioassay, bromoform induced a small increase in relatively rare tumours
of the large intestine in rats of both sexes but did not induce tumours in mice. Data
from a variety of assays on the genotoxicity of bromoform are equivocal. IARC has
classified bromoform in Group 3 (not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans).
54
Dibromochloromethane
In an NTP bioassay, DBCM induced hepatic tumours in female and possibly in male
mice but not in rats. The genotoxicity of DBCM has been studied in a number of
assays, but the available data are considered inconclusive. IARC has classified DBCM
in Group 3 (not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans).
Bromodichloromethane
IARC has classified BDCM in Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans). BDCM
gave both positive and negative results in a variety of in vitro and in vivo genotoxic-
ity assays. In an NTP bioassay, BDCM induced renal adenomas and adenocarcinomas
in both sexes of rats and male mice, rare tumours of the large intestine (adenoma-
taus polyps and adenocarcinomas) in both sexes of rats and hepatocellular adenomas
and adenocarcinomas in female mice. Exposure to BDCM has also been linked to a
possible increase in reproductive effects (increased risk for spontaneous abortion or
stillbirth).

The 1958, 1963 and 1971 WHO International Standards for Drinking-water did not
refer to THMs. In the first edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, pub-
lished in 1984, no guideline values for THMs other than chloroform were recom-
mended after a detailed evaluation of the compounds. A health-based guideline value
of 0.03 mg/litre was established for chloroform only, as few data existed for the
remaining THMs and, for most water supplies, chloroform was the most commonly
encountered member of the group. It was noted that the guideline value for chloro-
form was obtained using a linear multistage extrapolation of data obtained from male
rats, a mathematical model that involves considerable uncertainty. It was also men-
tioned that although the available toxicological data were useful in establishing a
guideline value for chloroform only, the concentrations of the other THMs should
also be minimized. Limits ranging from 0.025 to 0.25 mg/litre, which represent a
balance between the levels that can be achieved given certain circumstances and those
that are desirable, have been set in several countries for the sum of bromoform,
DBCM, BDCM and chloroform. In the second edition of the Guidelines, published
in 1993, no guideline value was set for total THMs, but guideline values were estab-
lished separately for all four THMs. Authorities wishing to establish a total THM stan-
dard to account for additive toxicity could use a fractionation approach in which the
sum of the ratios of each of the four THMs to their respective guideline values is less
than or equal to 1. The 1993 Guidelines established health-based guideline values of
0.1 mg/litre for both bromoform and DBCM, and guideline values of 0.06 mg/litre for
BDCM and 0.2mg/litre for chloroform, associated with an upper-bound excess life-
time cancer risk of 10-S, were derived. The guideline value of 0.2 mg/litre for chloro-
form was retained in the addendum to the second edition of the Guidelines, published
55
in 1998, but was developed on the basis of a TDI for threshold effects. These guide-
line values were brought forward to the third edition.
Assessment date
IPCS (2000) Disinfectants and disinfectant by-products. Geneva, World Health
Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety (Environmental
Health Criteria 216).
IPCS (2004) Chloroform. Geneva, World Health Organization, International Pro-
ment 58).
WHO (2005) Trihalomethanes in drinking-water. Background document for develop-
ment of WHO Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Geneva, World Health Orga-
56
Changes to Annex 1:
Bibliography
Page 463
);;;- Delete the following references:
Farland & Dourson (1992)

Guth et al. (1991)
Hertzberg (1989)
Hertzberg & Miller (1985)
Page 464
);;;- Delete the following reference:
ICRP (1992)
Page 465
);;;- Delete the following reference:
Renwick (1993)
Page 466
);;;- Insert the following reference below WHO (2003b):
WHO (in revision) Guidelines for safe recreational water environments. Vol. 2.
Swimming pools and similar recreational water environments. Geneva, World Health
Organization, Water, Sanitation and Health.
57
Changes to Annex 2:
Contributors to the
development of the Third
Edition of the Guidelines for
Drinking-water Quality
Page 467
> Amend the title of Annex 2 as follows:
Contributors to the development of the third edition of the Guidelines on drinking-

water quality and addenda
> Insert the following below Mr R. Aertgeerts:
Dr F. Ahmed, ( 30), Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Bangladesh
> For Dr A. Aitio, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(26, 30)
Page 468
> Insert the following below American Chemistry Council:
Dr L.K. Andersen, (31: vii), The Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copen-
hagen, Denmark
> Insert the following below Mr R. Bannerman:
Dr M. Baril, (31: ii), Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauve en Sante et en Securite du

Travail, Montreal, Canada
> For Dr J. Bartram, replace the parenthetical material as follows:

(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 21: i-v, 22, 23, 24,
25, 29, 30)
58
;;... Insert the following below Dr A. Basaran:
Dr H. Bates, (31: vii), Nickel Producers Environmental Research Association, Durham,

NC, USA
;;... For Dr A. Bathija, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(19: xxvi, 30)
;;... Insert the following below Mr U. Bayar:
Mr A. Beaudoin, (31: ii), Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
;;... Insert the following below Dr R. Belmar:
Dr R. Benson, (31: viii), US Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, CO, USA
Page 469
;;... Replace right-hand page header in Annex 2 with the following:
ANNEX 2. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE THIRD EDITION AND ADDENDA
;;... Insert the following below Ms T. Boonyakarnkul:
Mr R. Bos, (30, 31: xiii), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
;;... Insert the following below Mr R. Carr:
Mr R. Carrier, (31: ii, viii, ix, xi), Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
;;... Insert the following below Professor W. Chee Woon:
Dr R.S. Chhabra, (31: ii), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences,

Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
Page 470
;;... Insert the following below Dr W.T. Chung:
Dr M. Cikrt, (31: ii), National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
;;... For Dr J. Cotruvo, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(3, 5, 7, 9, 14, 18, 22, 23, 25, 30)
;;... For Dr C. Cunliffe, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(8, 13, 19, 20, 21: iv, 22, 23, 25, 27, 30)
59
~ Insert the following below Dr J.M. Delattre:
Dr A.M. de Roda Husman, (30), National Institute of Public Health and the Envi-
ronment, Bilthoven, Netherlands
~ Insert the following below Dr P. Dillon:
Dr B.A. Dmytrasz, (31: xii), Petroleum Products CONCAWE, Brussels, Belgium
Page 471
~ For Dr J. Donohue, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(7, 19: xxxvi, 31: iii)
~ For Dr M. Ema, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
( 19: xlii, xlix, 31: x)
~ For Dr T. Endo, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(5, 7, 14, 15, 19, 22, 30)
~ For Dr J. Fawell, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(4, 5, 7, 15, 17, 19: vi, xii-lxix, 20, 22, 29, 30,31: iv-vii, xii)
Page 472
~ Replace Mr B. Fields with Dr B. Fields
~ Insert the following below Dr P. Gale:
Dr Luiz Augusto Galvao, (30), Regional Office for the Americas/Pan American Health
Organization, Washington, DC, USA
~ Insert the following below Dr T. Gerschel:
Dr A. Geyid, (30), Ethiopian Health and Nutrition Research Institute, Addis Ababa,
Ethopia
~ For Ms M. Giddings, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(15, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 20, 22, 29, 30, 31: ii, viii, ix, xi)
~ Insert the following below Dr M.I. Gonzalez:
Mr B. Gordon, (30), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
~ For Ms F. Gore, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(22, 30)
60
Page 473
~ Insert the following below Professor W. Grabow:
Professor R.C. Grafstri:im, (31: v), Institute of Environmental Medicine, Stockholm,

Sweden
~ For Dr. S. Grant-Trusdale, replace the text as follows:
Ms S. Grant-Trusdale, (19: xxxiv, 31: ix, xi), Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
~ Insert the following below Professor A. Grohmann:
Professor ]. Gunnar, (31: xi), Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Insti-

tutet, Stockholm, Sweden
~ Insert the following below Mr P. Hecq:
Mr H. Heijnen, (30), WHO, New Delhi, India
~ Insert the following below Mr A. Hicking:
Dr R. Hilton, (31: vii), Inco Limited, Toronto, Canada
Page 474
~ For Dr G. Howard, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(2, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 30)
~ For Mr ]. Hueb, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(20, 21: v, 23, 30)
~ For Mr P. Jackson, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(2, 5, 7, 15, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 22, 25, 30, 31: i, xiv)
Page 475
~ Insert the following below Dr T. Kuiper-Goodman:
Dr S. Kumar, (30), University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
~ For Dr S. Kunikane, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(7, 15, 17, 22, 30)
~ Insert the following below Dr ]. Langford:
Dr P.B. Larsen, (31: vii), The Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen,
Denmark
61
);.;> For Dr J. Latorre, replace the entry as follows:

Dr J. Latorre Monterro, (25, 30), Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia
);.;> For Dr P. Literathy, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(2, 5, 29, 31: xii)
);.;> For DrY. Magara, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(1, 4, 5, 7, 14, 15, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 21: iv, 22, 30,31: x)
Page 476
);.;> Insert the following below Dr I. MakeHiinen:
Mr M. Malkawi, (30), WHO, Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, Cairo,
Egypt
Dr A.K. Mallett, (31: xii), Consultant, Woking, UK
);.;> Insert the following below Dr D. McFadden:
Dr D. McGregor, (31: xi), Toxicity Evaluation Consultants, Aberdour, UK
Page 477
);.;> For Dr T. Nishimura, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(15, 19: xix, xlii, xlix, lvii, 31: x)
);.;> Insert the following below Dr C. Nokes:
Dr N. Nwachuku, (30), US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA
);.;> For Dr H. Ogawa, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(23, 30)
);.;> Insert the following below Dr Y. Ortega:
Dr M. Ouahdi, (22), Ministry of Health and Population, Alger, Algeria
Page 478
);.;> For Mr F. Properzi, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(22, 30)
62
Page 479
y Insert the following below Professor K.-P. Seiler:
Dr S. Semalulu, (31: viii, ix), Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada
y Insert the following below Mr T. Simons:
Ms J. Sims, (30), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
Page 480
y Remove italics from the Professor H.V. Smith entry
y For Professor M. Sobsey, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(7,8, 12, 13,20,22,25,28,30)
y Insert the following below Professor J.A. Sokal:
Dr R. Solecki, (30), Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Thielallee, Berlin
y Insert the following below Dr G. Stanfield:
Dr U. Stenius, (31: viii), Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet,

Stockholm, Sweden
Page 481
y For Dr B.H. Thomas, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(4,31:xi)
y For Mr T. Thompson, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(7, 12, 15, 17, 22, 23, 25, 27, 30)
y For Dr P. Toft, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
(1, 4, 7, 15, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 22, 31: xiii)
y Insert the following below Mr V. Tovu:
Dr A. Tritscher, (30), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
y Insert the following below Dr F.X.R. van Leeuwen:
Dr M. van Raaij, (30), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment,
Bilthoven, Netherlands
y For Ms C. Vickers, replace the text as follows:
Ms C. Vickers, (15, 19: xiii-lii, liv-lxviii, 30), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
63
Page 482
> Insert the following below Mr M. Waite:
Dr G. Wallace, (31: xi), The European Fuel Oxygenates Association, Brussels, Belgium
> Insert the following below Dr B. Wilkins:
Dr C. Willert, (31: vii), Jacques Whitford Limited, Markham, Canada
> For Dr D. Wong, replace the parenthetical material as follows:
( 19: xxvii, xxxiii, lxviii, 31: iii)
> Insert the following below Dr Z. Yinfa:
Dr Abdul Sattar Yoosuf, (30), Regional Office for South-East Asia, New Delhi, India
Page 485
> In #23, amend the title of the document as follows:
"Safe Piped Water: Managing Microbial Water Quality in Piped Distribution Systems."
> Add the following text at the bottom of the page:
30. Participant in Expert Consultation for the Rolling Revision of the Guidelines on
Drinking-water Quality, Geneva, Switzerland, 17-21 May 2004
31. Contributors to the chemical background document on:
I. Bromate
tt. Chloral hydrate
m Dichloroacetate
IV. 1,1-Dichloroethene
V. Formaldehyde
vi. Mercury
Vll. Nickel
viii. Trichloroethene
IX. Trihalomethanes
X. 1,4-Dioxane
XI. MTBE
Xtt. Petroleum oils
xm. Permethrin
XIV. Chlorite and chlorate
64
Changes to Annex 3: Default
assumptions
Pages 486-487
)o-- Delete Annex 3
65
Changes to Annex 4:
Chemical summary tables
Page 488
);>- In Table A4.1, add the following entry immediately below "Cypermethrin":
Deltamethrin Unlikely to occur in drinking-water
Page 489
);>- Insert the following below "Bromochloroacetonitrile":
Chloral hydrate Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

(trichloroacetaldehyde) those at which toxic effects may occur
);>- Insert the following below "Dichloroethane, 1,1-":
Dichloroethene, 1,1- Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

);>- Insert the following below "Fluoranthene":
Formaldehyde Occurs in drinking-water at concentrations well below

Page 490
);>- Insert the following below "Methyl parathion":
Methyl tertiary-butyl Any guideline that would be derived would be

ether (MTBE) significantly higher than concentrations at which MTBE
would be detected by odour
);>- Insert the following below "Permethrin":
Petroleum products Taste and odour will in most cases be detectable at con-
centrations below those concentrations of concern for
health, particularly with short-term exposure
66
Page 491
);o> In Table A4.3, delete "Chloral hydrate (trichloroacetaldehyde)" entry
);o> In Table A4.3, revise the "Chloroform" entry as follows:
Chloroform 0.3
);o> In Table A4.3, revise the "Dichloroacetate" entry as follows:
Dichloroacetate O.OSb (T, D)
Page 492
);o> In Table A4.3, delete the "Dichloroethene, 1, 1-" entry
);o> In Table A4.3, insert the following below "Dimethoate":
Dioxane, 1,4- O.OSb
);o> In Table A4.3, delete the "Formaldehyde" entry
);o> In Table A4.3, replace the "Mercury" entry as follows:
Mercury 0.006 For inorganic mercury
);o> In Table A4.3, revise the "Nickel" entry as follows:
Nickel 0.07
);o> In Table A4.3, insert the following below "Pentachlorophenol":
Permethrin 0.3 Only when used as a larvicide for public health purposes
Page 493
);o> Revise the "Trichloroethene" entry as follows:
Trichloroethene 0.02 (P)
67
Changes to Index
Page 510
~ Replace "Safe, Piped Water: Managing Microbial Water Quality in Piped Distrib-
ution Systems" with Safe Piped Water: Managing Microbial Water Quality in Piped
Distribution Systems
Note: This index has not been updated to reflect any new entries or changes that result
from the incorporation of the first addendum into the third edition of the Guidelines
for Drinking-water Quality.
68

WHO Guidelines For Water

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WHO Guidelines For Water

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

WHO Guidelines For Water

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guidelines for

l.Potable water- standards 2.Water- standards 3.Water quality-

© World Health Organization 2006

Typeset in China, Hong Kong SpeCial Admmistrative Regwn

Acronyms and abbreviations used in text lX

Changes to Table of contents

Changes to Acronyms and abbreviations used in text 4

Changes to Chapter 1: Introduction 5

Changes to Chapter 2: The Guidelines: a framework for safe drinking-water 6

Changes to Chapter 4: Water safety plans 8

Changes to Chapter 6: Application of the Guidelines in specific circumstances 11

Changes to Chapter 7: Microbial aspects 12

Changes to Chapter 8: Chemical aspects 16

Changes to Chapter 9: Radiological aspects 32

Changes to Chapter 12: Chemical fact sheets 35

Changes to Annex 1: Bibliography 57

Changes to Annex 2: Contributors to the development of the Third Edition

Changes to Annex 3: Default assumptions 65

Changes to Annex 4: Chemical summary tables 66

T he preparation of the third edition of the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality

Dr I. Chorus, Federal Environment Agency, Germany (Resource and source

AAS atomic absorption spectrometry

NTP National Toxicology Program (USA)

};> Replace section "1.16" with section "1.1"

};> Delete section 4.4.4

};> In chapter 6 heading, replace "guidelines" with "Guidelines"

};> Insert the following new sections below section 7.5:

};> Insert the following new sections below section 8.5.6:

? Delete section 9.6.2

? Insert the following below section 12.54:

? In section 12.66, replace "ibromoacetonitrile" with "dibromoacetonitrile"

? Insert the following below section 12.84:

12.84(a) Methyl tertiary-butyl ether

? Insert the following below section 12.99:

12.99(a) Petroleum products

? Delete "Annex 3 Default assumptions"

These include fluoride, arsenic and nitrate.

~ Insert below DBP:

DCA dichloroacetic acid

~ Insert below MS:

MTBE methyl tertiary-butyl ether

~ Insert below TID:

TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons

? In Section 1.1, fourth paragraph, delete the sentence:

? Amend the subsequent sentence to read as follows:

In order to define mandatory limits, it is preferable to consider the guidelines in the

? In section 1.3 heading, replace "guidelines" with "Guidelines"

? Replace "Arsenic in Drinking-water: Assessing and managing health risks" with:

:;;.. Add the following text at the end of section 2.3.2:

See section 4.3

:J;;.> In the first sentence of the paragraph beginning "Retention of water m

Oxidation-reduction potential ( ORP, or redox potential) measurement can

Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)

During an emergency in which there is evidence of faecal contamination of the drink-

);;>- Replace the above deleted text with the following:

Response plans for emergencies and unforeseen events involving microorganisms or

;..- Delete section 4.4.4.

These differences include the factors described below.

> Insert the following sections below Table 7.8: