Many people fail to realize the impact that pesticides in water can have on wildlife, on aquatic life, and in what humans consider ‘extreme’ situations, on human life.

In an article by Jeff Barnard (Associated Press Writer) published on Yahoo News on Thursday August 14, 2008. . .

“GRANTS PASS, Ore. - Three pesticides commonly used on farms and orchards throughout the West are jeopardizing the survival of Pacific salmon, the federal agency in charge of saving the fish from extinction has found.

Under the settlement of a lawsuit brought by anti-pesticide groups and salmon fishermen, NOAA Fisheries has issued a draft biological opinion that found the way chlorpyrifos, diazinon and malathion get into salmon streams at levels high enough to kill salmon protected by the Endangered Species Act.

. . .

Banned from many household uses, tens of millions of pounds of the chemicals are still used throughout the range of Pacific salmon on a wide range of fruits, vegetables, forage crops, cotton, fence posts and livestock to control mosquitoes, flies, termites, boll weevils and other pests, according to NOAA Fisheries.

. . .

The chemicals are the first of 37 that NOAA Fisheries and EPA must evaluate by 2012 under terms of a settlement reached last week in a lawsuit brought by Northwest Coalition Against Pesticides and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, which represents California commercial salmon fishermen.

A total of 28 species of Pacific salmon are classified as threatened or endangered from overfishing, dams, logging, grazing, urban development, pollution, irrigation, misguided hatchery practices and other threats.

Lecky said he could not say where pesticides rank in the threats to salmon, but eliminating the harm from pesticides would boost efforts to save them.”

This naturally leads all of us here at Water Testing Blog to wonder what sort of effect those same compounds may have on human life.

With that in mind, we sought out testing methods for ‘common’ pesticides currently viewed as harmful and/or toxic to human life and sometimes found in well, surface, and drinking water. We discovered the Pesticides in Water test kit which detects Atrazine and Simazine in drinking water at levels established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as harmful to humans.

The Pesticides in Water test kit detects Simazine at the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 4 parts per billion and Atrazine at the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 3 parts per billion.

As always, though, if you have serious reason to suspect the accidental or intentional addition of harmful chemicals to your drinking water supply, we suggest you seek the testing services of trained water professionals.

People often ask about iron in drinking water.  It has the abilty to stain fixtures, clog certain types of filters, stain clothes, ruin the taste of food and beverages, cause water to have an unpleasant taste, etc.  It does not, however, at least according to the current Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards set forth by the USEPA, pose a health risk. 

Note: The USEPA has set the Maximum Contaminant Level for iron in drinking water at 0.3 ppm in their Secondary Drinking Water Standards, which deal more with aesthetic properties of water than with health-related issues.

Its presence in drinking and process water does annoy people, though, so knowing what types of iron may exist in a water supply has a bit of relevance. Below please find four types of iron commonly found in public and private water supplies:

• Ferrous — This form of iron results in the most complaints and reasons for examination of water for iron content.  If allowed to remain in a state with little oxygen present, this type of iron remains in solution and the water will appear colorless.  However, in the case of tap water allowed to remain in service lines coming from a well or other source, rust colored iron particles may begin to precipitate out of solution.  These particles obviously ruin water clarity and give the impression of unsafe drinking water.  Additionally, they clog certain types of water filtration systems and cause the owners of those water filtration systems to replace them well in advance of their expected replacement dates.  Water professionals often refer to this type of iron in water as ‘clear iron’.
• Ferric — This form of iron creates sediments ranging in color from riddish-brown all the way to black and the precipitates formed will not go back into solution.  Therefore they pose a great problem for water filtration systems.  Water professionals often refer to this form of iron in water as ‘red iron’.
• Iron Bacteria — While this form of bacteria does have the word ‘bacteria’ in it, it has no pathogenic properties and exists more as a nuisance than anything else.  You can expect to find this form of bacteria in drinking water showing up in soil, ground water, and surface water.  In a household environment you may encounter this form of bacteria lingering around the metal parts of plumbing fixtures and/or in dark areas such as spaces hidden under the toilet lid tank.  Appearance-wise this form of iron in drinking water can look like a slimy or gelatinous substance hanging in the water.  With regard to color, the substance will typically appear brown, red or sometimes even white.
• Organic Iron — This form of iron exists in a complexed form with a wide variety of different organic materials.  It typically has a yellow or brown appearance and shows up mainly in shallow wells and surface water.

If you want to test for iron, keep in mind that a lot of home water test kits will not detect total iron (Fe+2 and Fe+3).  Also keep in mind that even the total iron test kits do not detect iron bacteria or organic iron.  Therefore, when attempting to diagnose your water’s potential iron problems, make sure that you choose the proper test kit and/or certified laboratory testing service for your individual water testing needs.

What do we suggest as options for water testing when it comes to detecting iron in drinking water?  Companies such as National Testing Laboratories and MWH Laboratories offer nice packages of comprehensive water testing services which you may want to explore.

If you have only ferrous and ferric iron as your main concerns, then a simple home test kit for total iron (Fe+2/Fe+3) such as the new WaterWorks Total Iron visual test kit may work quite well.

Keep in mind, though, that nothing takes the place of a qualified laboratory analysis of your drinking water when/if you you feel your family’s safety is on the line.

Many microorganisms and forms of bacteria, including coliform bacteria, occur naturally in our environment and not all forms of bacteria or types of microorganisms cause harm to humans. The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Primary Drinking Water Standards states that most harmful types of bacteria and microorganisms such as Legionella, Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium, E. Coli, fecal coliform, and enteric viruses come primarily from human and animal waste.

Simple Testing Methods for Bacteria?

Yes. Homeowners wishing to test their water for the potential presence of harmful bacteria can use a number of kits such as the 48 Hour Presence/Absence Bacteria Check test kit which is also available in 2-pack and 6-pack versions.

WaterWorks^TM Bacteria Check

Bacteria Check will not tell you what KIND of coliform bacteria it detected, but it will tell you that the sample water contained at least ONE coliform unit of bacteria in the 100 mL sample and that you may want to get the water professionally evaluated.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency requires public water companies, utilities, etc. to monitor and report specific water quality parameters on a regular basis. You can find the full list of those parameters here.

“National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs or primary standards) are legally enforceable standards that apply to public water systems. Primary standards protect public health by limiting the levels of contaminants in drinking water.” (source)

The government regulates the introduction of and requires the removal of items listed in the Primary Drinking Water Standards if they exceed Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL’s) because scientists and health officials have concluded that overexposure to those items ingested via drinking water causes signifigant health risks in humans.

As always, when evaluating your drinking water for safety reasons, keep in mind that home water test kits work quite well as a screening tool in the field and that no one should rely colely upon the results of ANY field screening method when making the final determination as to whether or not they have safe drinking water.

Lead, Lead and more Lead. . . For the longest time many water professionals viewed lead as a problem only if the water lines from the treatment plant to the house contained inappropriate amounts of lead — but not any more.

Ivars Jaunakais, chief analytical chemist, founder and President of Industrial Test Systems, Inc. uncovered interesting data which suggested that lead comes from other sources and was able to prove his hypothesis by testing for the presence of lead in faucet aerators. He found that particulates which had accumulated in the nozzles and faucet aerators sometimes contained and, in turn, produced substantial amounts of lead far in excessive of the EPA’s 15ppb ruling for drinking water.

Older testing methods involved testing procedured best carried out in a laboratory setting. Through the use of groundbreaking LEADQuick^TM ReagentStrip & Reagent technology and the Hach’s already established LeadTrak^TM Pocket Colorimeter^TM II, Ivars greatly reduced the cost per test and total test times while making the test safer, simpler and easier to perform.

No longer do water samples have to get hauled back to a laboratory for analysis in order to get laboratory grade test results. Field samplers and field technicians can now safely and easily test for lead concentrations in water at a fraction of the cost and in a fraction of the time.

LEADQuick^TM Lead Test for the LeadTrak^TM Pocket Colorimeter^TM II

(More Information on Ivars’ New Lead Test Coming Soon!)

A huge percentage of the general public does not know the difference between MCL, MCLG, MRDL and MRDLG. They ought not feel ashamed, though, because we took a short survey of people connected to water treatment, water testing, water processing, etc. and found that many of them had just as little knowledge on the topic as the general public.

Therefore we decided to visit the United States Environmental Protection Agency web site to find clear, concise definitions of MCL, MCLG, MRDL and MRDLG. See below:

Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology and taking cost into consideration. MCLs are enforceable standards.

Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) - The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety and are non-enforceable public health goals.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) - The highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.

Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG) - The level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

( source )