This volume describes the methods used in the surveillance of drinking water quality in the light of the special problems of small-community supplies, particularly in developing countries, and outlines the strategies necessary to ensure that surveillance is effective.

Use of coastal, estuarine and freshwater recreational environments has significant benefits for health and well-being, including rest, relaxation, exercise, cultural and religious practices, and aesthetic pleasure, while also providing substantial local, regional and national economic benefits. These guidelines focus on water quality management for coastal and freshwater environments to protect public health. The guidelines: 1. describe the current state of knowledge about the possible adverse health impacts of various forms of water pollution; and2. set out recommendations for setting national health-based targets, conducting surveillance and risk assessments, putting in place systems to monitor and control risks, and providing timely advice to users on water safety.These guidelines are aimed at national and local authorities, and other entities with an obligation to exercise due diligence relating to the safety of recreational water sites. They may be implemented in conjunction with other measures for water safety (such as drowning prevention and sun exposure) and measures for environmental protection of recreational water use sites.

Contamination of drinking-water is a significant concern for public health throughout the world. Microbial hazards make the largest contribution to waterborne disease in developed and developing countries. Nevertheless, chemicals in water supplies can cause serious health problems--whether the chemicals are naturally occurring or derive from sources of pollution. At a global scale, fluoride and arsenic are the most significant chemicals, each affecting perhaps millions of people. However, many other chemicals can be important contaminants of drinking-water under specific local conditions. Often, identification and assessment of risks to health from drinking-water relies excessively on analysis of water samples. The limitations of this approach are well recognized, and contributed to the delay in recognizing arsenic in drinking-water as a significant health concern in Bangladesh and elsewhere. To overcome such limitations, the latest edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (WHO, 2004; WHO,2006) emphasizes effective preventive management through a 'framework for drinking-water safety' that incorporates 'water safety plans.' Effective preventive management of chemicals in drinking-water requires simple tools for distinguishing the few chemicals of potential local or national concern from the unmanageably long list of chemicals of possible significance. The aim is to identify and prioritize the chemicals of concern, to overcome the limitations of direct analysis of water quality, and ensure that limited resources are allocated towards the monitoring, assessment and control of the chemicals that pose the greatest health risks. Identifying and prioritizing chemical risks presents a challenge, especially in developing countries, because information on the presence of chemicals in water supplies is often lacking. This document provides guidance to help readers to meet that challenge. It shows how information on aspects such as geology and industrial and agricultural development, which is often readily available, can be used to identify potential chemical contaminants (and potential sources of chemicals), from catchment to consumer, and thus prioritize risks. As a supporting document to the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (WHO, 2004; WHO, 2006), this publication is aimed at policy-makers, regulators, managers and public health practitioners at national and local level. It is divided into three parts: Part A provides general guidance on using limited information in prioritizing chemicals in drinking-water for risk management. The need for such guidance is outlined in Chapter 1,which also describes the administrative and policy context. Chapter 2 describes the principles applied in prioritizing chemicals, provides information on some factors that affect chemical concentrations along pathways, and highlights several specific chemicals that are frequently considered priorities because of their widespread occurrence or significant health effects. Chapter 3 discusses the role of drinking-water standards and guidelines, and provides an overview of contemporary water quality management procedures. Part B provides practical guidance on identifying specific chemicals that are likely to be of concern in individual water supply systems. It groups chemical contaminants into five categories on the basis of their potential sources: naturally occurring, from agriculture activities, from human settlements, from industrial activities, and from water treatment and distribution processes themselves. Part C comprises the appendices. It includes guidance on the most likely sources of potential contaminants and on identifying chemicals that could be of concern in particular circumstances. The appendices address potential sources of chemicals considered in the WHO drinking-water guidelines (WHO, 2004; WHO, 2006), chemicals potentially discharged in effluents from industrial sources, and the association of pesticides with crops and crop types. This information is presented in an accessible format that will help users to determine the chemical hazards that can arise in the catchment, in treatment and in distribution, in large, medium and small water supplies. Many experts worldwide contributed to this work over a period of several years, beginning with the 1st Meeting of Experts on Monitoring Chemicals in Drinking Water, held in Bangkok, Thailand, in January 2001. This was followed by the 2nd Meeting of Experts on Monitoring Chemicals in Drinking Water, also held in Bangkok, in December 2001. Both meetings were sponsored by WHO and hosted by the Department of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Thailand. The draft guidance document was subsequently tested in a series of field trials in 2002-2003 in Indonesia, Fiji, Nepal, Mongolia, the Philippines and Thailand. Lessons learnt through the field trials provided feedback that was valuable in revising and finalizing the document. Readers should note that while this publication has been developed as a supporting document for, and with reference to, the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, the guidelines themselves are frequently updated and the latest information should always be sought by reference to relevant World Health Organization publications and web site. (http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/guidelines/en/index.html).

Having safe drinking water is important to all Americans. The Environmental Protection Agency's decision in the summer of 2001 to delay implementing a new, more stringent standard for the maximum allowable level for arsenic in drinking water generated a great deal of criticism and controversy. Ultimately at issue were newer data on arsenic beyond those that had been examined in a 1999 National Research Council report. EPA asked the National Research Council for an evaluation of the new data available. The committee's analyses and conclusions are presented in Arsenic in Drinking Water: 2001 Update. New epidemiological studies are critically evaluated, as are new experimental data that provide information on how and at what level arsenic in drinking water can lead to cancer. The report's findings are consistent with those of the 1999 report that found high risks of cancer at the previous federal standard of 50 parts per billion. In fact, the new report concludes that men and women who consume water containing 3 parts per billion of arsenic daily have about a 1 in 1,000 increased risk of developing bladder or lung cancer during their lifetime.

In 1997, New York City adopted a mammoth watershed agreement to protect its drinking water and avoid filtration of its large upstate surface water supply. Shortly thereafter, the NRC began an analysis of the agreement's scientific validity. The resulting book finds New York City's watershed agreement to be a good template for proactive watershed management that, if properly implemented, will maintain high water quality. However, it cautions that the agreement is not a guarantee of permanent filtration avoidance because of changing regulations, uncertainties regarding pollution sources, advances in treatment technologies, and natural variations in watershed conditions. The book recommends that New York City place its highest priority on pathogenic microorganisms in the watershed and direct its resources toward improving methods for detecting pathogens, understanding pathogen transport and fate, and demonstrating that best management practices will remove pathogens. Other recommendations, which are broadly applicable to surface water supplies across the country, target buffer zones, stormwater management, water quality monitoring, and effluent trading.