Regulating Water Safety

Reprinted with permission of the Canadian Golf Superintendents Association from the December 2004 issue of GreenMaster, Vol. 39. No. 6.
By Peter Langan, P.Eng.

When a group of people become ill, or in the worse case when there is death, an investigation is undertaken to find the cause and to determine how to prevent needless harm in the future. Such was the case with the tragic events that took place in Walkerton, Ont., and North Battleford, Sask., where several people died as a result of unsafe drinking water.

These places have become synonymous with what can go wrong with a drinking water supply. These mishaps have lead to water regulation reform across the country, resulting in water system improvements. However, it does not always take government regulations to affect change. The death of a junior golfer, due to complications from a contaminated water cooler on a Phoenix area golf course, caused the golf industry in Canada to take notice. When a tragic event occurs in the industry, it hits uncomfortably close to home and most golf course operators are quick to react.

As a result of this event, many golf courses have removed their water coolers. No government agencies, regulations or insurance companies initiated this action. Undoubtedly, liability concerns were also a factor in this decision. To take water safety one step further, the next logical move would be to review the safety of the drinking water supply. Superintendents who have taken on the responsibility for their drinking water system, willingly or not, must look at the big picture, including the condition of the entire drinking water supply system from source to tap. If a water supply is old, lacks maintenance, suffers from neglect or does not have adequate disinfection, it should be considered potentially unsafe.

Regulations and due diligence
Soon after the tragedies in Walkerton and North Battleford, governments reacted by producing new water regulations. Some of these new rules will have a direct impact on golf course drinking water supplies. For example, in Ontario all drinking water supplies serving the public are regulated, and the implementation deadlines are approaching for facilities that are classified as small, non-municipal, non-residential drinking water systems. This includes golf courses. Some other provincial jurisdictions have not gone to this extent, however, due diligence should still be applied whether regulated or not.

Minimum requirements for water regulations include water treatment and disinfection, sampling and testing, operations and maintenance as well as response to adverse water quality events. The following provides a general description of elements that may be contained in the water regulations. It is primarily based on Ontario Regulation 170/03.

Treatment
The minimum level of treatment typically depends on the source of supply. A secure groundwater well supply (e.g. groundwater that is not under the influence of surface water) requires a minimum disinfection that will remove or inactivate 99 per cent of viruses. This is most commonly achieved by chlorination or by ultraviolet (UV) light irradiation. Other forms of treatment may be required to reduce unwanted concentrations of contaminants to within provincial or federal water quality objectives/standards. These objectives set maximum acceptable concentrations allowed for health-related parameters and set aesthetic objectives for parameters not related to health. Groundwater tends to be hard and often has iron present, so additional treatment such as water softening or iron removal is commonly required.

Surface water varies in quality on a seasonal basis, and is affected by runoff from storms and the spring freshet. Much care must be taken to establish the raw water quality to select an appropriate treatment system. The minimum level of treatment for a surface water supply is filtration and disinfection. Filtration is needed to remove water borne parasites such as cryptosporidium and giardia as they are resistant to some forms of disinfection (e.g. chlorination).

Surface water disinfection commonly requires removal of 99 per cent cryptosporidium, 99.9 per cent giardia cysts and 99.99 per cent of viruses. For surface water sources where the presence of sewage is possible, the requirements are even more stringent. Again, the water must be tested for the presence of other contaminants and the treatment process must be adequately designed to ensure provincial/federal objectives are met.

Water sampling and testing
Regulations outline requirements for frequent sampling of the raw and treated water for microbiological parameters such as total coliforms and e. coli. The frequency of microbiological sampling can vary with the disinfection method used. Chemical parameters such as nitrate and nitrite are tested regularly, while the majority of other chemicals are tested less often. The frequency of chemical testing also varies with the source of supply, with surface water supplies requiring more frequent sampling. While testing must be conducted by an accredited laboratory, sampling can be carried out by someone who follows established sampling procedures.

Operations and maintenance
Trained persons or a certified operator must provide operations and maintenance of regulated water systems. Regulated golf courses would likely have the least stringent operational requirements, as these are smaller systems compared to those of a town or city. Golf course drinking water supplies that have a significant residential component would have increased operational requirements. Observations should be recorded in a log book and an operational manual must be kept. Routine operational checks such as chlorine residual and turbidity testing are required.

Responding to adverse water quality events
Some common adverse water quality events include:

• Presence of e. coli or total coliforms.
• High background bacteria count.
• Exceeding health-related parameters.
• Improper disinfection or low chlorine residual.
• High turbidity.

Protocols are set up to notify the Ministry of Environment, the Medical Officer of Health and water users. Testing laboratories also have an obligation to report, so there is redundancy in the system. There are remedies established to address most adverse events and these are typically done in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health.
The regulations also address items such as routine reporting, making information available to water users, record keeping, professional engineer's evaluation and certification of the system as well as follow-up engineers' reports.

All owners and superintendents responsible for drinking water supplies are recommended to make themselves familiar with new provincial water regulations to determine if and how they apply to them. (Find out if the drinking water system at your facility is regulated, and know when the deadline for compliance is.)
If your golf course's drinking water system is not regulated, the legislation provides guidance to provide safe drinking water.

Training
All persons operating water supplies should be adequately trained. The Ontario Environmental Training Consortium (OETC) offers a correspondence course for small water systems, which will address most aspects of a golf course's drinking water system. After studying the course material, a take home exam is sent to confirm one's knowledge of the material. Provincial ministries having jurisdictions over drinking water should be contacted to determine if similar courses are available locally.

Source water protection
The best water supply is from a safe uncontaminated source, but a water source should always be disinfected as an added precaution.

Many provincial jurisdictions are implementing source water protection and watershed protection legislation to minimize the opportunity for contamination in the first place. This is a logical evolution of the legislation.

As part of source water protection initiatives, wastewater treatment plants will be looked at more critically. Now that the regulatory reforms are substantially completed within the water sector, the next wave of government regulation will likely be in the wastewater sector.

Superintendent's burden
Many superintendents have been burdened with the responsibility for water and wastewater systems. These systems range in complexity and if not designed, maintained and operated properly, they have the potential to harm individuals and groups that consume the drinking water. Water quality should be tested frequently for microbiological parameters. If there is any concern of the adequacy of the treatment process or condition of the equipment, this should be reviewed by a professional engineer with experience in water supply.

When it comes right down to it, taking care of your patrons and fellow employees by reducing the risk of contamination is an essential business practice.

Chlorine vs UV
Chlorine is a powerful oxidant that kills bacteria, viruses and most parasites. It is not very effective against giardia cysts and cryptosporidium oocysts, unless very high chlorine concentrations are used with prolonged contact times. The cryptosporidium oocysts have a protective egg-like shell that allows the microscopic parasite to survive in the presence of chlorine. When ingested, these parasites cause symptoms such as severe diarrhea and nausea.

Giardia, also known as beaver fever, is a water borne microscopic parasite found in the feces of animals such as beavers. Giardia cysts have a membrane that permits it to survive in the environment and are also resistant to chlorination.

Filtration is the most effective method of eliminating these microscopic parasites. Chemically assisted filtration, membrane filtration and a NSF-approved filter cartridge with a one-micron absolute pore size are effective filtration options.

UV light in the 254nm range has germicidal qualities that are used at a dose of 40mJ/cm² to deactivate viruses, bacteria and parasites. UV is an effective means of deactivating both cryptosporidium and giardia. Although UV light is highly effective, the water must still be filtered to prevent contaminants from hiding in larger particles and not receiving the required does for deactivation.

UV is most appropriately used at the point of entry to a building’s plumbing system and is not suitable for water entering an outdoor watermain. Unlike Chlorination, UV does not leave a persistent disinfectant in the water, which is important to fight off contamination that may occur after the initial disinfection.

There are many UV systems available at varying cost, quality and features. At a minimum, only NSF 55 Class A-approved units should be considered for use.

Often a multi-barrier approach is used where both UV and chlorination are incorporated. Water that has only been disinfected with UV or water that has been de-chlorination by a carbon filter should not be used in water coolers, as there will be no persistent disinfectant remaining in the water.

Peter Langan, P. Eng., MCSCE, is a senior associate at R.V. Anderson Associates Ltd., a firm specializing in environmental engineering and land development. He may be reached at (416) 497-8600 or via e-mail at plangan@rvanderson.com.

For more information on the Canadian Golf Sunperintendents Association: www.golfsupers.com