A standard protocol for the measurement
of SUVA was developed as part of the report,
The Role of Filtration in DOC, UV-254,
and SUVA-254 Determinations (2005,
order #91060F/project #2722). The project
investigated several types of filtration
membranes, cleaning procedures, filter-to waste wash volume, and developed
a reproducible proven method for the
determination of SUVA. Many finding
from this study have been included in the
published USEPA method (Method 415.3:
“Determination of Total Organic Carbon and
Specific Ultraviolet Absorbance at 254 nm
in Source and Drinking Water”).
Analytical and Monitoring Methods for
THMs and HAAs
The Foundation has funded several method
development and optimization studies.
These include methods for individual
compounds, classes of compounds, as well
as surrogate parameters and formation
potential (FP) protocols. FPs can be a useful
tool to predict the formation of DBPs under
specific treatment conditions.
After the discovery of THMs in disinfected
drinking water, the Foundation funded
research into simpler methods of
determining the THMFP. Development
of Haloform Potential Tests for
Water Treatment Plant Control (1987,
order #90520/project #73) developed a
spectrophotometric method based on
using iodine or bromine as a disinfectant,
which would form primarily iodoform or
bromoform. The methods are also rapid
and can be completed in as little as 1. 5
hours for the rapid version at 100°C or
two days for the standard test at 25°C. The
detection limit was near 0.1 µM. The study
confirmed that iodoform and bromoform
correlated more closely to THMFP than
TOC or UV absorbance (UVA).
While the developed method was used with
artificial solutions of humics as precursors
in Development of Haloform Potential
Tests for Water Treatment Plant Control,
it was used to test real raw and treated
water in Development and Laboratory
Evaluation of the Haloform Potential
Tests (1989, order #90547/project #204). The
study found the bromoform FP test to be
unsuited for natural samples due to spectral
interferences at 223 nm. The method also
suffered from large and unpredictable bias.
The iodoform test showed better suitability
and correlation with THMFP. The one-hour
“standard” method did not perform well in
this study; however, it was recommended
that further validation of the one-hour
alkaline iodoform method be conducted.
In addition to FP tests, spectrophometric
methods for the analysis of individual or
classes of compounds were investigated in
several Foundation projects.
The most used method for the analysis
of THMs is USEPA method 551.1. The
method includes liquid-liquid extraction
followed by gas chromatography-/electron
capture detection (GC/ECD). A Simple
Spectrophotometric Method for the
Determination of THMs in Drinking
Water (1992, order #90608/project #428)
looked into the possibility of a simple
spectrophotometric method, as the
equipment would be less costly than a gas
chromatograph and probably require less
analyst training. The project was successful
in developing a method for THMs that was
rapid and relatively inexpensive. However,
the method suffered from a lack of precision
for chlorodibromomethane (CDBM) and
low recoveries for brominated THMs in
high-bromide waters.
A spectroscopic method was developed
in Development of Differential UV
