Justification of the priority indicators choice for water quality control in aquifers

Introduction. The study of the aquifers water quality is an urgent task due to the increasing volumes of groundwater consumed, on the one hand, and the supply of drinking water to the population with insufficient water treatment or without it at all, on the other. In the Leningrad Region, one thousand three hundred thirty two water sources are used for drinking and household water supply to the population, while water without water treatment is supplied to the population of a significant number of settlements.

Materials and methods. In this study, a systematic analysis, statistical analysis, and the first stage of health risk assessment — the identification of danger were conducted. Research materials included 2634 water quality laboratory studies protocols (135200 studies) of 728 underground water sources of the Leningrad region for 2018–2021; data of the Federal Information Fund for Social and Hygienic Monitoring (FIF SGM) (34709 studies) for 2009–2019, reports on the results of searches and assessments of groundwater reserves for settlements water supply for 2003–2015; sanitary and epidemiological conclusions on the possibility of using water sources for drinking and household water supply, placed in the register of the Federal Service for Supervision in Protection of the Rights of Consumer and Man Wellbeing.

Results. The analysis of the laboratory examinations results of the underground water quality, due to natural factors, from various aquifers was exploited in the studied area. Substances which concentrations exceed the maximum permissible level have been identified. The first carried out stage of health risk assessment included hazard identification with ranking of chemicals by hazard indices for all operational aquifers. Recommendations are given on the adjustment of social-hygienic monitoring and industrial control programs of underground water quality, as well as on the improvement of water treatment systems.

Limitations. In this study there was a limitation on the nitrogen triad compounds origin and petroleum products analysis, in addition, the health risk assessment was limited to the hazard identification stage, due to the fact that exposure assessment was not performed.

Conclusion. Based on the ranking, there were identified carcinogenic substances as follows: arsenic, beryllium, lead, cadmium and substances that don`t have a carcinogenic effect: fluoride ion, ammonium ion, calcium, sodium, barium, magnesium, nitrates, nitrites, manganese, iron, which must be included in the groundwater industrial control programs.

Compliance with ethical standards. The study doesn`t require submission of the biomedical ethics committee opinion or other documents.

Contribution:
Gorbanev S.A. — concept and design of the study;
Stepanyan A.A. — content formation, statistical processing of results;
Isaev D.S. — the first stage of public health risk assessment — hazard identification;
Eremin G.B. — content formation;
Mozzhukhina N.A. — text verification and editing;
Myasnikov I.O. — collection and analysis of the results of laboratory tests.
All authors are responsible for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript and approval of the manuscript final version. 

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest. 

Acknowledgement. The study had no sponsorship. 

Received: May 17, 2022 / Accepted: August 04, 2022 / Published: September 14, 2022