INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

The primary concern of the drinking water industry is to provide people with water that is

potable enough and is aesthetically acceptable. In the Philippines, two major concessionaires

of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) namely Manila Water

Company, Inc. (MWCI) and Maynilad Water Services, Inc. (MWSI) provide the different

cities in Metro Manila with treated water. Generally, to be able to reduce pathogens present

in water and hence, produce potable water, disinfection must be performed on it.

Chlorination has always been the widely known method of disinfecting raw water. However,

reports have confirmed that disease-carrying pathogens are still able to infiltrate the water.

This fact increased the concern for the development of more methods for disinfecting water,

ones that truly remove diseases-carrying pathogens in water while still ensuring that it is safe

to drink (Delcomyn, Unnam, and Weinberg, 2003).

Alternative methods of disinfection use chemicals other than chlorine such as chloramine,

chlorine dioxide, ozone and hypochlorite. However, one unintended disadvantage of using

these disinfectants is the formation of disinfection by-products (DBPs) which may cause

more harm once ingested. Currently, ozone is the most studied disinfectant because it is

highly efficient. Bromate (BrO3-) is one specific DBP that results when ozonation is used for

disinfection. Particularly, bromate is generated when the source water contains bromide ions.

Bromate has been classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a Group 2B

carcinogen, a classification for compounds that are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Achilli

and Romele, 1998). In vitro studies in mice show that certain amounts of bromate can cause

renal tumors, epididymal sperm density decrease, and liver and kidney toxicity, among
others (Wolf and Kaiser, 1996). On the other hand, for humans, any amount exceeding the

provisional maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 μg L-1 as proposed by the United

States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), can cause harm to the body.

Furthermore, toxic effects of bromate in humans include nausea, abdominal pains,

diarrhea, anuria, and central nervous system depression among others. Irreversible effects

such as renal failure have also been reported in cases where the MCL is greatly exceeded

(Matsumoto et al., 1980).

In line with this, treated water analysis for bromate has considerably continued to be

attended by researchers all over the world in the past years. In this current study, the use of

UV-Vis spectrophotometry is employed to determine the concentrations of bromate in tap

water samples collected in a number of sites in Metro Manila and nearby provinces.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Bromate is one of the most studied DBP formed from the disinfection treatment of raw

water. This study focused on the determination of bromate concentrations in tap water

samples using the method of UV-Vis spectrophotometry and relies on the reaction of

bromate with fuchsin.

As such, this study provided information on the widespread occurrence of bromate

contamination in the Philippine water supplies. Specifically, all of the samples analyzed in

this study resulted to bromate concentrations that greatly exceeded the current guideline of

10 μg L-1, ranging from 84.5 (±0.4) to 350.0 (± 0.8) μg L-1.

In tap water samples collected from sites located in the UP Diliman campus and cities in

Metro Manila, the most plausible reasons for bromate contamination were industrial
pollution brought about by the presence of industrial establishments and factories near the

locations of the sites. For the sites which were located inside subdivisions, domestic

pollution was the most probable factor for the bromate contamination in water. Also, as

suggested by Genuino and Espino (2012) on earlier experiments, there can be a correlation

between the bromate concentration and the site’s nearness to a pumping station and

distribution lines. In pumping stations, there is the tendency that disinfectant concentrations

are high, thus a higher bromate concentration can be observed in sites such as Pasig.

Correlations between the MWCI and MWSI provided waters were not very clear since the

samples were taken at different times during the duration of March to April 2015.

Nonetheless, minor differences between the two have been observed. For one, the bromate

concentrations of the tap water samples collected from MWSI-serviced sites have a range

which was somehow the same as that of the MWCI-serviced sites. The bromate

concentration values were observed to be nearly the same regardless if it was treated with

MWSI or MWCI.

Moreover, results on the provincial water samples were not very concise since only one

site from each province was utilized. It was observed that groundwater bromate

concentration is generally lower than that of the water samples obtained from other sites

maybe because of the groundwater sources’ location. Still, a consistent conclusion cannot be

rendered because only one ground water site was available.

The researcher believes that to further improve this study, more sites should be added and

sampling must be done in several days. Furthermore, more locations from each site should be

utilized so as to be able to compare bromate concentrations from different environments

from the same site. Also, more sensitive methods of detection such as mass spectrometry
can be used in junction with the current method, UV-Vis spectrophotometry, to be able to

arrive at more concise observations and conclusions.

The current knowledge on the effects of bromate and possible sources should be good

enough reasons for the country to attempt to meet the contaminant limit. In current time, the

minimization of bromate in drinking water must be thoroughly studied and continuously

accomplished for the safety of the public.