Alternative for HPC22 after repairs in the drinking water distribution system

There is a risk of contamination by (pathogenic) microorganisms from the outside environment into the drinking water during maintenance or pipe breaches in the drinking water distribution system (DWDS) and, consequently, the drinking water distributed to consumers may result in possible detrimental effects on public health. Traditional time-consuming microbiological testing is, therefore, performed to confirm drinking water is not microbially contaminated. This is done by culturing methods of the faecal indicators Escherichia coli, intestinal enterococci and the technical parameters coliform bacteria and heterotrophic plate counts at 22 °C (HPC22). In this study, fast methods (adenosine triphosphate (ATP), flow cytometry, enzyme activity and qPCR) were compared as an alternative for HPC22. Using dilution series and field samples, ATP (ATP_total-lab and ATP_cell-mob) and enzymatic activity (ALP-2) methods proved to be the more reliable and sensitive than flow cytometry and qPCR methods for detecting microbiological contaminations in drinking water. Significant (p < 0.05) and relatively strong correlations (R² = 0.61-0.76) were obtained between HPC22 and both ATP methods, enzyme activity and qPCR parameters, but relations with flow cytometry were weak (R² = 0.24 - 0.52). The samples taken after repairs or a calamity from the DWDS showed in general limited variation in the HPC22 count and were in most cases below the guidance level of 1,000 CFU/mL. We recommend that the best performing alternative methods, i.e. ATP_total-lab and ATP_cell-mob and ALP-2, should be included next to HPC22 in additional field studies to further test and compare these methods to be able to decide which fast method can replace HPC22 analysis after maintenance work in the DWDS.