Is flushing necessary during building closures? A study of water quality and bacterial communities during extended reductions in building occupancy

Drinking water stagnation can lead to degradation of chlorine residual, bacterial growth (including of opportunistic pathogens and nitrifiers), and metals release from plumbing materials;however, few studies have characterized building water quality and bacterial communities during the extended stagnation periods that occurred during COVID-19 pandemic-related building closures. Additionally, despite a lack of evidence-based guidance, flushing fixtures has been recommended to restore building water quality. We aimed to evaluate the impacts of reduced building occupancy (>2 months) and weekly restorative flushing on drinking water quality, bacterial communities, and the occurrence of undesirable microorganisms in three university buildings. Reduced occupancy led to diminished chloramine and elevated intact cell counts, but values remained stable after additional weeks of limited water use. Flushing temporarily improved water quality, with chlorine and cell counts remaining stable for at least 1 day but returning to levels measured prior to flushing within 1 week. Alpha diversity was lower under more stagnant conditions, and fixture identity, not flushing, was the most influential factor on bacterial community composition, suggesting a strong influence from local biofilm. Although Mycobacterium, Legionella, Pseudomonas, Nitrosomonas, and Nitrospira were detected in samples via amplicon sequencing, concentrations measured via qPCR of M. avium complex, L. pneumophila, P. aeruginosa, and ammonia-oxidizing bacteria were very low or were undetected, supporting that stagnation alone did not lead to high occurrence of undesirable microorganisms. Findings from this study contribute to our understanding of the effects of stagnation on building water microbiomes and the efficacy of flushing to improve water quality. Under the conditions of this case study, repeated flushing on a weekly timescale during low occupancy periods was not sufficient to maintain chlorine residual and prevent bacterial growth in fixtures. Building managers need to weigh the temporary water quality benefits of flushing against the labor and water resources required considering local context.

A Participatory Science Approach to Evaluating Factors Associated with the Occurrence of Metals and PFAS in Guatemala City Tap Water

Limited information is available regarding chemical water quality at the tap in Guatemala City, preventing individuals, water utilities, and public health authorities from making data-driven decisions related to water quality. To address this need, 113 participants among households served by a range of water providers across the Guatemala City metropolitan area were recruited as participatory scientists to collect first-draw and flushed tap water samples at their residence. Samples were transported to the U.S. and analyzed for 20 metals and 25 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). At least one metal exceeded the Guatemalan Maximum Permissible Limit (MPL) for drinking water in 63% of households (n = 71). Arsenic and lead exceeded the MPL in 33.6% (n = 38) and 8.9% (n = 10) of samples, respectively. Arsenic was strongly associated with groundwater while lead occurrence was not associated with location, water source, or provider. One or more PFAS were detected in 19% of samples (n = 21, range 2.1–64.2 ppt). PFAS were significantly associated with the use of plastic water storage tanks but not with location, water source, or provider. Overall, the high prevalence of arsenic above the MPL in Guatemala City tap water represents a potential health risk that current water treatment processes are not optimized to remove. Furthermore, potential contaminants from premise plumbing and storage, including lead and PFAS, represent additional risks requiring further investigation and public engagement.