Pentair 1,2,3-TCP Filter

Buy Now

View full details

Understanding Pierre’s Water System and Its Source

The City of Pierre, serving over 14,000 residents through public surface water sources, obtains water treated and distributed by the local community water system. This system's water reaches homes via a centralized network, with no health-based EPA violations on record. Federal monitoring between 2013 and 2015 recorded no detections of 1,2,3-trichloropropane above the reporting level, indicating that this chlorinated solvent, known as 1,2,3-TCP or simply TCP, has not been measured in amounts that prompt federal concern at the system level.

1. The Agricultural Land-Use History and Its Relation to 1,2,3-TCP Occurrence

The surrounding agricultural activities in Hughes County historically influence water quality considerations since chlorinated solvents like 1,2,3-trichloropropane have been used in industrial and agricultural applications. However, Pierre’s water system, supplied from surface sources, shows no federal detections exceeding the 0.03 micrograms per liter reporting limit during the referenced monitoring period. This suggests limited impact from known local land use regarding this specific chlorinated solvent at the community supply scale.

2. Granular Activated Carbon Contact Time: Why Bed Depth Matters More for TCP Than for Taste

Effective treatment for 1,2,3-trichloropropane in water depends heavily on the contact time with granular activated carbon (GAC). Unlike constituents affecting taste or odor, TCP’s molecular properties require adequate bed depth to allow sufficient adsorption. Shallow or insufficient contact time beds may fail to achieve lower levels of this contaminant. Therefore, when considering water treatment equipment for TCP, focus on systems configured to provide deep GAC contact to address this persistent chlorinated solvent effectively.

3. How Treated Water Differs at the Tap Once the Documented Technology Is in Place

When equipped with appropriately configured treatment technology such as the Pentair 1,2,3-TCP Filter, water at the tap demonstrates significantly reduced TCP concentrations, even if initial levels are near or below detection limits. This treatment approach ensures that the chlorinated solvent is addressed on-site within the home, providing an additional layer of confidence by reducing any TCP potentially present in the local water supply before consumption.

4. How Seasonal or Multi-Year Variation Shows in the Record

The federal monitoring data for Pierre’s water system spans from January to September 2014, encompassing multiple months within a single calendar year. Across all 24 samples taken in this period, TCP was not detected above the reporting threshold of 0.03 micrograms per liter (0.03 parts per billion). These findings suggest that multi-month seasonal variation did not reveal measurable TCP presence in the public system water during that time frame, though individual private wells and localized conditions may vary.

5. How to Judge Treatment Capacity Against Household Daily Demand

Choosing treatment equipment for TCP involves matching the unit’s performance capacity to the daily household water consumption. A filter designed to handle typical residential demand efficiently processes the volume of water a household uses each day, maintaining effective contact time and adsorption capacity to keep TCP levels low. Evaluating usage patterns, including peak flows and total gallons per day, helps in selecting a system that supports consistent water quality without overburdening the treatment media.

6. Why Aesthetic Secondary Standards Differ From Health-Based Limits in This Context

1,2,3-TCP does not have established federal maximum contaminant levels because of its unregulated status under the Safe Drinking Water Act during the monitoring period. The EPA’s monitoring program records detections at levels as low as 0.03 micrograms per liter, which are not health-based limits but measurement thresholds. Aesthetic standards pertaining to chlorides or total dissolved solids in water address taste and staining concerns, but these are unrelated to TCP levels. Thus, the absence of detected TCP above reporting limits in Pierre’s system is consistent with no recorded health concerns for this chlorinated solvent.

Conclusion: Selecting the Right Treatment Based on Your Demand

If you determine from testing that 1,2,3-trichloropropane is present in your household water above your comfort level, the documented solution is a Pentair 1,2,3-TCP Filter. This system ships ready to configure and is designed with sufficient capacity and carbon bed depth to address typical residential daily water demands while targeting this persistent chlorinated solvent. Confirm your household demand through measurement and consider this information when selecting an appropriate treatment approach for TCP.

Where this information comes from

Source: EPA SDWIS public water system record. Sampled 2014-09-10. These figures describe the public water system's record, not the plumbing inside any individual building.

On record: EPA UCMR3 monitoring (2013-2015) for Pierre (SD4600242), SD: 24 results across 1 listed contaminants, 0 detections above the reporting level; nothing detected above the method reporting level