美国东南部的许多饮用水设施通常使用氯和/或氯胺进行一次和二次消毒。实施微生物/消毒副产品（M/DBP）系列规则的最后期限即将到来，迫使其中一些公用事业公司评估其他合规策略。由于在维持足够的失活水平和减少DBPs之间进行权衡，这种情况进一步恶化。本文评估了南卡罗来纳州三个中小型地表水系统的几种替代策略。本文中评估的所有公用设施（Bennettsville-400万加仑/天[mgd]；Clinton-6.0 mgd；Orangeburg-19.0 mgd）均使用常规地表水处理（混凝、絮凝、沉淀、双循环）- 介质重力过滤）。每家公用事业公司都使用明矾作为主要混凝剂，并使用石灰或苛性钠调节pH值。消毒策略根据病原体灭活水平、DBP形成的减少和消毒化学品成本进行评估。包括10个参考文献、表格和图表。

Many drinking water utilities in the southeastern United States have typically used chlorine and/or chloramines for primary and secondary disinfection. The approaching deadline for implementation of the microbial/disinfection byproducts (M/DBP) cluster of rules has forced some of these utilities to evaluate alternative strategies for compliance. The situation is exacerbated due to the tradeoff between maintaining sufficient levels of inactivation and reducing DBPs. This paper evaluates several alternative strategies for three small to medium surface water systems in South Carolina. All of the utilities evaluated in this paper (Bennettsville - 4.0 million gallons per day [mgd]; Clinton - 6.0 mgd; Orangeburg - 19.0 mgd) use conventional surface water treatment (coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, dual-media gravity filtration). Each utility uses alum as a primary coagulant and either lime or caustic soda for pH adjustment. Disinfection strategies are evaluated based upon level of pathogen inactivation, reduction of DBP formation, and disinfection chemical costs. Includes 10 references, tables, figures.