Water Quality Assessment of a Tank Cascade System using CCME Water Quality Index

Abstract

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME)has developed a water quality index which certainly be used with fairly consistent in different geographical locations and different water quality parameters. This study was conducted to assess the water quality of Malwathu Oya cascade-I in tropical Sri Lanka for drinking, fish & aquatic life, irrigation & agriculture and recreational use by applying CCME Water Quality Index (WQI). Water samples from ten tanks were collected once a month representing wet and dryperiods during 2013/14 and analyzed for seven physicochemical parameters (electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen level, turbidity, pH, nitrate nitrogen, phosphate and sodium) using standard instruments and procedures. Physicochemical parameters were compared with the drinking water quality guidelines 17 and proposed ambient water quality standards for inland waters of Sri Lanka. Average values of CCME WQI showed that water quality is poor for drinking, fish & aquatic life and irrigation & agriculture in tanks of Malwathu Oya cascade-I while, marginal for recreational use. However, it showed high spatial and temporal variation of water quality for all kind of water uses. CCME WQI can be successfully used to draw meaningful and easily understandable conclusions about cascade systems from large data matrix on water quality.

Full text

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 1
Water Quality Assessment of a Tank Cascade System
using CCME Water Quality Index
MHJP Gunarathna, MKN Kumari
Department of Agricultural Engineering and Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka,
Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka.
Abstract- Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
(CCME)has developed a water quality index which certainly be
used with fairly consistent in different geographical locations and
different water quality parameters. This study was conducted to
assess the water quality of Malwathu Oya cascade-I in tropical Sri
Lanka for drinking, fish & aquatic life, irrigation & agriculture
and recreational use by applying CCME Water Quality Index
(WQI). Water samples from ten tanks were collected once a
month representing wet and dryperiods during 2013/14 and
analyzed for seven physicochemical parameters (electrical
conductivity, dissolved oxygen level, turbidity, pH, nitrate
nitrogen, phosphate and sodium) using standard instruments and
procedures. Physicochemical parameters were compared with
the drinking water quality guidelines17 and proposed ambient
water quality standards for inland waters of Sri Lanka. Average
values of CCME WQI showed that water quality is poor for
drinking, fish & aquatic life and irrigation & agriculture in tanks
of Malwathu Oya cascade- I while, marginal for recreational use.
However, it showed high spatial and temporal variation of water
quality for all kind of water uses. CCME WQI can be
successfully used to draw meaningful and easily
understandableconclusions about cascade systems from large
data matrix on water quality.
Keywords -CCME WQI, cascade, drinking, fish & aquatic life,
irrigation & agriculture, recreational use
I. INTRODUCTION
illage tanks were the back bone of the hydraulic
civilization of ancient dry zone of Sri Lanka and usually
located as tank cascades. A cascade is defined as a connected
series of small irrigation tanks organized within a meso
catchment of the dry zone landscape, storing, conveying and
utilizing water from an ephemeral rivulet [1]. Usually tank
cascade systems comprise of 4 to 10 small tanks which has its
own micro-catchment, however all these tanks located in a
single meso-catchment.In tank cascade systems, the excess
water of upper level tankscan be captured by lower level
tanks, therefore water can be re-use several times. However,
there is a risk to accumulate high level of agricultural
pollutantssuch as pesticides, fertilizers and sediments, and
effluents of industrial and household activities in lower tanks.
These pollutants can harm to the crop production, aquaculture,
environment and ultimately the human health. Although there
is a method developed to evaluate water availability and
sustainability of cascade systems, no proper evaluation
method or criteria to evaluate cascade water quality yet.
About 180 cascade systems were already identified in
Malwathu Oya river basin and few of them were evaluated in
terms of quality and quantity of water.Malwathu Oyacascade-I
is a meso catchment of NuwaraWewa catchment which is part
of Malwathu Oya river basin. It is extended about 25.88
km2,located in DL1b agro ecological region of Sri Lanka and it
belongs to NuwaragamPalatha - East and Mihintale divisional
secretariat areas in Anuradhapura district [2].
Water is one of thebasic needs of human beings andpeople use
water for their drinking, sanitation, recreation uses, irrigation
and etc. Among the surface water and groundwater resources,
surface water is the most popularly used source to fulfil their
water requirements. Therefore, almost all the major human
settlements are centered on surface water resources.
Physical, chemical and biological substances presence in
water determines the quality of the water [3]. However, the
water quality is subjective based on thepurpose. Good quality
water for respective water uses is an essential requirement of
human beings toeliminate the health hazards and to improve
the life standards [4]. The water quality should be assessed by
analyzing physicochemical and biological parameters of water
based on respective water uses. Frequent studies on
physicochemical parameters of tank water is required in better
management of tank cascades which is the primary water
source of many rural communities in dry zone of Sri Lanka.
However, these studies should help in the decision making
process of relevant authorities and aware the general public
[5]. The size of the data matrix is higher in water quality
studies due to higher number of physicochemical parameters
and sampling points. It cause to complex situations in data
analyzing and interpretation of results [6]. Different analyzing
techniques to simplify the interpretation process of large data
setshas been used with different merits and demerits which are
unique to each method [7]. Water quality indices has attained
higher attention on decision making using large data sets [8].
Water quality index (WQI) is a single number which can
express the overall quality of water in a designated location. It
is calculated using different observed physicochemical
parameters of water. The importance of this index is the
conversion of complex water quality data matrix into a single
number which can provide understandable information to the
public [9].
Although it has demerits of unique to pollution type and
geographical areas, water quality index is a widely used tool in
different parts of the world to solve the problems associated
with the handling of large data sets on water quality [9].
Different authors derived different options especially
weightages in calculation of WQI, therefore universal
application is limited. Canadian Council of Ministers of the
Environment (CCME) WQI is one of the main WQI which
was developed by the CCME It was developed to overcome
the problem of limited applications in different geographical
locations and with different measured parameters [10]. The
application of the CCME WQI requires water quality
guidelines and model essentially consists of three measures of
variance (scope, frequency and amplitude) from selected
guidelines that combine to produce a value between 0 and 100
that represents the overall water quality. The CCME WQI is
based on mathematical framework for assessing water quality
conditions relative to water quality guidelines. It is flexible as
testing of parameters and testing periods are defined by the
user. However, defining the water quality parameters, time
period and guidelines based on the objectives are vital before
the calculation of index [10].
A study on designing of water quality index reported that the
water quality is bad in Kesbewalakebased on WQI. In this
study Qi values were calculated based on WHO and CEA
standards and different rating values assigned for different
water uses as drinking, bathing, irrigation, fish and aquatic
lives. Further, weightage factors were assigned using available
secondary data [11]. Physicochemical parameters of
Chikkakere andPeriyapatna in Mysore district, India was
studied using CCME WQI and reported that the water quality
is not suitable for drinking, aquatic lives, recreation, irrigation
and livestock [3]. A study on evaluation of pollution status
using CCME WQI reported that poor water quality of
Chakkamkandamlakein India [12]. Based on 14
V

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 2
physicochemical parameters, Sankey tank was categorized as
good water and Mallathahallilakewas categorized as poor
water based on WQI [13]. Shivanna and Nagendrappa[14]
reported that the successful application of WQI in tank water
evaluation in Tumkurdistrict, Karnataka, India.Water quality
of the Aboaboriver, Kumasi-Ghana was studied using CCME-
WQI model and water samples from five locations along the
river were used to estimate eight parameters. Based on the
results, overall river water quality was categorized as poor.
Further, spatial variation of CCME WQI was also studied and
reported that water quality was poor all along the river [15].
Analysis of water samples for eleven parameters drawn from
three locations along the Tigris rivershowed that poor water
quality according to the CCME WQI for drinking [16]. Water
quality of four different places of Surma river in Bangladesh
was analyzed based on CCME WQI and concluded that the
water quality of the riverwaspoor. By calculating CCME WQI
in three different time periods, the study showed that water
quality in the Surmariverwasdeteriorating at an alarming rate
and it is vital to conduct frequent water quality studies in
rivers [17]. In a water quality assessment based on CCME
WQI in Kelaniriver basin of Sri Lanka reported that poor
water quality for drinking and recreation while fair for
irrigation and good for livestock [9].
Although number of water quality studies of different cascade
systemsin Sri Lanka were reported, only few attempts were
taken on application of WQI to interpret results. Therefore,
this study was aimed to assess the water quality of a tank
cascade systems in Sri Lanka for drinking, fish & aquatic life,
irrigation & agriculture and recreational use by applying
CCME water quality index.
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
A. Sampling points
Water samples from ten small tanks (viz. Illuppukanniya (IL),
Halmillawewa (Ha), Kammalakkulama (KM),
MahaKalaththewa (MK), Sattambikulama (SK),
Thariyankulama (TK), Palugaswewa (PW), Nelumkanniya
(NK), KudaKalaththewa (KK) and Bandialankulama (BK))
located inMalwathu Oya cascade-I were collected (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1Map of study area - Malwathu Oya Cascade-I
B. Physicochemical analysis of water
Sampling was done in 2013/14 in monthly interval basis to
estimate seven water quality parameters. At the time of
sampling, electrical conductivity (EC),dissolved oxygen level
(DO), turbidityand pH were measured using instruments
mentioned in Table 01. The water samples were collected,
transported and stored for further analysis in soil and water
laboratory of Department of Agricultural Engineering and Soil
Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri
Lanka following the procedures explained in APHA
guidelines for standard methods for examination water and
wastewater [18]. Nitrate nitrogen, Phosphate and sodium
concentrations were measured using the methods listed in the
Table 01 as procedures explained in APHA guidelines.
TABLE I
INSTRUMENTS AND METHODS USED FOR WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
Water quality parameter
Instrument / Method
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
DO meter (EUTECH, CyberScan DO 300)
Turbidity (TBD)
Turbidity meter (EUTECH, TN 100)
pH
Multi parameter analyzer (HATCH, Sension 156)
Electrical Conductivity (EC)
Multi parameter analyzer (HATCH, Sension 156)
Nitrate nitrogen (NO3 –N)
Salicylic Acid method
Phosphorus (PO4 – P)
)
Ascorbic acid method
Na+ concentration (Na)
Flame photometer (Sherwood Model 360)

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 3
C. CCME WQI Model
The water quality index (WQI) developed by the
CCMEemploys the combination of three essential measures of
variance such as scope, frequency and amplitude.Detailed
calculation procedures and classification are explained in
Canadian Water Quality Index 1.0 – Technical report as
follows [10].
Scope (F1) represents the extent of water quality guideline
non-compliance over the time period of interest. F1 is
expressed as indicated in Equation 01.
1=   
    ×100 Equation 01
Frequency (F2) represents the percentage of individual tests
that do not meet the guidelines called “failed tests” as
expressed in Equation 02.
2=   
    ×100 Equation 02
Amplitude (F3) represents the amount by which failed test
values do not meet their guidelines. Amplitudeis calculated in
three steps.
i. The number of times by which an individual
concentration is greater than (or less than, when the
guideline is a minimum) the objective is termed an
“excursion” and is expressed as follows.
When the test value must not exceed the objective,
=   
 / 1 Equation 03
For the cases in which the test value must not fall below
the objective,
= / 
   1 Equation 04
ii. The collective amount by which individual tests are out
of compliance is calculated by summing the excursions
of individual tests from their objectives and dividing by
the total number of tests (both those meeting objectives
and those not meeting objectives). This variable, referred
to as the normalized sum of excursions, or nse, is
calculated as Equation 05.
 = 

=1
   Equation 05
iii. F3is calculated by an asymptotic function that scales the
normalized sum of the excursions from objectives (nse)
to yield a range between 0 and 100. Mathematically, F1
is expressed as indicated in Equation 06.
3= ( 
0.01+0.01 ) Equation 06
The CCME WQI is then calculated as,
  =100 1
2+2
2+3
2
1.732 Equation 07
Classification of water quality classes based on water quality
index is shown in Table 02 [10].
TABLE II
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY CLASSES
Rank
WQI value
Description about water quality
Excellent
95-100
Water quality is protected with a virtual absence of threat or impairment; conditions very close to natural or pristine
levels. These index values can only be obtained if all measurements are within objectives virtually all of the time
Good
80-94
Water quality is protected with only a minor degree of threat or impairment; conditions rarely depart from natural
or desirable levels
Fair
65-79
Water quality is usually protected but occasionally threatened or impaired; conditions sometimes depart from
natural or desirable levels
Marginal
45-64
Water quality is frequently threatened or impaired; conditions often depart from natural or desirable levels
Poor
0-44
Water quality is almost always threatened or impaired; conditions usually depart from natural or desirable levels
Seven, four, four and fivevariables used for CCME WQI
calculations for drinking, fish & aquatic life, recreational use
and irrigation & agriculture respectively. Spatial variation of
CCME WQI values were calculated by grouping the tanks in
to two groups such as upper level tanks and lower level tanks.
Seasonal water quality variation was studiedin rainy period
and dry period.
D. Water quality guidelines
SLS 614 was used as the guideline for drinking water quality
[19]. Drinking water quality guidelines in proposed ambient
water quality standards for inland waters of Sri Lanka was
used to get the guidelines for parameters which were not
addressed in SLS 614 [20].Proposed ambient water quality
standards for inland waters of Sri Lanka were used as the
water quality guidelines for fish & aquatic life, irrigation &
agriculture and recreational use [20].
E. User perceptions about water quality
Use perceptions about the quality of water and their practical
issues related to the water quality were gathered using
informal discussions with farmer leaders of each farmer
organizations.
II. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Electrical conductivity
Electriacal conductivity levels were varied between 90 - 3030
μS/cm. During the study period 19% and 23% failure tests
were recorded compared to the guidelines of drinking,
irrigation & agriculture respectively while no guidelines on
recreation and fish & aquatic life in Sri Lankan context [19],
[20].
B. Turbidity
Turbidity levels were varied between 0.5 – 153 NTU during
the study period as 79% tests showed exceeded levels of
turbidity than the guidelines of drinking water quality. No
guidelines were found for irrigation & agriculture, recreation
and fish & aquatic based on turbidity in Sri Lankan context
[19], [20].
C. Dissolved oxygen (DO)

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 4
Dissolved oxygen levels were varied between 0.3 – 18.3 mg/l
during the study period. 66%, 13%, 43% and 13% failure tests
were recorded compared to the guidelines of drinking, fish &
aquatic life, recreation and irrigation & agriculture
respectively [19], [20].
D. pH
During the study period pH of tank water was varied from 6.3
to 8.5. pH level was within the safe limits only for recreation
while, 24%, 1% and 1% failure tests were recorded for
drinking,irrigation & agriculture, and fish & aquatic life
respectively [19], [20]. .
E. Sodium
During the study period, sodium levels were varied from 0 to
300 mg/l. Based on sodium concentration in Sri Lankan
context 3% of failure tests were recorded for drinking and no
guidelines were found for irrigation & agriculture, recreation
and fish & aquatic life based on [19], [20].
F. Phosphorus
During the study period the phosphate concentration was
ranged from 0.0 to 5.0 mg/l. Thirty nine percent (39%), 58%,
39% and 39% failure tests were recorded compared to the
guidelines of drinking, fish & aquatic life, recreation and
irrigation & agriculture respectively [19], [20].
G. Nitrate nitrogen
Nitrate nitrogen levels were varied between 0.0 – 8.3 mg/l
during the study period and 3% of each failure tests were
recorded for drinking, irrigation & agriculture, recreation and
fish & aquatic life [19], [20].
TABLE III
SPATIAL VARIATION OF MEASURED WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
H. CCME WQI
Average values of CCME WQI showed that water quality is
poor for drinking (32),fish & aquatic life (39) and irrigation &
agriculture (41) in tanks of Malwathu Oya cascade- I
while,marginal for recreational use (53).
1) Spatial variation of CCME WQI
Spatial variation of CCME WQI for different water uses of
tanks in Malwathu Oya cascade –I is shown in Table 04.
CCME WQI for drinking water was varied from marginal to
poor during the study period. CCME WQI for fish & aquatic
life and recreational water were varied between marginal and
fair respectively. CCME WQI for irrigation and agriculture
were varied between marginal to good.
Based on CCME WQI, the water quality is poor for drinking
(32), in tanks located at the upper part of Malwathu Oya
cascade- I while, marginal for fish & aquatic life (53) and
irrigation & agriculture (53) recreational use (54).
Furthermore, CCME WQI showed that water quality is poor
for drinking (32), fish & aquatic life (38) and irrigation &
agriculture (40) in tanks located at the lower part of Malwathu
Oya cascade- I while, marginal for recreational use (52).
2) Temporal variation of CCME WQI
Temporal variation of CCME WQI for different water uses of
tanks in Malwathu Oya cascade –I is shown in Table 05.
CCME WQI for drinking water, fish & aquatic life,
recreational use and irrigation & agriculture were varied
between fair to poor, excellent to poor, good to marginal and
excellent to marginal during the study period respectively.
Based on CCME WQI water quality is poor for drinking (31)
in tanks of Malwathu Oya cascade- I while, marginal for fish
& aquatic life (50), irrigation & agriculture (52) and
recreational use (50) during dry periods.
Furthermore, water quality is marginal for drinking (47), fish
& aquatic life (55) and irrigation & agriculture (53) in tanks of
Malwathu Oya cascade- I while, fair for recreational use (67)
during wet periods.
Parameter
IL
Ha
KM
MK
SK
TK
PW
NK
KK
BK
EC (µS cm-1)
Av
492.5
824.2
236.7
932.5
416.7
490.8
386.0
393.3
1080.0
395.8
SD
203.0
560.8
66.8
534.2
100.4
242.0
176.2
139.2
766.2
616.7
Turbidity (NTU)
Av
7.0
18.2
15.9
18.1
10.4
7.5
25.4
7.9
13.3
22.4
SD
7.9
36.9
25.2
27.3
11.3
7.7
49.1
9.7
21.2
33.1
DO (mg/l)
Av
5.4
5.8
5.6
6.5
4.2
5.2
5.7
4.3
6.8
6.5
SD
1.2
2.9
1.3
2.1
3.7
1.7
2.3
2.5
5.6
4.1
pH
Av
7.2
7.4
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.7
7.6
7.3
7.6
7.1
SD
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
Na+ (mg/l)
Av
37.9
29.5
20.8
50.2
7.5
37.6
5.7
27.6
38.2
38.6
SD
49.3
36.4
27.8
85.6
4.6
65.0
3.4
36.7
60.6
65.1
PO4 –P (mg/l)
Av
0.9
1.4
1.0
1.3
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.8
SD
1.3
1.9
0.9
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.8
NO3- - N (mg/l)
(mg/l)
Av
1.4
1.4
1.7
1.9
1.7
2.0
1.9
2.6
2.7
2.3
SD
1.1
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.5
1.6
2.0
2.1
2.2

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 5
TABLE IV
SPATIAL VARIATION OF CCME WQI AND WATER CATEGORIES
Location
Drinking
Fish &aquatic life
Recreational use
Irrigation &agriculture
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
IL
52
Marginal
65
Fair
68
Fair
64
Marginal
Ha
42
Poor
48
Marginal
63
Marginal
49
Marginal
KM
51
Marginal
76
Fair
68
Fair
86
Good
SK
53
Marginal
67
Fair
66
Fair
75
Fair
TK
51
Marginal
78
Fair
66
Fair
75
Fair
PW
50
Marginal
69
Fair
69
Fair
65
Fair
NK
50
Marginal
53
Marginal
53
Marginal
64
Fair
KK
37
Poor
49
Marginal
49
Marginal
47
Marginal
BK
29
Poor
66
Fair
54
Marginal
64
Marginal
MK
36
Poor
72
Fair
66
Fair
70
Fair
TABLE V
TEMPORAL VARIATION OF CCME WQI AND WATER CATEGORIES
Location
Drinking
Fish &aquatic life
Recreational use
Irrigation &agriculture
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
CWQI
Category
Feb
26
Poor
72
Fair
66
Fair
65
Fair
Mar
60
Marginal
63
Marginal
67
Fair
63
Marginal
Apr
64
Marginal
70
Fair
81
Good
76
Fair
May
39
Poor
45
Marginal
47
Marginal
49
Marginal
Jun
38
Poor
43
Poor
46
Marginal
47
Marginal
Jul
51
Marginal
76
Fair
69
Fair
73
Fair
Aug
43
Poor
65
Fair
54
Marginal
59
Marginal
Sep
26
Poor
72
Fair
66
Fair
65
Fair
Oct
38
Poor
69
Fair
66
Fair
64
Marginal
Nov
40
Poor
48
Marginal
60
Marginal
50
Marginal
Dec
67
Fair
100
Excellent
82
Good
100
Excellent
Jan
62
Marginal
69
Fair
85
Good
77
Fair
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Average values of CCME WQI showed that water quality is
poor for drinking, fish & aquatic life and irrigation &
agriculture in tanks of Malwathu Oya cascade- I while,
marginal for recreational use. However, it showed high spatial
and temporal variation of water quality for all kind of water
uses. Since results of CCME WQI akin with the farmer
perceptions and their practical problems related to the water
quality,CCME WQI can be successfully used to draw
meaningful and comprehensible conclusions from large data
matrix on water quality of a cascade systems.
REFERENCES
[1]. MaddumaBandara, C.M., (1985). Catchment ecosystems and village
tank cascades in the dry zone of Sri Lanka: A Time-Tested System of
Land and Water Management. In: Lundquist J. et.al. (Eds). Strategies
for River Basin Management, Germany. D. Reidel Publishing
Company.
[2]. Gunarathna, M.H.J.P., Kumari, M.K.N., (2014). Sustainable
Management of Malwathu Oya Cascade – I: Present Status and Future
Needs. GSTF Journal on Agricultural Engineering Vol. 1, Issue I. 81-
85
[3]. Mahesh Kumar, M.K, Mahesh, M.K., Sushmitha, B.R., (2014).
CCME Water Quality Index and Assessment of Physico-Chemical
Parameters of Chikkakere, Periyapatna, Mysore District, Karnataka
State, India. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,
Engineering and Technology. Vol. 3, Issue 8. 15343-15347. DOI:
10.15680/IJIRSET.2014.0308038
[4]. Kazi, T.G., Arain, M.B., Jamali, M.K., Jalbani, N., Afridi, H.I.,
Sarfraz, R.A., (2009). Assessment of water quality of polluted lake
using multivariate statistical techniques: A case study. Ecotoxicology
and Environmental Safety (72). 301-309.
[5]. Iqbal, F., Ali, M., Salam, A., Khan, B.A., Ahmad, S., Qamar, M.,
Umer, K., (2004). Seasonal Variations of Physico-Chemical
Characteristics of River Soan Water at DhoakPathan Bridge
(Chakwal), Pakistan. International Journal of Agriculture &
Biology.Vol. 6, No. 1. 89 - 92
[6]. Fan, X., Cui, B., Zhao, H., Zhang, Z., Zhang, H., (2010). Assessment
of river water quality in Pearl River Delta using multivariate statistical
techniques. Procedia Environmental Sciences (2). 1220–1234
[7]. Yang, L.I., Linyu, X.U., Shun, L.I., (2009). Water Quality Analysis of
the Songhua River Basin Using Multivariate Techniques. Journal of
Water Resource and Protection (2). 110-121.
[8]. Giriyappanavar, B.S., Patil, R.R., (2013). Application of CCME WQI
in Assessing Water Quality for Fort Lake of Belgaum, Karnataka.
Indian Journal of Applied Research Vol.03, Issue 04. 32-33.
[9]. Mahagamage, M.G.Y.L., Manage, P.M., (2014). Water Quality Index
(CCME-WQI) Based Assessment Study of Water Quality in Kelani
River Basin, Sri Lanka. The 1st Environment and Natural Resources
International Conference (ENRIC 2014). 199 – 204.
[10]. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. (2001). Canadian
water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: CCME
Water Quality Index 1.0, User’s Manual. Canadian environmental
quality guidelines. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment,
Winnipeg.
[11]. Wijetunge, H.S., Hewage, S., (2001). Designing a Water Quality
Index for Kesbewa Lake, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Forestry
and Environment Symposium of the Department of Forestry and
Environmental Science.University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka.
28.
[12]. Rakesh, V.B., Ammini, J., (2013). Evaluation of Pollution Status of
Chakkamkandam Lake, India using Water Quality Index. Journal of
Environmental Research and Development Vol. 7 No. 3. 1311-1315.
[13]. Ravikumar, P., Mehmood, M.A., Somashekar, R.K., (2013). Water
quality index to determine the surface water quality of Sankey tank
and Mallathahallilake, Bangalore urban district, Karnataka, India.
Applied water science Vol. 3 Issue I. 247-261.
[14]. Shivanna, A.M., Nagendrappa, G., (2015). Water quality index (WQI)
approach to evaluate water quality of certain tanks of TipturTaluk in
Tumkur district, Karnataka, India. Current world environment 10 (1).
http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.10.1.22.
[15]. Gyamfi, C., Boakye, R., Awuah, E., Anyemedu, F., (2013).
Application of the CCME WQI Model in Assessing the Water Quality
of the Aboabo River, Kumasi-Ghana. Journal of Sustainable
Development Vol. 6, No. 10. 1-7.
[16]. Al-Janabi, Z.Z., Al-Kubaisi, A.R., Abdul-Hameed, M., Al-Obaidy, J.,
(2012). Assessment of Water Quality of Tigris River by using Water
Quality Index (CCME WQI). Journal of Al-Nahrain University
Vol.15 (1). 119-126.

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS) |Volume I, Issue III, June 2016|ISSN 2454-6194
www.ijrias.org Page 6
[17]. Munna, G.M., Chowdhury, M.M.I., Masrur Ahmed, A.A.,
Chowdhury, S., Alom, M.M., (2013). A Canadian Water Quality
Guideline-Water Quality Index (CCME-WQI) based assessment study
of water quality in Surma River. Journal of Civil Engineering and
Construction Technology Vol. 4(3). 81-89.
[18]. APHA. (1992). Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater, 18th edition. America Public Health Association,
Washington.
[19]. Sri Lanka Standards for drinking water guidelines (SLS 614) Part II
Physical and Chemical Requirements. (1983). Sri Lanka Standards
Institute. Colombo, Sri Lanka.
[20]. Proposed Ambient Water Quality Standards for Inland Waters Sri
Lanka. (2001). Environment Action 1 Project (Funded by ADB).
Central Environmental Authority. Colombo, Sri Lanka.