Drinking water quality in the United States

Drinking water quality in the United States is generally good. In 2016, over 90 percent of the nation's community water systems were in compliance with all more-than-90 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards.[1] Over 286 million Americans get their tap water from a community water system. Eight percent of the community water systems—large municipal water systems—provide water to 82 percent of the US population.[2]

Most of the systems that are out of compliance are small systems in rural areas and small towns, partly because most public water systems are small ones. Drinking water quality in the U.S. is regulated by state and federal laws and codes, which set Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for some pollutants and naturally occurring constituents, determine various operational requirements, require public notification for violation of standards, provide guidance to state primacy agencies, and require utilities to publish Consumer Confidence Reports.[3]


Historically, up through 1914, drinking water quality in the country was managed at the state and local level. After that, interstate waters were protected using United States Public Health Service (USPHS) standards. Ultimately the USPHS standards were adopted and expanded as national drinking water standards after passage of the 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and U.S. water quality became subject to a whole new generation of federal standards.[4]

Enforcement of standards

How Does Your Water System Work - EPA 2017
EPA poster explaining public water systems and Consumer Confidence Reports

The SDWA requires EPA to issue federal regulations for public water systems.[5][6] There are no federal regulations covering private drinking water wells, although some state and local governments have issued rules for these wells.[7] The EPA enters into primary enforcement authority (primacy) agreements with state governments, so in most states the EPA does not directly enforce the SDWA. State rules can be different from the EPA's, but they must be at least as stringent.[8]

The EPA defines a public water system (PWS) as an entity that provides water for human consumption to at least 25 people (or at least 15 connections) for at least 60 days a year. There are three types of public water system: community systems (like cities or trailer parks); non-transient, non-community systems (like factories or schools with their own water source); and transient non-community systems (like rural restaurants or camps).[9]

Enforcement of drinking water standards in small water systems is less consistent than enforcement in large systems. According to a 2016 USA Today article, more than 3/4ths of small community water systems that were classified as having serious health violations by the EPA still had the same violations three years later. Some violations included an overabundance of lead, exceeding allowed rates for nitrate and fecal coliform. Around half of the most contaminated water systems were located in Kansas, Texas and Puerto Rico. In a letter, the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance noted that the agency faced “a daunting list of challenges” in its continuing efforts, particularly with small systems that “lack the basic infrastructure, resources and capacity to provide clean drinking water.”[10]

Consumer Confidence Reports

EPA's Consumer Confidence Rule of 1998 requires community public water suppliers to provide customers with annual reports of drinking water quality, called Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR).[11] Each year by July 1 anyone connected to a public water system should receive in the mail an annual water quality report that tells where your water comes from and what's in it. Consumers can find out about these local reports on a map provided by EPA.[12][13]

The regulation requires water suppliers to list the water sources, report detected contaminants and the system's compliance with National Primary Drinking Water Regulations in the annual reports.[14] Suppliers may also provide additional information such as explanation of the system's treatment processes, advice on water conservation and information about protecting the community's water sources.[15] Elizabeth Royte wrote in 2008 that the reported contaminant numbers are annual averages and that utilities may not provide data on unregulated contaminants.[16]:223 During 2011-2012 EPA conducted a review of the CCR process which including public hearings. EPA agreed with recommendations from commenters that water utilities and regulatory agencies should make improvements to the reports in order to make them more understandable to the public. The Agency planned to accomplish this by providing additional guidance and training to the utilities, and stated that no revisions to the CCR regulation were needed.[17]

Common Drinking Water Contaminates

When it comes to drinking water studies have shown that there are more than 80 common contaminants that may pose a risk to human health. These contaminates fall into two separate categories, acute and chronic effects. Acute effects occur within hours or days of the time that a person consumes a contaminant. People can suffer acute health effects from almost any contaminant if they are exposed to extraordinarily high levels (as in the case of a spill). In drinking water, microbes, such as bacteria and viruses, are the contaminants with the greatest chance of reaching levels high enough to cause acute health effects [18] Acute effects are the most commons contaminates found in drinking water, acute contaminates are usually easy for the human body to fight off and don't normally have long lasting health effects. Chronic effects occur after people consume a contaminant at levels over EPA’s safety standards over the course of many years. The drinking water contaminants that can have chronic effects include chemicals (such as disinfection byproducts, solvents and pesticides), radionuclides (such as radium), and minerals (such as arsenic). Examples of these chronic effects include cancer, liver or kidney problems, or reproductive difficulties.

Figure 2 shows several water contaminates that are mostly found in drinking water. These contaminates do not only effect human health but agriculture production as well, causing possible cross contaminating. [19]

Though these Chronic contaminates are rare to come across in the US, there are many parts of the world that battle with these chronic contaminates and have to face the possible hazards on a daily basis. A few common water borne contaminates include Aluminum, Ammonia Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chloramine, Chromium, Copper, Fluoride, Bacteria & Viruses, Lead, Nitrates/Nitrites, Mercury, Perchlorate, Radium, Selenium, Silver, and Uranium. Some of these contaminates are easy to detect through human senses, such as smell and taste, and other contaminates are impossible to detect with the human eye. Some of the most dangerous contaminates are consumed without any notice. It is extremely important to know the difference between chemical and biological contaminates, chemical contaminates are elements or compounds that can either be naturally occurring or man-made. These contaminates usually result in external/internal damages to the body. Biological contaminates are organisms that are found in water these contaminates include viruses and bacteria and are usually fought off by the bodies immune system. [20]

Substances for which there are federal standards

Federal drinking water standards are organized into six groups:

  • Microorganisms
  • Disinfectants
  • Disinfection byproducts
  • Inorganic chemicals
  • Organic chemicals
  • Radionuclides.[21]


EPA has issued standards for Cryptosporidium, Giardia lamblia, Legionella, coliform bacteria and enteric viruses. EPA also requires two microorganism-related tests to indicate water quality: plate count and turbidity.[21]


Cryptosporidium is a parasite that has a thick outer shell and thus is highly resistant to disinfection with chlorine. It gets into rivers and lakes from the stools of infected animals. Municipal water treatment plants usually remove Cryptosporidium oocysts through filtration. Nevertheless, at least five outbreaks of cryptosporidiosis in the U.S. have been associated with contaminated drinking water, including a well-publicized one in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in 1993.[22]

The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule ("LT2 rule") of 2006 requires evaluation of surface water treatment plants and specific treatments be provided in order to minimize the potential for Cryptosporidium infections from public water at supplies using surface water.[23]


EPA has issued standards for chlorine, chloramine and chlorine dioxide.[21]

Disinfection by-products

EPA has issued standards for bromate, chlorite, haloacetic acids and trihalomethanes.[21]

Disinfectants such as chlorine can react with natural material in the water to form disinfection byproducts such as trihalomethanes. Animal studies indicate that none of the chlorination byproducts studied to date is a potent carcinogen at concentrations normally found in drinking water. According to the "GreenFacts" website, there is insufficient epidemiological evidence to conclude that drinking chlorinated water causes cancers. The results of currently published studies do not provide convincing evidence that chlorinated water causes adverse pregnancy outcomes.[24]

Inorganic chemicals

EPA has issued standards for antimony, arsenic, asbestos, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, fluoride, lead, mercury, nitrate, nitrite, selenium and thallium.[25]


Most people associate fluoride with the practice of intentionally adding fluoride to public drinking-water supplies for the prevention of tooth decay. However, fluoride can also enter public water systems from natural sources, including runoff from weathering of fluoride-containing rocks and soils and leaching from soil into groundwater. Fluoride pollution from various industrial emissions can also contaminate water supplies. In a few areas of the United States, fluoride concentrations in water are much higher than normal, mostly from natural sources. In 1986, EPA established a maximum allowable concentration for fluoride in drinking water of 4 milligrams per liter (mg/L). After reviewing research on various health effects from exposure to fluoride, the Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water of the National Research Council concluded in 2006 that EPA's drinking water standard for fluoride does not protect against adverse health effects. Just over 200,000 Americans live in communities where fluoride levels in drinking water are 4 mg/L or higher. Children in those communities are at risk of developing severe tooth enamel fluorosis, a condition that can cause tooth enamel loss and pitting. It can also increase the risk of bone fractures. The report concluded unanimously that the present maximum contaminant level goal of 4 mg/L for fluoride should be lowered.[26]

Several states have more stringent regulations.


Lead typically gets into drinking water after the water leaves the treatment plant. The source of lead is most likely pipe or solder in older service connections or older plumbing inside homes, from which lead "leaks" into the water through corrosion. EPA's lead and copper rule, last revised in 2007, defines an "action level" of 15 parts per billion (ppb) for lead, which is different from a Maximum Contaminant Level.[27]

If tests show that the level of lead in drinking water is in the area of 15 ppb or higher, it is advisable – especially if there are young children in the home – to replace old pipes, to filter water, or to use bottled water. EPA estimates that more than 40 million U.S. residents use water "that can contain lead in excess of 15 ppb".[28] In Washington, DC these concerns have led to a $408 million program carried out since 2004 to replace lead service connections to about 35,000 homes. The effectiveness of the program has, however, been put in question in 2008 by WASA, the city's utility.[29] In 2016, more than 5,000 drinking water systems were found to be in violation of the lead and copper rule.[30]

Impacts of arsenic

Short term effects from exposure of Arsenic

When it comes to water quality it is important to know what chemicals can possibly be lurking in ones drinking water and the long term affects those contaminates can have on one’s health. As seen in 1879, arsenic was the first of several chemicals that have been recognized to cause cancer as a long term affect. A few years after testing for levels of arsenic in drinking water high rates of both skin and lung cancers arose. Startling results from Taiwan, appearing in 1985, showed increased mortality from several cancers, especially lung, bladder, and kidney cancers (13). Bladder cancer mortality rates for those with more than 600 µg/liter of arsenic in their water were more than 30 to 60 times the rates in the unexposed population.[31] With these high rates of cancers being found, people were starting to witness a large shift of human diets, cancer rates begin to link with available drinking water and agricultural efforts. To this day the communities of Taiwan still face high levels of arsenic in their water, this is an ongoing problem that has been going on for years. In this case arsenic is only one of the many dangerous contaminates that can be present in water, Figure 1 shows the short term effects resulting from the exposure to Arsenic. The characteristic skin lesions included pigmentation changes, mainly on the upper chest, arms and legs, and keratoses of the palms of the hands and soles of the feet (Fig. 1). After ruling out other causes, water sources used by the patients were analysed, and the diagnosis of arsenic-caused disease was confirmed.[32] Over time this expose to arsenic became for extreme, long term exposure resulted in cancerous effects all over the body.

Organic chemicals

EPA has issued standards for 53 organic compounds, including benzene, dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD), PCBs, styrene, toluene, vinyl chloride and several pesticides.[21]


EPA has issued standards for alpha particles, beta particles and photon emitters, radium and uranium.[21]

Substances for which there are no federal standards

EPA maintains the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), a list of substances which are being considered for possible regulation in the drinking water program.[33] In an effort to assess the importance of certain substances as contaminants, the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations have required some public water systems to monitor for some of those substances.[34]

PFOA and related compounds

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a synthetic perfluorinated carboxylic acid and fluorosurfactant. It has been used in the manufacture of such prominent consumer goods as polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; Teflon and similar products). PFOA has been manufactured since the 1940s in industrial quantities.[35] PFOA persists indefinitely in the environment. It is a toxicant and carcinogen in animals. PFOA has been detected in the blood of more than 98% of the general US population in the low and sub-parts per billion (ppb) range, and levels are higher in chemical plant employees and surrounding subpopulations.

In the United States there are no federal drinking water standards for PFOA, PFOS or PFNA (collectively referred to as perfluorinated alkylated substances or PFAS) as of late 2018.[36] EPA began requiring public water systems to monitor for PFOA and PFOS in 2012,[37] and published drinking water health advisories, which are non-regulatory technical documents, in 2016. EPA has not announced whether it will develop a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for these contaminants.[37]

In November 2017 the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection announced plans to develop its own drinking water standards for PFOA.[38] New Jersey published a standard for PFNA in September 2018, the first state to do so.[39] The state set the MCL at 13 parts per trillion (ppt).[40] Other states that have issued PFAS standards include Michigan, New York and Vermont.[41]


Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) is used as a gasoline additive, as well as in various industrial manufacturing processes. The compound has contaminated groundwater and soil across the U.S., and its use has been banned in some states, including California and New York. (See MTBE controversy.) EPA included MTBE on its first Contaminant Candidate List, published in 1998, but has not announced whether it will develop a regulation.[42]


Perchlorate has been detected in public drinking water supplies of over 11 million people in 22 states at concentrations of at least 4 parts per billion (ppb).[43] Above a certain concentration perchlorate alters the production of thyroid hormones by the body, chemicals that are essential for proper development of the fetus and for normal metabolic functioning of the body. According to patient advocate and writer Mary Shomon, people with thyroid conditions, as well as pregnant women and their fetuses are particularly at risk.[44] However, according to the Perchlorate Information Bureau, an industry-supported group, sound scientific and medical research shows that the low levels of perchlorate being detected in drinking water are not dangerous to human health. Still according to the same source, these studies on adults, newborns and children provide reason to believe that low levels of perchlorate (even at levels many times higher than the minute amounts being found in some drinking water supplies) also have no measurable effect on pregnant women or fetuses.[45]

One source of perchlorate in drinking water is the past production of solid rocket propellants using perchlorate, combined with poor disposal practices. Industrial accidents and agricultural fertilizers are also suspected as sources of contamination of drinking water by perchlorate. Perchlorate is also found in breast milk at significant levels, possibly attributable to perchlorate in drinking water and foods.[46] The challenge of defining an acceptable level of perchlorate in drinking water sets two opposing groups with significantly different views against each other. In a draft risk assessment made in 2002, EPA suggested that levels higher than 1 part per billion (ppb) pose a health risk. In contrast, the Defense Department contended that perchlorate at 200 ppb has no lasting effect on humans. Perchlorate is one of only four of the seventy chemicals for which EPA has set public health goals that have a safety factor of 10, rather than the usual safety factors of 100 or 1000.[44][47]:21 In 2004 eight states had non-binding advisories for perchlorate in drinking water, ranging from 1 to 18 ppb. Only two states—Massachusetts and California—set legally binding maximum contaminant levels on the allowable amount of perchlorate in drinking water, at 2 ppb and 6 ppb respectively.[46][48]

EPA issued an "Interim Health Advisory" for perchlorate in 2009, while it continued to evaluate whether to issue regulatory standards.[47] In 2011 the agency announced that it would develop regulations for perchlorate.[49][50] In 2016 a federal district court in New York issued a consent decree that initially required EPA to issue a proposed rule in October 2018, and a final rule in December 2019.[51] The modified court order requires EPA to issue a proposed rule by May 28, 2019.[52]

Pharmaceutical substances

Many pharmaceutical substances are not regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. They have been found in tiny concentrations in the drinking water of several US cities affecting at least 41 million Americans, according to a five-month inquiry by the Associated Press published in March 2008. Pharmaceutical substances are used worldwide and are a big part of some peoples lives. These substances not being regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act has potential to have major impact on the lives of many individuals. At any point a region can face strong pollution and the pharmaceuticals made in that area can have a large chance of being contaminated as well causing possible harm to the consumers. According to the AP report, researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals.[53]

Pharmaceuticals are included in a broader group of substances currently being studied by EPA, "Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCPs)." This group includes classes of common consumer products such as cosmetics, fragrances, vitamins and sunscreen products.[54] These cosmetics listed have the potential to pose health risks to its consumers strictly due to the lack of regulations of clean water use. This can cause many problems, those who receive water borne illnesses from these cosmetics may scapegoat the illness to their water sources. the Safe Drinking Water Act is put in place in attempt to protect public health. Water contaminates are some of the harshest contaminates out here. When sources such as pharmaceuticals don't require this protection it is important to monitor these contaminates. Monitoring can occur though taking part in testing ones water and pharmaceuticals though monitoring under the Disinfection Byproduct rule. This rule if approved by the State, residual disinfectant concentrations for chlorine, chlorinates, and chlorine dioxide may be measured using DPD colormetric test kits. [55] This method has the potential to limit these harmful contaminates from both water and pharmaceutical use. Without disinfection methods as shown here, there would be little to no alternatives when it comes to finding a safe and effective way to be sure the products being used are safe. Due to all the regulations put at hand individuals should feel safe using water products, as these products are used in everyone's daily life.


EPA proposed regulations for radon in 1991 and 1999.[56] In 2010 it was reported that EPA had not finalized the proposal due to concerns raised by some utilities about high costs for controlling radon. However, nine states had issued their own radon guidelines.[57]

See also

Further reading


  1. ^ Beauvais, Joel (2016-04-26). "Moving Forward for America's Drinking Water". EPA Blog. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
  2. ^ U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA (2014-04-07). "Public Water Systems."
  3. ^ Joseph Cotruvo, Victor Kimm, Arden Calvert. “Drinking Water: A Half Century of Progress.” EPA Alumni Association. March 1, 2016.
  4. ^ EPA Alumni Association: Senior EPA officials discuss early implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Video, Transcript. (see p3)
  5. ^ United States. Safe Drinking Water Act. Pub.L. 93–523; 88 Stat. 1660; 42 U.S.C. § 300f et seq. 1974-12-16.
  6. ^ "Safe Drinking Water Act". EPA. 2017-01-12.
  7. ^ "Private Drinking Water Wells". EPA. 2018-06-06.
  8. ^ Understanding the Safe Drinking Water Act (Report). EPA. June 2004. EPA 816-F-04-030.
  9. ^ "Background on Drinking Water Standards in the Safe Drinking Water Act". EPA. 2017-02-08.
  10. ^ Ungar, Laura; Nichols, Mark (2016-03-22). "Report: EPA must do more to ensure safe water". USA Today.
  11. ^ "Consumer Confidence Reports". EPA. 2017-05-19.
  12. ^ "Find Your Local CCR". Consumer Confidence Reports. EPA. Retrieved 2019-04-06.
  13. ^ "A Guide to Understanding Your CCR". Drinking Water. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Centers for Disease Control. 2015.
  14. ^ "CCR Information for Consumers: Basic Information". EPA. 2016-12-01.
  15. ^ Best Practices Factsheet: Consumer Confidence Report (Report). EPA. July 2015. EPA 816-F-15-002.
  16. ^ Royte, Elizabeth (2008). Bottlemania: How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It. New York: Bloomsbury USA. ISBN 159691372X.
  17. ^ Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule Retrospective Review Summary (Report). EPA. December 2012. p. 31. EPA 816-S-12-001.
  18. ^ "Common Hidden Contaminants". www.wqa.org. Retrieved 2019-03-29.
  19. ^ "Common Hidden Contaminants". www.wqa.org. Retrieved 2019-03-29.
  20. ^ US EPA, OW (2014-06-23). "Types of Drinking Water Contaminants". US EPA. Retrieved 2019-03-29.
  21. ^ a b c d e f "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations". EPA. 2018-03-22.
  22. ^ MacKenzie, William R. (September 2007). "Cryptosporidium in Milwaukee's water supply caused widespread illness". Healio. Thorofare, NJ: Slack Inc. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
  23. ^ "Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule Documents". Drinking Water Requirements for States and Public Water Systems. EPA. 2016-11-02.
  24. ^ "Scientific Facts on Water Disinfectants & disinfectant by-products summary by GreenFacts of the ICPS Environmental Health Criteria 216". Brussels, Belgium: GreenFacts. Retrieved 2008-08-27.
  25. ^ Dartmouth Medical School. Dartmouth Toxic Metals Superfund Research Program. Hanover, NH (2009). "In Small Doses." Video.
  26. ^ National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC. "Drinking Water Quality and Contamination."National Academies' Water Information Center. Archived 2008-11-04 at the Wayback Machine
  27. ^ Lead and Copper Rule: A Revised Quick Reference Guide (Report). EPA. 2008. EPA 816-F-08-018.
  28. ^ Lead in Your Drinking Water; Actions You Take To Reduce Lead In Drinking Water (Report). EPA. June 1993. EPA 810-F-93-001.
  29. ^ Duggan, Paul (2008-01-26). "Doubts on Lead Pipe Replacement". Washington Post.
  30. ^ Ganim, Sara (2016-06-29). "5,300 U.S. water systems are in violation of lead rules". cnn.com.
  31. ^ Steinmaus, Craig M.; Bates, Michael N.; Lopipero, Peggy A.; Smith, Allan H. (2002-06-21). "Arsenic Epidemiology and Drinking Water Standards". Science. 296 (5576): 2145–2146. doi:10.1126/science.1072896. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 12077388.
  32. ^ Rahman, Mahfuzar; Lingas, Elena O.; Smith, Allan H. (2000). "Contamination of drinking-water by arsenic in Bangladesh: a public health emergency". Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 78: 1093–1103. doi:10.1590/S0042-96862000000900005. ISSN 0042-9686.
  33. ^ "Basic Information on the CCL and Regulatory Determination". EPA. 2017-04-26.
  34. ^ EPA. "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Monitoring requirements for unregulated contaminants." Code of Federal Regulations, 40 C.F.R. 141.40. Revised 2016-12-20.
  35. ^ Lindstrom, Andrew B.; Strynar, Mark J.; Libelo, E. Laurence (2011-08-25). "Polyfluorinated Compounds: Past, Present, and Future". Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (19): 7954–7961. doi:10.1021/es2011622.
  36. ^ "PFAS laws and Regulations". EPA. 2018-07-30.
  37. ^ a b "Drinking Water Health Advisories for PFOA and PFOS". EPA. 2018-12-17.
  38. ^ O'Neill, James M. (2017-11-02). "N.J. sets stringent standard on cancer-causing chemical PFOA in drinking water". The Record (Bergen County). Woodland Park, NJ.
  39. ^ Fallon, Scott (2018-09-06). "New Jersey becomes first state to regulate dangerous chemical PFNA in drinking water". North Jersey Record. Woodland Park, NJ.
  40. ^ "Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for Perfluorononanoic Acid and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane; Private Well Testing for Arsenic, Gross Alpha Particle Activity, and Certain Synthetic Organic Compounds". New Jersey Register. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. 2018-09-04. 50 N.J.R. 1939(a).
  41. ^ "Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances; State Legislation 2017-2018". Washington, D.C.: National Conference of State Legislatures. 2018-06-29.
  42. ^ "Contaminant Candidate List 1". EPA. 2017-06-11.
  43. ^ Health Implications of Perchlorate Ingestion. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council. 2005. doi:10.17226/11202. ISBN 0-309-09568-9. Committee to Assess the Health Implications of Perchlorate Ingestion.
  44. ^ a b Shomon, Mary (2016-02-20). "Suspect Salads: Lettuce May Be Toxic To Your Thyroid! Toxic Rocket Fuel Found in Samples of Winter Lettuce". VeryWell. New York: About, Inc.
  45. ^ Perchlorate Information Bureau, Sacramento, CA. "The Facts About Perchlorate."
  46. ^ a b "Perchlorate Information". Boston, MA: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Retrieved 2017-04-26.
  47. ^ a b Interim Drinking Water Health Advisory for Perchlorate (Report). EPA. December 2008. EPA 822-R-08-25.
  48. ^ "Perchlorate in Drinking Water". Sacramento, CA: California State Water Resources Control Board. 2016-02-22.
  49. ^ "Perchlorate in Drinking Water". Drinking Water Contaminants—Standards and Regulations. EPA. 2017-03-31.
  50. ^ EPA (2011-02-11). "Drinking Water: Regulatory Determination on Perchlorate." Federal Register, 76 FR 7762
  51. ^ Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency and Gina McCarthy, 16 Civ. 1251 (ER). United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Consent Decree filed October 17, 2016.
  52. ^ "Regulatory Update At-A-Glance". Washington, DC: Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies. Retrieved 2019-04-04.
  53. ^ "AP Probe Finds Drugs in Drinking Water" by Jeff Donn, Martha Mendoza, and Justin Pritchard, Associated Press, March 9, 2008 Archived April 4, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  54. ^ "Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products". EPA. 2010. Archived from the original on 2015-09-05.
  55. ^ US EPA, OW (2015-08-12). "Drinking Water Contaminants – Standards and Regulations". US EPA. Retrieved 2019-05-03.
  56. ^ "Proposed Radon in Drinking Water Regulation". EPA. 2014-06-14.
  57. ^ Vaidyanathan, Gayathri (2010-12-07). "States Pursue Radon Limits in Drinking Water as EPA Action Lags". New York Times.
  • World Health Organization. (2004). Guidelines for drinking-water quality (Vol. 1). World Health Organization. Smith, A. H., Lopipero, P. A., Bates, M. N., & Steinmaus, C. M. (2002). Arsenic epidemiology and drinking water standards
  • “Drinking Water Contaminants – Standards and Regulations.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 22 May 2017, www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulations.
  • Smith, A. H., Lingas, E. O., & Rahman, M. (2000). Contamination of drinking-water by arsenic in Bangladesh: a public health emergency. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78, 1093-1103.
  • “Common Hidden Contaminants.” Water Quality Association, www.wqa.org/learn-about-water/common-contaminants.
  • “Drinking Water Contaminants – Standards and Regulations.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 22 May 2017, www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulations.

External links

Community Fire Safety Act of 2013

The Community Fire Safety Act of 2013 (H.R. 3588) is a bill that would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from requiring that all new fire hydrants in the United States be lead-free beginning in 2014. The bill was passed by the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress.

Drinking water quality legislation of the United States

In the United States, public drinking water is governed by the laws and regulations enacted by the federal and state governments. Certain ordinances may also be created at a more local level. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is the principal federal law. The SDWA authorizes the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create and enforce regulations to achieve the SDWA goals.

Flint water crisis

The Flint water crisis began in 2014, after the drinking water source for the city of Flint, Michigan was changed from Lake Huron and the Detroit River to a less costly source of the Flint River. Due to insufficient water treatment, lead leached from water pipes into the drinking water, exposing over 100,000 residents to elevated lead levels.

After a pair of scientific studies proved lead contamination was present in the water supply, a federal state of emergency was declared in January 2016 and Flint residents were instructed to use only bottled or filtered water for drinking, cooking, cleaning, and bathing. Some officials have alleged that as of early 2017, the water quality had returned to acceptable levels. However, as of January 2019, residents and officials still express doubt over whether the water in Flint is safe to drink. All the lead pipes are being replaced, which is expected to be completed in 2019. There are an estimated 2,500 lead service lines still in place as of April 2019.

Lead and Copper Rule

The Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) is a United States federal regulation which limits the concentration of lead and copper allowed in public drinking water at the consumer's tap, as well as limiting the permissible amount of pipe corrosion occurring due to the water itself. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first issued the rule in 1991 pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act. EPA promulgated the regulations following studies that concluded that copper and lead have an adverse effect on individuals. The LCR sought to therefore limit the levels of these metals in water through improving water treatment centers, determining copper and lead levels for customers who use lead plumbing parts, and eliminating the water source as a source of lead and copper. If the lead and copper levels exceed the "action levels" water suppliers are required to educate their consumers on how to reduce exposure to lead. A 2004-2005 study of the LCR by EPA noted that the system had been effective in 96 percent of systems serving at least 3,300 people.EPA has stated that the LCR has reduced exposure to lead "that can cause damage to brain, red blood cells, and kidneys, especially for young children and pregnant women." It also explained that the rule has reduced copper exposure "that can cause stomach and intestinal distress, liver or kidney damage, and complications of Wilson’s disease in genetically predisposed people."

Maximum Contaminant Level

Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are standards that are set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for drinking water quality. An MCL is the legal threshold limit on the amount of a substance that is allowed in public water systems under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The limit is usually expressed as a concentration in milligrams or micrograms per liter of water.

Public water system

Public water system is a regulatory term used in the United States and Canada, referring to certain utilities and organizations providing drinking water.

Safe Drinking Water Act

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is the principal federal law in the United States intended to ensure safe drinking water for the public. Pursuant to the act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to set standards for drinking water quality and oversee all states, localities, and water suppliers that implement the standards.

The SDWA applies to every public water system (PWS) in the United States. There are currently over 151,000 public water systems providing water to almost all Americans at some time in their lives. The Act does not cover private wells.The SDWA does not apply to bottled water. Bottled water is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Water contamination in Lawrence and Morgan Counties, Alabama

Water contamination in Lawrence and Morgan Counties, Alabama, revolves around the presence of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in the water supply. After the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released new health advisories in March 2016, there was concern over health risks of the levels of PFOA and PFOS present. The responses of different government officials, agencies, and companies raise questions as to whether or not there was any environmental injustice involved.

Water resource policy

Water resource policy encompasses the policy-making processes that affect the collection, preparation, use and disposal of water to support human uses and protect environmental quality.

Water policy addresses provision, use, disposal and sustainability decisions. Provision includes identification, access, preparation for use and distribution. Uses include direct human consumption, agriculture, industry and ecosystem protection. Policy must set the rules for how water is allocated to the different uses. Disposal involves wastewater treatment and stormwater/flood management. Sustainability addresses issues such as aquifer depletion, reservoir management and mineral buildup."Supply isn't just about water production, it is also about distribution infrastructure."

A second dimension of issues addresses how policies are created, executed and amended. Since water resources often cross political boundaries, water policies must often be negotiated among multiple political entities (nations, states, etc.) Commentators such as Halcrow project resource wars as demand continues to increase.Policy makers typically adopt a set of best management practices BMPs to govern water management. BMPs cover everything from dam construction to wastewater treatment protocols.

Water resource policies may encompass "regions, catchments, shared or transboundary water resources, and inter-basin transfers. Policy leads management practices, but best management practices are identified, evaluated, modified and disseminated by policy making bodies."

Water resource policy issues are receiving increased attention as water shortages are believed to be at crisis levels in some regions. These regional crises have the potential worldwide implications.Organizations such as the Global Water Policy Project have sprung up to promote awareness and prod governments and NGOs into heightened awareness of the problems.

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors (here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.