The Headline May Read : “Ohio's School Drinking Water Contains Toxins”; But Check Out Your Schools Here…
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 25, 2009
CUTLER, Calif.—Over the last decade, the drinking water at thousands of schools across the country has been found to contain unsafe levels of lead, pesticides and dozens of other toxins.
An Associated Press investigation found that contaminants have surfaced at public and private schools in all 50 states—in small towns and inner cities alike.
An EPA report analyzed by the AP reveals 451 drinking water violations in Ohio schools from 1998 until 2008.
Click here for an interactive map that clicks through to detailed information on each school’s violations.
In Central Ohio, the following cities have had drinking water violations at schools anywhere from 1998-2008: Grove City, London, Marysville, Mount Vernon, Newark and Plain City.
Darbydale Elementary School sits eight miles west of Grove City and had nine unsafe drinking water violations between 2006 and 2008. Every child in the school had to drink bottled water for the past two years instead of the school’s well water.
According to the EPA, the water had unsafe arsenic levels, which can cause disease.
Residents in the neighborhood were informed, receiving news letters from the school on water quality.
Ten days ago, South-Western City Schools officials received approval from the EPA that the water is now at safe levels.
“It’s a quarterly report and actually we’ve got a new filtration system here, all the testing has been done, the system is working great, so out children are no longer drinking bottled water,“ said district community relations director Sandy Nekoloff.
But the problem has gone largely unmonitored by the federal government, even as the number of water safety violations has multiplied.
“It’s an outrage,“ said Marc Edwards, an engineer at Virginia Tech who has been honored for his work on water quality. “If a landlord doesn’t tell a tenant about lead paint in an apartment, he can go to jail. But we have no system to make people follow the rules to keep school children safe?“
The contamination is most apparent at schools with wells, which represent 8 to 11 percent of the nation’s schools. Roughly one of every five schools with its own water supply violated the Safe Drinking Water Act in the past decade, according to data from the Environmental Protection Agency analyzed by the AP.
In California’s farm belt, wells at some schools are so tainted with pesticides that students have taken to stuffing their backpacks with bottled water for fear of getting sick from the drinking fountain.
Experts and children’s advocates complain that responsibility for drinking water is spread among too many local, state and federal agencies, and that risks are going unreported. Finding a solution, they say, would require a costly new national strategy for monitoring water in schools.
Schools with unsafe water represent only a small percentage of the nation’s 132,500 schools. And the EPA says the number of violations spiked over the last decade largely because the government has gradually adopted stricter standards for contaminants such as arsenic and some disinfectants.
Many of the same toxins could also be found in water at homes, offices and businesses. But the contaminants are especially dangerous to children, who drink more water per pound than adults and are more vulnerable to the effects of many hazardous substances.
“There’s a different risk for kids,“ said Cynthia Dougherty, head of the EPA’s Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water.
Still, the EPA does not have the authority to require testing for all schools and can only provide guidance on environmental practices.
In recent years, students at a Minnesota elementary school fell ill after drinking tainted water. A young girl in Seattle got sick, too.
The AP analyzed a database showing federal drinking water violations from 1998 to 2008 in schools with their own water supplies. The findings:
- Water in about 100 school districts and 2,250 schools breached federal safety standards.
- Those schools and districts racked up more than 5,550 separate violations. In 2008, the EPA recorded 577 violations, up from 59 in 1998 - an increase that officials attribute mainly to tougher rules.
- California, which has the most schools of any state, also recorded the most violations with 612, followed by Ohio (451), Maine (417), Connecticut (318) and Indiana (289).
- Nearly half the violators in California were repeat offenders. One elementary school in Tulare County, in the farm country of the Central Valley, broke safe-water laws 20 times.
- The most frequently cited contaminant was coliform bacteria, followed by lead and copper, arsenic and nitrates.
The AP analysis has “clearly identified the tip of an iceberg,“ said Gina Solomon, a San Francisco physician who serves on an EPA drinking water advisory board. “This tells me there is a widespread problem that needs to be fixed because there are ongoing water quality problems in small and large utilities, as well.“
Schools with wells are required to test their water and report any problems to the state, which is supposed to send all violations to the federal government.
But EPA officials acknowledge the agency’s database of violations is plagued with errors and omissions. And the agency does not specifically monitor incoming state data on school water quality.
Critics say those practices prevent the government from reliably identifying the worst offenders - and carrying out enforcement.
Scientists say the testing requirements fail to detect dangerous toxins such as lead, which can wreak havoc on major organs and may retard children’s learning abilities.
“There is just no excuse for this. Period,“ said California Sen. Barbara Boxer, Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. “We want to make sure that we fix this problem in a way that it will never happen again, and we can ensure parents that their children will be safe.“
The problem goes beyond schools that use wells. Schools that draw water from public utilities showed contamination, too, especially older buildings where lead can concentrate at higher levels than in most homes.
In schools with lead-soldered pipes, the metal sometimes flakes off into drinking water. Lead levels can also build up as water sits stagnant over weekends and holidays.
Schools that get water from local utilities are not required to test for toxins because the EPA already regulates water providers. That means there is no way to ensure detection of contaminants caused by schools’ own plumbing.
But voluntary tests in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Seattle and Los Angeles have found dangerous levels of lead in recent years. And experts warn the real risk to schoolchildren is going unreported.
“I really suspect the level of exposure to lead and other metals at schools is underestimated,“ said Michael Schock, a corrosion expert with the EPA in Cincinnati. “You just don’t know what is going on in the places you don’t sample.“
Since 2004, the agency has been asking states to increase lead monitoring. As of 2006, a survey by the Centers for Disease Control found nearly half of all schools nationwide do not test their water for lead.
Because contaminant levels in water can vary from drinking fountain to drinking fountain, and different children drink different amounts of water, epidemiologists often have trouble measuring the potential threats to children’s health.
But children have suffered health problems attributed to school water:
- In 2001, 28 children at a Worthington, Minn., elementary school experienced severe stomach aches and nausea after drinking water tainted with lead and copper, the result of a poorly installed treatment system.
- In Seattle several years ago, a 6-year-old girl suffered stomach aches and became disoriented and easily exhausted. The girl’s mother asked her daughter’s school to test its water, and also tested a strand of her daughter’s hair. Tests showed high levels of copper and lead, which figured into state health officials’ decision to phase-in rules requiring schools to test their water for both contaminants.
Many school officials say buying bottled water is less expensive than fixing old pipes. Baltimore, for instance, has spent more than $2.5 million on bottled water over the last six years.
After wrestling with unsafe levels of arsenic for almost two years, administrators in Sterling, Ohio, southeast of Cincinnati, finally bought water coolers for elementary school students last fall. Now they plan to move students to a new building.
In California, the Department of Public Health has given out more than $4 million in recent years to help districts overhaul their water systems.
But school administrators in the farmworker town of Cutler cannot fix chronic water problems at Lovell High School because funding is frozen due to the state’s budget crisis.
Signs posted above the kitchen sink warn students not to drink from the tap because the water is tainted with nitrates, a potential carcinogen, and DBCP, a pesticide scientists say may cause male sterility.
As gym class ended one morning, thirsty basketball players crowded around a five-gallon cooler, the only safe place to get a drink on campus.
“The teachers always remind us to go to the classroom and get a cup of water from the cooler,“ said sophomore Israel Aguila. “But the bathroom sinks still work, so sometimes you kind of forget you can’t drink out of them.“
For additional information, stay with NBC 4 and refresh nbc4i.com—Where Accuracy Matters.
To submit a story idea or news tip, e-mail stories@nbc4i.com .
Ohio's School Drinking Water Contains Toxins
NBC4i.com - Columbus,OH,USA
Residents in the neighborhood were informed, receiving news letters from the school on water quality. Ten days ago, South-Western City Schools officials ...
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/toxic_water/index.html?SITE=WCMHTV&SECTION=HOME
Drinking Water Contaminants
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/consumer/pdf/mcl.pdf
- You are here: EPA Home
Drinking Water Contaminants
Information on this section
Alphabetical List (PDF)
(6 pp, 924 K) (About PDF)
EPA 816-F-09-0004, May 2009
List of Contaminants & their MCLs
- Microorganisms
- Disinfectants
- Disinfection Byproducts
- Inorganic Chemicals
- Organic Chemicals
- Radionuclides
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Long-Term Exposure Above the MCL (unless specified as short-term) | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| Cryptosporidium (pdf file) | zero | TT 3 | Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) | Human and animal fecal waste |
| Giardia lamblia | zero | TT3 | Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) | Human and animal fecal waste |
| Heterotrophic plate count | n/a | TT3 | HPC has no health effects; it is an analytic method used to measure the variety of bacteria that are common in water. The lower the concentration of bacteria in drinking water, the better maintained the water system is. | HPC measures a range of bacteria that are naturally present in the environment |
| Legionella | zero | TT3 | Legionnaire's Disease, a type of pneumonia | Found naturally in water; multiplies in heating systems |
| zero | 5.0%4 | Not a health threat in itself; it is used to indicate whether other potentially harmful bacteria may be present 5 | Coliforms are naturally present in the environment; as well as feces; fecal coliforms and E. coli only come from human and animal fecal waste. | |
| n/a | TT3 | Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of water. It is used to indicate water quality and filtration effectiveness (e.g., whether disease-causing organisms are present). Higher turbidity levels are often associated with higher levels of disease-causing microorganisms such as viruses, parasites and some bacteria. These organisms can cause symptoms such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea, and associated headaches. | Soil runoff | |
| Viruses (enteric) | zero | TT3 | Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) | Human and animal fecal waste |
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| zero | 0.010 | Increased risk of cancer | Byproduct of drinking water disinfection | |
| 0.8 | 1.0 | Anemia; infants & young children: nervous system effects | Byproduct of drinking water disinfection | |
| n/a6 | 0.060 | Increased risk of cancer | Byproduct of drinking water disinfection | |
| n/a6 | 0.080 | Liver, kidney or central nervous system problems; increased risk of cancer | Byproduct of drinking water disinfection |
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| MRDLG=41 | MRDL=4.01 | Eye/nose irritation; stomach discomfort, anemia | Water additive used to control microbes | |
| MRDLG=41 | MRDL=4.01 | Eye/nose irritation; stomach discomfort | Water additive used to control microbes | |
| MRDLG=0.81 | MRDL=0.81 | Anemia; infants & young children: nervous system effects | Water additive used to control microbes |
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| 0.006 | 0.006 | Increase in blood cholesterol; decrease in blood sugar | Discharge from petroleum refineries; fire retardants; ceramics; electronics; solder | |
| 07 | 0.010 | Skin damage or problems with circulatory systems, and may have increased risk of getting cancer | Erosion of natural deposits; runoff from orchards, runoff from glass & electronicsproduction wastes | |
| 7 million fibers per liter | 7 MFL | Increased risk of developing benign intestinal polyps | Decay of asbestos cement in water mains; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 2 | 2 | Increase in blood pressure | Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge from metal refineries; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 0.004 | 0.004 | Intestinal lesions | Discharge from metal refineries and coal-burning factories; discharge from electrical, aerospace, and defense industries | |
| 0.005 | 0.005 | Kidney damage | Corrosion of galvanized pipes; erosion of natural deposits; discharge from metal refineries; runoff from waste batteries and paints | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | Allergic dermatitis | Discharge from steel and pulp mills; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 1.3 | TT8; | Short term exposure: Gastrointestinal distress Long term exposure: Liver or kidney damage People with Wilson's Disease should consult their personal doctor if the amount of copper in their water exceeds the action level | Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 0.2 | 0.2 | Nerve damage or thyroid problems | Discharge from steel/metal factories; discharge from plastic and fertilizer factories | |
| Fluoride | 4.0 | 4.0 | Bone disease (pain and tenderness of the bones); Children may get mottled teeth | Water additive which promotes strong teeth; erosion of natural deposits; discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories |
| zero | TT8; | Infants and children: Delays in physical or mental development; children could show slight deficits in attention span and learning abilities Adults: Kidney problems; high blood pressure | Corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 0.002 | 0.002 | Kidney damage | Erosion of natural deposits; discharge from refineries and factories; runoff from landfills and croplands | |
| 10 | 10 | Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate in excess of the MCL could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue-baby syndrome. | Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from septic tanks, sewage; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 1 | 1 | Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrite in excess of the MCL could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue-baby syndrome. | Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from septic tanks, sewage; erosion of natural deposits | |
| 0.05 | 0.05 | Hair or fingernail loss; numbness in fingers or toes; circulatory problems | Discharge from petroleum refineries; erosion of natural deposits; discharge from mines | |
| 0.0005 | 0.002 | Hair loss; changes in blood; kidney, intestine, or liver problems | Leaching from ore-processing sites; discharge from electronics, glass, and drug factories |
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| zero | TT9 | Nervous system or blood problems; increased risk of cancer | Added to water during sewage/wastewater treatment | |
| zero | 0.002 | Eye, liver, kidney or spleen problems; anemia; increased risk of cancer | Runoff from herbicide used on row crops | |
| 0.003 | 0.003 | Cardiovascular system or reproductive problems | Runoff from herbicide used on row crops | |
| zero | 0.005 | Anemia; decrease in blood platelets; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from factories; leaching from gas storage tanks and landfills | |
| zero | 0.0002 | Reproductive difficulties; increased risk of cancer | Leaching from linings of water storage tanks and distribution lines | |
| 0.04 | 0.04 | Problems with blood, nervous system, or reproductive system | Leaching of soil fumigant used on rice and alfalfa | |
| zero | 0.005 | Liver problems; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from chemical plants and other industrial activities | |
| zero | 0.002 | Liver or nervous system problems; increased risk of cancer | Residue of banned termiticide | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | Liver or kidney problems | Discharge from chemical and agricultural chemical factories | |
| 0.07 | 0.07 | Kidney, liver, or adrenal gland problems | Runoff from herbicide used on row crops | |
| 0.2 | 0.2 | Minor kidney changes | Runoff from herbicide used on rights of way | |
| zero | 0.0002 | Reproductive difficulties; increased risk of cancer | Runoff/leaching from soil fumigant used on soybeans, cotton, pineapples, and orchards | |
| 0.6 | 0.6 | Liver, kidney, or circulatory system problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| 0.075 | 0.075 | Anemia; liver, kidney or spleen damage; changes in blood | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| zero | 0.005 | Increased risk of cancer | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| 0.007 | 0.007 | Liver problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| 0.07 | 0.07 | Liver problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | Liver problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| zero | 0.005 | Liver problems; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from drug and chemical factories | |
| zero | 0.005 | Increased risk of cancer | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| Di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate | 0.4 | 0.4 | Weight loss, liver problems, or possible reproductive difficulties. | Discharge from chemical factories |
| Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | zero | 0.006 | Reproductive difficulties; liver problems; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from rubber and chemical factories |
| 0.007 | 0.007 | Reproductive difficulties | Runoff from herbicide used on soybeans and vegetables | |
| zero | 0.00000003 | Reproductive difficulties; increased risk of cancer | Emissions from waste incineration and other combustion; discharge from chemical factories | |
| 0.02 | 0.02 | Cataracts | Runoff from herbicide use | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | Stomach and intestinal problems | Runoff from herbicide use | |
| 0.002 | 0.002 | Liver problems | Residue of banned insecticide | |
| zero | TT9 | Increased cancer risk, and over a long period of time, stomach problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories; an impurity of some water treatment chemicals | |
| 0.7 | 0.7 | Liver or kidneys problems | Discharge from petroleum refineries | |
| zero | 0.00005 | Problems with liver, stomach, reproductive system, or kidneys; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from petroleum refineries | |
| 0.7 | 0.7 | Kidney problems; reproductive difficulties | Runoff from herbicide use | |
| zero | 0.0004 | Liver damage; increased risk of cancer | Residue of banned termiticide | |
| zero | 0.0002 | Liver damage; increased risk of cancer | Breakdown of heptachlor | |
| zero | 0.001 | Liver or kidney problems; reproductive difficulties; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from metal refineries and agricultural chemical factories | |
| 0.05 | 0.05 | Kidney or stomach problems | Discharge from chemical factories | |
| 0.0002 | 0.0002 | Liver or kidney problems | Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on cattle, lumber, gardens | |
| 0.04 | 0.04 | Reproductive difficulties | Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on fruits, vegetables, alfalfa, livestock | |
| 0.2 | 0.2 | Slight nervous system effects | Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on apples, potatoes, and tomatoes | |
| zero | 0.0005 | Skin changes; thymus gland problems; immune deficiencies; reproductive or nervous system difficulties; increased risk of cancer | Runoff from landfills; discharge of waste chemicals | |
| zero | 0.001 | Liver or kidney problems; increased cancer risk | Discharge from wood preserving factories | |
| 0.5 | 0.5 | Liver problems | Herbicide runoff | |
| 0.004 | 0.004 | Problems with blood | Herbicide runoff | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | Liver, kidney, or circulatory system problems | Discharge from rubber and plastic factories; leaching from landfills | |
| zero | 0.005 | Liver problems; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from factories and dry cleaners | |
| 1 | 1 | Nervous system, kidney, or liver problems | Discharge from petroleum factories | |
| zero | 0.003 | Kidney, liver, or thyroid problems; increased risk of cancer | Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on cotton and cattle | |
| 0.05 | 0.05 | Liver problems | Residue of banned herbicide | |
| 0.07 | 0.07 | Changes in adrenal glands | Discharge from textile finishing factories | |
| 0.20 | 0.2 | Liver, nervous system, or circulatory problems | Discharge from metal degreasing sites and other factories | |
| 0.003 | 0.005 | Liver, kidney, or immune system problems | Discharge from industrial chemical factories | |
| zero | 0.005 | Liver problems; increased risk of cancer | Discharge from metal degreasing sites and other factories | |
| zero | 0.002 | Increased risk of cancer | Leaching from PVC pipes; discharge from plastic factories | |
| 10 | 10 | Nervous system damage | Discharge from petroleum factories; discharge from chemical factories |
| Contaminant | Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water | Sources of Contaminant in Drinking Water | ||
| Alpha particles | none7 | 15 picocuries per Liter (pCi/L) | Increased risk of cancer | Erosion of natural deposits of certain minerals that are radioactive and may emit a form of radiation known as alpha radiation |
| Beta particles and photon emitters | none7 | 4 millirems per year | Increased risk of cancer | Decay of natural and man-made deposits of certain minerals that are radioactive and may emit forms of radiation known as photons and beta radiation |
| Radium 226 and Radium 228 (combined) | none7 | 5 pCi/L | Increased risk of cancer | Erosion of natural deposits |
| Uranium | zero | 30 ug/L | Increased risk of cancer, kidney toxicity | Erosion of natural deposits |
Notes
1 Definitions:
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) - The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety and are non-enforceable public health goals.
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology and taking cost into consideration. MCLs are enforceable standards.
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG) - The level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.
Treatment Technique - A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water.
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) - The highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.
2 Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L) unless otherwise noted. Milligrams per liter are equivalent to parts per million.
3 EPA's surface water treatment rules require systems using surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water to (1) disinfect their water, and (2) filter their water or meet criteria for avoiding filtration so that the following contaminants are controlled at the following levels:
- Cryptosporidium: Unfiltered systems are required to include Cryptosporidium in their existing watershed control provisions.
- Giardia lamblia: 99.9% removal/inactivation
- Viruses: 99.99% removal/inactivation
- Legionella: No limit, but EPA believes that if Giardia and viruses are removed/inactivated, according to the treatment techniques in the Surface Water Treatment Rule, Legionella will also be controlled.
- Turbidity: For systems that use conventional or direct filtration, at not time can turbidity (cloudiness of water) go higher than 1 nephelolometric turbidity unit NTU), and samples for turbidity must be less than or equal to 0.3 NTU in at least 95 pervent of the samples in any month. Systems that use filtration other than the conventional or direct filtration must follow state limits, which must include turbidity at no time exceeding 5 NTU.
- HPC: No more than 500 bacterial colonies per milliliter.
- Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment: Surface water systems or (GWUDI) systems serving fewer than 10,000 people must comply with the applicable Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule provisions (e.g. turbidity standards, individual filter monitoring, Cryptosporidium removal requirements, updated watershed control requirements for unfiltered systems).
- Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule This rule applies to all surface water systems or ground water systems under the direct influence of surface water. The rule targets additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements for higher risk systems and includes provisions to reduce risks from uncovered finished water storage facilities and to ensure that the systems maintain microbial protection as they take steps to reduce the formation of disinfection byproducts.
- Filter Backwash Recycling; The Filter Backwash Recycling Rule requires systems that recycle to return specific recycle flows through all processes of the system's existing conventional or direct filtration system or at an alternate location approved by the state.
4 No more than 5.0% samples total coliform-positive in a month. (For water systems that collect fewer than 40 routine samples per month, no more than one sample can be total coliform-positive per month.) Every sample that has total coliform must be analyzed for either fecal coliforms or E. coli if two consecutive TC-positive samples, and one is also positive for E.coli fecal coliforms, system has an acute MCL violation.
5 Fecal coliform and E. coli are bacteria whose presence indicates that the water may be contaminated with human or animal wastes. Disease-causing microbes (pathogens) in these wastes can cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. These pathogens may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, and people with severely compromised immune systems.
6 Although there is no collective MCLG for this contaminant group, there are individual MCLGs for some of the individual contaminants:
- Trihalomethanes: bromodichloromethane (zero); bromoform (zero); dibromochloromethane (0.06 mg/L): chloroform (0.07mg/L).
- Haloacetic acids: dichloroacetic acid (zero); trichloroacetic acid (0.02 mg/L); monochloroacetic acid (0.07 mg/L). Bromoacetic acid and dibromoacetic acid are regulated with this group but have no MCLGs.
7 Lead and copper are regulated by a Treatment Technique that requires systems to control the corrosiveness of their water. If more than 10% percent of tap water samples exceed the action level, water systems must take additional steps. For copper, the action level is 1.3 mg/L, and for lead it is 0.015 mg/L.
8 Each water system must certify, in writing, to the state (using third-party or manufacturer's certification) that when it uses acrylamide and epichlorohydrin are used to treat water, the combination (or product) of dose and monomer level does not exceed the levels specified, as follows:
- Acrylamide = 0.05% dosed at 1 mg/L (or equivalent)
- Epichlorohydrin = 0.01% dosed at 20 mg/L (or equivalent)
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations (NSDWRs or secondary standards) are non-enforceable guidelines regulating contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color) in drinking water. EPA recommends secondary standards to water systems but does not require systems to comply. However, states may choose to adopt them as enforceable standards.
- National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations - The complete regulations regarding these contaminants available from the Code of Federal Regulations Web Site.
- For more information, read Secondary Drinking Water Regulations: Guidance for Nuisance Chemicals.
List of National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations
| Contaminant | Secondary Standard |
| Aluminum | 0.05 to 0.2 mg/L |
| Chloride | 250 mg/L |
| Color | 15 (color units) |
| Copper | 1.0 mg/L |
| Corrosivity | noncorrosive |
| Fluoride | 2.0 mg/L |
| Foaming Agents | 0.5 mg/L |
| Iron | 0.3 mg/L |
| Manganese | 0.05 mg/L |
| Odor | 3 threshold odor number |
| pH | 6.5-8.5 |
| Silver | 0.10 mg/L |
| Sulfate | 250 mg/L |
| Total Dissolved Solids | 500 mg/L |
| Zinc | 5 mg/L |
This list of contaminants which, at the time of publication, are not subject to any proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water regulation (NPDWR), are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems, and may require regulations under SDWA. For more information check out the list, or vist the Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) web site.
- Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 2
- Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) Web Site
- Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Program (UCM)
- Information on specific unregulated contaminants
No comments:
Post a Comment