Is your drinking water clean?
New search tool hopes to tighten water regulations.
Residents concerned about the quality of their drinking water have access to new information online.
Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that focuses on public health, recently published the search tool, which is compiled from state and federal data.
The new data provides information on contaminants ranging from lead and chromium-6 to cancer-causing chemicals that are byproducts of disinfecting water.
“Part of the value in this is that you can look up your own utility," David Andrews, EWG senior scientist, said.
EWG’s standards for how much of a chemical is acceptable in water are stricter than those set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency, Andrews said.
Andrews said there’s "growing awareness" of the connection between chemical exposures and cancer.
The group hopes to push government agencies to set stricter standards.
EWG also recommends certain types of water filters as a stop-gap measure, said Andrews.

Is your drinking water clean?
New search tool hopes to tighten water regulations.
Residents concerned about the quality of their drinking water have access to new information online.
Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that focuses on public health, recently published the search tool, which is compiled from state and federal data.
The new data provides information on contaminants ranging from lead and chromium-6 to cancer-causing chemicals that are byproducts of disinfecting water.
“Part of the value in this is that you can look up your own utility," David Andrews, EWG senior scientist, said.
EWG’s standards for how much of a chemical is acceptable in water are stricter than those set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency, Andrews said.
Andrews said there’s "growing awareness" of the connection between chemical exposures and cancer.
The group hopes to push government agencies to set stricter standards.
EWG also recommends certain types of water filters as a stop-gap measure, said Andrews.

New research from Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Northeastern University in Boston details PFC pollution in tap water supplies for 15 million Americans in 27 states and from more than four dozen industrial and military sources from Maine to California.
EWG and the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute at Northeastern collaborated to produce an interactive map that combines federal drinking water data and information on all publicly documented cases of PFAS pollution from manufacturing plants, military air bases, civilian airports and fire training sites.
On the map, blue circles show public water systems where PFCs were detected in public drinking water systems – the larger the circle, the more people served by the system.
Red dots indicate a contamination site in Northeastern’s PFAS Contamination Site Tracker.
Drinking water contamination Despite widespread contamination and mounting evidence of health hazards, there are no federal regulations for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water.
EWG’s analysis of the results shows that the tests found PFOA and/or PFOS in 162 systems serving 15.1 million Americans.
Because the EPA only required reporting of detections at or above 20 ppt for PFOA and 40 ppt for PFOS, all of those water supplies had detections exceeding Grandjean and Clapp’s safe level of 1 ppt.
There is no ongoing national-level testing of PFCs in drinking water, and the EPA has said it could be 2019 or later before it decides whether to set a national drinking water standard for PFOA and PFOS.
The Site Tracker provides detailed information for 50 industrial or military contamination sites in 18 states and Guam, plus Australia, Canada and the Netherlands.
Groundwater at the base was found to have 580,000 ppt of PFOS.

BIRMINGHAM, AL (WBRC) – A new study finds Alabama is tied with New Hampshire and second only to New Jersey for the number of drinking water sites contaminated with toxic chemicals. The Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University released the report last week highlighting locations contamination levels of highly fluorinated toxic chemicals known as PFCs or PFAs in drinking water. The study created an interactive map identifying locations throughout the country. “PFCs are chemicals previously used for Scotchguard for waterproofing, things like that….

The Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University released the report last week highlighting locations contamination levels of highly fluorinated toxic chemicals known as PFCs or PFAs in drinking water.
“PFCs are chemicals previously used for Scotchguard for waterproofing, things like that.
The EPA has stopped it from being used and produced any more, but even though they stopped it, they (PFCs) are still persistent in the environment,” said Dr. Michelle Fanucchi, a water pollution expert at UAB.
Among the areas identified, included Morgan and Lawrence counties, a location recently part of a settlement over polluted water.
Water systems along the Coosa River included Gadsden, Rainbow City, Southside and the Shelby County Water System.
“The data suggest we are safe drinking water at that level here,” Fanucchi said of the reported levels along the Coosa.
She did acknowledge some groups contend the EPA level should be lower than 70 PPTs.
Fanucchi said every municipal water system provides water reports and many post them online, recommending water system customers review those.
Link to study: http://www.ewg.org/research/mapping-contamination-crisis Copyright 2017 WBRC.
All rights reserved.

Alabama has second-most sites with PFC-contaminated drinking water in U.S.: Study.
Alabama is tied with New Hampshire for having the second-highest number of sites where the drinking water supply is contaminated with a certain type of toxic chemical, according to a new study.
Though the federal government does not regulate the appearance of highly fluorinated toxic chemicals known as PFCs or PFASs in drinking water, the chemicals are linked to a range of maladies including cancer and thyroid disease.
And they were found in the drinking supply at five sites in northern Alabama, according to the research study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Northeastern University, which was released Thursday.
"New Jersey has the most known contamination sites with six, followed by Alabama and New Hampshire with five each and New York with four," the EWG, a national advocacy group, wrote in a statement.
"At many of the sites, contamination levels are extremely high."
David Andrews, senior scientist at the EWG, said the fact that Alabama ranks so high on the list is "is partially due to the presence of a large manufacturing facility in the state," a reference to the 3M Co manufacturing facility in Decatur, WBHM reported.
Contaminated water sites were also reported in Etowah County and Fort Payne, according to the study.

Stuart replaced wells after EPA found too much PFOS and PFOA in drinking water.
In 2016, when the EPA recognized the chemicals’ dangers and lowered acceptable PFOS levels by 65 percent, the city closed and later replaced the wells that were contaminating the water supply to all customers, city spokesman Ben Hogarth said.
Cleaning the water Stuart’s levels meet today’s EPA standards, as they did before 2016, but they’re still higher what many experts consider safe.
Heightened exposure can cause cancer, liver damage, low birth weight and a weakened immune system, according to the EPA.
The only safe level is 1 part per trillion, said Bill Walker, an Environmental Working Group senior scientist.
That’s analogous to one square inch in 250 square miles.
The city also has allocated $600,000 in the 2017-18 proposed budget for additional water treatment that would remove these chemicals, Peters said.
Some experts caution individuals against relying on such filters, however.
"We think this is an issue that needs to be addressed on a community level, and it shouldn’t be down to the individual homeowner to remove these types of chemicals," said Andrews, the Environmental Working Group senior scientist.
Their health effects are unknown, and they’re not as easy to remove from water as PFOS and PFOA, said Phil Brown, a Northeastern University professor who co-authored a study with the Environmental Working Group on PFOS and PFOA levels in drinking water throughout the U.S. More studies Stuart’s previously high levels were cited in that study, released Thursday.

Fire fighting foam contamination sites clustered along Delaware River.
A national mapping project detailing tap water contaminated with toxic chemicals used in fire fighting foams and nonstick frying pans shows a large number of those public water systems along the Delaware River in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.
The chemicals, commonly referred to as PFC’s, (and include PFOA and PFOS), are used by manufacturers in making non-stick pans, waterproof clothing, take out food packaging, and fire-fighting foams.The compound is no longer manufactured in the U.S., but increasing numbers of drinking water sources have been found to contain levels that exceed EPA’s maximum contaminant levels.
The report, entitled “Mapping a Contamination Crisis,” reveals 15 million people are exposed to PFC’s through their drinking water resulting from use of the chemical at manufacturing sites and military bases across the country.
David Andrews, a senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group, says the bulk of the data came from the EPA, which required drinking water facilities that served more than 10,000 people to test for PFC’s between 2013 and 2016 and report findings to the federal government of levels above 20 parts per trillion for PFOA and 40 ppt for PFOS.
Andrews says they found 162 systems serving 15.1 million people had high PFC levels.
Seventeen of those tap water sources were located in Southeastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware along the Delaware River.
New Jersey officials have recommended lowering the maximum levels from 70 ppt to 14 ppt.
Some have suggested it should be as low as 1 ppt.
The Delaware Riverkeeper Network recently petitioned Pennsylvania officials to set a lower level than the federal standard based on new peer-reviewed research into the health impacts.

New Report Ranks Alabama Second-Worst in Drinking Water Pollution.
Alabama has the second-highest number of water systems in the nation where contaminants called perfluorinated chemicals or PFC’s have been detected in the drinking water, according to a new report.
And for decades they were used to manufacture things like non-stick cookware and fabric stain protectors.
Alabama has 15 public water systems where the US Environmental Protection Agency has detected these toxic chemicals, plus three more sites with known contamination.
David Andrews, senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group, says Alabama’s ranking has to do with the number of contaminated water systems, related lawsuits, and media coverage of the affected communities.
“And this is partially due to the presence of a large manufacturing facility in the state,” Andrews says.
That large manufacturing facility is 3M, maker of Scotchgard and other products, which lawsuits contend is the source of contaminants in the Decatur area.
Much of the data in the report is based on EPA samples.
The EPA only issues guidelines.
So he urges residents to get their water tested through the local utilities, and to push state lawmakers to implement protections.

New research from EWG and Northeastern University in Boston details PFC pollution in tap water supplies for 15 million Americans in 27 states and from more than four dozen industrial and military sources from Maine to California.
EWG and the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute at Northeastern collaborated to produce an interactive map that combines federal drinking water data and information on all publicly documented cases of PFAS pollution from manufacturing plants, military air bases, civilian airports and fire training sites.
[3] Drinking water contamination Despite widespread contamination and mounting evidence of health hazards, there are no federal regulations for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water.
Under the EPA’s Unmonitored Contaminant Monitoring Rule, or UCMR, from 2013 to 2016 all U.S. public water systems serving 10,000 or more customers tested their supplies for PFOA, PFOS, and four other PFCs.
[†] EWG’s analysis of the results shows that the tests found PFOA and/or PFOS in 162 systems serving 15.1 million Americans.
Because the EPA only required reporting of detections at or above 20 ppt for PFOA and 40 ppt for PFOS, all of those water supplies had detections exceeding Grandjean and Clapp’s safe level of 1 ppt.​ Several large metro areas had detections in only a small number of samples.
[7] There is no ongoing national-level testing of PFCs in drinking water, and the EPA has said it could be 2019 or later before it decides whether to set a national drinking water standard for PFOA and PFOS.
The Site Tracker provides detailed information for 50 industrial or military contamination sites in 18 states and Guam, plus Australia, Canada and the Netherlands.
Groundwater at the base was found to have 580,000 ppt of PFOS.
Of the 47 locations where the source of the contamination is known or suspected, 21 sources are military bases, 20 are industrial facilities and seven are from civilian firefighting sites.