Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Low-income and minority communities often face disproportionately high pollutant exposures. The lead crisis in Flint, Michigan, has sparked concern about broader socioeconomic disparities in exposures to drinking water contaminants. Nitrate is commonly found in drinking water, especially in agricultural regions, and epidemiological evidence suggests elevated risk of cancer and birth defects at levels below U.S. EPA’s drinking water standard (10 mg/L NO 3 -N). However, there have been no nationwide assessments of socioeconomic disparities in exposures to nitrate or other contaminants in U.S. drinking water. The goals of this study are to identify determinants of nitrate concentrations in U.S. community water systems (CWSs) and to evaluate disparities related to wealth or race/ethnicity. Methods We compiled nitrate data from 39,466 U.S. CWSs for 2010–2014. We used EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) to compile CWS characteristics and linked this information with both city- and county-level demographic data gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau. After applying multiple imputation methods to address censored nitrate concentration data, we conducted mixed-effects multivariable regression analyses at national and regional scales. Results 5.6 million Americans are served by a CWS that had an average nitrate concentration ≥ 5 mg/L NO 3 -N between 2010 and 2014. Extent of agricultural land use and reliance on groundwater sources were significantly associated with nitrate. The percent of Hispanic residents served by each system was significantly associated with nitrate even after accounting for county-level cropland and livestock production, and CWSs in the top quartile of percent Hispanic residents exceeded 5 mg/L nearly three times as often as CWSs serving the lowest quartile. By contrast, the percent of residents living in poverty and percent African American residents were both inversely associated with nitrate. Conclusions Epidemiological evidence for health effects associated with drinking water above 5 mg/L NO 3 -N raises concerns about increased risk for the 5.6 million Americans served by public water supplies with average nitrate concentrations above this level. The associations we observed between nitrate concentrations and proportions of Hispanic residents support the need for improved efforts to assist vulnerable communities in addressing contamination and protecting source waters. Future studies can extend our methods to evaluate disparities in exposures to other contaminants and links to health effects.

The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) regulates >170,000 public water systems to protect health, but not >13 million private wells. State and local government requirements for private well water testing are rare and inconsistent; the responsibility to ensure water safety remains with individual households. Over the last two decades, geogenic arsenic has emerged as a significant public health concern due to high prevalence in many rural American communities. We build the case for universal screening of private well water quality around arsenic, the most toxic and widespread of common private water contaminants. We argue that achieving universal screening will require policy intervention, and that testing should be made easy, accessible, and in many cases free to all private well households in the United States, considering the invisible, tasteless, odorless, and thus silent nature of arsenic. Our research has identified behavioral, situational and financial barriers to households managing their own well water safety, resulting in far from universal screening despite traditional public health outreach efforts. We observe significant socioeconomic disparities in arsenic testing and treatment when private water is unregulated. Testing requirements can be a partial answer to these challenges. Universal screening, achieved through local testing requirements complemented by greater community engagement targeting biologically and socioeconomically vulnerable groups, would reduce population arsenic exposure greater than any promotional efforts to date. Universal screening of private well water will identify the dangers hidden in America's drinking water supply and redirect attention to ensure safe water among affected households. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP629.

The distribution, enrichment, and ecotoxicity potential of Bangladesh part of Sundarban mangrove was investigated for eight trace metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Zn) using sediment quality assessment indices. The average concentration of trace metals in the sediments exceeded the crustal abundance suggesting sources other than natural in origin. Additionally, the trace metals profile may be a reflection of socio-economic development in the vicinity of Sundarban which further attributes trace metals abundance to the anthropogenic inputs. A total of eleven surficial sediment samples were collected along a vertical transect along the freshwater–saline water gradient. The sediment samples were digested using EPA 3051 method and were analyzed on ICP-MS. Geo-accumulation index suggests moderately polluted sediment quality with respect to Ni and As and background concentrations for Al, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, Pb, Co, As, and Cd. Contamination factor analysis suggested low contamination by Zn, Cr, Co, and Cd, moderate by Fe, Mn, Cu, and Pb while Ni and As show considerable and high contamination, respectively. Enrichment factors for Ni, Pb, and As suggests high contamination from either biota or anthropogenic inputs besides natural enrichment. As per the three sediment quality guidelines, Fe, Mn, Cu, Ni, Co, and As would be more of a concern with respect to ecotoxicological risk in the Sundarban mangroves. The correlation between various physiochemical variables and trace metals suggested significant role of fine grained particles (clay) in trace metal distribution whereas owing to low organic carbon content in the region the organic complexation may not be playing significant role in trace metal distribution in the Sundarban mangroves.

Heavy metal pollution of sediments is a growing concern in most parts of the world, and numerous studies focussed on identifying contaminated sediments by using a range of digestion methods and pollution indices to estimate sediment contamination have been described in the literature. The current work provides a critical review of the more commonly used sediment digestion methods and identifies that weak acid digestion is more likely to provide guidance on elements that are likely to be bioavailable than other traditional methods of digestion. This work also reviews common pollution indices and identifies the Nemerow Pollution Index as the most appropriate method for establishing overall sediment quality. Consequently, a modified Pollution Index that can lead to a more reliable understanding of whole sediment quality is proposed. This modified pollution index is then tested against a number of existing studies and demonstrated to give a reliable and rapid estimate of sediment contamination and quality.

The aim of the study is to address the issues and associated health risks due to consumption of high-fluoride water supplied for drinking in a rural part of Shanmuganadhi River basin, Tamil Nadu, India. In this study, 61 groundwater samples were gathered from various tube and open wells and analysed for fluoride and other physicochemical parameters. The abundance of cations is Na+ > Ca2+ > Mg2+ > K+, and that of anions is HCO3− > SO42− > Cl− > F−. The fluoride concentration in drinking groundwater varied from 0.10 to 3.3 mg/l. According to the WHO standards, about 26% of the samples were unfit for drinking requirements (16 out of 61 samples) Water quality index (WQI) method was adopted to categorize the water into different classes to understand its suitability for drinking requirements. WQI signified that nearly 52% of the samples denoted poor, very poor and not suitable categories, whereas 48% of samples denoted good and excellent categories for consumption. Health risks associated with high-fluoride drinking water were assessed for various age groups of inhabitants such as children, teens and adults. The hazard quotient estimated based on the oral intake ranged from 0.00E+00 to 5.50E+00, from 0.00E+00 to 4.22E+00 and from 0.00E+00 to 3.45E+00 for children, teens and adults, respectively. It suggested that the health risks are associated with 75%, 59% and 43% of samples, respectively, among children, teens and adults. Therefore, children are more inclined towards risk than teens and adults in this region based on the intake of fluoride-rich drinking water. To improve the present scenario, groundwater should be either treated before drinking water supply or must be artificially recharged to lower the concentration of ions.

Groundwater quality investigations were carried out in one of the urban parts of south India for fluoride and nitrate contaminations, with special focus on human health risk assessment for the rapidly growing and increasingly industrialized Coimbatore City. Twenty-five groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for physico-chemical parameters (EC, pH, TDS, Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , Na + , K + , Cl − , SO 4 2− , HCO 3 − , PO 4 3− , NO 3 − , and F − ) and the piper diagram characterized 60% of them as Ca-Mg-Cl type. Analysis of fluoride (0.1 to 2.4 mg/l) shows that 32% of the groundwater samples contain F − over the permissible limit, affecting a region of 122.10 km 2 . Nitrate (0.1 to 148 mg/l) is over the permissible limit in 44% of the groundwater samples spread over an area of 429.43 km 2 . The total hazard indices (THI) of non-carcinogenic risk for children (0.21 to 4.83), women (0.14 to 3.35), and men (0.12 to 2.90) shows some of the THI values are above the permissible limit of the US Environmental Protection Agency. The THI-based non-carcinogenic risks are 60%, 52%, and 48% for children, women, and men. This investigation suggests higher health risk for children and also recommends that proper management plan should be adopted to improve the drinking water quality in this region in order to avoid major health issues in the near future.

Seventy-five surface water samples were collected from three agricultural regions of California and analyzed for the neonicotinoid insecticide imidacloprid. Samples were collected during California’s relatively dry-weather irrigation seasons in 2010 and 2011. Imidacloprid was detected in 67 samples (89%); concentrations exceeded the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s chronic invertebrate Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.05 μg/L in 14 samples (19%). Concentrations were also frequently greater than similar toxicity guidelines developed for use in Europe and Canada. The results indicate that imidacloprid commonly moves offsite and contaminates surface waters at concentrations that could harm aquatic organisms following use under irrigated agriculture conditions in California.

A national drinking water quality survey conducted in 2009 furnished data that were used to make an updated estimate of chronic arsenic exposure in Bangladesh. About 20 million and 45 million people were found to be exposed to concentrations above the national standard of 50 µg/L and the World Health Organization's guideline value of 10 µg/L, respectively. From the updated exposure data and all-cause mortality hazard ratios based on local epidemiological studies, it was estimated that arsenic exposures to concentrations > 50 µg/L and 10-50 µg/L account for an annual 24,000 and perhaps as many as 19,000 adult deaths in the country, respectively. Exposure varies widely in the 64 districts; among adults, arsenic-related deaths account for 0-15% of all deaths. An arsenic-related mortality rate of 1 in every 16 adult deaths could represent an economic burden of 13 billion United States dollars (US$) in lost productivity alone over the next 20 years. Arsenic mitigation should follow a two-tiered approach: (i) prioritizing provision of safe water to an estimated 5 million people exposed to > 200 µg/L arsenic, and (ii) building local arsenic testing capacity. The effectiveness of such an approach was demonstrated during the United Nations Children's Fund 2006-2011 country programme, which provided safe water to arsenic-contaminated areas at a cost of US$ 11 per capita. National scale-up of such an approach would cost a few hundred million US dollars but would improve the health and productivity of the population, especially in future generations.

Communities across the U.S. are discovering drinking water contaminated by perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and determining appropriate actions. There are currently no federal PFAS drinking water standards despite widespread drinking water contamination, ubiquitous population-level exposure, and toxicological and epidemiological evidence of adverse health effects. Absent federal PFAS standards, multiple U.S. states have developed their own health-based water guideline levels to guide decisions about contaminated site cleanup and drinking water surveillance and treatment. We examined perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) water guideline levels developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies to protect people drinking the water, and summarized how and why these levels differ. We referenced documents and tables released in June 2018 by the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) to identify states that have drinking water and groundwater guideline levels for PFOA and/or PFOS that differ from EPA’s health advisories (HAs). We also gathered assessment documents from state websites and contacted state environmental and health agencies to identify and confirm current guidelines. Seven states have developed their own water guideline levels for PFOA and/or PFOS ranging from 13 to 1000 ng/L, compared to EPA’s HA of 70 ng/L for both compounds individually or combined. We find that the development of PFAS guideline levels via exposure and hazard assessment decisions is influenced by multiple scientific, technical, and social factors, including managing scientific uncertainty, technical decisions and capacity, and social, political, and economic influences from involved stakeholders. Assessments by multiple states and academic scientists suggest that EPA’s HA is not sufficiently protective. The ability of states to develop their own guideline levels and standards provides diverse risk assessment approaches as models for other state and federal regulators, while a sufficiently protective, scientifically sound, and enforceable federal standard would provide more consistent protection.