EWG INVESTIGATION
Findings
About The Data
News Release
EWG Statement, 03/10/2008
Related News Clips
WHAT'S IN YOUR WATER?
Find Your Water Company
NATIONAL SUMMARY
Quality Varies Across the U.S.
CONTAMINANTS DATABASE
Find a Contaminant
Credits
Sign up to receive email updates from EWG
|
|
Status: For this chemical EPA has established a non-enforceable guideline
called a "secondary standard," regulating it for aesthetic or cosmetic
concerns (taste, odor, tooth discoloration, etc.) Copper is a contaminant that enters water by corrosion of household plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits. Potential health impacts associated with Copper include cardiovascular or blood toxicity, developmental toxicity, gastrointestinal or liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, reproductive toxicity, and respiratory toxicity. [read more] Sources of Copper:  | Sprawl and Urban Areas (road runoff, lawn pesticides, human waste) |  | Naturally Occurring (naturally present but increased for lands denuded by sprawl, agriculture, or industrial development) |
An Environmental Working Group analysis of Copper tests reported by 20,340 public water suppliers in 37 states shows that between 1998 and 2003, 77.9 million people in 12,210 communities drank water contaminated with Copper. In 1,402 of these communities, tap water was contaminated at levels above health-based thresholds. Exposure Summary 77,892,155 | People drinking water contaminated with Copper | 12,210 | Communities served water contaminated with Copper | 4,398,112 | People drinking water contaminated with Copper over health based limits | 1,402 | Communities served water with Copper above health based limits |
|
Table. Copper Exposure by State4.4 million Americans in 29 states were served tap water contaminated with Copper at levels above health-based limits between 1998 and 2003. | State | Water suppliers with Copper contamination | Water suppliers reporting Copper above health-based limits |
|---|
| Systems | Population | Systems | Population |
|---|
| Wisconsin | 1,038 | 3,764,611 | 400 | 1,104,399 | | Washington | 1,373 | 3,348,635 | 237 | 660,996 | | Minnesota | 5 | 497,149 | 4 | 494,187 | | Iowa | 826 | 2,275,687 | 171 | 383,610 | | Nebraska | 528 | 1,373,738 | 90 | 370,821 | | Ohio | 230 | 2,514,350 | 30 | 205,929 | | New Mexico | 136 | 927,719 | 10 | 182,202 | | New York | 231 | 442,173 | 65 | 116,088 | | Michigan | 749 | 2,552,386 | 63 | 108,861 | | Arizona | 434 | 4,502,424 | 23 | 108,524 | | New Jersey | 206 | 4,530,349 | 13 | 107,830 | | Illinois | 175 | 1,278,413 | 31 | 103,099 | | Kentucky | 340 | 4,716,030 | 11 | 102,479 | | Idaho | 41 | 315,673 | 24 | 65,725 | | Texas | 2,171 | 13,764,908 | 15 | 56,418 | | Tennessee | 113 | 1,710,986 | 2 | 42,124 | | North Dakota | 187 | 360,423 | 57 | 40,207 | | Maine | 333 | 550,093 | 36 | 25,789 | | Arkansas | 430 | 2,542,115 | 6 | 21,235 | | Virginia | 193 | 211,428 | 31 | 19,906 | | Pennsylvania | 64 | 296,567 | 13 | 15,711 | | Utah | 62 | 939,093 | 6 | 15,225 | | Missouri | 1,278 | 2,740,668 | 20 | 15,107 | | Oklahoma | 181 | 294,490 | 11 | 12,541 | | Nevada | 174 | 2,145,661 | 3 | 8,270 | | Colorado | 351 | 3,367,655 | 10 | 5,538 | | Montana | 17 | 105,145 | 5 | 3,304 | | New Hampshire | 26 | 193,740 | 8 | 1,068 | | California | 277 | 14,812,313 | 7 | 919 | | Florida | 1 | 416,303 | 0 | 0 | | Alabama | 18 | 156,045 | 0 | 0 | | Alaska | 15 | 141,317 | 0 | 0 | | Delaware | 3 | 100,123 | 0 | 0 | | South Carolina | 2 | 3,105 | 0 | 0 | | Wyoming | 2 | 640 | 0 | 0 | | Total | 12,210 | 77,892,155 | 1,402 | 4,398,112 |
|---|
Table. The most polluted communities4.4 million Americans in 1,402 communities were served tap water contaminated with Copper above health based limits between 1998 and 2003 Ranked by highest average Copper level | Rank | System
| Population Served
| Positive test results of total reported tests
| Average Level (Range) |
|---|
| 1 | Altona Correctional Facility Altona, NY | 880 | 1 of 1 | 9000 ppb (9000 to 9000 ppb) | | 2 | Millbrook Village Millbrook, NY | 2,100 | 2 of 2 | 7384.5 ppb (769 to 14000 ppb) | | 3 | White Lake Estates Tamworth, NH | 250 | 1 of 1 | 4890 ppb (4890 to 4890 ppb) | | 4 | Fort Campbell Water System Ft Campbell, KY | 40,000 | 1 of 2 | 3450 ppb (0 to 6900 ppb) | | 5 | Fort Mc Coy South Post Fort Mccoy, WI | 140 | 3 of 3 | 2417 ppb (34 to 7000 ppb) | | 6 | Cullom Cullom, IL | 570 | 1 of 1 | 2400 ppb (2400 to 2400 ppb) | | 7 | Stockport Water Department #2 (consolida Hudson, NY | 3,100 | 2 of 2 | 2395 ppb (1560 to 3230 ppb) | | 8 | City of Wolf Point Water Wolf Point, MT | 2,880 | 1 of 1 | 2330 ppb (2330 to 2330 ppb) | | 9 | Cold Spring Water Company Lamoine, ME | 138 | 8 of 8 | 2246.81 ppb (0.5 to 5900 ppb) | | 10 | Basin County Water and Sewer District Basin, MT | 200 | 1 of 1 | 1960 ppb (1960 to 1960 ppb) |
Next --> Health based limits for Copper
| Health Limit | Limit Value | Limit Description |
|---|
| Maximum Contaminant Limit Goal (MCLG) | 1300 ppb | A non-enforceable health goal that is set at a level at which no known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of persons occurs and which allows an adequate margin of safety. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. | | California Public Health Goals | 170 ppb | Defined by the State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) as the level of contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. For acutely toxic substances, levels are set at which scientific evidence indicates that no known or anticipated adverse effects on health will occur, plus an adequate margin-of safety. PHGs for carcinogens or other substances which can cause chronic disease shall be based solely on health effects without regard to cost impacts and shall be set at levels which OEHHA has determined do not pose any significant risk to health. | | EPA Human Health Water Quality Criteria | 1300 ppb | Water quality criteria set by the US EPA provide guidance for states and tribes authorized to establish water quality standards under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to protect human health. These are non-enforceable standards based upon exposure by both drinking water and the contribution of water contamination to other consumed foods. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. | | National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations | 1000 ppb | A National Secondary Drinking Water Regulation is a non-enforceable guideline regarding contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color). Some states choose to adopt them as enforceable standards. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
| Testing Summary for Copper Water suppliers report an average of 0.6 Copper tests per year. 19,411 water suppliers failed to report
any Copper tests at all. | Are tests routinely required for Copper by federal law? | Yes | | Water suppliers reporting tests for Copper (1998-2003): | 20,340 of 39,751 | | Average testing rate for water supplier reporting tests (1998-2003): | 0.6 per year |
|
Copper Violations Table. < 0.1 percent of all water suppliers violated safe drinking water standards for Copper between 1998 and 2003 | Violation Type | Violations | Systems |
|---|
| Any Violation (1998-2003) | 4 | 4 | | (< 0.1% of all suppliers) | | Testing violations (1998-2003) | 4 | 4 | | (< 0.1% of all suppliers) |
|