The Wellhead Protection Program in the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act requires states to protect underground sources of drinking water from contaminants that may adversely affect human health. Over half of the U.S. population relies on groundwater for drinking water [1] However, residential, municipal, commercial, industrial, and agricultural activities can all contaminate groundwater. [2] : C-2 In the event of contamination, a community's drinking water supply can develop poor quality or be lost altogether. Groundwater contamination occurs from products such as oil, chemicals, gasoline, or other toxic substances to infiltrate groundwater. These products can travel through soil and seep into the groundwater; this process can occur through landfills, septic tanks, mining sites, fertilization, etc. [1] Groundwater contamination might not be detected for a long period of time and health problems can occur from drinking contaminated water. Cleanup of a contaminated underground source of drinking water may be impossible or so difficult it costs thousands or millions of dollars. [2] : C-7 The U.S. Congress requiring Wellhead Protection Programs by 42 U.S.C. § 300h–7 in the Safe Drinking Water Act applied the concept that it is better to prevent groundwater contamination than try to remediate it. [3] : 4 U.S. Congress by 42 U.S.C. § 300h–7 requires identification of the areas that need implementation of control measures in order to protect public water supply wells from contamination as "wellhead protection areas". Communities can use the police power established by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to enforce zoning and subdivision regulations to protect drinking water sources. [3] : 8 Thereby communities can direct development away from areas that would pose a threat to drinking water sources. [3] : 7
Public groundwater supply aquifers that can support a public water system are vital natural resources. [4] According to an estimate by the U.S. Geological Survey 37% of public water comes from groundwater. [5] The U.S. Geological Survey aquifer sampling for the National Water-Quality Assessment Program frequently found man-made contaminants at concentrations greater than human-health standards in public groundwater supply aquifers. The frequency of man-made contaminants in public water supply aquifers proves the vulnerability of these aquifers to inappropriate land uses. This vulnerability indicates the importance of wellhead protection. [6] : 6–7 Wellhead protection is essential to have safe drinking water because the concentrations of many man-made carbon-containing contaminants are not decreased by commonly used drinking water treatment processes. [6] : 8 Only by controlling the land uses of their public water source can a community control the quality of the water they drink. [6] : 7–8 The U.S. Geological Survey aquifer sampling also frequently detected contaminants for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not yet established human health standards. [6] : 8–9 Several Wikipedia articles involve the vulnerability of groundwater aquifers to contamination as follows:
U.S. Congress determined the nation's community water supplies must be protected. The United States Code 42 U.S.C. § 300h–7 requires States protect their underground sources of drinking water (USDWs) by Wellhead Protection Programs. These Wellhead Protection Programs must specify the duties of State agencies, local governmental entities, and public water supply systems to develop and implement wellhead protections. Identification of the area that needs wellhead protection must be based on the hydrologic and geologic information on groundwater flow, recharge, and discharge. A community's Wellhead Protection Program must identify all man-made sources of contaminants in the wellhead protection area that may cause adverse health effects. There must be educational and control measures to protect the water supply from these identified sources of contaminants. There must also be a contingency plan for alternate drinking water supplies in the event of contamination. A community's Wellhead Protection Program must add in any new water well that serves a public water supply system. A demonstration program which protects designated aquifers is required. Additionally, EPA must impose monitoring requirements on water systems for contaminants which have not yet been regulated [7]
The most beneficial aspects of introducing a Wellhead Protection Plan are the reliable drinking water sources for the future, and cost-savings. Developing a protection plan effectively prevents groundwater contamination, which saves the money that would potentially be spent on clean-up processes; clean-up methods can be 30-40 times more costly than prevention methods. [7] Additionally, the plan's main goal is to secure safe drinking water for everyone. It is crucial to effectively manage wells now to preserve drinking water for the future.
In 42 U.S.C. § 300h–7 U.S. Congress says each State shall "protect wellhead areas within their jurisdiction from contaminants which may have any adverse effect on the health of persons." The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says many microorganisms and chemicals have the potential to contaminate ground water. Bacteria and viruses can produce illnesses such as hepatitis, cholera, or giardiasis. High concentrations of nitrates can produce Methemoglobinemia or “blue baby syndrome”. Gasoline contamination promotes the formation of cancer. Lead contamination causes learning disabilities in children as well as nerve, kidney, liver, and pregnancy problems. The EPA goes on to say, "Hundreds of other chemicals, however, are not yet regulated, and many of their health effects are unknown or not well understood. Preventing contaminants from reaching the ground water is the best way to reduce the health risks associated with poor drinking water quality." [2] : C-8 Public health agencies report waterborne disease outbreaks to the Center of Disease Control. During the period from 1971 to 2006, a majority (52.7%) of the 801 reported deficiencies involved the use of contaminated groundwater, [8]
Safe drinking water in several, typically rural, areas of the United States is a not so recent crisis within the Country. Most urbanized counties have access to clean, safe drinking water, however this is not the case in every county, especially states with a more rural landscape. [9] There are over 150,000 public water systems in the United States, and a majority of the population, about 94%, relies on these systems for a portion of the water they use on a daily basis. The quality of drinking water is heavily correlated with the characteristics in source-water, which is extremely contaminated by human activity and pollution. The U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversight on these public water systems, and they are required to regulate the amount of contaminants in drinking water and source water. The Toxic Substances Control Act acknowledges over 80,000 unregulated chemicals that are used within the United States, posing an enormous threat to safe drinking water, and may be associated with health risks. [10] These unregulated chemicals pose challenges for the EPA's approach of maintaining the safety of water within the public water systems.
The State of California enacted the Safe and Affordable Drinking Water Fund in 2019 to target the drinking water systems that exposed over one million residents, primarily in the lower socioeconomic and agricultural areas of the Central Valley, to unsafe water. [10] The goal of this act was to reduce the contaminants in drinking water and source water in community water sources. The Safe and Affordable Drinking Water Fund arises from the long-term issues of exposure to harmful contaminants, most experienced by those inhabiting the lower part of the Central Valley known as the San Joaquin Valley. Communities in the Valley with fewer economic resources are not only exposed to higher levels of arsenic from the environment, they are also being supplied with drinking water systems that have maximum contamination level violations. [11] A majority of where violations to the Safe Drinking Water Act primarily occur in water systems that serve smaller areas. Lower socioeconomic status individuals and minority groups are associated with an increase in and repeated drinking water violations. [10]
As previously referenced, a majority of individuals who lack safe drinking water represent marginalized communities. There is a sociodemographic pattern of racial, economic, and geographic disparities which represent a safe water supply. The safe and equal access to water is a fundamental right for all individuals, however, there is an increasingly large number of individuals and communities in the United States who continue to be stripped of this right and face a water crisis. [12] Historically, there has been and continues to be a disproportionate access to safe drinking water for underprivileged, underpopulated, and underrepresented communities. For example, redlining began in the 1930s, which allowed Home Owner Loan Corporations to divide neighborhoods based on housing stock. People of color or lower income households were deemed "high risk," resulting in denial from mortgage loans and causing house foreclosures. Due to the encouragement of redlining, these impacted communities were forced to live in areas with less advancements for water and wastewater infrastructures. [13] With urbanization accelerating at a quick rate, it is crucial to take into consideration the access to safe water that still must be provided for all communities. [12]
Lower-income areas and communities of color are impacted unequally by the water crisis in the United States. This consequently exposes these social groups to higher levels of pollutants in both the air and water. More exposed individuals are susceptible to potential health problems. A majority of those exposed are typically in poverty, resulting in a financial burden to seek necessary resources for proper water disposal systems, sewage treatment, and safe drinking water. [13] Additionally, water in lower income communities has tested for higher levels of nitrate and arsenic, which has come from soil and water runoff. [13]
Contaminated drinking water poses a large threat to communities' public health, and several vulnerability factors, which include community water sources and demographic characteristics, are heavily associated with violations to the Safe Drinking Water Act and its amendments outlined in the Wellhead Protection Program. [14] Identifying the violations between "hot spots", spatial clusters of health based violations, and vulnerability factors allows for public policies to be enforced and target the reasons the community water sources get contaminated. Rural areas of the country are heavily impacted by violations to community water sources, and coliform violations are most prevalent in the West and Midwest regions of the country. [15] In addition, low income, minority communities face higher rates of violations in their community water sources including coliform. [14] Similarly, areas which have urbanized at an accelerated rate and are densely populated are more vulnerable to drinking water hazards. [13] Throughout the nation, over 21 million people that rely on their community's water sources have experienced safe drinking water violations on health based quality standards. [15] As of 2022, 4.1 million Americans still did not have access to safe drinking water and basic sewage treatment. The lack of treatment resulted in roughly 900 billion gallons annually of untreated sewage to infiltrate the U.S. water ways. [13]
Communities evaluate the properties of the aquifer to determine the sensitive areas that need to be protected by local land use zoning. When land use zoning is based on competent scientific evidence to support wellhead protection, land use zoning has been upheld by courts. [16] : 231 Communities direct the location of potential sources of contamination to areas outside of sensitive wellhead protection areas to ensure their underground source of drinking water (USDW) remains uncontaminated. [3] : 7 For example, a community successfully blocked a proposed $12 million travel plaza/welcome center from endangering their water supply by local land use zoning that prohibits petroleum underground storage tanks (USTs) in a wellhead protection area. [17] [18] [19]
Federal, State, and local agencies with regulatory and funding power can also limit development to areas outside sensitive wellhead protection areas. By project approvals and by funding authorizations these agencies can control the location of roads, water lines, and wastewater lines that are essential for intensive development. [20]
To protect underground sources of drinking water (USDWs), the U.S. Congress requires Federal agencies by 42 U.S.C. § 300j–6 to comply with Wellhead Protection Programs and Underground Injection Control (UIC) Programs. Actions such as forestry management plans, pipelines, highways, etc. with federal control that may result in contamination of water supplies in wellhead protection areas must comply with Wellhead Protection Programs and Underground Injection Control Programs.
The EPA says most local governments can protect underground sources of drinking water by establishing and enforcing zoning regulations. [3] : 8 For example, a state court supported a community's denial of a variance from their land use ordinances prohibiting installation of underground petroleum storage tanks in a wellhead protection area. The court found the installation of underground petroleum storage tanks might cause substantial damage to the public good and would be contrary to the community's zoning code. [21]
Several Federal statutes also relate to groundwater protection such as the Safe Drinking Water Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act; the Clean Water Act; and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. [3] : 9–10 For example, after a U.S. Geological Survey dye trace study identified the potential contamination risks in the Biscayne Aquifer were far greater than previously considered, [22] a U.S. District Court applied the Clean Water Act (CWA) to deny permits for mining in order to protect public and private drinking water wells: [23]
. . . the CWA specifically provides that unacceptable adverse effects on municipal water supplies are sufficient grounds for denial of a 404(b) permit. 33 U.S.C. § 1344(c). The implementing regulations of the CWA also direct that the Corps consider water quality and water supply issues (as part of the "Public Interest Review"). 33 C.F.R. § 320.4(a)(1)[141]. [23] : 1224
Even if the water treatment plants are able to treat the raw water for the anticipated amounts of benzene, it is nevertheless of grave concern that benzene will now regularly affect a previously pristine Aquifer.[58] The ability to cure a problem does not justify its creation.
[58] . . . While the Corps previously, and perhaps erroneously, concluded that those projects "would be of no risk to the drinking water resource," it is unclear what the level of risks are to the neighboring residential communities which may use private wells to tap into the Aquifer for drinking water or other purposes. [23] : 1202
. . . this Court has "taken a long while to come to a short conclusion:" these permits should not have issued.[322] And,, the activities pursuant to these permits should not continue. These activities should not have been permitted in the first instance if the Corps had been conducting the level of analysis mandated by the CWA, ESA, NEPA, and APA, and the relevant regulatory guidance. [23] : 1285
Contamination of an underground source of drinking water (USDW) may be a legal injury suffered by the public subject to court action. [16] : 206–208 Even if the source of contamination had a permit for its operation that may not avoid groundwater contamination liability. [16] : 213 The liability and high costs of groundwater cleanup can cause businesses to abandon problem sites leaving significant long-term financial losses to the community. [24] Businesses want to locate in communities that protect their water supplies in order to avoid paying taxes to clean up someone else's multimillion-dollar contamination. [25]
In 1987 the New Jersey Superior Court says that the public trust doctrine applies to the protection of drinking water sources:
While the original purpose of the public trust doctrine was to preserve the use of the public natural water for navigation, commerce and fishing, Arnold v. Munday, 6 N.J.L. 1, 69-78 (Sup.Ct. 1821), it is clear that since water is essential for human life, the public trust doctrine applies with equal impact upon the control of our drinking water reserves. The Supreme Court has determined that "It is appropriate to consider the unique nature of water." K.S.B. Tech. Sales v. No. Jersey Dist. Water Supply, 75 N.J. 272 (1977). Ultimate ownership rests in the people and this precious natural resource is held by the state in trust for the public benefit. Borough of Neptune City v. Borough of Avon-by-the-Sea, 61 N.J. 296 (1972). [26]
In 2008 the Vermont legislature revised statute "Title 10, Chapter 048: Groundwater Protection" saying "the groundwater resources of the State are held in trust for the public" and "the groundwater resources of the State shall be managed to minimize the risks of groundwater quality deterioration by regulating human activities that present risks to the use of groundwater". [27] In applying this statute the Vermont Superior Court said:
By its nature, the public trust imposes on the state a "special obligation to maintain the trust for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations." [28]
U.S. Congress by the National Environmental Policy Act 42 U.S.C. § 4331(a) recognizes it is not acceptable to abuse renewable natural resources that would prevent their use by future generations. The role of the Federal government in water resources is shifting from resource development to environmental protection and water conservation. [16] : 553
The Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program prohibits and regulates underground injections or discharge that could endanger Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDWs). These injections are categorized as either hazardous or non-hazardous liquid and gas. For shallow injection wells, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found that storm waters directed into Class V injection wells contain many contaminants in concentrations above the drinking water standards or health advisory limits. [29]
By 42 U.S.C. § 300i Congress gives the Environmental Protection Agency's Administrator emergency power to “take such actions as he may deem necessary in order to protect the health of” consumers of public water. This emergency power applies to preventing contamination of all Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDWs). This includes USDWs future generations may need for public water and private wells. [30]
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-523, 42 U.S.C. 300 et. seq), an aquifer can be designated as a Sole Source Aquifer if the aquifer supplies at least 50% of a community's drinking water and there is no alternative drinking water source. With this designation there can be no federal financial assistance for any project which the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator determines may contaminate the aquifer so as to create a significant hazard to public health. [31]
States identify all the potential contaminate sources that might affect their surface and underground public water supplies for the Source Water Quality Assessment Program of 42 U.S.C.§ 300j–13.
Drinking water or potable water is water that is safe for ingestion, either when drunk directly in liquid form or consumed indirectly through food preparation. It is often supplied through taps, in that case, it is also called tap water. Typically in developed countries, tap water meets drinking water quality standards, even though only a small proportion is actually consumed or used in food preparation. Other typical uses for tap water include washing, toilets, and irrigation. Greywater may also be used for toilets or irrigation. Its use for irrigation however may be associated with risks.
Water quality refers to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water based on the standards of its usage. It is most frequently used by reference to a set of standards against which compliance, generally achieved through treatment of the water, can be assessed. The most common standards used to monitor and assess water quality convey the health of ecosystems, safety of human contact, extent of water pollution and condition of drinking water. Water quality has a significant impact on water supply and oftentimes determines supply options.
The Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility is a military fuel storage facility in Hawaii. Operated by the United States Navy, Red Hill supports U.S. military operations in the Pacific.
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.
Arsenic contamination of groundwater is a form of groundwater pollution which is often due to naturally occurring high concentrations of arsenic in deeper levels of groundwater. It is a high-profile problem due to the use of deep tube wells for water supply in the Ganges Delta, causing serious arsenic poisoning to large numbers of people. A 2007 study found that over 137 million people in more than 70 countries are probably affected by arsenic poisoning of drinking water. The problem became a serious health concern after mass poisoning of water in Bangladesh. Arsenic contamination of ground water is found in many countries throughout the world, including the US.
Water supply and sanitation in the United States involves a number of issues including water scarcity, pollution, a backlog of investment, concerns about the affordability of water for the poorest, and a rapidly retiring workforce. Increased variability and intensity of rainfall as a result of climate change is expected to produce both more severe droughts and flooding, with potentially serious consequences for water supply and for pollution from combined sewer overflows. Droughts are likely to particularly affect the 66 percent of Americans whose communities depend on surface water. As for drinking water quality, there are concerns about disinfection by-products, lead, perchlorates, PFAS and pharmaceutical substances, but generally drinking water quality in the U.S. is good.
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.
Water testing is a broad description for various procedures used to analyze water quality. Millions of water quality tests are carried out daily to fulfill regulatory requirements and to maintain safety.
An injection well is a device that places fluid deep underground into porous rock formations, such as sandstone or limestone, or into or below the shallow soil layer. The fluid may be water, wastewater, brine, or water mixed with industrial chemical waste.
Drinking water quality in the United States is generally safe. In 2016, over 90 percent of the nation's community water systems were in compliance with all published U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards. 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. The Safe Drinking Water Act requires the US EPA to set standards for drinking water quality in public water systems. Enforcement of the standards is mostly carried out by state health agencies. States may set standards that are more stringent than the federal standards.
Public water system is a regulatory term used in the United States and Canada, referring to certain utilities and organizations providing drinking water.
Source Water Protection is a planning process conducted by local water utilities, as well as regional or national government agencies, to protect drinking water sources from overuse and contamination. The process includes identification of water sources, assessment of known and potential threats of contamination, notification of the public, and steps to eliminate the contamination. The process is applicable to lakes, rivers and groundwater (aquifers).
A wellhead protection area is a surface and subsurface land area regulated to prevent contamination of a well or well-field supplying a public water system. This program, established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, is implemented through state governments.
Water contamination in Crestwood, Illinois, a village in Cook County, was discovered in April 2009, Tricia Krause and she reached out to a newspaper, which reported that the city had been using a well which was contaminated with toxic chemicals as the village's drinking water for 40 years.
Water pollution in the United States is a growing problem that became critical in the 19th century with the development of mechanized agriculture, mining, and industry, although laws and regulations introduced in the late 20th century have improved water quality in many water bodies. Extensive industrialization and rapid urban growth exacerbated water pollution as a lack of regulation allowed for discharges of sewage, toxic chemicals, nutrients and other pollutants into surface water.
Groundwater pollution occurs when pollutants are released to the ground and make their way into groundwater. This type of water pollution can also occur naturally due to the presence of a minor and unwanted constituent, contaminant, or impurity in the groundwater, in which case it is more likely referred to as contamination rather than pollution. Groundwater pollution can occur from on-site sanitation systems, landfill leachate, effluent from wastewater treatment plants, leaking sewers, petrol filling stations, hydraulic fracturing (fracking) or from over application of fertilizers in agriculture. Pollution can also occur from naturally occurring contaminants, such as arsenic or fluoride. Using polluted groundwater causes hazards to public health through poisoning or the spread of disease.
Water in Arkansas is an important issue encompassing the conservation, protection, management, distribution and use of the water resource in the state. Arkansas contains a mixture of groundwater and surface water, with a variety of state and federal agencies responsible for the regulation of the water resource. In accordance with agency rules, state, and federal law, the state's water treatment facilities utilize engineering, chemistry, science and technology to treat raw water from the environment to potable water standards and distribute it through water mains to homes, farms, business and industrial customers. Following use, wastewater is collected in collection and conveyance systems, decentralized sewer systems or septic tanks and treated in accordance with regulations at publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) before being discharged to the environment.
The Orange Valley Regional Groundwater Superfund site is a group of wells in Orange and West Orange, two municipalities in Essex County, New Jersey, United States. The groundwater in the public wells are contaminated with the hazardous chemicals of Trichloroethylene (TCE), Dichloroethene (DCE), Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethene), 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), and 1,2-Dichloroethene (1,2-DCE). These chemicals pose a huge risk to the towns nearby population, as the wells are a source of public drinking water. In March 2012, the site was added to the National Priorities List (NPL) of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund site list.
The Chernobyl disaster remains the major and most detrimental nuclear catastrophe which completely altered the radioactive background of the Northern Hemisphere. It happened in April 1986 on the territory of the former Soviet Union. The catastrophe led to the increase of radiation in nearly one million times in some parts of Europe and North America compared to the pre-disaster state. Air, water, soils, vegetation and animals were contaminated to a varying degree. Apart from Ukraine and Belarus as the worst hit areas, adversely affected countries included Russia, Austria, Finland and Sweden. The full impact on the aquatic systems, including primarily adjacent valleys of Pripyat river and Dnieper river, are still unexplored.
The most cost-effective approach is to prevent contamination before it occurs, rather than attempting to remedy existing contamination.