Environment International (Jul 2021)

Public and private tapwater: Comparative analysis of contaminant exposure and potential risk, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA

  • Paul M. Bradley,
  • Denis R. LeBlanc,
  • Kristin M. Romanok,
  • Kelly L. Smalling,
  • Michael J. Focazio,
  • Mary C. Cardon,
  • Jimmy M. Clark,
  • Justin M. Conley,
  • Nicola Evans,
  • Carrie E. Givens,
  • James L. Gray,
  • L. Earl Gray,
  • Phillip C. Hartig,
  • Christopher P. Higgins,
  • Michelle L. Hladik,
  • Luke R. Iwanowicz,
  • Keith A. Loftin,
  • R. Blaine McCleskey,
  • Carrie A. McDonough,
  • Elizabeth K. Medlock-Kakaley,
  • Christopher P. Weis,
  • Vickie S. Wilson

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 152
p. 106487

Abstract

Read online

Background: Humans are primary drivers of environmental contamination worldwide, including in drinking-water resources. In the United States (US), federal and state agencies regulate and monitor public-supply drinking water while private-supply monitoring is rare; the current lack of directly comparable information on contaminant-mixture exposures and risks between private- and public-supplies undermines tapwater (TW) consumer decision-making. Methods: We compared private- and public-supply residential point-of-use TW at Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where both supplies share the same groundwater source. TW from 10 private- and 10 public-supply homes was analyzed for 487 organic, 38 inorganic, 8 microbial indicators, and 3 in vitro bioactivities. Concentrations were compared to existing protective health-based benchmarks, and aggregated Hazard Indices (HI) of regulated and unregulated TW contaminants were calculated along with ratios of in vitro exposure-activity cutoffs. Results: Seventy organic and 28 inorganic constituents were detected in TW. Median detections were comparable, but median cumulative concentrations were substantially higher in public supply due to 6 chlorine–disinfected samples characterized by disinfection byproducts and corresponding lower heterotrophic plate counts. Public-supply applicable maximum contaminant (nitrate) and treatment action (lead and copper) levels were exceeded in private-supply TW samples only. Exceedances of health-based HI screening levels of concern were common to both TW supplies. Discussion: These Cape Cod results indicate comparable cumulative human-health concerns from contaminant exposures in private- and public-supply TW in a shared source-water setting. Importantly, although this study’s analytical coverage exceeds that currently feasible for water purveyors or homeowners, it nevertheless is a substantial underestimation of the full breadth of contaminant mixtures documented in the environment and potentially present in drinking water. Conclusion: Regardless of the supply, increased public engagement in source-water protection and drinking-water treatment, including consumer point-of-use treatment, is warranted to reduce risks associated with long-term TW contaminant exposures, especially in vulnerable populations.

Keywords