Estimating the High-Arsenic Domestic-Well Population in the Conterminous United States

Abstract

For more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprodTo order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. ForewordThe U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is committed to providing the Nation with reliable scientific information that helps to enhance and protect the overall quality of life and that facilitates effective management of water, biological, energy, and mineral resources (http://www.usgs.gov). Information on the Nation's water resources is critical to ensuring long-term availability of water that is safe for drinking and recreation and is suitable for industry, irrigation, and fish and wildlife. Population growth and increasing demands for water make the availability of that water, now measured in terms of quantity and quality, even more essential to the long-term sustainability of our communities and ecosystems.The USGS implemented the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program in 1991 to support national, regional, state, and local information needs and decisions related to water-quality management and policy (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa). The NAWQA Program is designed to answer: What is the quality of our Nation's streams and ground water? How are conditions changing over time? How do natural features and human activities affect the quality of streams and ground water, and where are those effects most pronounced? By combining information on water chemistry, physical characteristics, stream habitat, and aquatic life, the NAWQA Program aims to provide science-based insights for current and emerging water issues and priorities. From 1991 to 2001, the NAWQA Program completed interdisciplinary assessments and established a baseline understanding of water-quality conditions in 51 of the Nation's river basins and aquifers, referred to as Study Units (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/ studyu.html).National and regional assessments are ongoing in the second decade (2001-2012) of the NAWQA Program as 42 of the 51 Study Units are reassessed. These assessments extend the findings in the Study Units by determining status and trends at sites that have been consistently monitored for more than a decade, and filling critical gaps in characterizing the quality of surface water and ground water. For example, increased emphasis has been placed on assessing the quality of source water and finished water associated with many of the Nation's largest community water systems. During the second decade, NAWQA is addressing five nation...

Predicting geogenic Arsenic in Drinking Water Wells in Glacial Aquifers, North‐Central USA: Accounting for Depth‐Dependent Features

“…More than 20% of public and private well‐water samples in the United States contain at least one anthropogenic or natural contaminant at concentrations exceeding a human‐health benchmark; As was among the contaminants most likely to exceed human health benchmarks (DeSimone et al, ; Toccalino et al, ; Warner & Ayotte, ). More than 2 million U.S. private well water users are estimated to be exposed to elevated As (Ayotte et al, ).…”

“…Approximately 11% of all tested drinking water wells in Minnesota have As concentrations above 10 μg/L (range: < 2 to 1,550 μg/L; median: < 2 μg/L; 95th percentile: 17.8 μg/L), with some counties in western MN having more than 35% of samples from tested wells above 10 μg/L (Minnesota Department of Health, ). An estimated 80,000 (Ayotte et al, ) to 130,000 (Minnesota Department of Health, , ) domestic water well users in Minnesota are exposed to As above 10 μg/L in drinking water.…”

“…The few U.S. studies that have modeled and mapped predicted As in groundwater are national assessments that do not specifically differentiate aquifers (Amini et al, ; Ayotte et al, ), or they focus on regions where drinking water is obtained from bedrock (Ayotte et al, ; Gross & Low, ; Tesoriero et al, ), delta deposits (Yang et al, ), or basin fill aquifers (Ayotte et al, ). Predictive models and maps of drinking water contaminants in glacial settings in the United States have focused on shallow sand and gravel aquifers that are susceptible to anthropogenic contamination (e.g., nitrate and pesticides) migrating downward from the ground surface (Nolan & Hitt, ; Setterholm, ).…”

Arsenic Concentrations in Ground and Surface Waters across Arizona Including Native Lands

“…The arsenic water quality information represented in the USEPA and National Water Quality Monitoring Council databases demonstrated water resources that exceeded the USEPA MCL of 10 ppb were widely distributed across the state, with most exceedances located in the central and southern regions (Figures 3–6). The frequency of contaminated wells in Arizona at 20.7% exceeded the national average of 12%; however, several states including Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, and Nevada have a high percentage of exceedances similar to the levels found in Arizona (Uhlman et al 2009; Ayotte et al 2011, 2017). The USGS points to the geologic substrate across Arizona as the explanation for an elevated background concentration of arsenic in water resources, which explains the statewide contamination (Ryker 2001).…”

“…A rsenic contamination represents a growing public health concern in numerous countries across the globe (Mukherjee et al 2006; Uddin and Huda 2011; Alarcón‐Herrera et al 2013; Huang et al 2015; Ayotte et al 2017; Hsu et al 2017; Malloch et al 2017; Saint‐Jacques et al 2018; Zeng et al 2018). It has been responsible for some of the most devastating natural mass poisoning incidents in recent times, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) (Flanagan et al 2012), and represents a looming threat as concerns about water security and water shortages increase (IPCC 2013, 2014).…”