Cancer-Linked Contaminants Found In Suffolk Tap Water: Report

SUFFOLK, NY — Most Americans don’t think twice about drinking a glass of water. A report released Wednesday, though, found more than 270 harmful contaminants in local drinking water across the nation, including in Suffolk County. The substances are linked to cancer, damage to the brain and nervous system, hormonal disruption, problems in pregnancy and other serious health conditions.

The nonprofit Environmental Working Group, collaborating with outside scientists, aggregated and analyzed data from almost 50,000 local water utilities in all 50 states.

The organization found a troubling discrepancy between the current legal limits for contaminants and the most recent authoritative studies of what is safe to consume.

"Legal does not necessarily equal safe," Sydney Evans, a science analyst at the environmental group, told Patch.

"A lot of these legal limits are outdated and not necessarily the safe level, and the EWG really wants to fill that gap," Evans said. "The federal government has not been able to, or is not willing to, set those new regulations to protect public health. We’re trying to fill the gap to let people know, based on the latest science, what the safe levels of contaminants in water are."

In Suffolk County, the group found six contaminants exceeding its health guidelines, and 40 total contaminants, across the water supply between 2012 and 2017.

The Suffolk County Water Authority serves 1,100,000, according to the environmental group.

The following contaminants were detected above the environmental group’s own recommended health guidelines in Suffolk County:

1. Chromium (hexavalent)

• Potential effect: Cancer
• 21x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 0.414 parts per billion (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 0.02 ppb (EWG Health Guideline)
• No Legal Limit

2. Nitrate

• Potential effect: Cancer
• 18x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 2.54 parts per million (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 0.14 ppm (EWG Health Guideline)
• Legal limit: 10 ppm

3. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)

• Potential effect: None listed
• 2.5x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 2.51 parts per trillion (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 1 ppt (EWG Health Guideline)
• No Legal Limit

4. Radium, combined (-226 & -228)

• Potential effect: Cancer
• 6.3x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 0.32 picocuries per liter (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 0.05 pCi/L (EWG Health Guideline)
• Legal limit: 5 pCi/L

5. Radon

• Potential effect: Cancer
• 11x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 15.83 pCi/L (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 1.5 pCi/L (EWG Health Guideline)
• No Legal Limit

6. Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs)

• Potential effect: Cancer
• 34x the rate of suggested EWG guideline
• 5.13 ppb (Rate this contaminant appears in Suffolk County Water Authority)
• 0.15 ppb (EWG Health Guideline)
• Legal limit: 80 ppb

In the case of polyfluorinated substances, or PFAs, the environmental group estimated up to 110 million Americans could have the potentially cancer-causing, immune-system damaging contaminant in their drinking water. Yet the EPA requires drinking water utilities across the country to test for only six of 14 known substances in the category.

A variety of other contaminants often found in the water of millions of Americans can profoundly impact health. They include lead, which has been linked to brain damage in small children; arsenic, which can cause cancer; and copper, which can be harmful to infants.

The Suffolk County Water Authority challenged the EWG's findings and assured Suffolk County residents that the drinking water they're being supplied is safe, courtesy of the company's own strong testing.

"It’s important for the public to know that some of the testing averages cited in the report as being over the Environmental Working Group’s internally-developed health guidelines are actually so low that they cannot be reliably attained by New York State-approved methodology," Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey W. Szabo told Patch. "But that said, the Suffolk County Water Authority provides drinking water that meets all state and federal water quality regulations, and in fact our internal standards for drinking water quality are generally more rigorous than these regulations require.

"As a sign of our commitment to water quality, we currently test for approximately 250 more contaminants than required and test more frequently than required. And so it’s very easy for us to say that we’re extremely proud of the water we serve and would put it up against just about any other water supplied around the country."

Ty Fuller, chairman of the Long Island Water Conference, echoed the sentiments of Szabo.

"The conclusions drawn from the EWG's report are not only inaccurate, but purposely attempt to instill fear in Long Islanders for the sole purpose of profiting from the promotion and sale of unnecessary water filters," he told Patch in a statement. "We are suspect of the lack of science behind their recommendations as well as their questionable credentials to make them."

Fuller said the EPA, the New York State Department of Health and the Nassau and Suffolk County Department of Health, all rely on "comprehensive science and very conservative" risk assessments when evaluating and making standards for drinking water. He added that when the EPA hasn't moved quick enough, New York State has stepped in and set action levels for contaminants such as perchlorates, 1,4-dioxane and PFAS.

"The EWG's report focuses solely on the standards set at the federal level and neglects the several additional layers of oversight and guidelines set at the state and local level," Fuller said. "Due to this fact, residents should be cautious when drawing conclusions from this report."

Fuller said residents should know the importance of "whether you are talking about tap water or bottled water, there is no such thing as pure H2O." He says all water contains minerals and other naturally-occurring substances.

"It is the job of water providers to ensure that the drinking water being delivered to residents meets or surpasses the strict standards put in place by our expert health regulators," Fuller said. "Long Island's water providers take an immense amount of pride in the quality of the water delivered to its customers."

The EPA did not respond to numerous requests by Patch seeking comment on the findings of the study.

According to the environmental group, many of the 270-plus contaminants detected through water sampling are at levels deemed legal under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, yet are above levels that recent studies have found to pose possible health risks.

Visit the environmental group’s web page for Suffolk County to see the recommended ways to combat the specific substances in your drinking water and the risks that they pose.

The Environmental Working Group has a clear opinion on the federal government’s handling of water safety.

"The regulatory system meant to ensure the safety of America’s drinking water is broken. The inexcusable failure of the federal government’s responsibility to protect public health means there are no legal limits for more than 160 unregulated contaminants in U.S. tap water," Environmental Working Group researchers stated in its “State of American Drinking Water.”

A focal point of the organization’s concern is the Environmental Protection Agency’s refusal to add a single new contaminant to the toxic chemicals list covered by the Safe Drinking Water Act in almost 20 years.

Independent experts agree.

"With the science on what we call ‘emerging contaminants’ continuing to grow, it is clear that there are components of our tap water that can be improved," Kristin Strock, professor of Environmental Science at Dickinson College, told Patch.

Strock, who is not affiliated with the environmental group, also emphasized the challenges in the process of federally regulating harmful contaminants, suggesting the current system is somewhat backward.

"The road to regulating harmful contaminants is difficult, as our current construct for ensuring clean water is based on ‘proving’ that something is harmful before it is regulated as opposed to assuming contaminants could be harmful and ‘proving’ them safe before allowing them to go into industrial production and, as a result, our environment," she said. "The EPA has been working on identifying safe limits for a number of these emerging contaminants and continues to work on the problem."

The Environmental Working Group also noted that the every-day person is frustratingly helpless to the chemicals going into their water supply, and the subsequent costs associated with different water filtering techniques.

Olga Naidenko, vice president of science investigation at the group, further explained, "Industries and companies that released PFAS into the environment and drinking water sources — should be responsible to covering such costs, as it is unfair for homeowners to be saddled with costs for pollution they did not create."

The water group does offer information, though, on filtering technologies that you can use to dramatically reduce water contamination. Filtering technology will help. Carbon filters, for example, will reduce many, but not all, contaminants.

How to Check Contaminants In Your Water:

The environmental group’s public database catalogs contaminants in every water system in the country — the first such database of its kind. First, select the state where you live, and you’ll see state-level data. For more local information, enter your ZIP code.

After you enter your ZIP code, you’ll be directed to a page showing the name of your water utility system. Select “View Utility” to see which contaminants were identified in your area.

What You Can Do:

For those with concerns, the environmental group provides a guide to buying water filters. If you find your local water supply has a particularly high level of a dangerous chemical, you can search for a filter that best blocks the specific substance.

While water filters are important, the group also acknowledges they are more of a Band-Aid solution than an actual fix.

"We really want to iterate that’s a first-line, temporary measure," Evans told Patch. "It’s what you can do today to protect yourself, but really we want long-term permanent change, and that’s going to happen at the community level."

Subsequently, the environmental group has created a set of seven questions to ask your elected officials about tap water.

The organization strongly believes that everyone can help in the battle to improve tap water safety.

"We absolutely believe in the power of personal advocacy — for individuals to reach out to their local elected officials of all levels. The power of people can come into play," Naidenko said.

Where The Environmental Working Group Gets Its Funding:

The majority of the group’s funding comes from private charitable foundations. Here’s a partial list of the organization’s largest backers.

• 11th Hour Project
• Civil Society Institute
• Jacob and Hilda Blaustein Foundation
• William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
• The McKnight Foundation
• Popplestone Foundation
• Park Foundation
• The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
• Barbra Streisand Foundation
• Turner Foundation
• Wallace Genetic Foundation
• The Walton Foundation
• Winslow Foundation

Read more on the Environmental Working Group’s data sources and methodology.