When you fill a glass from your tap in Cleveland County, Arkansas, you might notice nothing unusual. Yet, knowing that water can carry tiny amounts of industrial chemicals like 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) prompts many households to look closer at their water quality and what public records say about it.
How does the groundwater source and well depth affect expectations about 1,2,3-TCP in Cleveland County water?
The local public water system, Hwy. 63 Water Association, serves over 7,000 people with groundwater sourced from wells in Cleveland County. Groundwater tends to have different chemical profiles than surface water, often with fewer fluctuating contaminants. The depth and construction of wells feeding the system influence what chemicals may be present. In this case, the groundwater sources have shown no detections of 1,2,3-TCP above the EPA reporting threshold during federal monitoring, aligning with expectations that deeper groundwater can shield water from certain surface contaminants. However, individual household wells might differ due to localized conditions, so knowing the source type helps set a baseline but doesn’t provide a definitive answer for every tap.
What do 'detected', 'median', and 'range' mean in the EPA’s sampling record for Cleveland County’s 1,2,3-TCP?
The EPA reports monitoring results by terms that are often misunderstood. "Detected" means the instrument measured some level of a substance above its reporting limit—in this case, 0.03 micrograms per liter (µg/L) for 1,2,3-TCP. Importantly, none of the ten samples collected by the Hwy. 63 Water Association from 2013 to 2015 showed detection above this limit. The "median" would be the middle value in a set of results if detections occurred, and "range" would provide the lowest and highest measurement found. Here, since no samples registered 1,2,3-TCP above the reporting level, the median and range for detectable levels aren’t applicable. This means that within this monitoring period, 1,2,3-TCP was either absent or below levels measurable by the EPA’s tests in the public water system.
How can a Cleveland County homeowner interpret the monitoring data based on sampling numbers and their significance?
The dataset behind these results includes 10 samples from the water system collected over roughly six months in 2013. While this offers a snapshot of system-wide conditions, the limited number and period of samples mean it may not reflect all seasonal or localized variations. Monitoring targets public water system entry points and does not measure water at individual homes. Therefore, a homeowner should understand this data as informative but not definitive for their household. To know their specific 1,2,3-TCP status, testing water directly from their tap is necessary.
How many wells and samples form the basis of these 1,2,3-TCP figures, and what should a household consider about sampling size?
The results come from the public water system's groundwater sources collectively, not from individual well samples. Ten samples may seem limited given the number of homes served, but federal rules require representative monitoring rather than exhaustive sampling. The small number of samples provides evidence about typical system conditions, yet it can’t exclude brief or localized changes undetectable in this schedule. Homeowners should think of these figures as broad indicators rather than precise measures of their tap water quality.
What distinguishes 1,2,3-TCP from more common water concerns households might confuse it with?
While chlorine and other disinfectant byproducts sometimes cause taste and odor complaints, 1,2,3-TCP is a synthetic chemical coming mainly from industrial sources and pesticides rather than typical treatment additives. It is not naturally occurring and has no taste, color, or smell at low levels, making it undetectable without lab analysis. This sets it apart from problems like hardness minerals or iron staining, which are visually obvious. Understanding this difference emphasizes the importance of targeted testing if 1,2,3-TCP is suspected.
What should a Cleveland County household not conclude from area data on 1,2,3-TCP?
Residents should not assume that the EPA’s non-detections mean their individual water is free of 1,2,3-TCP. Nor does it indicate that any detection would necessarily mean the water is unsafe or in violation of any rule. The absence of 1,2,3-TCP in public system monitoring does not eliminate the need for private well testing or confirm household water safety in all contexts. To address any concern about this chemical, homes can consider direct water testing and solutions like the Fleck 1,2,3-TCP Filter, which ships ready to configure to reduce 1,2,3-TCP if found. This approach offers a clear path to clarify and manage household water quality independently of broader public system records.
Where this information comes from
Source: EPA SDWIS public water system record. Sampled 2013-08-19. These figures describe the public water system's record, not the plumbing inside any individual building.
On record: EPA UCMR3 monitoring (2013-2015) for Hwy. 63 Water Association (AR0000107), AR: 10 results across 1 listed contaminants, 0 detections above the reporting level; nothing detected above the method reporting level
- ✓ 90-Day Money-BackNo restocking fees — return within 90 days.
- ✓ Manufacturer WarrantyGenuine Fleck · Pentair · VIQUA equipment.
- ✓ Free Expert SizingTalk to a specialist and buy the right system the first time.