PFAS in the drinking water of Clinton Water Dept: 18.8 ng/L, 37.6x our 0.5 ng/L benchmark
Last PFAS check: · Source: EPA UCMR 5
PFAS in drinking water
37.6× above our health benchmark
0.5 ng/L is our benchmark, not an official limit. It uses the same EFSA method as the Swedish, Danish and Dutch limits, with stricter safety choices. It's meant as a yearly average. The comparison above uses the latest check.
checked on March 20, 2024
Sampled on March 20, 2024 at Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP). It has the highest PFAS-4 sum of the system's 10 entry points. Samples are taken at the entry point to the distribution system, not at your tap.
US legal limit: 4.0 ng/L federal MCL for PFOA and PFOS
- PFOA 6.6 ng/L above the 2029 federal MCL
- PFOS 12.2 ng/L above the 2029 federal MCL
Applies from April 2029, as a running annual average per sampling point. UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with the PFAS drinking water standards.
Other regulated PFAS: 10 ng/L MCLs and the Hazard Index. PFHxS below the 3 ng/L reporting limit, PFNA below the 4 ng/L reporting limit, HFPO-DA below the 5 ng/L reporting limit; Hazard Index (PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, PFBS): not computable from UCMR 5: none of its four compounds was quantified, and the reporting limits alone would add up to 1.2. EPA proposed on May 20, 2026 to rescind the PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA MCLs and the Hazard Index; no final rule had been published when this page's regulation data was retrieved (September 19, 2026).
More about this result
Substances below the detection limit count as 0, so the real total may be higher.
One of these four, PFOA, is classified as causing cancer in humans by the WHO's cancer research agency (IARC).
More PFAS than in 94% of the water systems we track
UCMR 5 measures 29 PFAS one by one and publishes no EU-style total; this page shows the PFAS-4 sum and each compound.
29 PFAS (see each substance)
| PFAS substance | Value |
|---|---|
| PFOS | 12.2 ng/L |
| PFPeA | 7.8 ng/L |
| PFOA | 6.6 ng/L |
| PFHxA | 5.3 ng/L |
| PFHxS | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFNA | below the 4 ng/L reporting limit |
| HFPO-DA | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFBS | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| 11Cl-PF3OUdS | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| 4:2 FTS | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| 6:2 FTS | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| 8:2 FTS | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| 9Cl-PF3ONS | below the 2 ng/L reporting limit |
| ADONA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| NEtFOSAA | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| NFDHA | below the 20 ng/L reporting limit |
| NMeFOSAA | below the 6 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFBA | below the 5 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFDA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFDoA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFEESA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFHpA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFHpS | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFMBA | below the 3 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFMPA | below the 4 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFPeS | below the 4 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFTA | below the 8 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFTrDA | below the 7 ng/L reporting limit |
| PFUnA | below the 2 ng/L reporting limit |
Above our health benchmark. You can compare filter types below.
- Federal MCL, PFOA and PFOS (each)
- 4.0 ng/L PFOA and PFOS above it at the headline sample; applies from April 2029
- Latest UCMR 5 sample
- March 20, 2024 entry-point sample, not your tap
- EPA system ID (PWSID)
- NJ1005001
Details and sources
At Clinton Water Dept (New Jersey), the four most closely watched PFAS (PFAS-4) add up to at least 18.8 ng/L (0.0188 µg/L), the other compounds being below the 3 to 4 ng/L reporting limit in the latest UCMR 5 entry-point sample on March 20, 2024 at Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP). That is 37.6 times the 0.5 ng/L health benchmark used by pfasnearme. PFOA 6.6 ng/L and PFOS 12.2 ng/L, both above the 4.0 ng/L federal MCL for PFOA and PFOS that systems must meet from April 2029. Across 20 UCMR 5 sampling events since September 11, 2023, the PFAS-4 sum reached up to 18.8 ng/L and was below the reporting limits at other times. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) occurrence data, final dataset (August 2026), public domain.
PFAS over time in Clinton Water Dept
20 UCMR 5 sampling events since September 11, 2023, as published by EPA. Samples come from 10 entry points; the trend refers to Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP).
| Date | PFAS-4 | Entry point |
|---|---|---|
| 11.1 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Pond Ridge TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 16 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 1 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 2 TP) | |
| 13 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 3A TP) | |
| 16.3 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 4 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 6 TP) | |
| 14.5 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 7 TP) | |
| 9.4 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 11 TP) | |
| 18.8 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP) | |
| 15.4 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 7 TP) | |
| 10.8 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Pond Ridge TP) |
Show the 8 earlier checks (back to September 11, 2023)
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 16 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 1 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 2 TP) | |
| 13.1 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 3A TP) | |
| 11.9 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 4 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 6 TP) | |
| < 15 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 11 TP) | |
| 13.1 ng/L | Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP) |
A value preceded by "<" means no PFAS-4 compound was quantified, the figure being the sum of the four UCMR 5 reporting limits. Sums with a compound below the 3 to 4 ng/L reporting limit are lower bounds. How to read a PFAS result
Compliance status
UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with the PFAS drinking water standards. UCMR 5 is a national monitoring survey; the system's compliance record and its annual Consumer Confidence Report come from the state agency and EPA's SDWIS.
Values to watch
These entry-point results are above a federal MCL that systems must meet from April 2029, or above the Hazard Index limit of 1. UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with the PFAS drinking water standards.
| What was tested | Value | Limit | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Pond Ridge TP) · maximum | 11.1 ng/L (0.0111 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 3A TP) · maximum | 13.1 ng/L (0.0131 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 4 TP) · maximum | 16.3 ng/L (0.0163 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 7 TP) · maximum | 15.4 ng/L (0.0154 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 11 TP) · maximum | 9.4 ng/L (0.0094 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
See all 11 test results
| What was tested | Value | Limit | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFAS Hazard Index (US EPA) | < 1.2 (index; nothing quantified) | MCL (from April 2029): 1 | not computable |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Pond Ridge TP) · maximum | 11.1 ng/L (0.0111 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 16 TP) · maximum | below the 15 ng/L reporting limit | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | not detected |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 1 TP) · maximum | below the 15 ng/L reporting limit | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | not detected |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 2 TP) · maximum | below the 15 ng/L reporting limit | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | not detected |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 3A TP) · maximum | 13.1 ng/L (0.0131 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 4 TP) · maximum | 16.3 ng/L (0.0163 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 6 TP) · maximum | below the 15 ng/L reporting limit | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | not detected |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 7 TP) · maximum | 15.4 ng/L (0.0154 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| PFAS-4 (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) · Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 11 TP) · maximum | 9.4 ng/L (0.0094 µg/L) | no MCL for the sum; MCL (from April 2029) 4.0 ng/L for PFOA and for PFOS | PFOA or PFOS above the 2029 federal MCL |
| Lithium · UCMR 5, for reference | below the 9 µg/L reporting limit | no MCL | for reference |
Frequently asked questions
Is the tap water in Clinton Water Dept safe to drink?
In the latest UCMR 5 entry-point sample on March 20, 2024, the four most closely watched PFAS added up to at least 18.8 ng/L, 37.6 times the 0.5 ng/L health benchmark pfasnearme uses. PFOA and PFOS were above the 4.0 ng/L federal MCL that systems must meet from April 2029. EPA set the maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for PFOA and PFOS at zero because there is no level without risk. UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with the PFAS drinking water standards, and this site reports published measurements without judging health risk. This is not medical advice. If you are concerned, talk to your water system or your doctor.
What is UCMR 5 and why do the results say "below the reporting limit"?
The Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) had every large US water system and a sample of small ones test 29 PFAS and lithium between 2023 and 2025, at each entry point to the distribution system. EPA set minimum reporting levels of 3 to 4 ng/L for PFOA, PFOS, PFNA and PFHxS and reports nothing below them. A result "below the 3 to 4 ng/L reporting limit" therefore means the lab could not quantify the compound, not that it is absent, and it is never shown here as zero.
What do the 0.5 ng/L benchmark and the 4.0 ng/L MCL mean, and why are both shown?
0.5 ng/L for the PFAS-4 sum (PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS) is the health benchmark pfasnearme applies on every page, in Europe and the United States, built from the European Food Safety Authority's tolerable intake with stricter safety choices. 4.0 ng/L is the enforceable federal maximum contaminant level for PFOA and for PFOS individually under EPA's PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR), the US legal limit. Any PFAS-4 compound quantified under UCMR 5 (at or above 3 to 4 ng/L) is above the benchmark, so the benchmark tells you whether anything was found and the MCL tells you whether the system would have to act. EPA set the maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for PFOA and PFOS at zero because there is no level without risk.
When does the 4.0 ng/L MCL apply, and could it change?
EPA published the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) on April 26, 2024. Systems must finish initial monitoring by April 26, 2027, tell customers about PFAS in their 2027 Consumer Confidence Reports, and comply with the PFOA and PFOS MCLs from April 26, 2029. Two proposals published on May 20, 2026 are not final: one would let systems in states where EPA holds primacy extend PFOA and PFOS compliance to April 26, 2031; the other would rescind the PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA MCLs and the Hazard Index while keeping PFOA and PFOS. The rule is also before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (American Water Works Association v. EPA, argued 2026-09-18 before Judges Millett, Pillard and Wilkins; no decision). Regulation data retrieved September 19, 2026.
Does New Jersey have its own PFAS limits?
Yes. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Bureau of Safe Drinking Water enforces MCLs under N.J.A.C. 7:10: PFNA 13 ng/L (since September 4, 2018); PFOA 14 ng/L (since June 1, 2020); PFOS 13 ng/L (since June 1, 2020). The federal PFOA and PFOS MCLs (4.0 ng/L) are stricter than every state MCL, so the federal line is about severity and the state line is about what is enforceable today. In this UCMR 5 sample, no compound was above a New Jersey MCL. State monitoring: quarterly compliance monitoring since 2021.
Is this the water that comes out of my tap in Clinton Water Dept?
Only if Clinton Water Dept (PWSID NJ1005001) is your water system: check your water bill or your ZIP code page on this site, or the Hunterdon County page. Samples are taken at the entry point to the distribution system, not at your tap. The system may have changed sources or installed treatment since this sample. PFAS treatment reported to EPA: no PFAS treatment reported (NMT). The system's own Consumer Confidence Report, published every year, states what it measures today.
What can I do about PFAS in my water?
Ask Clinton Water Dept for its latest PFAS results and its plan for the 2029 MCLs, read its Consumer Confidence Report (EPA's CCR finder, PWSID NJ1005001), and if you want to lower PFAS at home, use a filter certified to NSF/ANSI 53 or 58 for PFOA and PFOS (reverse osmosis and activated carbon block filters; see the filter comparison linked on this page). Boiling water does not remove PFAS.
Are PFAS levels rising in Clinton Water Dept's water?
pfasnearme reads a trend per entry point, and the headline entry point (Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP)) has 2 quantified samples across the 20 UCMR 5 sampling events since September 11, 2023; a trend needs at least three. UCMR 5 monitoring is complete, so later trends will come from state compliance monitoring.
Where does this data come from?
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5), final dataset August 2026, retrieved 2026-09-19. Public domain. Results are entry-point samples and do not indicate compliance with drinking water standards. System registry from EPA SDWIS/ECHO (2026Q2 edition); service areas from EPA ORD (model code MIT); geography from the U.S. Census Bureau. pfasnearme retrieved the data on September 19, 2026.
Water systems in the same county
Other community water systems in Hunterdon County covered by this site, largest first.
Nearby water systems
The community water systems closest to Clinton Water Dept covered by this site, by service-area center.
Data source
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5) occurrence data, final dataset (August 2026)
- https://www.epa.gov/dwucmr/occurrence-data-unregulated-contaminant-monitoring-rule
- License
- Public domain (U.S. federal government work, 17 U.S.C. § 105)
- Retrieved
- September 19, 2026
- Entry points and samples
- Entry Point to Dist. System (Pond Ridge TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 16 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 1 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 2 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 3A TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 4 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 6 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 7 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 11 TP), Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP)
- UCMR 5 sample window
- September 11, 2023 to March 20, 2024; 10 entry points, 21 sampling events
- Source water
- groundwater; community water system (large, over 10,000 people)
- PFAS treatment reported to EPA
- no PFAS treatment reported (NMT). The system may have changed sources or installed treatment since this sample.
- Consumer Confidence Report
- Search EPA's CCR finder for PWSID NJ1005001 to read the system's own annual report
- Regulation data (MCLs, dates) retrieved
- September 19, 2026
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5), final dataset August 2026, retrieved 2026-09-19. Public domain. Results are entry-point samples and do not indicate compliance with drinking water standards.
System registry from EPA SDWIS/ECHO (2026Q2 edition); service areas from EPA ORD (model code MIT); geography from the U.S. Census Bureau.
UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with the PFAS drinking water standards. Samples are taken at the entry point to the distribution system, not at the tap; the system may have changed sources or installed treatment since. Treatment reported to EPA for PFAS: no PFAS treatment (NMT). 10 entry points sampled, 21 sampling events between 2023-09-11 and 2024-03-20. The page's PFAS values come from the newest sample at Entry Point to Dist. System (Well 12 TP) (98019/TP008019), the entry point with the highest PFOA + PFOS + PFNA + PFHxS sum; the other entry points' maxima are listed as separate rows. Non-detects are shown as "<" followed by EPA's minimum reporting level (3 to 20 ng/L); PFAS-4 sums quantified compounds only, so it is a lower bound when a compound was not detected. Registry (name, population, counties, ZIPs) from EPA SDWIS/ECHO; service-area centroid from EPA ORD.
Get notified when alerts open for Clinton Water Dept
Email alerts for US water systems start once our US postal address is published (CAN-SPAM). We collect nothing here yet; the report for Clinton Water Dept on this page is updated as new results are published.
This site is a data project, not an official source. If in doubt, check with your water supplier or local authority.