Full contaminant data, sample history, and sourcing for Martin County. For readers who want to go beyond the summary.
Contaminant Data — All Analytes
2822 well testing events on record, covering
23 analytes.
Data spans 1923 to 2023.
Contaminant
Samples
Years
Detection Rate
Distribution LowModHigh
vs. Limit
vs. FL Avg
Radon
12
2008–2019
100%
105% of limit
↑ 258% above
Iron
151
1923–2024
96%
120% of limit
↓ 40% below
PFOS
municipal
12
2023–2025
33%
262% of limit
↑ 24% above
PFOA
municipal
12
2023–2025
25%
103% of limit
↓ 28% below
Chloride
2806
1923–2024
100%
13% of limit
↓ 74% below
Sulfate
166
1923–2024
93%
6% of limit
↓ 78% below
Manganese
65
1984–2024
97%
22% of limit
~ typical
Lead
68
1974–2024
79%
1% of limit
↓ 58% below
Arsenic
68
1974–2024
87%
3% of limit
↓ 79% below
PFNA
municipal
12
2023–2025
0%
—
—
Fluoride
146
1946–2024
97%
8% of limit
~ typical
HFPO-DA (GenX)
municipal
12
2023–2025
0%
—
—
Nitrite
42
1974–2019
60%
1% of limit
~ typical
Nitrate
71
1923–2019
80%
0% of limit
↓ 94% below
PFHxS
municipal
12
2023–2025
17%
62% of limit
↑ 21% above
Uranium
12
2008–2019
58%
0% of limit
↓ 88% below
Hardness
123
1923–2019
99%
—
~ typical
Total Coliform
51
2015–2024
92%
—
~ typical
Sodium
135
1954–2024
100%
—
↓ 46% below
pH
176
1942–2024
100%
—
~ typical
E. coli
22
2015–2024
78%
—
~ typical
Fecal Coliform
29
2017–2021
100%
—
~ typical
PFBS
municipal
12
2023–2025
25%
—
~ typical
Distribution shows the share of samples in each concentration band relative to the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): Low = below half the MCL, Moderate = between half and the MCL, High = above the MCL. Analytes without an MCL (e.g. sodium, pH) show — in the limit columns. State average is based on county median values across FL.
Compare your result with Martin County
Of the 68 arsenic tests on record for Martin County (1974–2024),
13% found none, and half were below 0.2 µg/L.
Of the 2806 chloride tests on record for Martin County (1923–2024),
0% found none, and half were below 32 mg/L.
Of the 146 fluoride tests on record for Martin County (1946–2024),
3% found none, and half were below 300 µg/L.
Of the 151 iron tests on record for Martin County (1923–2024),
4% found none, and half were below 290 µg/L.
Of the 68 lead tests on record for Martin County (1974–2024),
21% found none, and half were below 0.2 µg/L.
Of the 65 manganese tests on record for Martin County (1984–2024),
3% found none, and half were below 10.5 µg/L.
Of the 71 nitrate tests on record for Martin County (1923–2019),
20% found none, and half were below 10 µg/L.
Of the 166 sulfate tests on record for Martin County (1923–2024),
7% found none, and half were below 12.9 mg/L.
Data Coverage & Gaps
Well-sampled analytes (15+ samples)
Iron 151 samples
Chloride 2806 samples
Sulfate 166 samples
Manganese 65 samples
Lead 68 samples
Arsenic 68 samples
Fluoride 146 samples
Nitrite 42 samples
Nitrate 71 samples
Hardness 123 samples
Total Coliform 51 samples
Sodium 135 samples
pH 176 samples
E. coli 22 samples
Fecal Coliform 29 samples
Limited data (<15 samples) — interpret with caution
Radon 12 samples
Uranium 12 samples
No private-well PFAS data for Martin County
We have no private well sampling data for PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, and related chemicals) in Martin County.
PFAS has been detected in local public water systems (UCMR 5 data) — indicated by the "municipal" badge in the table above — but this does not directly indicate private well contamination.
PFAS testing for private wells requires a dedicated lab panel (~$300–$500). If you are near a military base, airport, or industrial site, consider testing proactively. Learn more about PFAS →
Public vs. Private Water in Martin County
60Active public water systems
161,250Residents on public water
7%Households on private wells
Public water systems in Martin County are regulated by the EPA and must test and report contaminant levels. Private well owners are responsible for their own testing — there is no routine monitoring of private wells by any government agency.
CDC Health Outcome Correlations
Where contaminants detected in Martin County have established associations with specific health outcomes, we cross-reference CDC PLACES county-level prevalence data. This is a contextual signal, not a causal claim.
This report aggregates data from the following public databases:
Water Quality Portal (WQP) — groundwater sample results for Martin County from EPA, USGS, and state agencies. Browse WQP data →
EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) — public water system inventory used to estimate the share of residents on private wells. Browse SDWIS →
Census ACS 5-Year Estimates — well and cistern household counts (variable DP04_0074E) used to calculate the private-well percentage for Martin County. Census data explorer →
USGS Aquifer Atlas — principal aquifer type underlying Martin County, which informs which contaminants are geologically likely. USGS Aquifer Atlas →
EPA UCMR 5 (2023–2025) — PFAS occurrence data from public water systems, used as a proxy indicator for aquifer PFAS exposure. Rows marked "municipal" in the table above come from this source. About UCMR 5 →
EPA Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) — industrial facility chemical releases near Martin County, used in contamination risk scoring. TRI Explorer →
EPA Superfund NPL — National Priorities List sites in or near Martin County, used in contamination risk scoring. Superfund site search →
CDC PLACES — county-level health outcome prevalence (kidney disease, cancer, heart disease) correlated with detected contaminants. About CDC PLACES →
Methodology
Raw records are downloaded from the Water Quality Portal and normalized to µg/L (ppb). Records are deduplicated by sample ID and date, and certified outliers are excluded. Analyte names are mapped to EPA canonical forms. Detection rates, distribution bands, and MCL comparisons are computed from the normalized dataset.
Distribution bands use the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level as the threshold: concentrations below 50% of the MCL are classed as Low, between 50% and 100% as Moderate, and above 100% as High. For analytes without an MCL (sodium, hardness, pH), distribution is not computed.
State comparison uses the median of county median values across all counties in FL with at least one sample for that analyte.