Again - I don't mean to sound unsympathetic - I wish everyone in your area a speedy resolution to this situation.
Also as a co-owner of a small fast food restaurant (in northern california), I can't use stored water for anything related to running the business. 40 gallons is a literal drop in the bucket in one day of use too, let alone however many days it will take to clean up the spill. That's a lot of businesses closed right there because they literally can't do anything to prevent that from happening. That alone, even before considering individual water needs, is a big deal.
WV is a low-risk area for various natural disasters  . And it is relatively rural and gets good rainfall - folks aren't generally depending on giant city-wide water infrastructure or imported water, but rather on smaller, distributed water supplies that are individually perceived to be rather dependable.
Long term I don't know how they are going to deal with something of this magnitude.
I used to live in a town where there was a cancer warning on the back of the water bill because of the (naturally occurring) radium content of the water (sourced from wells). We had a water service bring 5-gallon jugs (water-cooler type) which we used for cooking and drinking.
You're thinking of Radon, which is a decay product of Radium (which is a metal).
Radium is soluble in water, and similar enough to calcium that it's absorbed into bones where it releases alpha particles that will cause cancer in high enough doses.
 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon
 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium#Chemical_characteristics...
 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16839204
Living in a 750 sq ft apartment, 40 gallons of water would occupy a significant amount of space.
Obviously in this situation it's hard to do either - I hope they find a way to solve this quickly...
I think a few large jugs of water is likely the top item on that list for any home, anywhere.
edit: My thinking was that you could use any other freshwater supply nearby. Not that you should use a contaminated supply. This is more practical for me than storing 40 gallons of emergency water in my home.
"filters to 0.2 microns through the use of hollow-fiber membranes" "Does not filter chemicals, salt, viruses, heavy metals, taste"
This looks like a major disaster from what I understand, and the situation has the potential to deteriorate rather quickly.
Don't forget, thanks to state rights, they have to be invited in.
This of course never leads to governments using this to play politics to be able to blame the Federal Government to make themselves look better, or the Federal Government look bad. No that would never happen.
States rights make it so that each state can dictate policy best suited and tuned for its own population--and so that it can be held more directly responsible by its populace.
The federal government isn't going to be dictating people in Austin all wear winter coats because it gets cold in Jeuno. But they are hindered in their ability to render aid to the very people they govern because each state acts like its own little country.
That indicates one issue with splitting political power into states: most American political differences are urban/suburban/rural, not regional. Austonians and San Franciscans have more in common with each other than they do with other areas of their own states, and California's Central Valley would get along fine with West Texas. But SF and the Central Valley don't get along, and West Texas and Austin don't get along.
Well, they have a very similar need for clean water and unless chemistry varies wildly across state lines, some sort of coordinated response would seem sensible.
I would think that would be pretty obvious...
And given the influence of mining companies in the region, I say there is a high probability that is the case.
I also understand people mostly accept and support mining, as it is seen as the only real economic driver in the state. This might change that perspective, depending on how it is handled.
And in recent memory, the Chesapeake incidents:
I think a lot of people have essentially accepted things the way they are now and aren't willing to rock the boat. There are a handful of documentaries that come to mind- namely The Last Mountain, Coal Country, and Coal Rush- that are pretty difficult to watch, but I think if more people in our area saw the effects of our beloved industry they might see things differently. However, I think most end up turning a blind eye to it out of fear of unemployment.
Pretty much abandon the area or risk cancer.
"Freedom Industries" indeed.
So yeah, dilution appears to be the solution (really, the problem seems to be that one treatment plant drew in a large quantity of contaminated water).
That being said, I'm not going to take the risk, and I've only used water out of water bottles since this started.
The NIH has much more information about methylcyclohexanol here: http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/a?dbs+hsdb:@ter...
The NIH link is to a 4-methylcyclohexanol (CAS: 589-91-3), not to 4-methylcyclohexane methanol (CAS: 34885-03-5), a similar but distinct compound.
Any idea why the Wiki article gets the oxygen / hydrogen counts wrong?
Presumably whoever created the page copied the info box and forgot to edit it.
I wanted to provide some information about the chemical that was spilled, which is being reported to be 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol.
You may see it referred to in its shortened form as MCHM.
This chemical is used in a purification process called froth flotation.  In the case of WV, it is used in coal purification.
OSHA guidelines list this chemical as hazardous. It is harmful if swallowed, and causes skin and eye irritation. At elevated temperatures, vapor may cause irritation of eyes and respiratory tract. 
If you are familiar with the so-called fire diamond or NFPA 704 , this chemical is listed as:
Instability/Reactivity (Yellow) 0:
Materials which in themselves are normally stable, even under fire exposure conditions, and which are not reactive with water.
Flammability (Red) 1:
Materials that must be pre-heated before ignition can occur.
Health (Blue) 2:
Materials which on intense or continued exposure could cause temporary incapacitation or possible residual injury unless prompt medical treatment is given.
Coincidentally, I was just listening to some talk about alternative energy  with some interesting arguments for solar and hydro power over coal.
Makes me wonder if we've become inured to the environmental cost/risk of coal power and processing?
Also, coal is big part of the WV economy . So this would seem to have the potential for an extended impact.
First with the water problems. Second in any backlash that arises against the industry in response to the spill.
I imagine you're familiar with the recommendation that children and pregnant women should limit their fish intake, due to mercury present in seafood. The largest part of that mercury comes from emissions from burning coal.
Similarly, there is much more worry about the safety of nuclear power than coal power. But guess which one emits more radioactivity into the environment? You guessed it: coal. I believe this is true even if you account for nuclear accidents, although I admit that I'm going by memory on this one.
Coal accounts for something like a million deaths a year worldwide. That's a significant chunk of overall human mortality. Coal kills more people each year than nukes have ever killed, even if you count the atomic bombs.
Not to mention mountain top removal mining, or any other destructive practices considered A-OK in the industry.