Water Quality InformationWritten By Actual Experts

Analies Dyjak, M.A.  |  Policy Nerd

The U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce recently held a virtual hearing about the nation's drinking water. The hearing discussed how Congress can revamp the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to better protect public health. Our team at Hydroviv has been aware of its shortcomings for years, and even testified on a similar subject last October. This blog highlights some of the major regulatory hurdles, and why it’s so difficult to regulate new tap water contaminants like PFAS.

What is the Safe Drinking Water Act?

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was created by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1974, to protect drinking water sources throughout the United States. The SDWA is responsible for setting national standards called National Primary Drinking Water Standards for roughly 90 contaminants. Unfortunately, it’s widely accepted throughout the scientific community that the SDWA is outdated, and no longer works to protect public health.

EPA, Bureaucracy, and "Sound Science":

Both members of congress and the scientific community are critical of EPA’s approach to regulating drinking water. The current process has failed to regulate a new contaminant since 1996. This is especially alarming at a time when chemical and industrial manufacturing are at an all time high. Any type of industrial activity can make surrounding waterways susceptible to pollution, resulting in compromised drinking water. Chemicals developed in the last 24 years go entirely unchecked by the time they enter your municipal water system. What’s worse is the bottled water companies use the same contaminated sources as tap water, and follow weaker reporting standards. EPA claims to preach "sound science," but has failed to follow scientific recommendations.

PFAS and The Safe Drinking Water Act:

The recent hearing on the SDWA was prompted by the fact that a category of known human carcinogens called Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are not regulated under this law. PFAS are known to cause an increased risk of cancer, an increased risk of miscarriage, and other adverse health effects. Because PFAS are not regulated, municipalities are not required to test for or remove PFAS from tap water. The EPA has created non-enforceable public health advisories for two different types of PFAS; PFOA and PFOS. Certain states have developed their own more stringent health advisories and some have even created enforceable standards. Health advisories use the best available science and epidemiological studies to determine a “safe” level of contamination in drinking water. While the goal of a health advisory is certainly positive, they fail to create actionable change. Health advisories are not enforceable, and therefore municipal water providers are not required to follow them. It's also important to mention that PFAS are not a "new" contaminant, and that they have been on EPA's radar for years. EPA first recommended setting a public health goal for both PFOA and PFOS eleven years ago in 2009.

Is a National PFAS Standard Realistic? 

Proponents for a National Standard: When states have a variety of different public health advisory levels or even state standards, it creates a lapse in risk communication and fosters distrust. Public distrust may occur if “state A” has a lower PFAS standard than “state B.” This is especially true for neighboring states that may share the same aquifer, river, or tributary. Proponents believe that if EPA has enough scientific evidence to develop a Public Health Advisory, they should be able to create a national enforceable standard for PFAS. 

Opponents for a National Standard: Municipalities lose big time whenever a new water quality standard is created. Opponents believe that imposing a regulation, and requiring municipal water treatment facilities to purchase expensive equipment that will remove a contaminant that is not present in their water, is not a responsible use of resources. One of the issues with this argument is that there is no federal mandate for testing, so most municipal systems don’t even know if PFAS are present. Some regulators claim that there are too many types of PFAS to regulate, and that it’s impossible to set a standard for the entire category of PFAS. Currently, there are only testing standards for 29 different PFAS variations, despite there being over 5,000 known variations present in the environment. 

Our Take:

The SDWA impacts people every single day. Every time someone turns on their water, the health and safety of what’s coming out of their tap is dictated by the Safe Drinking Water Act. As is, the SDWA does not go far enough to protect American’s, including our most vulnerable populations (infants, pregnant moms, and older adults). Industrial manufacturing companies are entirely unrestricted when it comes to developing new products, and chemicals pushed to the market are essentially “safe” until proven otherwise. This sort of regulatory approach comes at a serious cost to human health. Regarding PFAS, there is enough scientific and epidemiological research to conclude that this category of chemicals should be regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Hydroviv's Water Nerds

Little Miss Flint (Mari Copeny) has partnered with Hydroviv to help donate water filters to low-income families across the country. As of April 5, 2024, the Little Miss Flint Clean Water Fund has raised over $850,000. Mari even inspired us to provide these filters at our break-even cost, which translates to well over one million dollars worth of product. Mari's current goal is to raise $1 Million for her Filter Fund, to help get clean water to those that need it the most. Many families impacted by poor water quality need access to an effective solution for clean water. 

About Our Charitable Partner: Little Miss Flint

You may remember Little Miss Flint or Mari Copeny, as the face of the Flint Lead Crisis back in 2014. Mari was just 8 years old when she became one of the most prominent activists for the city of Flint, Michigan. After thousands of children in her community were exposed to unsafe levels of lead, Mari knew she needed to do something to help. Mari donated over one million bottles of water to families in Flint impacted by the high lead levels. At the beginning of the crisis, bottled water was the only resource for drinking water that the community of Flint could trust. After Hydroviv’s Scientific Founder, Dr. Eric Roy, heard about the situation in Flint, he began developing and donating high-capacity lead water filters to child-centric organizations and families in Flint, Michigan. This is where we met Mari, and decided to form a partnership to address water quality issues together.

Cost of Impact:

Sustainability: Our filter donation program has a significant environmental impact by eliminating the need for bottled water. While plastic water bottles may be a short-term solution, they end up in landfills and the ocean, causing a host of other environmental problems.

Time: Most bottled water donation programs require physically going to a location and standing in line for hours just to receive a week's worth of water. Installing a Hydroviv water filter allows for tap water on demand, and eliminates the need to take time off work just to receive a basic human right. 

Why Are Hydroviv Filters Different?

Not all water filters are designed to effectively remove high concentrations of contaminants found in tap water, and not all tap water is the same. Our scientific founder had this in mind when creating water filters for Flint, Michigan, and it still holds true today. Hydroviv Water Filters, including those being donated, are optimized to remove contaminants specific to any particular zip code. 

Some communities have “free filtration programs” that are often created a significant amount of time after the problem has been identified. Most city officials choose the cheapest option on the market, and the water filters inevitably end up failing to remove contaminants. Newark, New Jersey had a lead crisis similar to Flint, Michigan throughout 2018 and 2019. In response, the city provided free Pur water filters to eligible Newark residents. Unfortunately, the filters distributed by the city did not perform to the levels that Newark residents were led to believe. 

Hydroviv Specifications

Hydroviv Undersink Water Filters are NSF/ANSI 53 certified to remove lead. Hydroviv was included in a Duke University/NC State study that examined the effectiveness of residential water filters and their ability to remove PFAS. According to the study, water with PFAS present in the unfiltered samples had undetectable (below the Method Detection Limit (<MDL)) levels of PFAS after the water was filtered through a Hydroviv filter. The results from the Duke/NC State study were consistent with a previous study that looked at PFAS removal rates, including GenX. Additional studies show that Hydroviv filters remove Arsenic, Uranium, Chromium 6, and many other contaminants. Hydroviv is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Duke University, NC State University, or any of the researchers involved in the study.

How Can I Donate?

Analies Dyjak, M.A.  |  Policy Nerd

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has introduced a new rule regarding a category of common drinking water contaminants called Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. The proposed final rule does not ban the production and distribution of PFAS chemicals, but provides an brief check for chemical manufacturers. 

Why Is Chemical Pollution Problematic in the United States? 

The United States has historically pushed products and chemicals to market without any sort of environmental or public health due diligence. Further, chemical manufacturers are not required to study how their products may impact human health before becoming available to the public. This includes a plethora of chemicals used in things like household cleaning products, solvents, fire suppressants, pesticides, and more. Typically a chemical manufacturing company gets served a lawsuit years after people become seriously ill after using or being exposed to their chemicals. In short, there are few barriers to entry when introducing a new product or chemical to market. The United States does not follow the “precautionary principle,” which is a commonly used method in European countries. The precautionary principle is a preventative check used to ensure the safety of a product before entering the market.

How Does This Affect Drinking Water?

Industrial and chemical pollution threaten drinking water more than almost any other type of pollution in the United States. You cannot see, taste, or smell most industrial pollutants - and most are so small that traditional municipal water treatment facilities are not able to remove them. Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are believed to be one of the largest threats to drinking water in the United States. PFAS are a category of man-made contaminants that are believed to be ubiquitous in tap water. They are associated with the production of Scotch-Guard, Teflon, stain-repellent products, non-stick products, and more. This rule only puts a small barrier between PFAS pollution and contaminated drinking water, rather than an outright ban. 

Health Effects Associated with PFAS Exposure:

1. Increased risk of miscarriages 
2. Increased risk of cancer
3. Lowered immune function
4. Thyroid hormone disruptions
5. Low infant birth weight

Did EPA Go Far Enough?

Under the proposed rule, EPA will be required to review and approve the use of products that contain PFAS chemicals. This rule is being proposed under the Toxic Substance and Control Act (TSCA), which regulates the use of new and existing chemicals. It’s important that we are crystal clear in the breakdown of this rule: PFAS are still being manufactured and distributed in the United States, and will continue to be manufactured and distributed as a result of this proposed rule. 

Why This Rule is Flawed:

The proposed rule still allows the manufacturing and distribution of new PFAS in the United States. This is a particularly important regulatory flaw because federal or state governments have not been able to implement a plan that addresses existing PFAS in the environment. Even worse, the proposed rule does not acknowledge drinking water as a potential exposure route. Although other rules and proposed rules acknowledge the problem, none provided by EPA present a clear protocol as to how to remove them from tap water. 

Analies Dyjak, M.A.  |  Policy Nerd

Maine Well Water Case Study: 

A prospective customer reached out to us about a year ago with concerns about his well water. After sending the well water test results from an EPA accredited lab to our science team, we were able to determine that his well water water was well above EPA regulatory standards for both arsenic and uranium. This meant that the levels in his well water were above what EPA considers to be safe for human consumption. Private well owners are on their own for determining the safety of their well water.

How Well Did Hydroviv Remove Arsenic and Uranium?

Hydroviv’s Undersink Water Filter brought his arsenic levels down from 23.9 parts per billion to undetectable. For a bit of perspective, his pre-filtered levels were over twice as high as the EPA federal standard for arsenic. Hydroviv filters also brought his uranium levels down from 235 parts per billion to undetectable. His pre-filtered levels were over 7 times higher than the EPA federal standard for uranium. The graph below shows the uranium and arsenic levels, before and after installing a Hydroviv Undersink Water Filter. 

Arsenic in Drinking Water:

Arsenic is a naturally occurring heavy metal found in bedrock throughout the United States. Arsenic leaches from bedrock into well water overtime through a process known as natural weathering. The presence of arsenic is entirely dependent on your area’s geology. This means that arsenic may be present in seemingly pristine well water located far away from factories and other sources of pollution. Arsenic can cause various types of cancers, including bladder, lung, liver, and prostate. Some states with the highest rates of bladder cancer also have the highest levels of arsenic in groundwater.

Uranium in Drinking Water:

Uranium is a naturally occurring radionuclide typically found in groundwater. Similar to arsenic, the presence of uranium in well water is dependent on your area’s geology. Long term exposure to uranium in drinking water increases the risk of kidney cancer in humans. The current EPA federal standard for uranium in drinking water is 30 parts per billion. Most standard pitcher and refrigerator pitchers do not include the necessary filtration media to remove uranium from drinking water.

How Do I Know if Arsenic and Uranium are in My Well Water?

Our team of Water Nerds analyzes every order based on the zip code provided at check out. If you live on a private well, we use publicly available USGS data, State Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) data, municipal Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR), and other internal well water test results. Using these data, we are able to determine the contaminants that are likely present in your well water.