America's water testing problems must and can be fixed, experts say

A tragedy of widespread testing failures in US drinking water is that experts believe the remedies are fairly straightforward – if there is political will.

As the Guardian has revealed, at least 33 cities across 17 states have used water testing methods that regulators and experts have said may inaccurately reduce lead levels found in tests.

Marc Edwards, the Virginia Tech scientist who helped uncover the Flint disaster, said some of this “cheating” could even be criminal in nature. Officials in Michigan face criminal charges in part because they used some of these techniques to allegedly lower lead levels in the city.

The Guardian’s analysis of thousands of water department documents show that a crisis such as Flint’s, while not probable, could be obscured by testing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said could diminish the amount of lead found in water.

Here are fixes experts said could improve America’s water testing problems:

The EPA could lead

The federal regulation aimed at protecting people from ingesting lead from water, the Lead and Copper Rule, was introduced in 1991 and has not been updated to stamp out questionable testing methods used since then.

In 2001, before a water crisis in Washington DC, authorities asked samplers to flush their water for 10 minutes before starting a six-hour, federally mandated test period. The Guardian didn’t find any utilities “pre-flushing” for that length of time, but instructions to flush for three to four minutes were not uncommon, and many asked residents to run the water until they felt a change in temperature.

Later, Edwards found water in some Washington DC homes contained up to 83 times the federal limit for lead. This prompted some updates to regulations in 2007, but failed to stamp out the use of pre-flushing.

Since then, the EPA has embarked on a lengthy review of lead rules and has consistently stated that it will update them in 2017.

A memo sent to water utilities in February warned against techniques that reduce lead found in tests, but the EPA could move to enshrine this in law. Despite the Flint crisis, and the ongoing revelations of poor testing in dozens of other cities, the EPA has so far shied away from making the practices strictly illegal.

States could step up

The EPA has largely left water testing and treatment to states, and acted as a backstop rather than first line of defense. This was the intention of the Clean Water Act, which imagined federal intervention only in the most dire circumstances.

Clearly, though, many of the states maintained these practices even after scientists inside and outside the EPA warned against them repeatedly. Wildly inconsistent water testing methods from city to city, and state to state, showcase how some water utilities managed to keep up with these warnings, while others fell behind.

For example, Cincinnati, Ohio, follows EPA and expert guidance, but a mere two hours away, in Columbus, a whole different testing regime reigns and includes “pre-flushing” water pipes.

Several committees have been set up to share best practices, but there remains a patchwork of varying systems across the US. The state of Michigan used testing practices that could diminish lead until Flint made national headlines, which forced a change. It’s unclear how many other states have updated their guidance since.

Cities could confront the cost

Although the installation of lead water pipes was banned in 1986, the US has a huge legacy of underground lead due to its widespread use as an easy engineering solution for growing cities in need of plumbed water.

There are an estimated 3m to 6m miles of lead pipes in US towns and cities, mostly in the eastern states. While we now know that lead is toxic when ingested even in the smallest quantities, especially to children, the cost of replacing the pipes is significant – the EPA estimates it would cost $276.8bn and take 20 years. Each year, the US spends twice the amount it would take to replace lead pipes on its military.

Costs of caring for exposed children also add up, for suffering families and taxpayers both. As of 2002, researchers found the most severe lead exposures alone cost the US $43.4bn. Children exposed to even tiny amounts of lead can develop conditions associated with learning difficulties, behavior disorders and even the propensity to commit crime.

Further, some cities have shown it is possible to replace lead lines. Springfield, Massachusetts, for example, began proactively replacing its lead pipes in 1992. As of 2005, “all known lead service lines have been removed and replaced”. The city also updated its lead testing procedures this winter, in response to the EPA’s renewed call to end these practices in February.

What people can do in their own homes

Parents should never use hot water to cook or prepare formula for infants; hot water has a tendency to dissolve more lead in water. If residents don’t have a filter installed, they should periodically clean the filters at the tip of faucets, called aerators. Lastly, do not boil water to remove lead – this concentrates the metal and will not remove it.

People can also consider installing NSF-certified faucet filters that remove lead concentrations of up to 150 parts per billion. Edwards recommends filters for the ends of faucets, not only because they’re less expensive than whole house filters, but because they may actually capture lead those systems miss. That’s because they also filter lead that’s been picked up in plumbing fixtures, such as the faucets themselves. NSF also certifies some low-cost water pitchers that remove lead.

Because Congress didn’t reduce the allowable amount of lead in faucets until 2011, from 8% to 0.25% by weight, faucets purchased even in the last few years could have been sold as “lead-free” and still contained leaded brass of up to 8%. Amendments defining “lead-free” as 0.25% of lead went into effect in 2014.

Some water utilities offer low-cost loans or may provide discounts, for those willing and able to take on the expensive job of replacing lead service lines. But it is important to replace the entire line, and those fixes can potentially cost up to $18,000. Research indicates that partial lead service lines replacements may actually increase lead concentrations.