The Importance of “Filter First”: A Preventive Approach to Reduce Lead Contamination in Drinking Water

The Importance of “Filter First”: A Preventive Approach to Reduce Lead Contamination in Drinking Water

By Deandrah Cameron, New Jersey Future, and Cori Bell, Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC)

Lead is a toxic metal that, when ingested in significant quantities, can seriously damage human health, especially infants and children. The most common sources of lead in drinking water are lead pipes, faucets, and fixtures. According to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), “lead-free” plumbing can contain a weighted average of 0.25% lead calculated across the wetted surfaces of a pipe, pipe fitting, plumbing fitting, and fixture and 0.2% lead for solder and flux. Until 2014, “lead-free” plumbing was allowed to contain up to 8% lead. Given that the plumbing components in schools contain lead in various concentrations, the problem is pervasive. In places like schools and childcare facilities, the concern is usually around indoor lead plumbing, which typically contains lead components. Since lead poses a greater risk to children when compared to any other stakeholder group, it is crucial to take preventive measures in schools and childcare centers, especially those housed in older buildings where lead levels are likely high. According to a 2019 article, Compliance With Mandated Testing for Lead in Drinking Water in School Districts in New Jersey, by Marianne Sullivan and Marcos Lopez, nearly 4-in-5 NJ school districts reported at least one drinking water outlet exceeding 15 parts per billion (ppb). The Centers for Disease Control, the World Health Organization, and the American Academy of Pediatrics agree that any amount of lead threatens children’s health. For this reason, some places have implemented a Filter First approach to protect against lead exposure. This innovative approach is based on a simple but powerful principle: don’t wait until you discover water pollution; act proactively, filtering the water from the beginning.

State policies requiring the use of certified filters at consumption points would ensure that the water that arrives to the children is safe for drinking and cooking, eliminating or reducing lead levels.

Health Impact

In schools and childcare centers, it is crucial to take reduction measures before exposure occurs. Exposure to lead is a silent danger, especially for children. Numerous studies have shown that even low levels of exposure could have irreversible effects on health, from learning and behavioral problems to a reduction in cognitive capacity. These adverse health effects follow children and affect their communities for their entire lives. In the face of these risks, “Filter First” policies are the most effective reduction measures and a critical strategy for childhood lead exposure prevention.

In contrast to other reactive approaches implemented after the pollution is detected,  the Filter First method reduces lead exposure before children come in contact with lead-affected drinking water. It guarantees a safer learning environment and generates trust between the parents, school staff, and community by ensuring that children’s water is filtered before it is accessed at taps or fountains.  

Implementation

For the “Filter First” policies to succeed, it is critical to raise awareness about the importance of reducing lead exposure and the effectiveness of filters in reducing lead, both among parents and the school staff, administrators, and educational policymakers. A practical approach is to develop an integral communication strategy that involves all stakeholders to understand the risks of lead and how the “Filter First” method protects them. Regularly sharing updates on the state of the filters, the results of the water tests, and any maintenance is an effective way to generate trust between the parents and school staff. 

Although implementing the “Filter First” method is still relatively new, there have already been long-term and short-term successes in the US. 

• The Washington D.C. government passed the Childhood Lead Exposure Prevention Amendment Act of 2017 in response to high levels of lead found in drinking water in public schools, establishing a strict standard of less than 5 parts per billion (ppb) ¹. Aquaspace Water Systems successfully developed a cost-effective filtration solution to meet this standard and has since supplied nearly 4,000 water filters to D.C. public schools. These filters have been highly effective, reducing lead levels to less than 1 part per billion, well below the EPA’s limit of 15 ppb and D.C.’s standard of 5 ppb. 
• In June 2023, the Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, signed bipartisan legislation requiring all water sources in state schools and childcare programs to be equipped with certified filters. This law requires the installation of filters and establishes clear protocols for their maintenance and substitution, ensuring they are always in optimal condition.
• Philadelphia City Council enacted similar legislation requiring filtered hydration stations in all public schools by 2025. 

While laws can vary, the principal objective is always the same: protect the children and school staff from the harmful effects of lead in drinking water.

Cost and Benefit

Cost-effectiveness is a determining factor when discussing implementing new policies or technological solutions. Fortunately, “Filter First” policies appear to be a highly affordable approach in the long term. Although the initial investment in certified filters can seem high, it is much lower than the costs that could derive from not taking a more preventive approach compared to the cost of testing and remediation. Additionally, medical treatment for health problems related to lead exposure, including neurological damage and behavioral problems, can be extremely costly for both families and health systems. Children in schools with lead-contaminated water often additionally rely on single-use plastic bottled water, which imposes high financial burdens upon their families to supply it, along with the health impacts of exposure to microplastics and toxic chemicals in bottled water. Besides, the emotional and social cost of these problems is invaluable. Therefore, spending on certified filters is a proactive measure that can save money and suffering in the future. 

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) analyzed the costs of the “Filter First” approach in Michigan. It calls for a filtered water station for every 100 students and staff. The estimated cost of a filtered water station is $2,725, and replacing the filter cartridges would cost $141 three times a year. This approach is more cost-effective than the “test and tell” policy, which involves testing all taps and replacing those that test positive for lead. 

Compared to other methods, such as the 3T framework (training, testing, and taking action), “Filter First” is a time-sensitive and more effective solution. Although testing the water for lead is important, it doesn’t guarantee that it is always contamination-free, as testing below 15 ppb could provide a false sense of security, and lead release is sporadic, meaning lead levels may be low one day and high the next. There is no identified safe level of lead exposure. Since filters consistently reduce lead, they are the best option for safeguarding the health of children. In summary, “Filter First” is the most cost-effective and health-protective option, ensuring reliable, lead-free water in schools.

Challenges 

While the “Filter First” method effectively reduces lead contamination, implementing and maintaining these systems presents certain challenges. First, only filters certified to remove lead must be installed. Numerous schools have purchased and installed filters that are not certified to remove lead, as was seen in Portland. Second, the school leadership has to guarantee that the filters are correctly replaced and maintained. A filter not replaced on time can become ineffective, meaning lead levels can increase in drinking water.

Maintenance

Installing the filtration device is not enough for “Filter First” to have a lasting impact. Regular maintenance and monitoring are essential to guarantee that filters continue working properly and that the water remains safe to drink. While this requires a continuous commitment from schools, educational institutions, and government authorities because large-capacity filters exist, maintenance can be as minimal as changing a filter once a year. 

Each state or school district must develop clear maintenance policies. In Michigan, for example, the new law requires that the school implement a drinking water management plan. This plan should include not only the installation of the filters but also regular replacement and inspection of the water outlets, in addition to requiring that filtration devices have a light or other device to indicate filter cartridge replacement status. Sector leaders are discussing creating standard online dashboards that display the status of all filters in operation, substantially reducing the manual burden of tracking each filter station individually. Some school districts may already have existing platforms for incorporating this tracking feature.

Early and effective communication about lead in drinking water in schools is essential for building trust among various stakeholders at all levels of intervention. Among members of the school community are students, parents, building/facility staff, and operators who execute, implement, and oversee processes that protect access and delivery of safe drinking water. Local organizations, such as health departments, community groups, and state drinking water programs, are also a part of the community and often can provide valuable resources, guidance, and support. Even in the case of a crisis, timely communication with stakeholders can help minimize risks, provide accurate information, and promote a safe and healthy environment. 

For example, in Oakland, parents expressed frustration in their school’s inability to take measures such as securing blood lead level testing at a time when lead exposure was known. Since lead only stays in the bloodstream for about 20-30 days and past lead exposure cannot be detected, it’s crucial to have open lines of communication between impacted stakeholders to ensure schools take the necessary precautions. While communication of lead hazards is important, the gold standard would be communication that confirms water is safe for consumption. Without transitioning to a Filter First approach, there is a risk of repeated cases, as seen in Oakland. 

Since lead is 100% preventable but lead poisoning is irreversible, it is not enough to test and inform. Schools should install filtration devices and continue to monitor their optimized functions. The former erodes trust and confidence when levels are above 15 ppb and institutes a false sense of protection when levels are just below 15 ppb. Still, the latter places public health at the forefront by proactively reducing exposure. Filters additionally rebuild trust in public water, which can be eroded after years of exposure and misplaced into false solutions like plastic bottled water.

The “Filter First” method is the most proactive and effective approach to reducing lead exposure in drinking water, especially in school environments. Its implementation in the US is a testimony of its feasibility and effectiveness. However, for this policy to be successful in the long term, it is crucial that the schools and authorities remain committed to its maintenance and that the community is fully informed about its importance. 

With the right support and commitment, “Filter First” policies can transform how we manage drinking water safety in our New Jersey schools, protecting future generations from the devastating effects of lead.