Lead found in water at 2 Navy childcare sites.

Image source: http://peakwater.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/leadwater-300×225.jpg

Lead is schools is of particular concern because children spend a significant amount of their time in school buildings. According to the EPA, up to 50% of a child’s total lead exposure can come from water, therefore, it is important that schools take proactive steps to make sure that their drinking water is safe. In the last two decades alone elevated lead levels were documented in school districts in at least 39 states. In the case of schools, the monitoring and correcting lead issues is voluntary. In fact, there are no enforceable lead standards for schools. However, in the circumstance mentioned in the article “Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Navy must test for lead in its water systems every three years” so very proactive steps were taken to ensure the safety of the children.

Original article can be found at: http://hamptonroads.com/2013/03/lead-found-water-2-navy-child-care-sites

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 thoughts on “Lead found in water at 2 Navy childcare sites.

  1. Interesting article — it highlights a really important issue for kids everywhere.

    One thing that the article doesn’t point out, which I think is a little misleading, is that I’m pretty sure the “every three years” sampling they are talking about is the normal LCR (Lead and Copper Rule) compliance sampling for the whole distribution system that this facility is linked to. Because of the way the LCR is designed (only residential taps are used for LCR compliance), schools will never be tested under this type of sampling.

    In case anyone wants to learn more about how lead is regulated:

    Also, I know the EPA was at least at one point discussing the possibility of regulating schools as part of the long-term revision of the LCR. They had an interesting presentation discussing the barriers to implementing this type of regulation back in 2010 (starts at Slide 43 of the link below).


  2. The article mentioned an interesting point on the role of flushing and changing aerator- 3 out of 7 faucets fell into acceptable range. I was wondering which of the two caused such decrease. To my knowledge, a ‘first-draw’ sample (without flushing) will tell a different story than flushed samples (flushing time is another fact of concern). Back to the question, probably a ‘quick’ first-step action is to warn people and flushing X minutes before drinking the water. Is changing the pipes the only way to fundamentally solve the problem? If so that would be a huge cost… I must confess that I don’t know much on this area, and have little clues on how to solve the problem.

Leave a Comment