Get The Lead Out

Get the Lead Out
Ensuring Safe Drinking Water

for Our Children at School
RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER

Get the Lead Out
Ensuring Safe Drinking Water
for Our Children at School
RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER
Written by:
John Rumpler and Emma Dietz

Environment America Research & Policy Center
March 2019
Acknowledgements
PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center and PennPIRG Education Fund would like to thank Dr. David
Bellinger,PhD, Researcher Boston Children’s Hospital, Professor at Harvard Medical School; Dr. Morri Markowitz,
MD, Professor, Department of Pediatrics Albert Einstein College of Medicine; Yanna Lambrinidou, PhD, anthro-
pologist at Virginia Tech Department of Science and Technology in Society; Adrienne Katner, D.Env, M.S. Loui-
siana State University Health Sciences Center; and Gideon Weissman, policy analyst at Frontier Group for their
review of this report. Thanks also to Christina Schlegel for her work on our initial 2017 report.
The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of PennEnvironment Re-
search & Policy Center. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the views of our funders or those who provided review.
© 2019 PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center
The PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization focused on protecting our environ-
ment and providing the people of Pennsylvania a voice in the environmental debate. Drawing on more than 30
years of experience, our professional staff combines independent research, practical ideas and effective educa-
tional campaigns to overcome the opposition of special interests and win real results for Pennsylvania’s environ-
ment. For more information about PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center or for additional copies of this
report, please visit www.pennenvironmentcenter.org.
PennPIRG Education Fund is also a 501(c)(3) organization that offers an independent voice on behalf of the public
interest. We advocate to protect consumers and promote good government through investigations, public
education, and civic engagement.
Design: Meltzer Design
Cover photo: Phase4Photography/Shutterstock

Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Lead in Schools’ Water: A Threat to Children’s Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Solutions to Ensure Safe Drinking Water at School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Communities Rising to the Head of the Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Executive Summary
O
ver the past five years, the tragedy of Flint, able.3 Moreover, even when federal rules do apply to
Michigan has stunned the nation. We a school, they only require remediation when testing
watched the drinking water of an entire city confirms lead concentrations in excess of 15 parts per
become contaminated with lead. And, we know now billion at ten percent or more of taps sampled, even
that this toxic threat extends well beyond Flint to though medical and public health experts agree that
communities across the country. there is no safe level of lead for our children.4 The er-
ror of this approach is compounded by the fact that
In fact, test results now show that lead is even con-
testing, even when properly done, often fails to detect
taminating drinking water in schools and pre-schools
maximum lead levels in water coming out of the tap.
— flowing from thousands of fountains and faucets
where our kids drink water every day. Unfortunately, so far, most states are failing to protect
children from lead in schools’ drinking water. Our
In all likelihood, the confirmed cases of lead in schools’
review of 32 states’ laws and regulations finds:
water are just the tip of the iceberg. Most schools have
at least some lead in their pipes, plumbing, or fixtures. • Several states have no requirements for schools
And where there is lead, there is risk of contamination.1 and pre-schools to address the threat of lead in
drinking water; and
The health threat of lead in schools’ water deserves im-
mediate attention from state and local policymakers for • Of the few states with applicable laws, most follow
two reasons. First, lead is highly toxic and especially dam- flaws in the federal rules — relying on testing
aging to children — impairing how they learn, grow, and instead of prevention and using standards that
behave. So, we ought to be particularly vigilant against allow health-threatening levels of lead to persist
this health threat at schools and pre-schools, where our in our children’s water at school.
children spend their days learning and playing.
More specifically, when assessed in terms of protect-
Second, current regulations are too weak to protect ing children from lead in water at school, these states’
our children from lead-laden water at school. Federal policies earned the following grades:
rules only apply to the roughly ten percent of schools
and pre-schools that are considered to be their own State Grade
Public Water Systems.2 At schools not considered to be DC B+
a Public Water System, there is no federal rule protect- IL B-
ing kids from exposure to lead in schools’ drinking wa-
CA, NY, OR C+
ter. While the latest edition of the EPA’s 3Ts for Reducing
Lead in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Centers MD; NH; NJ C
recommends that schools reduce lead to the “lowest AZ; MA D
possible concentration,” unless a state’s law directs AL; CO; CT; FL; GA; IN; LA; ME; MI; MN; MT; F
schools to adhere to it, this guidance is not enforce- NC; NM; OH; PA; RI; TN; TX; VA; VT; WA; WI
1 Get the Lead Out

Given the high toxicity of lead to children, the most
health-protective policy is simply to “get the lead out”
“When it comes to schools,
of our schools and pre-schools. This involves pro-
actively removing lead-bearing parts from schools’
there often is an ideological
drinking water systems — from service lines to faucets
and fixtures. Because this prevention work will take divide…but potable water
time, schools can start by proactively installing filters
certified to remove lead at every tap used for drinking should know no ideological
or cooking. Schools should also immediately begin
regular and proper testing of all water outlets used or political constraint.”
for drinking or cooking to ensure that the prevention
steps being taken are effective, and promptly remove —Bob Casey, Senator from Pennsylvania8
from service any outlets where lead is detected. And,
schools should provide the public with easy access to
all testing data and the status of remediation plans. • Require testing at all water outlets used for drink-
ing or cooking at all schools annually, using proto-
The promise and viability of this “get the lead out” cols designed to capture worst-case lead exposure
approach can be seen in municipal and voluntary for children;
programs across the country. Madison, Wisconsin5
and Lansing, Michigan6 have removed all lead service • Immediately remove from service any faucet
lines from homes, and New York City has replaced or fountain used for drinking or cooking where
them at schools. Washington, D.C. also now requires testing indicates lead in the water;
school to pro-actively install certified filters at all out-
• Disclose all available information about lead in
lets used for drinking or cooking in schools.7
water infrastructure, test results, and remediation
plans/progress both onsite and online; and
Recommendations
• Provide funding to remove lead in schools’ water
The science now makes clear that there is no safe infrastructure
level of lead exposure for our children. So, to ensure
safe drinking water for our children, we need poli- The federal government should:
cies that are strong enough to “get the lead out” at
• Enforce and strengthen federal rules to protect drink-
schools and pre-schools.
ing water from lead — e.g. the Lead and Copper Rule;
States and communities should:
• Provide major funding to help states and commu-
• Proactively “get the lead out” of schools and child nities remove lead in water infrastructure —
care centers by replacing fountains, faucets, and including lead service lines and plumbing/fixtures
other parts containing lead; in schools; and
• Install and maintain filters certified to remove lead on • Marshal the authority of all relevant federal
every faucet or fountain used for cooking and drinking; agencies to protect public health from contamina-
tion of drinking water
• Adopt a 1 ppb standard for lead in schools’ drink-
ing water, consistent with recommendations of And of course, we should fully protect all sources of
the American Academy of Pediatrics; drinking water from pollution.
Executive Summary 2
Introduction
A
s our nation rushed through more than water contaminated with high levels of lead. Tens of
a century of unprecedented economic thousands of children were exposed to lead during
growth, we allowed several toxic health the crisis in Flint.11 In addition to acute symptoms and
threats to become embedded into the fabric of our other illnesses, by one estimate, these children will
lives. One of the more enduring and pervasive of lose 18,000 future healthy years combined.12
these threats has been the use of lead. While the
While Flint is an extreme case, it is hardly alone.
toxic nature of lead has been known for centuries, we
For decades, Washington D.C. struggled with lead
allowed manufacturers to put it in our paint, plumb-
contamination in schools’ drinking water. Initial tests
ing, gasoline, and many other products.
done in 1987 revealed taps dispensing lead over 80
For the past few decades, public health officials have ppb. And in 2006, nearly 20 years later, tests revealed
been working to undo the damage. Banning lead that 75 percent of schools were still experiencing
in gasoline immediately removed a major source of contamination, with taps in 14 schools dispensing
toxic air pollution.9 Barring lead in paint stopped a lead levels considered to be an acute health risk.13
major threat to children’s health from becoming even Since then, D.C. has adopted some of the strongest
worse, but we are still cleaning up the damage from policies in the nation. But thousands of communi-
millions of homes with lead paint, as well as related ties across the country still have lead in their drink-
lead in dust and soil.10 ing water. A review of data by USA Today found that
nearly 2,000 water systems across the 50 states had
Yet until recently, few Americans paid as much at-
levels of lead in their water in excess of U.S. Environ-
tention to another pervasive pathway for this potent
mental Protection Agency (EPA) standards between
toxicant: the delivery system that brings drinking
2012 and 2016.14 And the contamination is likely even
water right to our faucets.
more widespread.
Over the past five years, many Americans have
Now we know that lead is even contaminating the
watched in horror and disbelief as a tragedy unfolded
water at many of our schools and pre-schools — the
in Flint, Michigan. Through a combination of ap-
places our children go each day to learn and play.
palling decisions and denials, an entire city had its
3 Get the Lead Out

Lead in Schools’ Water:
A Threat to Children’s Health
“Anything above zero is harmful. Just like crack cocaine and

heroin, there’s no safe amount.”15
—Ron Saff, MD, who coordinated lead tests at Florida schools, from interview with Natural News
Lead is Harmful to Children — Figure 1: Adverse Effects of Lead at Low Levels22

Even at Low Levels
L
Figure 3
ead is a potent neurotoxicant. It is particularly
Lowest o
damaging to children for several reasons. Chil- lead serv
dren absorb 4-5 times as much ingested lead of route —
ganic lea
as adults from any given source.16 Once absorbed, and funct
lead flows from the blood to the brain, kidneys, and
bones.17 Yet children’s organs and bones are imma-
ture and more vulnerable than adults’; children also a halvin
have an incomplete blood-brain barrier.18 are not m
confirm
“We see learning difficulties, hyperactivity, developmen- financia
tal delays,” said Marcie Billings, a pediatrician with Mayo represen
Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.19 Experts say that some of It has be
resulting
the damage caused by absorbing lead is irreversible.20,21 levels be
year’s co
We have known for some time that high levels of lead tion rath
can cause severe health impacts — including anemia, lenge con
kidney disease, abnormal brain function and even rather th
death. (See Figure 1) applied
nary hea
Yet the medical science now confirms that even low “Blame
of lead p
blood lead levels can cause permanent damage to
called th
our children. According to EPA, “In children, low levels a “disea
of [lead] exposure have been linked to damage to hood lea
the central and peripheral nervous system, learning among p
disabilities, shorter stature, impaired hearing, and entirely preventable. As noted previously, it was only after 1970 that Perhaps
major steps were taken in the United States to address the problem. on the in
impaired formation and function of blood cells.”23 It is instructive to ask why the use of lead remained ubiquitous, and broader
in such immense quantities, throughout most of the twentieth cen- ness occ
tury, even in the face of the accumulating evidence that, by 1969, the victi
Dubos found so compelling. Many factors were likely in play, some housing
of which are discussed in the following paragraphs. tions tha
Lead in Schools’Water: A Threat to Children’s Health 4
The prevailing model of disease. For much of the twentieth century, mothers
public health was governed by a model of disease that was pri- viding in
marily patient oriented rather than population oriented. A child logical b
Of particular alarm for schools, the data now links low Figure 2: More Than 24 Million Children at Risk
lead levels with long-term loss of learning in our chil- of Losing IQ Points Due to Low Levels of Lead27
dren. For example, a study done in Wisconsin found
that 3,757 fourth-graders with relatively low lead
levels in their blood “scored significantly lower on
reading and math tests than those without elevated
blood-lead levels.” These children were exposed to
lead before the age of three, yet the adverse effects
of lead exposure persisted seven to eight years later.24
In 2016, the American Academy of Pediatrics con-

cluded that “[e]xtensive and compelling evidence
now indicates that lead-associated cognitive deficits
and behavioral problems can occur at blood lead
concentrations below 5 μg/dL”(micrograms per cubic
deciliter), which is the current reference level being
used by the Center for Disease Control.25,26
persistent toxicant, and once absorbed, it can remain
One stunning fact underscores the danger at hand: in the body.29 So, a child who drinks water from a
more than 24 million children in America are at risk fountain at school that episodically contains a slug
of losing IQ points due to low levels of lead. See of lead might not show elevated blood-lead levels
Figure 2. a month or two later. But the damage will persist in
her body.
Moreover, because lead flows from blood into the
organs and bones within several weeks, it will not In light of this alarming data, public health experts
always show up in blood tests. The half-life of lead in and agencies now agree: there is no safe level of lead
blood ranges from 28 to 36 days.28 However, lead is a for our children.30
5 Get the Lead Out

Lead is Contaminating
Water at Our Schools
S
areanda Hoffman goes to Caroline Elementary Moreover, some tests are showing exceedingly high
School in Ithaca, New York. She used to drink levels of lead. For example, one drinking water fountain
every day from a water fountain in her kin- at a Montessori school in Cleveland dispensed 1,560 parts
dergarten classroom – a fountain that, when tested, per billion at the time of testing.39 A school in the Chicago
measured high for lead. Unfortunately, this foun- suburbs dispensed lead at 212 times the federal standard
tain was just one of many in Caroline Elementary at the time of testing.40 Leicester Memorial Elementary in
that was found to be contaminated with lead; tests Massachusetts had a tap that tested at 22,400 ppb.41
showed numerous taps that dispensed lead concen-
Yet given the toxicity of lead at low levels, it is critical
trations of 100 parts per billion (ppb).32 As reported
to look beyond the most extreme test results. What
by USA Today, while drinking from these fountains,
emerges is a pattern of widespread contamination of
Sareanda used to come home with a rash around
drinking water at school.
her mouth and so tired she needed a long nap, two
symptoms which have been associated with expo- Massachusetts is one of the few states to publish
sure to lead.33 Concerned about this unusual behav- statewide test results showing lead in concentrations
ior, Sareanda’s mother switched her to bottled water below the 15 ppb level. Of the 43,000 taps tested
only. Since then, the rash cleared up and Saraenda’s in schools across the Commonwealth as of 2018, 59
energy has returned. percent found lead in the water.42
Unfortunately, Sareanda is not alone. As more
schools test, they are finding drinking water con- A More Pervasive Threat Than
taminated with lead at thousands of faucets and Confirmed by Testing
fountains across the country, as seen in the map at
In all likelihood, these confirmed cases of lead in
Figure 3. 34 From Maine to California, lead laced wa-
schools’ water are just the tip of the iceberg. Most
ter is being found in schools in communities across
schools are still not testing for lead at all.
the country.
Moreover, tests — even when properly done — can
The threat of lead in schools’ water affects not only
fail to capture the lead hazard present. Part of this
big cites but also suburban and rural communities.
conundrum is that corrosion and breaking off of lead
Sareanda Hoffman lives in Ithaca, New York. Else-
particles from pipes is highly variable. Multiple water
where, tests have documented lead tainted water
tests from one tap can result in highly variable lead
in schools in Cherry Hill, New Jersey35, Yarmouth,
levels between samples.43 In a lead sampling study
Maine36, several other school districts in upstate New
conducted in 2013, researchers concluded that a
York37 and suburban communities in Illinois.38
Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools 6

Figure 3: A Deeper Dive: State-Specific Information About Lead in Schools’ Water
PENNSYLVANIA NEW YORK MAINE NEW HAMPSHIRE

Lead has been found in taps In New York City, Of the limited testing Little or no data is currently
in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh 83% of the buildings done, 26 schools and available, but lead contamination
schools, as well as Berks, tested had at least child cares found is likely as prevalent in New
Bucks, Lancaster, Butler and one outlet with lead “high levels of lead” Hampshire as in other states.
Montgomery Counties. levels over 15 ppb. in the water.
MASSACHUSETTS
More than half of the
OHIO
43,000 outlets tested
40 out of 54 schools tested in
found lead in the water
Cincinnati found some level
as of December 2018.
of lead in the drinking water.
CONNECTICUT
VIRGINIA
NEW JERSEY Little or no data is
5 school districts in central
55% of school taps currently available, but
Virginia confirmed instances
tested in Bergen lead contamination
of lead contamination in
County found lead is likely as prevalent
schools’ water.
in the water. Tests in Connecticut as in
MARYLAND also confirmed lead other states.
At least 12 schools tested in in schools’ water in
Montgomery County have one or Newark, Trenton,
WASHINGTON more taps with lead above 15 ppb. Cherry Hill, and
60.8% of taps tested found lead
elsewhere.
concentrations above 1 ppb.
WISCONSIN
MONTANA ILLINOIS Milwaukee schools had
OREGON On average, 75% of the water 78% of the 155 schools tested 183 fountains with lead
A 2016 analysis found samples from four school districts in Cook County School District levels above 15 ppb.
that 88% of the 100 found lead concentrations at or found at least one tap with lead
school districts who above 1 ppb. concentrations of 2 ppb or higher
tested found lead in
drinking water.
MICHIGAN
COLORADO
Detroit Public School District
100 Colorado
shut off their water after 57
CALIFORNIA schools have
of 86 schools found elevated
More than 400 detected lead in
levels of lead in water fixtures.
schools have found their water as of
lead in the water at June 2017.
concentrations of
5 ppb or greater. TENNESSEE
MINNESOTA Even when outlets were
This year, a new flushed prior to sampling,
law went into 30% of Metro Nashville
UTAH effect that will schools found lead in
Testing done in 2017 revealed that require schools to their water in 2017.
lead was present in drinking water at test for lead.
90% of the 249 Utah schools tested.
NORTH CAROLINA
41 out of 89 schools in the
ARIZONA
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Lead was detected at 48 percent of the
district had taps with lead
13,380 taps tested at schools in Arizona.
exceeding 15 ppb.
FLORIDA
ALABAMA Four out of five
TEXAS The state is now requiring Polk County
71 percent of Texas schools schools test for lead, but schools in GEORGIA
tested had lead in water data from results has not Florida showed Outlets at 25 of 60 Atlanta schools tested
above 1 part per billion. been analyzed. elevated levels. found lead in water above 15 ppb.
7 Get the Lead Out

single sample from a water tap could not accurately results show that 83% of the buildings tested had at
reflect the levels of lead flowing through the tap. In least one outlet with lead levels over 15 ppb.49
their test of 32 homes with lead service lines, samples
To be sure, the limited available test results from
from the same tap varied from below the lead action
schools across the country are alarming enough, as
level to well above it. This degree of variation was
they confirm the presence of a potent neurotoxicant
true for most samples in the study.44
in thousands of faucets and fountains in schools
across the country. But in truth, the scope of this lead-
“This is like Russian roulette.” laden threat to our children’s health is even wider.
—Marc Edwards on testing
for lead in drinking water.45 How Lead Gets into Schools’
Drinking Water
In addition to the inherent variability in testing, some Most schools have at least some lead in their pipes,
testing techniques mask lead risks even further. Chief plumbing, or fixtures. And where there is lead, there
among these is a practice known as pre-stagnation is risk of contamination.
flushing, where taps are run for a certain number of
For smaller schools and child care facilities, the prob-
minutes or even hours the night before test samples
lem can start with the pipe that brings water into the
are drawn. This practice can artificially lower lead
building, called the service line (or service connec-
levels in test samples because it removes the water
tion). When service lines are made of lead, they are a
which was sitting stagnant in lead service lines or
major source of water contamination.50 In part, this is
other lead-laden plumbing, and this extended period
a function of the unparalleled surface area inside the
of time is when lead typically leaches into the water.
service line where water is in direct contact with 100
With these considerations in mind, EPA is now recom-
percent pure lead. In addition, the service lines are in
mending against the use of pre-stagnation flushing
closer proximity to disturbances from construction —
in testing water for lead.46
especially repair work on water mains — which can
The experience of New York City provides a dramatic dislodge lead particles into the water.51 The role of
example of how pre-stagnation flushing can cause lead service lines in water contamination is so strong
failures in lead testing in schools’ drinking water. In that the Center for Disease Control was actually able
the summer of 2016, the city flushed the water in to correlate them with elevated blood lead levels in
every school for two hours the night before sampling Washington, D.C.52
the water for lead. According to Dr. Yanna Lam-
While installing new lead service lines was halted
brinidou from Virginia Tech, who has done extensive
decades ago with the passage of the Safe Drinking
research on leaded drinking water, “Unless N.Y.C.
Water Acts Amendments of 1986, their toxic legacy is
schools flush every drinking water tap every evening
pervasive.53 According to an estimate by the Ameri-
for 2 hours routinely, their sampling technique is both
can Water Works Association, over 6 million lead ser-
unreliable and scientifically and morally indefensible.”
vice lines remain in use across the nation. Though the
Dr. Marc Edwards, another nationally recognized lead
study had sampling limitations, and therefore may
expert at Virginia Tech, agreed. “The results should
not accurately reflect the number of service lines re-
be thrown into the garbage, and the city should start
maining nationwide, it made a conservative estimate
over.”47 The city has now retested taps at all its schools
that the drinking water of 15 to 22 million people still
without the two-hour pre-stagnation flushing step.48
passes through lead service lines.54
With retesting complete as of late April, 2017, the

Figure 4 further illustrates the locations where lead could be present in a school or ECE
facility.
Figure 4: Lead in Drinking Water Sources (Source: Edwards, 2009)

Reproduced from Lead in School Water Delivery Systems. W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Managing Lead in Drinking Water at Schools
and Early Childhood Education Facilities (February 2016), reproduced from Edwards, Marc and Simoni Triantafyllidou, Lead (Pb) in
U.S. Drinking Water: School Case Studies (2009).
While larger schools are unlikely to have lead service

lines, they do have extensive interior pipes, plumb-
ing, and many more faucets and fountains – all of
which are potential sources of lead. Until 1988, many
drinking water fountains or bubblers were manufac-
tured with lead liners.55 And until 2014, significant
amounts of lead were allowed in new pipes, pipe
fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures (except in Cali-
Managing
fornia, which Leadstricter
adopted in Drinking
codes Water at56Schools
in 2010). Some and Early Childhood Education Facilities
experts fear that even the new, stricter regulations
Prepared by the Horsley Witten Group, Inc.
for allowable levels of lead per
and commissioned by wetted
the W.K.surface
Kelloggarea in
Foundation 12
pipes and plumbing could still leave enough lead in
contact with water for contamination to occur.57
The bottom line: most schools and early childhood

education programs are likely to have had lead in
their water delivery systems. And where there is lead,
there is risk that the water kids are drinking can be
contaminated.
Data from several school districts underscores the A Lead Service Line58 Credit: EPA
danger from the lead contained in outlets and
9 Get the Lead Out

plumbing inside of schools. For example, after brass why is national policy falling so far short of this criti-
fixtures were installed at 131 schools in Los Angeles, cal health goal?
the school district found elevated lead levels.59 And in
Since 1974, the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) has
Milwaukee, even after the school district stated that all
provided an important framework for ensuring that
lead service lines had been removed, tests showed 183
the water public utilities send to their customers and
samples with lead in drinking water at levels greater
communities is clean and safe. As such, the primary
than 15 parts per billion.60
focus of regulations promulgated by EPA pursuant to
the Act — such as the Lead and Copper Rule — is on
Current Policies Do Not Ensure establishing and enforcing system-wide responsibili-
Lead-Free Drinking Water ties of water utilities.
Common sense suggests that the best way to keep However, this narrow regulatory focus leaves our
drinking water free of lead is to stop using it in water drinking water vulnerable to contamination both
delivery systems. Over time, national policies have before and after it is in possession of public water utili-
embraced this preventative approach, at least with ties. On the front end, it does little to prevent pollution
respect to new products. In 1986, new lead service of the rivers, lakes and streams that serve as sources of
lines were banned.61 In 1988, Congress passed the our drinking water; recently, we have seen cases where
Lead Contamination and Control Act, which dra- toxic threats — including nitrates, cyanotoxins, and
matically reduced the lead content of new pipes chemical spills — have entered the drinking water sup-
and plumbing to 8 percent.62 And then, as recently ply.66 And on the back end, it leaves water susceptible
as 2014, the definition of “lead free” plumbing was to contamination as it travels through plumbing in the
ratcheted down to “not more than a weighted aver- streets, in our homes and schools, all the way to the
age of 0.25 percent lead when used with respect to faucet where we actually drink it.
the wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing
fittings, and fixtures.”63 Still, some experts are con- It is on this “back end” where most lead contamina-
cerned that even this relatively small amount of lead tion of drinking water occurs. This is particularly true
can still cause some contamination.64 with large buildings like schools, which have exten-
sive networks of pipes and plumbing before water
Unfortunately, because these critical prevention poli-
cies were only adopted recently, we are still left with
an extensive legacy of lead in the pipes and fixtures
that bring water to the faucets in our homes and the
fountains our children use at school. And with thou-
sands of test samples now confirming the presence
of lead in water, it is self-evident that our existing

laws and rules are doing a poor job of protecting our
children from this dangerous legacy.
The problem is not a failure to acknowledge the

serious threat lead poses to children. Every relevant
federal agency — including EPA — agrees that there
is no safe level of lead for children, and that the goal Corroded water main with lead fittings. Photo by Mike
should be to have zero lead in drinking water.65 So Thomas via Flickr, CC BY NC ND 2.0

reaches the tap. In this context, it becomes clear how across the country are exempt from even its limited
federal policy has been formulated in ways which fail requirements.68
to ensure the water coming out of the faucet is safe
Fourth and finally, the schools the LCR does apply to
to drink.
are often home-based early child care centers, which
In 1991, EPA promulgated the Lead and Cop- house our youngest and most vulnerable population
per Rule, pursuant to SDWA. The rule is primarily — but the rule only requires utilities to take action
designed to get utilities to identify problems that when more than 10 percent of test samples exceed
require systemwide action, such as adjusting cor- this 15 ppb “action level.”69
rosion control at the treatment plant.67 At least to
A different federal guidance, the EPA’s 3Ts Manual
some degree, the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) has
for Reducing Lead in Drinking Water in Schools and
reduced lead concentrations in drinking water for
Child Care Facilities, has recommendations that
large water systems that it requires to use corro-
would address some of the shortcomings of the LCR.
sion control.
For example, it provides explicit testing instructions
Yet the rule has four key shortcomings. First, the that prohibit sampling protocols known to hide lead
rule relies heavily on testing (rather than proactively (such as pre-stagnation flushing). And significantly,
removing lead bearing parts and installing certified rather than using a 15 ppb standard, the 3Ts guidance
filters). As discussed above, testing for lead can often now urges schools to take action to “reduce their lead
result in false negatives due to the “Russian Roulette” levels to the lowest possible concentrations.”70 How-
factor in corrosion and water sampling. ever, except in states with policies explicitly directing
schools to adhere to this document, the 3Ts manual is
Second, the rule only mandates remediation when
not enforceable.71
tests show lead concentrations in water greater than
15 parts per billion in 10 percent or more of taps In summary, federal requirements to protect our
sampled, even though there is no safe level of lead children from lead-laced water at schools and early
in drinking water. This leads to the third shortcom- childhood programs are weak to non-existent. Much
ing, which is that, as the LCR only applies to water stronger action by state and local officials will be criti-
utilities, roughly 90 percent of schools and daycares cal for our children’s health.
11 Get the Lead Out

State Policies: Still Not
Making the Grade
F
or this report, we evaluated laws and policies law apply to all schools and child care centers, or
in 31 states and an ordinance in the District of just those built before a certain year?
Columbia on how well they protect children
Figure 6 shows the grade earned by each state this
from lead in drinking water at school. The states were
year – and how it compares to their grade from
graded on five main criteria:
2017.72 Some states like California and Oregon have
• Getting the lead out: Are schools required to seen progress, while others are continuing to receive
proactively remove lead from water delivery a failing grade.
systems, or only required to take action in response
More than half of the states reviewed have failed to
to testing if at all? Are required steps sufficient to
establish any meaningful law or policy for schools to
eliminate the threat of lead contamination?
reduce risks of lead in drinking water. Of the states with
• The “lead standard”: What level of lead triggers laws on the books, some only require testing and no
mandatory remedial action? remediation. What’s more, even when states do require
remediation, their policies often replicate some of the
• Testing: Is testing required, and if so, how are
key limitations of the federal Lead & Copper Rule, such
tests conducted, and how often?
as only requiring action when lead levels exceed 15 ppb.
• Public disclosure and transparency: How much infor-
While mandatory rules to protect children’s health
mation is being shared with parents and the public?
received higher scores in our assessment, states did
• Applicability: Do the state laws apply to both receive partial credit for well-funded voluntary mea-
schools and early childhood programs? Does the sures with demonstrated results. However, we did not
B+ Figure 5: How states are scoring on keeping

B- lead out of schools’ drinking water
Grade
C+
C
D
F
0 5 10 15 20 25
Number of states earning grade
State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade 12

include funding in our grading criteria; since funding Figure 6: State Grades: Then and Now
comes from so many different sources — including State 2017 2019 State 2017 2019
the federal drinking water state revolving fund —we
AL ** F MT ** F
could not establish a reliable way to assess sufficient
funding for any given state’s efforts. AZ ** D NC ** F
CA F C+ NH ** C
Exploring Some State Policies: CO ** F NJ C- C
Heralding a more preventative approach, in 2016 Cali- CT F F NM ** F

fornia became the first state in the nation to pass a law DC B B+ NY C C+
to eliminate lead service lines — not just for schools
FL F F OH F F
but across the entire state. Signed into law by Governor
Jerry Brown in September of 2016, SB 1398 required GA F F OR F C+
public water systems to compile an inventory of known IL D B- PA F F
lead service lines by July 2018; now, they are required IN ** F RI ** F
to provide the state with a timeline for the replacement
LA ** F TN ** F
of these lines. Erring on the side of public health, public
water systems must either affirmatively determine MA D D TX F F
whether service lines are made of lead and report that MD F C VA ** F
information to the State Water Resources Control Board ME F F VT ** F
or have a plan for replacing service lines where the lead
MI ** F WA F F
content cannot be determined by 2020.73 One key ca-
veat is that the state has yet to establish an enforceable MN ** F WI F F
timeline for this ambitious and preventative measure. ** Not graded in 2017
Wisconsin is also working to tackle lead service line
removal. While the Badger State’s program is not 3) requiring annual tests of all outlets; 4) publishing
mandatory or comprehensive, it has awarded $26 all testing and remediation data online; 5) placing bar
million through a voluntary program that is begin- codes with access to filter maintenance data on foun-
ning to remove lead service lines in 42 communities tains at school; and 6) the law applies to schools, early
across the state.74 As noted earlier, however, service childhood programs, and even public parks.75
lines are only one source of lead in schools’ water.
It is perhaps no accident that such a far-reaching
Wisconsin, like many other states, does not require
measure should emerge in Washington, D.C., as the
schools to take specific measures to “get the lead
District has experienced a major crisis with lead in
out” of their fixtures or plumbing, or to shut off taps
its drinking water. Many of the policy ideas in the
with elevated lead levels.
ordinance came from parents and long-time lead-
Far and away the most protective policy for address- in-water activists, who have been spearheading the
ing lead in schools’ drinking water is the ordinance push for this precedent-setting measure. While the
adopted by Washington, D.C. The U.S. Capitol is now standard for lead in schools’ water being used is
the first jurisdiction in the country with the following Washington, D.C. is still not the most health-protec-
protections: 1) requiring filters at every tap in school tive at 5 ppb, the policy as a whole earned the top
used for drinking; 2) establishing a standard for lead in grade in our report due to its pro-active approach to
drinking water stricter than the Federal “action level”; addressing this toxic threat.
13 Get the Lead Out

Finally, while our analysis focused on laws applicable installation of filters and removal of lead service lines
to schools, we did give additional credit where those and other lead-bearing parts; require annual testing of
same policies also applied to early childhood pro- all potable water outlets using protocols that capture
grams. As per a previous study by the Environmental worst-case lead exposure; and require transparent and
Law Institute, some states have requirements that ap- accessible reporting of all results and of remediation
ply solely to child care facilities.76 We did not include plans.82 The bill was introduced by Representative Eh-
such policies in our analysis. rlich (D-Marblehead) and Senator Lovely (D- Salem), and
as of February 20, 2019 has 79 co-sponsors.83
For a breakdown of how each state earned their
grade, see our methodology section. A strong bill is also being considered by the legislature
in Washington State. Introduced by Rep. Pollet (D- 46th
legislative district). HB 1860 would require schools to
Extra credit projects
proactively install certified filters on potable water
While many states are not making the grade on outlets; inventory and replace lead bearing parts
protecting children from exposure to lead in school in schools; design a consistent plan for testing and
drinking water, there are a handful of states across ensure transparent reporting of results; and shut off
the country with proposed laws or rules that, if adopt- taps where lead in drinking water exceeds 5 ppb.84
ed, would increase their grade. Some of these states
include Massachusetts77, Vermont78, Washington79, A bill introduced in Pennsylvania by Representative
Pennsylvania80 and Montana81. This year, we graded Boback (R-District 117) will require annual testing at
those proposed policies; Figure 7 shows how each of schools using protocols designed to capture worst-
these states’ grades would improve if they were to case lead exposure. If lead concentrations exceed 5
adopt the policy that is currently proposed: ppb, remediation must include either installing filters
certified to remove lead or removing the lead parts
Figure 7: Adopting proposed policies causing the contamination. And, all specific results of
could improve states’ grades the testing are to be shared online and sent home to
parents, in order to ensure transparency.85
State Proposed Policy Grade
MA A In Vermont S.40, An act relating to testing and
remediation of lead in the drinking water of schools
WA B+
and child care facilities, would require schools to test
PA B-
all outlets used for drinking or cooking using best-
VT C practice protocols; prohibit the use of outlets where
lead exceeds the established action level of 3 ppb;
remediate all affected taps; and ensure fully transpar-
If adopted, the proposed policy from Massachusetts,
ent and accessible data is available for the public.86
H 774/S 500, would be the strongest policy nationwide
based on our grading structure, earning the Bay State In each case, the proposed policy would be a good
an “A”. The bill would establish a 1 ppb standard for lead step forward in protecting our children from expo-
in schools’ water and require outlets that exceed this sure to lead in schools drinking water – and would
level to be shut off until remediated; require proactive earn the state a higher grade!
State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade 14

Solutions to Ensure Safe
Drinking Water at School
A
ll of our children deserve safe drinking water ensure that every part of their water delivery systems
— especially at the places they go each day — from plumbing to fixtures to faucets — is lead-free.
to learn and play. Yet we have constructed
2) Install and maintain certified filters. Getting the
water distribution systems that deliver water to their
lead out will take time. In the interim, every outlet
fountains and faucets laced with lead. And wherever
used for drinking or cooking should be fitted with
there is lead, there is an ever-present risk of corrosion
filters certified by the Occupational Safety and Health
and contamination. Given this reality, it is imperative
Administration (OSHA), which includes accreditations
to adopt all of the following solutions to ensure safe
such as the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) or
water at our schools and early childhood programs:
the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to
1) Get the Lead Out. The most effective way to en- remove lead from water. Even with high levels of con-
sure lead-free water for our children is, quite simply, tamination in Flint, an EPA analysis documented that
to get the lead out. As documented above, lead ser- NSF filters proved effective at removing lead.89
vice lines are a major source of water contamination.
3) Proactively prevent lead contamination. Rather
In 2015, the National Drinking Water Advisory Coun-
than waiting for tests to confirm that the water our
cil — comprised of experts, advocates, and affected
children drink is laced with lead, schools should be
communities advising EPA - made the clear case for
removing lead-bearing parts and installing filters
lead service line removal:
certified to remove lead proactively. This preventa-
“The Council considers that the driving proactive tive approach is critical because tests — even when
principle to improve public health protection is properly done — can fail to capture lead exposure.
removing full lead service lines from contact with
Moreover, a proactive prevention approach is consis-
drinking water to the greatest degree possible and
tent with other national policies aimed at protecting
minimizing the risks of exposure to the remaining
children’s health from lead. To address lead from auto
sources of lead in the meantime.”87
emissions, our nation has banned leaded gasoline.
Marc Edwards, the Virginia Tech engineer who Belatedly, we also banned lead in paint.90 For a home
helped Flint residents confirm their water contamina- to be certified as lead-safe, policies require rigorous
tion, has called for the “complete removal of all lead remediation to “get the lead out.”
service lines” across the country.88
4) Require action at 1 part per billion. Medical
Yet prevention cannot stop at the service line. As the experts agree that there is no safe level of lead, and
data from Milwaukee to Los Angeles shows, schools standards that trigger mandatory remediation —
and early childhood programs must take action to often called an “action level” — should reflect this
15 Get the Lead Out

health assessment. For this reason, the American tion should be available both onsite and online, with
Academy of Pediatrics is calling on officials “to ensure community-appropriate language access. In Wash-
that water fountains in schools do not exceed water ington DC, resident activists have urged local officials
lead concentrations of 1 ppb.”91 At a minimum, out- to require a bar code on each tap at school, so that
lets with water exceeding this concentration should parents can verify that filters are being maintained
immediately be removed from service until perma- properly at all sources used for drinking and cooking.
nent remediation — not mere flushing — ensures Further, all such information should be made accessi-
safe drinking water on an ongoing basis. ble online on a statewide basis as Massachusetts has
done. This provides the public with a clear picture of
5) Proper Testing. While schools must “get the lead
the scope of the lead-in-water problem, which facili-
out” proactively over time, testing in the interim can
tates informed statewide policy responses.
at least confirm some immediate threats to children’s
health and ensure that remediation steps are work- Finally, it is critical that all of these lead prevention
ing properly. Schools and early childhood programs measures apply to outlets used for cooking as well
should test at all water outlets used for drinking and as drinking. As Edwards explains, “If you’re cooking
cooking annually, and use protocols designed to pasta in the tap water, you’re using a huge volume
capture worst-case lead exposure for children. For of water and a high flow rate. Then you pour the
example, U.S. EPA put out a clarification on sampling water away and the lead sticks to the food. The net
procedures in 2016 that recommends against pre- result is almost the same as drinking that entire
stagnation flushing.92 And given the inherent vari- volume of water.”93
ability in lead concentrations, officials must be careful
to avoid suggesting that a failure to detect lead is the
same as a permanent assurance of safe water.
6) Provide full disclosure and accountability.

Parents have a right to know whether their children’s
water at school is safe. Moreover, as securing lead-
free water at school will require several steps over
time, transparency and accountability are critical to
ensure that those steps are implemented and effec-
tive. Schools and early childhood programs should
provide the public with information about lead-bear-
ing materials in their water infrastructure, test results,
and remediation plans and progress. Such informa- Photo by Jeff Turner via Flickr, CC BY 2.0
Solutions to Ensure Safe Drinking Water at School 16

Communities Rising to
the Head of the Class
“Parents send their kids to school to be in a safe environment.

You have to make sure the water the students are drinking in
schools is safe.”
—Mike Thomas, Superintendent of Operations, Brockton MA, after
replacing all old fountains with filtered bottle filling stations94
A
small number of cities and school communi- nation of schools’ drinking water. After voluntarily
ties are beginning to embrace the precau- testing more than 1,700 drinking water outlets across
tionary principle and have already been 69 school buildings, the district has either replaced,
working either on getting the lead out of their water capped, or (in a few cases) installed a certified filter at
systems completely or providing a safe alternative. every outlet that showed an elevated level of lead.96
While we only assigned grades to states as a whole Though this approach is not pro-active and the dis-
(and the District of Columbia) there are cities and trict is still using a 15 ppb standard, the remediation
school districts across the nation that are upholding steps are strong in that they “get the lead out” by
more protective standards than their state. Some removing the source of the problem.
trailblazing cities include San Diego, Austin, Cleve-
Austin, Texas has adopted one of the most health pro-
land, Brockton (MA) and Madison.
tective standards and is working to ensure that lead
San Diego’s school district has committed to testing in schools’ water does not exceed 1 ppb, as recom-
all drinking water outlets for lead and doing physical mended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. In
repairs anytime a water tap tests positive for lead at 5 order to achieve this, they will be installing (or replac-
parts per billion or higher.95 While pediatricians stress ing) filters certified to remove lead on any outlet that
that there is no safe level of lead for children, this 5 tests above this level.97 Installing point of use filters
ppb standard is still one third of the level of lead cur- or filtered water bottle filling stations as a source of
rently allowed in school drinking water by the state potable water is a relatively inexpensive and easy first
of California. step to “get the lead out” of kids’ water at school.
The Metropolitan School District in Cleveland, Ohio In Brockton, Massachusetts the public school district
has also begun taking steps to address lead contami- replaced all of their old water fountains with filtered
17 Get the Lead Out

water bottle filling stations and replaced all faucets reduction in lead contamination; between 2011 and
with new models that are certified lead-free. Brock- 2016, the highest lead level in the city’s water was
ton is hardly the wealthiest of school districts; 77 per- 3.5 ppb.101 Moreover, in opting to “get the lead out”
cent of its students receive free or reduced lunch.98 instead of adding phosphates to its water for cor-
Yet when testing showed lead in the water, Superin- rosion control, Madison helped protect its beloved
tendent of Operations Mike Thomas decided to draw lakes. Phosphates contribute to algal blooms, which
on the district’s emergency contingency budget to can harm wildlife and human health as well.102 And in
fix the problem. When asked what compelled him to the wake of Flint, Susan Bauman, who was Mayor of
do so, Thomas said, “Parents send their kids to school Madison during the pipe replacements, can see the
to be in a safe environment. That includes the physi- impact it has had on the city. “People walk up to me
cal part of the building they’re going to be in. You in the streets now and say, ‘Thanks.’”103
have to make sure the water the students are drink-
Just 60 miles from Flint is Lansing, another city that
ing in schools is safe.”99
has successfully removed lead from its water infra-
In Massachusetts, this message has been heard: in structure. Last year, Lansing completed the removal
his FY20 budget, Governor Baker has proposed up to of 14,500 lead pipes underneath the city.104 And lastly,
$30 million to help schools take first key “get the lead after identifying about 70,000 properties with lead
out” steps, such as buying filters and replacing lead pipes or lead service lines, Milwaukee is now planning
bearing parts.100 to borrow $2.6 million from the federal-state loan
fund for lead pipe replacement. The city is prioritizing
More broadly, a trio of Midwestern cities is at the
lead pipe replacement at 385 daycare centers.105
forefront of efforts to fully replace lead service
lines— not just at schools and pre-schools but across Other cities moving forward with lead service line
their communities. replacement include Galesburg, Illinois, which is
using a $4 million federal loan to remove half of the
Madison, Wisconsin, is already ahead of the pack.
estimated 10,000 lead service lines there.106 Denver
Faced with test results confirming lead in its water,
is also working to replace lead service lines as it finds
the city dug out approximately 8,000 lead pipes
them during construction projects.107
between 2001 and 2011. This step led to a drastic
Communities Rising to the Head of the Class 18

Methodology
For assessing state policies: We graded states in five main categories: Lead Stan-
dard in Water; Testing Protocols; “Get The Lead Out”
In scoring states’ laws and policies related to lead in
Steps; Public Disclosure and Transparency; and Appli-
schools’ drinking water, we assigned the following
cability. In some categories, the criteria were tiered so
values for specific measures based on our assessment
that states not taking the full recommended measure
of their relative importance in ensuring lead-free
could still earn points for the steps they are taking.
water at school:
Where appropriate, we gave states partial credit for
Point Range Grade
credible voluntary measures that, as best we could
verify, were actually being implemented.
0 - 39 F
40 - 64 D To a large degree, the successful implementation of
lead prevention policies will depend on funding and
65 - 79 C-
enforcement. Yet funding comes from so many differ-
80 - 94 C ent sources — including the federal drinking water
95 - 109 C+ state revolving fund — that we could not establish a
reliable way to assess sufficient funding for any given
110 - 125 B-
state’s efforts. Similarly, absent uniform data, we had
126 - 140 B
no meaningful way to compare the effectiveness of
141 - 155 B+ state enforcement or compliance efforts.
156 - 170 A-
The following chart provides a breakdown of where
171 - 185 A each state earned (or did not earn) points on our grad-
186 - 200 A+ ing structure. The policies assessed were confirmed
by our directors in each state organization to ensure
that 1) it was the most up-to-date policy promulgated
by the state and 2) points were awarded or withheld
accurately based on the requirements of the policy.
19 Get the Lead Out

Score AL AZ CA CO CT DC FL GA
Lead Standard in Water Max Score: 30 points 5 5 5 5 0 10 0 0
Uses 1 ppb or zero 30 points 0 0 0
Uses above 1 ppb but under 15 ppb 10 points 10
Uses 15 ppb (1 liter sample) or 20 ppb (250 mL sample) 5 points 5 5 5 5
No standard specified 0 points
Testing Protocols Max Score: 35 points 10 15 16 0 0 35 0 0
Testing for worst-case results—several samples per

15 points 0 0 15 0 0
tap, prohibit sampling protocols known to hide lead
Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead 10 points 10 10 10
Tests all faucets and fountains used for drinking or

15 points 0 0 0 0 15 0 0
cooking at every school
Tests at least some outlets at every school 5 points 5 5
Tests every year at schools 5 points 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
Tests every 2-5 years at schools 2 points
Only requires schools to test once 1 point 1
No testing required 0 points
"Get The Lead Out" Steps Max Score: 95 points 0 15 40 0 0 55 0 0
Requires pro-active replacement of fountains, faucets

30 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
and/or other lead-bearing parts
Requires pro-active installation of filters certified to

25 points 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0
remove lead at every outlet used for drinking or cooking
Requires immediate shut off of potable water outlets

20 points 0 5 20 0 0 20 0 0
that exceed testing standard for lead
Remediation requires removing lead bearing parts or

20 points 0 0 20 0 0 0 0
installing filters certified to remove lead
Requires some remediation, but there is broad

10 points 10 10
discretion (could allow flushing only, etc.)
No remedation required 0 points
Public Disclosure and Transparency Max Score: 20 points 10 10 13 10 0 18 0 0
Disclosure of lead infrastructure: service lines, fixtures 5 points 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0
Disclosure of all specific test results 5 points 5 5 5 5 0 5 0 0
Disclosure information available online 5 points 5 5 5 5 0 5 0 0
Disclosure of remediation plan and implementation 5 points 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
Applicability Max Score: 20 points 0 0 10 0 0 20 0 0
Laws cover all schools and all child care centers 20 points 0 0 10 0 0 20 0 0
Total Points 200 25 45 84 15 0 138 0 0
BONUS POINTS - Proactive removal of LSLs system wide Max Bonus: 30 points 0 0 20 0 0 10 0 0
Final Score 25 45 104 15 0 148 0 0
GRADE F D C+ F F B+ F F
Methodology 20
Score IL IN LA MD MA ME MI MN
Uses 1 ppb or zero 30 points 30 0 0 0
Uses above 1 ppb but under 15 ppb 10 points
Uses 15 ppb (1 liter sample) or 20 ppb (250 mL sample) 5 points 5 5 5

15 points 15 0 15 15 0 0
Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead 10 points 10 10

15 points 15 0 0 15 0 0 0 15
Tests at least some outlets at every school 5 points
Tests every year at schools 5 points 0 0 5 0 0 0
Tests every 2-5 years at schools 2 points 2

30 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 points 20 0 0 20 0 0 0 0

20 points 0 0 0 0 0 0

10 points 10 10
Total Points 200 107 20 10 80 30 0 0 37
Final Score 117 30 10 80 40 0 30 37
GRADE B- F F C D F F F
21 Get the Lead Out

Score MT NC NH NJ NM NY OH OR
Uses 1 ppb or zero 30 points 0 0 0
Uses 15 ppb (1 liter sample) or 20 ppb (250 mL sample) 5 points 5 5 5 5 5

15 points 0 0 15 0 15 12

15 points 0 0 15 15 0 15 0 15
Tests every year at schools 5 points 0 0 0 0
Tests every 2-5 years at schools 2 points 2 1 2 1
Only requires schools to test once 1 point

30 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 points 0 0 10 20 0 20 0 20

20 points 0 0 0 0 0 5 20

10 points 10 10
Total Points 200 0 0 82 81 0 97 25 108
Final Score 0 0 0 0 0 107 25 108
GRADE F F C C F C+ F C+
Methodology 22
Score PA RI TN TX VA VT WA* WI
Uses 1 ppb or zero 30 points 0 0 0 0
Uses 15 ppb (1 liter sample) or 20 ppb (250 mL sample) 5 points 5 5 5
Testing Protocols Max Score: 35 points 3 10 0 15 0 0 0

15 points 0 0 0 0 0 0

15 points 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0
Tests every year at schools 5 points 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tests every 2-5 years at schools 2 points

30 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 points 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0

20 points 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

10 points 10
Total Points 200 23 35 39 0 15 0 5 0
Final Score 33 35 39 0 20 0 25 10
GRADE F F F F F F F F
*Washington state score only reflects policies related to schools.
23 Get the Lead Out

How the States Earned Their Arizona
Grades: Explanations of Points:
partial credit and sources Lead Standard
• Uses a 15 ppb standard 1 - 5 points
Alabama
Testing Protocols
Points: • Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead 2 -
Lead Standard 10 points
• Uses a 20 ppb standard.1 - 5 points • Tests at least some outlets at every school 2 - 5 points
• Testing Protocols ºº Select two sampling locations from each build-
• Prohibits protocols known to hide lead.1 - 10 points ing built before January 1, 1988 and one sample
• Tests all taps used for drinking or cooking.3 - 0 points location for buildings built after this date
ºº At a minimum, each participating school shall • Frequency: 1 time program - 0 points
have at least one water cooler and one kitchen “Get The Lead Out” steps
sink tested. • No proactive measures - 0 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps • Requires immediate shut off of potable water
• None required - 0 points outlets exceeding testing standard for lead 1 - 5 out
of 20 points
Public Disclosure and Transparency ºº If two taps tested exceed 50 ppb, the school is
• Disclosure of all specific results.3 - 5 points required to shut off ALL their water
• Disclosure of results available online.3 - 5 points • Requires some remediation, but there is broad discre-
tion (could allow flushing only, etc.) 1 - 10 points
Applicability
• Not applicable to all schools or all preschools - 0 points Public Disclosure and Transparency
ºº Voluntary school testing program.1 • Disclosure of all specific test results 3 - 5 points
• Disclosure information available online (in google
Sources
1 Alabama Department of Environmental Management,
drive) 3 - 5 points
“Lead Testing in Public Schools Sampling Plan.” Accessed March
6th 2019 at http://www.adem.state.al.us/programs/water/water-
Applicability
forms/LeadTestingatSchoolsSamplingPlan.pdf • Only applies to schools, not child care centers -
2 State of Alabama Department of Education, “Alabama 0 points
state department of education and alabama department of
environmental management to assist in determining lead levels Sources
in drinking water in pre-k through grade 12 public schools,” 1 Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, “Public
November 15th, 2016. Available at https://www.alsde.edu/sec/ School Drinking Water Lead Screening Program Corrective Ac-
comm/News%20Releases/11-15-2016%20ADEM%20Water%20 tion Guidance.” Accessed March 6th 2019 at http://static.azdeq.
Testing.docx.pdf gov/wqd/pb_schools/corrective_action_guide.pdf
3 Alabama Department of Environmental Management, “De- 2 Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, “Arizona De-
termining Lead Levels in Drinking Water Alabama’s PK thru 12 partment of Environmental Quality Public School Lead Drinking
Public Schools Master Plan.” Accessed March 6th 2019 at http:// Water Screening Program Sampling Plan & Collection Log for Ex-
www.adem.state.al.us/programs/water/waterforms/LeadTestin- perienced Sample Collectors.” Accessed March 6th 2019 at http://
gatSchoolsMasterPlan.pdf static.azdeq.gov/wqd/pb_schools/sample_collection_short.pdf
3 ADEQ Lead in Drinking Water Results. Available on Google
Drive at https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_WEyjhNH-
Ga208HrplV9Bafja6Z4mWxD
Methodology 24
California Applicability
• Applies to schools and child care facilities.2 - 10
Points:
out of 20 points
Lead Standard ºº Required to test the lead levels of drinking
• Uses action level of 15 ppb2- 5 points water at ALL California public, K-12 schools
and preschools and child day care facilities
Testing Protocols
located on public school property, partial credit
• Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide lead.3
because only for schools built before 2010
- 10 points
• Tests at least some outlets at every school.3 - 5 points Bonus points
ºº Must test at least 5 outlets at every school • Required pro-active removal of LSLs statement1 -
• Every school must test, but only once.2 - 1 point 20 points out of 30
ºº partial credit because mandatory testing, but ºº No enforceable timeline
just once, not continued
Sources
“Get The Lead Out” steps 1 An act to add Section 116885 to the Health and Safety
Code, relating to drinking water, SB 1398. September 27th 2016.
• Requires immediate shut off of taps exceeding
Available at http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.
action level.2 - 20 points xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1398
• Remediation requires removing lead bearing 2 Health and Safety Code: Pure and Safe Drinking Water, Article 1
parts or installing filters certified to remove lead.2 added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 415, Sec. 6. Effective January 1st 2019. Avail-
able at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.
- 20 points
xhtml?lawCode=HSC&sectionNum=116277
3 California Water Boards, “SAMPLING GUIDANCE: Collecting
Public Disclosure and Transparency
Drinking Water Samples for Lead Testing At K-12 Schools,” De-
• Disclosure of lead infrastructure.5 - 3 out of 5 cember, 8th 2017. Available at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/
points drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/documents/leadsamplin-
ºº Disclosure of lead infrastructure (just service ginschools/sampling_guidance_final.pdf
4 California Water Board, “Lead Sampling of Drinking Water,”
lines) required by CWS, partial credit because
February 15th, 2019. Available at https://www.waterboards.
LSLs are the only infrastructure that must be ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/leadsamplingin-
disclosed schools.html
• Disclosure of all specific test results.4 - 5 points 5 California Water Board, “Lead Service Line Inventory Re-
quirement for Public Water Systems,” February 14th, 2019. Avail-
• Disclosure of results available online.4 - 5 points
able at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/
drinkingwater/lead_service_line_inventory_pws.html
25 Get the Lead Out

Colorado “Get The Lead Out” steps
• Required proactive installation of filters at every tap/
Points:
fountain used for drinking or cooking.1 - 25 points
Lead Standard • Requires immediate shut off of potable water
• Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points outlets exceeding 5 ppb.1 - 20 points
• Requires some remediation, but there is broad
Testing Protocols
discretion.1 - 10 points
• None required - 0 points
ºº There are training videos on the CO website, Public Disclosure and Transparency
but there is nothing that mandates schools to • Disclosure of lead infrastructure.4 - 3 out of 5 points
adhere to these protocols ºº Disclosure of lead service lines - partial credit
because not mandating disclosure of fixtures
“Get The Lead Out” steps
• Disclosure of all specific test results.1 -5 points
• Disclosure of all results available online.1 - 5 points
ºº HB 17-1306 requires the Department of Public
• Disclosure of remediation plan.1 - 5 points
Health & Environment to create a grant program
ºº Disclosure of remediation plan implementation to
for public schools to test, but does not include
COO, and notification of parents for any exceedance
any enforceable “get the lead out” steps.2
Applicability
• Applies to all schools and child care facilities.1,5 -
• Disclosure of all specific results.1 - 5 points
20 points
• Disclosure of results available online.1 - 5 points
ºº DCPS includes child care facilities, and this
Applicability law covers every DCPS; therefore including
• A grant program that allows schools to apply for pre-schools and child care facilities
reimbursements for testing their water, which
Bonus Points:
does not apply to child care centers - 0 points
• Proactive removal of LSLs.2 - 10 points out of 30
Sources ºº Partial credit for a planned District wide
1 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, program that requires proactive removal of LSLs
“School Lead Testing Results.” Available at https://www.colorado.gov/
pacific/cdphe/school-lead-testing-results Sources
2 “Test Lead in Public Schools’ Drinking Water”, HB17-1306. 2017. 1 § 38–825.01a. Prevention of lead in drinking water in
Available at https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb17-1306 schools. Available at https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/
sections/38-825.01a.html
2 DC Water, “New District Lead Service Line Replacement
Connecticut - No Policy Program Offers Historic Opportunity To Replace Old Plumbing,”
December 6th 2018. Available at https://www.dcwater.com/
whats-going-on/news/new-district-lead-service-line-replace-
Washington, D.C. ment-program-offers-historic-opportunity
Points: 3 Department of General Services, “Water Filtration and
Testing Protocol,” September 28th 2017. Available at https://dgs.
Lead Standard dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dgs/publication/attachments/
Water-Filtration-and-Testing-Protocol-9-28-17.pdf
• Uses action level of 5 ppb.1 - 10 points
4 DC Water, “DC Water Service Information” Available at
https://geo.dcwater.com/Lead/
Testing Protocols
5 District of Columbia Public Schools, “Early Learning” Avail-
• Testing for worst-case scenarios.3 - 15 points able at https://dcps.dc.gov/ece
• Tests all drinking water sources.1 - 15 points
• Tests all sources annually.1 - 5 points
Methodology 26
Florida- No Policy ºº For samples exceeding 5 ppb, results may be
posted online or may be sent directly to parents
via email
Georgia - No Policy • Disclosure of the specific sampling result.3 - 3 out
of 5
Illinois ºº Partial credit because only mandated if a test
Points: exceeds 5 ppb
Lead Standard Applicability

• Uses a 1 ppb standard for lead.1 - 30 points • Applies to schools and child care centers.1- 10 out
ºº Requires schools to remediate ANY level of lead of 20 points
found, de facto 1 ppb standard ºº Partial credit because applies to those built
before 2000
Testing Protocols
• Tests for worst case results.3 - 15 points Bonus Points:
• Tests all potable water outlets.3 - 15 points • Requires replacement of lead service lines.1 10
• Test schools one time.3 - 1 point out of 30 points
ºº One time testing program that applies to every ºº Requires replacement if the lead standard is
school built pre-2010 triggered so partial credit
“Get The Lead Out” steps Sources

1 Illinois Department of Public Health, “Mitigation Strategies
• Requires immediate shut off of water outlets
for Lead Found in School Drinking Water.” Available at http://
used for drinking or cooking that exceed testing www.dph.illinois.gov/sites/default/files/publications/school-
standard for lead. 1 - 20 points lead-mitigation-strategies-050917.pdf
ºº Per step 5 of DPH document 2 Illinois Lead Service Line Replacement Appendix A.
Available at https://www2.illinois.gov/epa/Documents/iepa/
• Requires some remediation, but can include just
compliance-enforcement/drinking-water/sample-collectors-
flushing.1 - 10 points handbook/ch-4-pbcu-appendix-i-lead-service-line-replace-
ment.pdf
Public Disclosure and Transparency 3 Illinois General Assembly, “225 ILCS 320: Illinois Plumbing
• Disclosure of test results online.3 - 3 out of 5 License Law” Available at http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/
points ilcs3.asp?ActID=1343&ChapterID=24
27 Get the Lead Out

Indiana Louisiana
Points: Points:
Lead Standard Lead Standard

• Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points • Does not have an action level.1,2 - 0 points
Testing Protocols Testing Protocols

• Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide lead.3- • Only tests in 12 schools.2 - 0 points
10 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps • None required
• Nothing required - 0 points
Public Disclosure and Transparency • All specific results of testing are disclosed.1 - 5 points
• Results posted online.2 - 5 points • All results published online.1 - 5 points
Applicability Applicability
• Does not apply to all schools or child care centers.2 • Only applies to 12 schools - 0 points
- 0 out of 15 points
Sources
ºº Voluntary but well-funded program, so not
1 Louisiana Department of Health, “School Water testing Pilot
mandatory Program.” Accessed March 6 2019 at http://ldh.la.gov/index.cfm/
ºº Only K-12 schools can opt-in page/3275
2 “An Act to enact R.S. 40:5.6.1, relative to safe drinking
Bonus Points: water; to authorize a pilot program for 3 drinking water testing
• Indiana Subsidiary of American Water Company at schools; and to provide for related matters.” HB. 632. 2018
Available at http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.
filed a plan with Indiana Utility Regulatory
aspx?d=1103405
Commission to fully replace LSLs in communities
it serves in the next 10 to 24 years - 10 out of 30
points
Sources
1 Indiana Finance Authority, “Lead Sampling Program,” 2018.
Available at https://www.in.gov/ifa/2958.htm
2 Indiana Finance Authority, “Indiana Lead Sampling Pro-
gram for Public Schools: Enrollment and Results.” Available at
https://www.in.gov/ifa/files/12.17.18%20Lead%20Sampling%20
Program%20Enrollment%20and%20Results.pdf
3 IFA’s Lead Sampling Program for Public Schools, “Guid-
ance For Schools.” Available at https://www.in.gov/ifa/files/
IFA%20Lead%20Sampling%20Program%20Guidance%20for%20
Schools.pdf
4 IFA Lead Sampling Program, “Frequently Asked Questions,”
2017. Available at https://www.in.gov/ifa/files/IFA%20Lead%20
Sampling%20Program%20for%20Schools%20FAQ.pdf
5 IURC Online Services Portal, “Docketed Case 45043” avail-
able at https://iurc.portal.in.gov/legal-case-details/?id=cf202ed
e-c405-e811-811c-1458d04eaba0
Methodology 28
Maryland Massachusetts
Points: Points:

• Uses a 15 ppb standard.2 - 5 points • Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points

• Testing for worst-case results.1 - 15 points • Test for worst-case lead exposure.2 - 15 points
ºº several samples per tap, prohibit sampling • Voluntary program; does not test multiple times,
protocols known to hide lead per section does not test all faucets and fountains - 0 points
6-1502 (C)(3)
• Tests all faucets or fountains used for drinking or
• No requirements - 0 points
cooking.1 - 15 points
• Testing required every year.1 - 5 points Public Disclosure and Transparency
• Disclosure of all specific test results.3 - 5 points
• Disclosure information available online.3 - 5 points
• Requires shut off of outlets exceeding testing
standard.1- 20 points Applicability
ºº If there is an elevated level of lead in a drinking • Voluntary program. - 0 points
water outlet, access to the drinking water outlet
be closed per section (C)(7)(II) Bonus Points
• Voluntary but very well-funded LSL replacement
Requires some remediation.1- 10 points program. - 10 points
ºº Broad range of possible remediation actions
that includes flushing as an option, (C)(7)(IV) Sources
1 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection,
Public Disclosure and Transparency “Lead and Copper in School Drinking Water Sampling Results.”
Available at https://www.mass.gov/service-details/lead-and-
• Sampling results posted online.1 - 5 points
copper-in-school-drinking-water-sampling-results
2 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protec-
Applicability
tion, “Sampling for Lead and Copper at Schools and Child-
• Does not apply to daycare centers care Facilities.” Available at https://www.mass.gov/guides/
• Applies to all schools (not limited by year) - 5 points sampling-for-lead-and-copper-at-schools-and-childcare-fa-
cilities#collecting-samples-from-faucets-and-fountains
Sources 3 Massachusetts Department of Energy and Environmen-
1 “AN ACT concerning Environment – Testing for Lead in tal Affairs Data Portal, available at https://eeaonline.eea.state.
Drinking Water – Public and Nonpublic Schools” HB 270. Avail- ma.us/portal#!/search/leadandcopper
able at http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2017RS/chapters_noln/ 4 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection,
Ch_386_hb0270T.pdf “Incentivized Lead Service Line Replacement Program.” Avail-
2 Maryland Department of the Environment, “Testing able at https://www.mass.gov/service-details/incentivized-lead-
for Lead in Drinking Water - Public and Nonpublic Schools” service-line-replacement-program
Available at https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/Water/wa-
ter_supply/Pages/Testing-For-Lead-In-Drinking-Water-Public-
and-Nonpublic-Schools.aspx
29 Get the Lead Out

Maine- No Policy Minnesota
Points:
Michigan Lead Standard
Points: • No standard in the law - 0 points
Lead Standard Testing Protocols
• No policy - 0 points • Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead.1-
10 points
Testing Protocols
• Tests all faucets and fountains used for drinking or
• No policy - 0 points
cooking.1 - 15 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps • Tests every five years.1 - 2 points
Public Disclosure and Transparency • No remediation or pro-active steps required - 0 points
Applicability • Disclosure of all test results.1 - 5 points
Applicability
Bonus Points • Applies to all schools (not limited by year) - 5 points
• Mandatory replacement of all LSLs - 30 points out of 20
ºº Paid for entirely by Public Water Systems in the ºº Partial credit because it’s happening in every
next 20 years school (not limited by year) but not happening
in pre-school
Sources
1 Michigan DEQ, “drinking water and municipal assistance Sources
division R 325.10101 to R 325.12820” available at http://src.bna. 1 2018 Minnesota Statutes, “121A.335 LEAD IN SCHOOL
com/zCj DRINKING WATER” available at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/stat-
utes/cite/121A.335
Montana - No Policy
North Carolina - No Policy
Methodology 30
New Hampshire New Jersey
Points: Points:

• Uses a 15 ppb standard.2 - 5 points • Uses a 15 ppb standard. 1 - 5 points

• Testing for worst-case results -- several samples • Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide lead.1
per tap, prohibit sampling protocols known to - 10 points
hide lead.1 - 15 points ºº Per section (d)1.(iii)(1)
ºº Schools are required to test in accordance to • Test all faucets and fountains used for drinking or
the technical guidance provided by the DEP, in cooking.1 - 15 points
this case the 3Ts guidance on testing, which is • Requires testing once every six years.1 - 1 out of 2
inclusive of all testing best practices points
• Tests every outlet used for drinking and cooking.1 ºº Partial credit because longer than every 5 years,
- 15 points but more than just once
• Testing once every five years.1 - 2 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps • Requires immediate shut off of potable water
• Requires immediate shut off of potable water outlets that exceed testing standard for lead.1-
outlets that exceed testing standard for lead.1 - 10 20 points
out of 20 points
ºº If a tap exceeds the level, schools must ensure
• Disclosure of all specific results.1 - 5 points
that the children are provided only drinking
ºº Per section (e)(1)
water that meets the standard; partial credit
• Disclosure of all results online.1 - 5 points
because it doesn’t require the outlet is shut
ºº Per section (e)(1).
off, but it does say that kids must be provided
alternate water Applicability
• Requires some remediation, but a broad discre- • Applies to all schools and child care centers.1 - 20
tion.1 - 10 points points
Public Disclosure and Transparency Sources
• Disclosure of lead infrastructure.1- 5 points 1 New Jersey Education Code, “N.J.A.C. 6A:26, EDUCATIONAL
FACILITIES” available at https://www.state.nj.us/education/code/
Applicability current/title6a/chap26.pdf
• Applies to public and private schools and licensed
and license-exempt child care centers.1 - 20 points New Mexico - No Policy
Sources
1 “Preventing childhood lead poisoning from paint and
water,” New Hampshire SB 247. Available at https://legiscan.com/
NH/text/SB247/id/1662028
2 New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services,
“Lead in Drinking Water” available at https://www.des.nh.gov/
organization/divisions/water/dwgb/lead-drinking-water.htm
31 Get the Lead Out

New York Ohio
Points: Points:

• Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points • Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points

• Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide • Testing for worst-case exposure - 15 points
lead.1,2 - 10 points ºº In order to be eligible for reimbursement, the
ºº they have re-adjusted their guidance to ensure testing must be done according to EPA proto-
testing is done according to proper protocol.2 cols.2
• Test all faucets and fountains used for drinking or
cooking.1- 15 points
• Remediation requires replacing plumbing or
• Test every 2-5 years.1 -2 points
installing filters - 5 out of 20 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps ºº Partial credit because there is a well-funded
• Requires immediate shut off of water outlets program that provides money for schools to
used for drinking or cooking that exceed testing take these steps but it is not required; had a
standard for lead.1 - 20 points 45% participation rate.
• Requires some remediation (broad discretion,
could allow flushing only.1- 10 points
• Nothing in the law - 0 points
Applicability
• Disclosure of all specific test results.1- 5 points
• Voluntary but well-funded program - 0 points
• Disclosure information available online.1 - 5 points
• Disclosure of remediation plan and implementa- Sources
tion.1- 5 points 1 Ohio Facilities Construction Commission, “Lead plumb-
ing fixture replacement assistance grants program,” January
Applicability 2019. Available at https://ofcc.ohio.gov/Portals/0/PbGP%20Pro-
• Applies to pre-kindergarten through 12th grade.1 gram%20Results%20FINAL%20January%202019.pdf
2 131st General Assembly Regular Session, H.B. No. 390
- 20 points
available at https://dsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
hb390_04_PS.pdf
Bonus:
• Incentivized lead service line replacement.3,4 - 10 points
Sources
1 New York Department of Health, “Subpart 67-4 Lead Testing
in School Drinking Water” available at https://regs.health.ny.gov/
book/export/html/56608
2 New York State Department of Health, “Lead in school
drinking water status report,” January 27 2017 available at
https://www.health.ny.gov/press/releases/2017/docs/lead_in_
school_drinking_water_report.pdf
3 New York State Assembly Bill A03007B. January 23 2017.
Available at https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_vide
o=&bn=A03007&term=2017&Summary=Y&Text=Y
4 NY Assembly, “Assembly Secures $2.5 Billion in Water Qual-
ity Improvement Funding in 2017-2018 SFY Budget” available at
https://nyassembly.gov/Press/20170407/
Methodology 32
Oregon Pennsylvania
Points: Points:

• Uses a 15 ppb action level.1 - 5 points • Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points
ºº Per section 5 of the bill
Testing Protocols
Testing Protocols • Requires annual testing.1- 3 out of 5 points
• Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide lead.1- ºº Partial credit; schools must test every year or
12 out of 15 points points hold a public meeting to explain why they’re
ºº Only requires a first draw sample unless the tap not testing
exceeds 15 ppb on the first draw. Partial credit
because multiple tests are only required where
• Requires some remediation, but broad discretion.1
exceedances are found.
- 10 points
• Tests all faucets or fountains used for drinking or
cooking.1- 15 points Public Disclosure and Transparency
• School must test once every 6 years .1 - 1 out of 2 points • Disclosure of results online.1 - 5 points
ºº Partial credit because it’s more than every 5
years, but it does require repeat testing. Applicability
• Does not mandate every school to act and doesn’t
“Get The Lead Out” steps apply to childcare - 0 points
• Requires immediate shut off of potable water outlets
that exceed testing standard for lead.1- 20 points Bonus Points:
• Remediation requires removing lead bearing parts or • Proactive removal of Lead Service lines.2,3 - 10 points
installing filters certified to remove lead.1 - 20 points ºº Has an incentivized LSL removal program and
ºº Flushing is not an accepted mitigation strategy, private water systems can replace public side
as defined by section (6)(b). pipes
Public Disclosure and Transparency Sources

1 Pennsylvania Act 39, “An act relating to the public school
• Disclosure of all specific test results.1- 5 points
system” available at https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/
ºº Per section (3)(d) of ORS 332.334 li/uconsCheck.cfm?yr=2018&sessInd=0&act=39
• Disclosure information available online.1- 5 points 2 “Governor Wolf Announces Funding to Support PWSA Lead
ºº Per section (4) of ORS 332.334 Line Replacement,” October 17th 2018 available at https://www.
governor.pa.gov/governor-wolf-announces-funding-support-
• Disclosure of remediation plan.1- 5 points
pwsa-lead-line-replacement/
ºº per section (3)(e) of ORS 332.334 3 Environmental Defense Fund, “Pennsylvania empowers
municipalities to replace lead service lines,” December 11, 2017.
Applicability Available at http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/12/11/pennsylva-
• Applies to schools and child care centers.1,2 - 20 points nia-lead-service-lines/
ºº Two different rules -- but there are rules for
both that are equally protective
Sources:
1 Oregon Administrative Rules, “Reducing Lead in School
Drinking Water,” available at https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/
HEALTHYENVIRONMENTS/DRINKINGWATER/RULES/Documents/
rulerevision/lead-testing-in-schools-FINAL-11-28-formatted.pdf
2 Oregon Early Learning, “Preventing exposure to lead” available
at https://oregonearlylearning.com/lead-poisoning-prevention/
33 Get the Lead Out

Rhode Island Tennessee
Points: Points:

• No standard established - 0 points • Uses a 20 ppb standard for lead.1 - 5 points

• Prohibits sampling protocols known to hide lead.1- • Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead.1
10 points -10 points
• Frequency of testing.1 - 1 point
ºº Requires schools test “periodically” but not to
• None - 0 points
exceed biennially
• Disclosure of testing results is available online.1 - 5
• Requires immediate shut off of potable water
points
outlets that exceed testing standard for lead.1 -
Applicability 20 points
• Tests all public schools pre-k through grade 12
and daycare facilities.2 - 20 points
• Disclosure of all specific results.1 - 3 out of 5
Sources ºº Disclosure of all specific results to parents if
1 Rhode Island Department of Health, “Lead in School and there is an exceedance
Daycare Facility Drinking Water” available at http://health.ri.gov/
data/schools/water/ Applicability
2 “An Act Relating to Water and Navigation - Lead and Copper • Does not apply to all schools - 0 points
Drinking Water Protection Act” H 8127. Enacted July 12 2016.
Available at http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/PublicLaws/law16/ Source
law16439.htm 1 “AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49; Title
68 and Title 69, relative to water quality in schools,” Tennessee
Public Chapter No. 977. Available at https://publications.tnsos-
files.com/acts/110/pub/pc0977.pdf
Texas - No policy
Methodology 34
Virginia Washington
Points: Points:

• No standard established.1 - 0 points • Uses a 15 ppb standard.1 - 5 points

• Test all faucets and fountains used for drinking or • There is no requirement for schools to test their
cooking.1 - 15 points water, only a voluntary program - 0 points
“Get The Lead Out” steps “Get The Lead Out” steps
• No steps required by the law.1 - 0 points • The law says that DOH must establish guidance
for what to do if the federal action level is exceed-
ed, but there are no mandatory requirements for
• No notification required.1 - 0 points
schools - 0 points
Applicability
• Does not apply to all schools - 0 points
ºº Gives priority to schools built before 1986, not
for daycare centers Applicability
• There are no requirements for schools, which is
Bonus:
the primary focus of this report. There is a separate
• Small, private side grants available for replace-
testing requirement for daycares. - 0 points
ment of LSLs that could apply to in-home
daycares.2 - 5 points Bonus
• Governor Inslee directed that DOH shall work with
Source
stakeholder groups to develop policy and budget-
1 Code of Virginia, § 22.1-135.1. Potable water; lead testing.
Available at https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/22.1-135.1 ary proposals with a goal of removing all lead
2 Virginia Department of Health, “Drinking water funding service lines within 15 years - 20 points
program details & application materials” available at http://www. ºº Partial credit because it is a goal, not an
vdh.virginia.gov/drinking-water/financial-construction-assis-
enforceable law.
tance-programs/drinking-water-funding-program-details/
Sources
Vermont - No policy 1 State of Washington, “Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill
6032,” March 29, 2018, available at http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/
biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/Senate/6032-S.
SL.pdf
2 Directive of the Governor, “Assisting community and
agency responses to lead in water systems,” May 2, 2016 avail-
able at http://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/directive/
dir_16-06.pdf
35 Get the Lead Out

Wisconsin
Points:
Lead Standard
• None - 0 points
Testing Protocols
• None - 0 points

• None - 0 points

• None - 0 points
Applicability
• None - 0 points
Bonus
• Significant funding has been put towards remov-
ing LSLs and many communities in Wisconsin are
taking steps to tackle the issue.1 - 10 points
Sources
1 “Community and utility efforts to replace lead service lines,”
Environmental Defense Fund, available at https://www.edf.org/
health/recognizing-community-efforts-replace-lsl
Methodology 36
Proposed Grades: Massachusetts
Justifications Points:
Lead Standard
• Uses a 1 ppb standard - 30 points
Testing Protocols
• Test for worst-case results - several samples per
tap, not just a first-draw sample and prohibits
sampling protocols known to hide lead - 15 points
• Test all faucets and fountains used for drinking or
cooking - 15 points
• Test every year at schools: 3 points out of 5
ºº Partial credit because of exemptions that can
be made

• Requires proactive installation of NSF-certified
filters at every tap/fountain used for drinking or
cooking - 25 points
• Requires proactive replacement of lead bearing
parts - 10 out of 30 points
ºº Public Water Systems must fully replace LSLs at
all schools and child care centers
• Requires immediate shut off of water outlets
used for drinking or cooking that exceed testing
standard for lead - 20 points
• Requires some remediation but broad discretion -
10 points

• Disclosure of lead infrastructure; service lines,
fixtures - 5 points
• Disclosure of all specific test results - 5 points
• Disclosure information available online - 5 points
• Disclosure of remediation plan and implementa-
tion - 5 points
Applicability
• Applies to all schools and all child care centers -
20 points
Bonus
• Incentivised LSL replacement - 10 points
Source
“An Act ensuring safe drinking water in schools” HD 3765 avail-
able at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/HD3765
37 Get the Lead Out

Pennsylvania Washington
Points: Points:

• Uses a 5 ppb standard - 10 points • Uses a 5 ppb standard - 10 points

• testing for worst-case results -- several samples • Tests once every 3 years - 2 points
per tap, prohibit sampling protocols known to • No specific protocol for lead testing, gives this
hide lead - 15 points responsibility to the office of the superintendent
• Tests all faucets and fountains used for drinking or of public instruction - 0 points
cooking at every school - 15 points
• Tests every year at schools - 5 points
• Requires proactive replacement of fountains,
“Get The Lead Out” steps faucets and/or other lead-bearing parts - 25
• Requires immediate shut off of potable water points
outlets that exceed testing standard for lead - 20 ºº Schools must create an inventory of lead-
points bearing parts and remove them by 2021 to the
• Remediation requires removing lead bearing parts extent feasible and cost effective
or installing filters certified to remove lead - 20 • Requires proactive installation of filters certified to
points remove lead at every outlet used for drinking or
cooking - 25 points
• Requires immediate shut off of outlets exceeding
• Disclosure of all specific test results - 5 points
action level - 20 points
• Disclosure information available online - 5 points
• Remediation requires removing lead bearing parts
• Disclosure of remediation plan and implementa-
or installing filters certified to remove lead - 20
tion - 5 points
points
Applicability
• Not applicable to all - 0 points
• Disclosure of complete results - 5 points
Bonus Points: • Disclosure information available online- 5 points
• Proactive removal of Lead Service lines - 10 points • Disclosure of lead infrastructure- 5 points
ºº Has an incentivised LSL removal program and • Disclosure of remediation plan- 5 points
private water systems can replace public side
Applicability
pipes
• Applies to all schools but does not apply to child
Source care: 5 points out of 20
AN ACT Amending the act of March 10, L949 (P.L.30, No.14),
“An act relating to the public school system, including certain Source
provisions applicable as well to private and parochial schools; “Addressing lead in drinking water in schools,” HB 1860. Avail-
amending. revising, consolidating and changing the laws relat- able at https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1860&Y
ing thereto” ear=2019&Initiative=false
Methodology 38
Vermont
Points:
Lead Standard
• Uses a 3 ppb standard - 15 points
ºº Gets 5 bonus points because it’s stronger than
the 5 ppb FDA standard, but still not quite at
1 ppb
Testing Protocols
• Testing for worst-case results -- several samples
per tap, prohibit sampling protocols known to
hide lead - 15 points

• Immediate shut off of tap exceeding action level -
20 points

• Disclosure of all specific results - 5 points
• Disclosure of results online - 5 points
Applicability
• Applies to schools and childcare centers: 20
points
Source
“An act relating to testing and remediation of lead in the drink-
ing water of schools and child care facilities” S. 40. Available at
https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2020/Docs/BILLS/S-
0040/S-0040%20As%20Passed%20by%20the%20Senate%20
Unofficial.pdf
39 Get the Lead Out

Appendix
History of Federal Policy on Lead in Drinking Water
National Policy/
What it does
Guidance
Safe Drinking Water Authorized EPA to establish Maximum Contaminant Levels for all substances known or suspected to be
Act, 1974 hazardous to humans. These requirements applied to every Public Water System in the U.S.
EPA Interim Drinking

Kept the standard maximum allowable concentration of lead at 50 parts per billion (ppb) where water
Water Regulations,
enters the distribution system.
1975
Lead Ban, 1986 Among other bans, pipes and pipe fittings with more than 8% lead were banned. Any pipe or fitting
under 8% lead was considered “lead free”.
Lead Contamination Banned the manufacture and sale of water fountains that did not meet the “lead free” definition. The
and Control Act, 1988 LCCA defined “lead-free” as: “not more than 8 percent lead, except that no drinking water cooler which
contains any solder, flux, or storage tank interior surface which may come in contact with drinking water
shall be considered lead-free if the solder, flux, or storage tank interior surface contains more than 0.2
percent lead.” In addition, the EPA was mandated to issue guidance to schools on how to identify and
remediate lead-contaminated drinking water. States were required to distribute this guidance and
required to help develop testing and remediation programs for schools. However, school testing was not
mandatory.
EPA Guidance, 1989 The first federal guidance to schools on assessing and remediating leaded drinking water. EPA also
recommended that “action be taken to limit exposure” whenever lead levels exceeded 20 ppb.
Lead and Copper Rule, Public Water Systems are required to provide corrosion control and routine water monitoring. If over 10%
1991 of samples collected from a water system exceeded lead levels of 15 ppb, the system was to intensify
water quality monitoring, optimize corrosion control, issue public notification and other education
materials, and in some cases, monitor and/ or replace lead service lines.
ACORN v. Edwards, The State of Louisiana was sued for failing to implement several provisions of the SDWA that required
81 F.3d 1387 (5th Cir. the establishment of water testing programs. The Court’s decision held the Act’s provisions were
1996) unconstitutional and compelled the state to enact federal programs which the state had no option to
decline. The decision does not restrict states from creating their own school drinking water programs.
EPA Guidance, 2006 EPA issued a guideline for monitoring lead in school drinking water, focused on three aspects: training
of school officials on the hazards of lead, proper lead testing, and proper telling to school communities
about test results. The EPA guidance is stated to be “only suggestions... not requirements”.
EPA Guidance, 2018 The EPA issues an updated guidance for monitoring lead in school drinking water. This document
provides new guidance for the 3Ts (training, testing, and telling) for protecting children from lead in
school water: The suggestions are non-enforceable, and the guidance provides no clear threshold for
lead in drinking water above which schools should remediate.
EPA Federal Action The EPA issues it’s Federal Action Plan for addressing lead in schools’ water, a product of the President’s
Plan, 2018 Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. The action plan establishes four
goals – reduce children’s exposure to lead; identify lead-exposed children and improve their health
outcomes; communicate more effectively with stakeholders; and support and conduct critical research.
However, the Action Plan fails to establish any clear goals or timelines for taking action to reduce kids
exposure to lead.
Table adapted from information in Yanna Lambrinidou, Simoni Triantafyllidou and Marc Edwards, “Failing Our Children: Lead in
U.S. School Drinking Water,” New Solutions Vol, 20(1), 2010, pages 28-33.Additional information sourced from the EPA website.
Appendix 40
Endnotes
1 Emma Brown, “A legal loophole might be exposing 10 “Protect your family from exposure to lead”, U.S. EPA
children to lead in the nation’s schools”, Washington Post, March accessed February 20, 2019 at https://www.epa.gov/lead/pro-
18th 2016 available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ tect-your-family-exposures-lead
education/wp/2016/03/18/a-legal-loophole-might-be-exposing-
children-to-lead-in-the-nations-schools/?noredirect=on&utm_ 11 Lori Higgins, “Up to 30,000 Flint kids to get screened
term=.a83a918fa14d for lead impact settlement”, Detroit Free Press April 9th,
2018, available at https://www.freep.com/story/news/educa-
2 Emma Brown, “A legal loophole might be exposing tion/2018/04/09/flint-water-crisis-lead/478577002/
children to lead in the nation’s schools”, Washington Post, March
18th 2016 available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ 12 Muennig, Peter. “The Social Costs Of Lead Poison-
education/wp/2016/03/18/a-legal-loophole-might-be-exposing- ings.” Health Affairs, vol. 35, no. 8, 2016, pp. 1545–1545.,
children-to-lead-in-the-nations-schools/?noredirect=on&utm_ doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0661.
term=.a83a918fa14d
13 Yanna Lambrinidou, Simoni Triantafyllidou and March
3 United States EPA, “3Ts for Reducing Lead in Drinking Edwards. “Failing Our Children: Lead in US School Drinking Wa-
Water in Schools and Child Care Centers,” October 2018. Avail- ter.” New Solutions, Vol. 20(1) 25-47, 2010
able at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-09/
documents/final_revised_3ts_manual_508.pdf 14 Alison Young and Mark Nichols, “Beyond Flint: Exces-
sive lead levels found in almost 2,000 water systems across all
4 Lead and Copper Rule: A Quick Reference Guide, U.S. 50 states,” USA Today, March 11, 2016, accessible at http://www.
Environmental Protection Agency available at https://nepis.epa. usatoday.com/story/news/2016/03/11/nearly-2000-water-sys-
gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=60001N8P.txt tems-fail-lead-tests/81220466/.
5 Cheryl Corley, “Avoiding A Future Crisis, Madison 15 Allergist Ron Saff, quoted by Isabelle Z., “High levels
Removed Lead Water Pipes 15 Years Ago,” National Public Radio of lead found in Florida schools’ drinking water,” Natural News,
available at https://www.npr.org/2016/03/31/472567733/avoid- November 12, 2016, accessible at http://www.naturalnews.
ing-a-future-crisis-madison-removed-lead-water-pipes-15-years- com/055983_lead_contamination_clean_water_Florida_
ago schools.html#ixzz4V77EJcJX.
6 Michael Gerstein, “Lansing Replaces City’s Final Lead 16 World Health Organization, Lead Poisoning and Health,
Service Line”, The Detroit News, 14 December 2016 available 23 August 2018. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/
at https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michi- fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health
gan/2016/12/14/lansing-lead-service-line/95435604/
17 World Health Organization, Lead Poisoning and Health,
7 Code of the District of Colombia § 38–825.01a. Preven- 23 August 2018. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/
tion of lead in drinking water in schools. Available at https:// fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health
code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/38-825.01a.html
18 Alan Woolf, Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical
8 Edwin Lopez, “School lead testing: The race for tighter School, “Blood Lead Thresholds & Health Effects,” webinar pre-
regulations and more funding,” Politico, June 16, 2016, accessible sentation for Environment America, slide 7, September 20, 2016
at http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/ school-lead-testing-
the-race-for-tighter-regulations-andmore-funding-224419 19 Marcie Billings, quoted by Laura Ungar, “Lead taints
drinking water in hundreds of schools, day cares across USA,”
9 Basic Information about Lead Air Pollution, U.S. EPA USA Today, March 17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday.
accessed February 20, 2019 at https://www.epa.gov/lead-air- com/story/news/nation/2016/03/17/ drinking-water-lead-
pollution/basic-information-about-lead-air-pollution schools-day-cares/81220916/.
41 Get the Lead Out

20 Marcie Billings, quoted by Laura Ungar, “Lead taints 30 This statement has been asserted by multiple health
drinking water in hundreds of schools, day cares across USA,” and environmental agencies and organizations. See for instance:
USA Today, March 17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Lead,” CDC.gov,
com/story/news/nation/2016/03/17/ drinking-water-lead- September 2016, accessible at https:// www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/;
schools-day-cares/81220916/. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Basic Information about
Lead in Drinking Water,” EPA.gov, December 2016, accessible
21 Ruff, H., Bijur, P., Markowitz, M., MA, Y., & Rosen, J. at https://www.epa. gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/
(1993). Declining blood lead levels and cognitive changes in basic-information- about-lead-drinking-water; and the American
moderately lead-poisoned children. JAMA. Retrieved from Academy of Pediatrics, “Lead Exposure in Children,” aap.org,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8455297. 2016, accessible at https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-
policy/aap-health-initiatives/lead-exposure/Pages/Lead- Expo-
22 David C. Bellinger and Andrew M. Bellinger, “Child- sure-in-Children.aspx.
hood lead poisoning: the torturous path from science to policy,”
The Journal of Clinical Investigation, Volume 116, Number 4, 31 Laura Ungar, “Lead taints drinking water in hun-
April 2006, accessible at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ dreds of schools, day cares across USA,” USA Today, March
articles/PMC1421365/pdf/JCI0628232.pdf. 17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday.com/story/
news/nation/2016/03/17/drinking-water-lead-schools-day-
23 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Basic Informa- cares/81220916/.
tion about Lead in Drinking Water,” EPA.gov, updated December
2016, accessible at https://www.epa. gov/ground-water-and- 32 Laura Ungar, “Lead taints drinking water in hun-
drinking-water/basic-information- about-lead-drinking-water. dreds of schools, day cares across USA,” USA Today, March
17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday.com/story/
24 Cara Lombardo and Dee Hall, “‘Regulatory vacuum’ news/nation/2016/03/17/drinking-water-lead-schools-day-
exposes Wisconsin children to lead in drinking water at schools, cares/81220916/.
day care centers,” WisconsinWatch.org, December 18, 2016,
accessible at http://wisconsinwatch.org/2016/12/regulatory- 33 Laura Ungar, “Lead taints drinking water in hun-
vacuum-exposes-wisconsin-children-to-lead-in-drinking- dreds of schools, day cares across USA,” USA Today, March
water-at-schools-day-care-centers/; summarizing the study 17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday.com/story/
conducted by Michael Amato et al, “Lead exposure and edu- news/nation/2016/03/17/drinking-water-lead-schools-day-
cational proficiency: Moderate lead exposure and educational cares/81220916/.
proficiency on end-of-grade examinations,” Annals of Epide-
miology 22(10), 2012, pages 738-743, accessible at http://www. 34 Information from the following articles: Florida -
sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.library.tufts.edu/science/article/pii/ Ryan Dailey and Jeff Burlew, “Lead found in drinking water at
S104727971200302X?np=y. area schools,” Tallahasee Democrat, October 25, 2016, acces-
sible at http://www.tallahassee.com/story/ news/2016/10/25/
25 American Academy of Pediatrics, Prevention of elevated-lead-levels-found-water-16-le- on-schools/92732168/;
Georgia – Molly Bloom, “Elevated lead levels found in more
Childhood Lead Toxicity, (policy statement), July 2016, page 3,
Atlanta schools’ water,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 13,
available at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pedi-
2016, accessible at http:// www.ajc.com/news/local-education/
atrics/138/1/e20161493.full.pdf
elevated-lead-levels- found-more-atlanta-schools-water/
26 Center for Disease Control, “What Do Parents Need oPiYaPnyoa5T7inZM-0KG9I/; Illinois - Jake Griffin, “Why schools
to Know to Protect Their Children?” May 17th 2017 available at won’t test for lead,” Daily Herald, December 6, 2016, accessible at
https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/acclpp/blood_lead_levels.htm http:// www.dailyherald.com/article/20161206/news/161209344/
and Maudlyne Ihejirika, “Latest CPS lead-testing results show
27 American Academy of Pediatrics, Prevention of Child- 113 schools with high levels,” Chicago Sun-Times, August 19,
hood Lead Toxicity, (policy statement), July 2016, page 4, avail- 2016, accessible at http://chicago.suntimes. com/news/cps-lead-
able at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/ testing-totals-113-cps-schools-with- high-levels/; Maine - Laura
early/2016/06/16/peds.2016-1493.full.pdf. Ungar, “Lead taints drinking water in hundreds of schools,
day cares across USA,” USA Today, March 17, 2016, accessible
28 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, at http://www.usatoday. com/story/news/nation/2016/03/17/
“Lead Toxicity: What is the Biological Fate of Lead in the Body”, drinking-water-lead- schools-day-cares/81220916/ and Madeline
June 12, 2017, available at https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/ St. Amour, “State investigates high lead levels in central Maine
csem.asp?csem=34&po=9 school’s water,” Portland Press Herald, October 19, 2016, acces-
sible at http://www.pressherald.com/2016/10/19/high- lead-lev-
29 Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, “Case els-found-in-central-maine-elementary-school/; Massachusetts
Studies in Environmental Medicine: Lead Texicity”, June 12, 2017 - Massachusetts Department of Environ- mental Protection.
available at https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/lead/docs/CSEM- “Lead and Copper in School Drinking Water Sampling Results.”
Lead_toxicity_508.pdf Accessed on January 10, 2017. Accessible at http://www.mass.
gov/eea/agencies/mass- dep/water/drinking/lead-and-copper-
Endnotes 42
in-school-drinking- water-sampling-results.html; Maryland – Liz 37 See Dan Herbeck, Jane Kwiatkowski Radlich, and
Bowie, “Water from a fountain? Not in Baltimore city schools,” T.J. Pignataro, “Tests show high lead levels in water in 11 WNY
Baltimore Sun, April 9, 2016, accessible at http://www.baltimore- school districts,” The Buffalo News, October 21, 2016, accessible
sun. com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-lead-in-wa- at https://buffalonews.com/2016/10/21/tests- show-high-lead-
ter-20160409-story.html; New Jersey – Dan Ivers, “Officials say water-multiple-wny-schools/, Bethany Bump, “Lead is new
contaminated water at Newark schools ‘urgent’, but no Flint,” water worry: High school in village plagued by PFOA coping
NJ.com, March 9, 2016, accessible at http://www. nj.com/essex/ with high levels of metal,” Times Union, November 28, 2016,
index.ssf/2016/03/officials_say_contami- nated_water_at_new- http://www.timesunion.com/ local/article/Lead-is-new-water-
ark_schools.html; New York - Larry Rulison, “Lead report: Most worry-10641099.php and Laura Ungar, “Lead taints drinking
drinking water in upstate schools safe,” Albany Times Union, Jan- water in hundreds of schools, day cares across USA,” USA Today,
uary 27, 2017, accessible at http://www.timesunion.com/local/ March 17, 2016, accessible at http://www.usatoday.com/story/
article/Lead-report-Most-drinking-water-in-upstate-10890137. news/ nation/2016/03/17/drinking-water-lead-schools-day-
php; Pennsylvania – Kristen Graham, “City school district to test cares/81220916/.
drinking water for lead,” Philly.com, October 7, 2016, accessible
at http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20161008_City_ 38 See Juan Perez Jr, “Claypool pledges to spend
school_district_to_test_drinking_wa- ter_for_lead.html; Ohio ‘whatever it takes’ to fix CPS lead in water problems,” Chicago
- Brie Zeltner, “Cleveland schools find dangerous lead levels in Tribune, June 20, 2016, accessible at http://www. chicagotri-
water from 60 buildings; will replace 580 outlets,” Cleveland. bune.com/news/ct-chicago-school-lead-water- meetings-met-
com, November 18, 2016, accessible at http://www.cleveland. 20160620-story.html, and Emily Coleman, “Water test: High
com/healthfit/index.ssf/2016/11/cleveland_schools_find_dan- levels of lead found in 10 percent of Waukegan schools,” Lake
gerous_lead_lev- els_in_water_from_60_buildings_will_re- County News-Sun, August 22, 2016, accessible at http://www.
place_580_out- lets.html and Greater Cincinnati Water Works, chicagotribune.com/ suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/news/ct-
(letter from Greater Cincinnati Water Works to Cincinnati Public lns-waukegan- district-60-lead-water-st-0819-20160822-story.
Schools), August 6, 2016, accessible at https://www.scribd. com/ html, and Jake Griffin, “Why schools won’t test for lead,” Daily
document/322734381/Letter-from-Greater-Cincinna- ti-Water- Herald, December 6, 2016, accessible at http://www.dailyherald.
Works-to-CPS; Oregon – Kelly House, “Portland schools lead: com/article/20161206/news/161209344/.
Superintendent Carole Smith vows to ‘take responsibility’,” The
Oregonian, June 4, 0216, accessible at http://www.oregonlive. 39 Brie Zeltner, “Cleveland schools find dangerous lead
com/portland/index.ssf/2016/06/ portland_schools_lead_su- levels in water from 60 buildings; will replace 580 outlets,”
perint.html; Texas – Scott Noll, “Houston-area schools fail to test Cleveland.com, November 18, 2016, accessible at http://www.
for lead despite federal guidelines,” KHOU.com, October 5, 2016, cleveland.com/healthfit/index.ssf/2016/11/cleveland_schools_
accessible at http://www.khou.com/news/investigations/high- find_dangerous_lead_levels_in_water_from_60_buildings_
lead-levels-found-in-houston-area-schools/329239520; Wash- will_replace_580_outlets.html.
ington D.C. – Sarah Anne Hughes, “D.C. Tested Public Schools’
40 Jake Griffin, “Why schools won’t test for lead,” Daily
Water for Lead. More Than 60 Had High Levels,” Washington City
Herald, December 6, 2016, accessible at http://www.dailyherald.
Paper, June 27, 2016, accessible at http:// www.washingtoncity-
com/article/20161206/news/161209344/.
paper.com/news/article/20782859/dc-tested-public-schools-
water-for-lead-more-than-60-had-high-levels; Wisconsin - Cara
41 Data from the Massachusetts Executive Office of
Lombardo and Dee Hall, “‘Regulatory vacuum’ exposes Wis-
Energy and Environmental Affairs’ Data Portal, “Lead and Copper
consin children to lead in drinking water at schools, day care
in School Drinking Water Sampling Results,” Mass.gov, updated
centers,” Wis- consinWatch.org, December 18, 2016, accessible
on February 18, 2019, https://eeaonline.eea.state.ma.us/por-
at http:// wisconsinwatch.org/2016/12/regulatory-vacuum-ex-
tal#!/search/leadandcopper/results?FacilityType=School%20
poses- wisconsin-children-to-lead-in-drinking-water-at-schools-
(SCH)&SchoolName=Leicester%20Memorial%20
day-care-centers/.
Elementary&AnalyteName=LEAD .
35 Jim Walsh, “Lead level high in Cherry Hill classroom,”
42 All data calculated from the Massachusetts Execu-
Courier-Post, December 7, 2016, accessible at http:// www.cou-
tive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs’ data portal of
rierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south- jersey/2016/12/07/
lead test results, “Lead and Copper in School Drinking Water
cherry-hill-lead-water/95095118/.
Sampling Results,” Mass.gov, as of December 18th 2018, https://
eeaonline.eea.state.ma.us/portal#!/search/leadandcopper. Data
36 Gillian Graham, “Excess lead in Yarmouth schools’
analysis done by Damon Guterman of Massachusetts DEP, per-
water sparks call for testing at all schools,” Portland Press Herald,
sonal communication via email.
September 2, 2016, accessible at http://www. pressherald.
com/2016/09/01/excess-lead-in-water-sparks- call-for-testing-at- 43 Miguel A. Del Toral, Andrea Porter and Michael R.
all-schools/. Schock, “Detection and Evaluation of Elevated Lead Release
from Service Lines: A Field Study,” Environmen- tal Science and
Technology Vol 47, No 16, July 2013, page 9304, accessible at
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es4003636.
43 Get the Lead Out

44 Miguel A. Del Toral, Andrea Porter and Michael R. 53 “Lead Ban: Preventing the Use of Lead in Public Water
Schock, “Detection and Evaluation of Elevated Lead Release Systems and Plumbing Used for Drinking Water,” National Service
from Service Lines: A Field Study,” Environmen- tal Science and Center for Environmental Publications accessed March 7, 2019 at
Technology Vol 47, No 16, July 2013, page 9304, accessible at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/10003GWO.TXT?ZyActionD
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es4003636. =ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1986+Thru+1990&Docs=&Qu
ery=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=
45 Michael Wines, Patrick McGeehan and John Schwartz, &TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=
“Schools Nationwide Still Grapple With Lead in Water,” New &IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Cz
York Times, March 26, 2016, available at http://www.nytimes. yfiles%5CIndex%20Data%5C86thru90%5CTxt%5C00000003%5C
com/2016/03/27/us/schools-nationwide-still-grapple-with-lead- 10003GWO.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&Sor
in-water.html. tMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&Ima
geQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSee
46 United States Environmental Protection Agency, kPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=R
Clarification of Recommended Tap Sampling Procedures for esults%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&Zy
Purposes of the Lead and Copper Rule, (memorandum), Febru- PURL
ary 29, 2016, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ production/
files/2016-02/documents/epa_lcr_sampling_ memorandum_ 54 David Cornwell, Richard Brown and Steve Via, “National
dated_february_29_2016_508.pdf. Survey of Lead Service Line Occurrence,” Journal AWWA (Vol.
108 No. 4), page E182, April 2016, accessible at http://www.awwa.
47 Dr. Marc Edwards, quoted by Kate Taylor, “Lead Tests
org/publications/journal-awwa/abstract/articleid/57880483.
on New York City Schools’ Water May Have Masked Scope of
aspx
Risk,” New York Times, August 31, 2016, accessible at http://www.
nytimes.com/2016/09/01/nyregion/lead- tests-on-new-york-city- 55 ”EPA Lists Coolers that Could Contain LEad Parts,”
schools-water-may-have-masked- scope-of-risk.html?_r=0. Education Week, Volume 08, Issue 30, published April 19,
1989, print. Available at https://www.edweek.org/ew/arti-
48 NYC Department of Education, Water Safety: 2017 NYC cles/1989/04/19/08260026.h08.html
DOE Water Test Results, available at https://www.schools.nyc.
gov/about-us/reports/water-safety 56 Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act, National Ser-
vice for Environmental Publications U.S. EPA, December 19 2013,
49 NYC Department of Education, Water Safety: 2017 NYC https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P100M5DB.txt
DOE Water Test Results, available at https://www.schools.nyc.
gov/about-us/reports/water-safety 57 Environmental Defense Fund, “Lead from a new “lead-
free” brass faucet? More common than you’d hoped” November
50 Anne Sandvig et al., Jointly sponsored by Awwa 6th 2018 accesible at http://blogs.edf.org/health/2018/11/06/
Research Foundation and the U.S. Environmental Protection nsf-61-lead-from-a-new-lead-free-brass-faucet/?utm_
Agency, Contribution of Service Line and Plumbing Fixtures to source=twitter&utm_campaign=edf-health_none_upd_
Lead and Copper Compliance Rules, 2008, page 24, available at hlth&utm_medium=social-media&utm_id=1541515990
http://www.waterrf.org/PublicReportLibrary/91229.pdf.
58 Image from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
51 Paul Biedrzycki, head of environmental health for “Advice to Flint Residents,” EPA.gov, September 2016, accessible
the city of Milwaukee, quoted by Silke Schmidt and Dee J. Hall, at https://www.epa.gov/flint/advice-flint- residents
“Lead pipes, antiquated law threaten Wisconsin’s drinking water
quality,” WisconsinWatch.org, February 1, 2016, accessible at 59 Michael Wines, Patrick McGeehan and John Schwartz,
http://wisconsinwatch.org/2016/02/ lead-pipes-antiquated-law- “Schools Nationwide Still Grapple With Lead in Water,” New
threaten-wisconsins-drinking- water-quality/. York Times, March 26, 2016, available at http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/03/27/us/schools-nationwide- still-grapple-with-lead-
52 See charts from Mary Jean Brown, Curtis Blanton and in-water.html.
Thomas Sinks, “Examining the Effect of Previously Missing Blood
Lead Level (BPb) Surveillance Data on Results Reported in the 60 Milwaukee Public Schools, “Milwaukee Public Schools
MMWR,” CDC.gov, May 2010, accessible at https://www.cdc. releases results of water quality testing,” Decem- ber 16, 2016,
gov/nceh/lead/leadinwater/reanalysis.htm. accessible at http://mps.milwaukee.k12.wi.us/ News/Milwaukee-
Public-Schools-releases-results-of-water- quality-testing.htm.
61 Lead Water Service Lines: Lead in the Water, National

Conference of State Legislature available at http://www.ncsl.
org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/lead-water-
service-lines.aspx
Endnotes 44
62 Drinking Water Contaminants – Standards and 73 “SB-1398 Public water systems: lead user service lines,”
Regulations, U.S. EPA available at https://www.epa.gov/dwstan- California Legislature, accessed December 10, 2016, available at
dardsregulations/use-lead-free-pipes-fittings-fixtures-solder- http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNav- Client.xhtml?bill_
and-flux-drinking-water id=201520160SB1398.
63 U.S. Congress, “An Act To amend the Safe Drink- ing 74 Governor Scott Walker, Governor Walker Adminis-
Water Act to reduce lead in drinking water,” Congress. gov, Janu- tration Awards More Than $26 Million for Lead Service Line
ary 4, 2011, accessible at https://www.congress. gov/111/plaws/ Replacement in 42 Wisconsin Communities (press release), 18
publ380/PLAW-111publ380.pdf. July, 2018, https://urbanmilwaukee.com/pressrelease/governor-
walker-administration-awards-more-than-26-million-for-lead-
64 Interview with Yanna Lambridinou, PhD, on February 1, 2017. service-line-replacement-in-42-wisconsin-communities/.
65 Basic Information for Lead in Drinking Water, U.S. EPA 75 “Childhood Lead Exposure Prevention Amend- ment
available at https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking- Act of 2017,” Council of the District of Columbia, (proposed
water/basic-information-about-lead-drinking-water ordinance), accessed on January 28, 2017, available at http://lims.
dccouncil.us/Download/37185/B22-0029-In- troduction.pdf.
66 See Georgina Gustin “Toxic Algal Blooms Occur-
ing More Often”, Inside Climate News available at https:// 76 Environmental Law Institute, Drinking Water Quality in
insideclimatenews.org/news/15052018/algae-blooms-climate- Child Care Facilities: A Review of State Policy (August 2015)
change-methane-emissions-data-agriculture-nutrient-runoff-
fertilizer-sewage-pollution-lake-erie; Amanda Schmidt, “600,000 77 Rep. Lori Ehrlich and Senator Joan Lovely, HD 3765 An
customers warned of drinking water as North Carolina’s flooded Act ensuring safe water in schools. Available at https://malegisla-
hog farms, waste lagoons under scrutiny for contamination”, ture.gov/Bills/191/HD3765
MSN.com September 19 2018 available at https://www.msn.com/
en-us/news/us/600000-customers-warned-of-drinking-water- 78 Sen. Brian Campion S.40 An act relating to testing and
as-north-carolinas-flooded-hog-farms-waste-lagoons-under- remediation of lead in the drinking water of schools and child
scrutiny-for-contamination/ar-BBNyHqr ; and John Rumpler, care facilities. Available at https://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/
“Accidents Waiting to Happen,” Environment America Research status/2020/S.40
& Policy Center (June 2016) and sources therein, available at
https://environmentamerica.org/sites/environment/files/re- 79 Rep. Pollet, HB 1860 Addressing Lead in Drinking Water
ports/WEB_AME_Accidents-Report-Jan19.pdf in Schools. Available at https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillN
umber=1860&Year=2019&Initiative=false
67 “Lead and Copper Rule,” U.S. EPA accessed February 20,
2019 at https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/lead-and-copper-rule 80 Rep. Boback HB 2025. Amending An Act relating to the
public school systems. February 5th 2018, available at https://
68 Lead and Copper Rule, 56 FR 26548 §141.80 (1991). www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtT
Available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?SID=9c5415b2 ype=PDF&sessYr=2017&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billN
fe8eb76878a169c14454171f&mc=true&node=sp40.25.141.i&rgn= br=2025&pn=2984
div6
81 Nicky Oullet, Proposed Rule Would Require Lead Testing
69 Lead and Copper Rule, 56 FR 26548 §141.80 (1991). In All Montana Schools. October 30th 2018, available at http://
Available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?SID=9c5415b2 www.mtpr.org/post/proposed-rule-would-require-lead-testing-
fe8eb76878a169c14454171f&mc=true&node=sp40.25.141.i&rgn= all-montana-schools
div6
82 Bill HD 3765 An Act Ensuring Safe Drinking Water in
70 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 3Ts for Schools, 191st Congress of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
Reducing Lead in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Facil- available at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/HD3765
ities, updated October 2018. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
sites/production/files/2018-09/documents/final_revised_3ts_ 83 Bill HD 3765 An Act Ensuring Safe Drinking Water in
manual_508.pdf Schools, 191st Congress of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
available at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/HD3765 ; and
71 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 3Ts for SD 1991 An Act Ensuring Safe Drinking Water in Schools, 191st
Reducing Lead in Drinking Water in Schools and Child Care Facil- Congress of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, available at
ities, updated October 2018. Available at https://www.epa.gov/ https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/SD1991
sites/production/files/2018-09/documents/final_revised_3ts_
manual_508.pdf 84 “Pollet’s HB 1860 addresses lead in school water”,
Washington House Democrats, February 5th 2019, available at
72 John Rumpler and Christina Schleagal, February 1st https://housedemocrats.wa.gov/pollet/2019/02/05/pollets-hb-
2017 available at https://environmentamerica.org/reports/ame/ 1860-addresses-lead-in-school-water/
get-lead-out
45 Get the Lead Out

85 Rep. Boback, House Co-Sponsorship Memorandum, 97 Rebecca Flores, “Austin school district responds to new
January 24th 2019. Available at https://www.legis.state.pa.us/ report on lead levels in drinking water,” KVUE ABC News, May 29th
cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=H&SPick=20 2018, available at https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/austin-
190&cosponId=27926 school-district-responds-to-new-report-on-lead-levels-in-drink-
ing-water/269-559469250; Austin Independent School District,
86 S. 40 CHAPTER 24A. LEAD IN DRINKING WATER OF Water Testing Results by Facility, September 22, 2017 available at
SCHOOLS AND CHILD CARE FACILITIES, as of January 18th 2019 https://www.austinisd.org/announcements/2017/09/22/more-
available at https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2020/ information-water-testing-results-facility-faqs
Docs/BILLS/S-0040/S-0040%20As%20Passed%20by%20the%20
Senate%20Unofficial.pdf 98 Alison Bovell and Ana Poblacion, “Ending Hunger
in Our Classrooms,” Children’s Health Watch and EOAs, April
87 U.S. EPA National Drinking Water Advisory Council 2017, available at http://eosfoundation.org/wp/wp-content/up-
letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy (December 15, 2015) loads/2014/09/CHW-School-Breakfast-Report_April-2017.pdf
accessed on 12/31/16 from http://media.jrn.com/documents/
lead_advisory01.27.16.pdf 99 Interview with Michael Thomas, Superintendent of
Operations, Brockton Public Schools. December 7th 2018.
88 Silke Schmidt and Dee J. Hall, “Lead pipes, antiquated
law threaten Wisconsin’s drinking water quality,” Wisconsin- 100 Massachusetts Legislature, Governor’s Budget FY 2020,
Watch.org, February 1, 2016, accessible at http://wisconsinwatch. H.1. outside section 58 and 62, available at https://malegislature.
org/2016/02/lead-pipes-antiquated-law- threaten-wisconsins- gov/Budget/GovernorsBudget
drinking-water-quality/.
101 Darryl Fears and Brady Dennis, “One city’s solu-
89 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Flint, MI Filter tion to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead
Challenge Assessment, June 2016, page 2, accessible at https:// pipe,” Washington Post, May 10, 2016, available at https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/ documents/fil- www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/
ter_challenge_assesment_field_report_-_ epa_v5.pdf one-citys-solution-to-drinking-water-contamination-get-
rid-of-every-lead-pipe/2016/05/10/480cd842-0814-11e6- bdcb-
90 Lead Home: Prevention Tips, Center for Disease Con- 0133da18418d_story.html.
trol. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips.htm
102 Nutrient Pollution: The Problem, US EPA accessed Febru-
91 American Academy of Pediatrics, Prevention of Child- ary 19th 2019 at https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/problem
hood Lead Toxicity, (policy statement), July 2016, page 11, avail-
able at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/ 103 Darryl Fears and Brady Dennis, “One city’s solution to
early/2016/06/16/peds.2016-1493.full.pdf. drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe,” Washing-
ton Post, May 10, 2016, available at https:// www.washingtonpost.
92 See United States Environmental Protection Agency, com/national/health-science/one-citys-solution-to-drinking-water-
Clarification of Recommended Tap Sampling Procedures for Pur- contamination-get- rid-of-every-lead-pipe/2016/05/10/480cd842-
poses of the Lead and Copper Rule, (memorandum), February 0814-11e6- bdcb-0133da18418d_story.html.
29, 2016, accessible at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ production/
files/2016-02/documents/epa_lcr_sampling_ memorandum_ 104 Darryl Fears and Brady Dennis, “One city’s solu-
dated_february_29_2016_508.pdf. tion to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead
pipe,” Washington Post, May 10, 2016, available at https://
93 Marc Edwards, quoted by Megan Cottrell, “Why www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/
experts say Chicago parents should worry about the drinking one-citys-solution-to-drinking-water-contamination-get-
water,” Chicago Parent, April 21, 2014, accessible at http://www. rid-of-every-lead-pipe/2016/05/10/480cd842-0814-11e6- bdcb-
chicagoparent.com/magazines/chicagoparent/2014-april/lead. 0133da18418d_story.html.
94 Interview with Michael Thomas, Superintendent of 105 Susan Bence, “Milwaukee Announces Water Filter Plan
Brockton Public Schools. December 7th 2018. to Help Address Lead Pipes,” Milwaukee Public Radio, Novem-
ber 8, 2016, available at http://wuwm.com/post/ milwaukee-
95 San Diego Unified School District, Drinking Water sam- announces-water-filter-plan-help-address- lead-pipes#stream/0.
pling, accessed February 4th 2019 at https://www.sandiegouni-
fied.org/watersampling 106 Michael Hawthorne and Peter Matuszak, “As other cities
dig up pipes made of toxic lead, Chicago resists,” Chicago Tribune,
96 Sam Allard, “CMSD Has Removed or Replaced ‘Virtually September 21, 2016, accessible at http://www.chicagotribune.com/
All’ Water Fountains with Elevated Lead Levels” March 5, 2018 news/watchdog/ct-lead- water-pipes-funding-20160921-story.html.
available at https://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/
archives/2018/03/05/cmsd-has-removed-or-replaced-virtually- 107 Brian Maass, “Denver Water Steps Up Lead Pipe Remov-
all-water-fountains-with-elevated-lead-levels al,” CBS Denver, June 13, 2016, accessible at http:// denver.cbslocal.
com/2016/06/13/denver-water-steps-up- lead-pipe-removal/.
Endnotes 46

Get The Lead Out

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Get The Lead Out

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Get The Lead Out

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Get the Lead Out

Ensuring Safe Drinking Water

RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER

RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER

John Rumpler and Emma Dietz

© 2019 PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center

Design: Meltzer Design

Cover photo: Phase4Photography/Shutterstock

Lead in Schools’ Water: A Threat to Children’s Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Solutions to Ensure Safe Drinking Water at School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Communities Rising to the Head of the Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

1 Get the Lead Out

3 Get the Lead Out

“Anything above zero is harmful. Just like crack cocaine and

Lead is Harmful to Children — Figure 1: Adverse Effects of Lead at Low Levels22

In 2016, the American Academy of Pediatrics con-

5 Get the Lead Out

Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools 6

PENNSYLVANIA NEW YORK MAINE NEW HAMPSHIRE

7 Get the Lead Out

Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools 8

Figure 4: Lead in Drinking Water Sources (Source: Edwards, 2009)

While larger schools are unlikely to have lead service

The bottom line: most schools and early childhood

9 Get the Lead Out

of lead in water, it is self-evident that our existing

The problem is not a failure to acknowledge the

Lead is Contaminating Water at Our Schools 10

11 Get the Lead Out

B+ Figure 5: How states are scoring on keeping

Number of states earning grade

State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade 12

Heralding a more preventative approach, in 2016 Cali- CT F F NM ** F

13 Get the Lead Out

State Policies: Still Not Making the Grade 14

15 Get the Lead Out

6) Provide full disclosure and accountability.

Solutions to Ensure Safe Drinking Water at School 16

“Parents send their kids to school to be in a safe environment.

17 Get the Lead Out

Communities Rising to the Head of the Class 18

19 Get the Lead Out

Lead Standard in Water Max Score: 30 points 5 5 5 5 0 10 0 0

Uses 1 ppb or zero 30 points 0 0 0

Uses above 1 ppb but under 15 ppb 10 points 10

Uses 15 ppb (1 liter sample) or 20 ppb (250 mL sample) 5 points 5 5 5 5

No standard specified 0 points

Testing Protocols Max Score: 35 points 10 15 16 0 0 35 0 0

Testing for worst-case results—several samples per

Only prohibits protocols known to hide lead 10 points 10 10 10

Tests all faucets and fountains used for drinking or

Tests at least some outlets at every school 5 points 5 5

Tests every year at schools 5 points 0 0 0 0 5 0 0

Tests every 2-5 years at schools 2 points

Only requires schools to test once 1 point 1

No testing required 0 points

"Get The Lead Out" Steps Max Score: 95 points 0 15 40 0 0 55 0 0

Requires pro-active replacement of fountains, faucets

Requires pro-active installation of filters certified to

Requires immediate shut off of potable water outlets