Harvey,
Since group call Tuesday | have been working cut how the fitter idea might take shape.
To reiteraie some key points so we're all clear:
1.
DEO does not inspect individuals’ homes in a situation lke this. i's the city’s system, their
operators nandie ail complaints and maintenance. In fact, our folks gierted me that the city’s
got union rules in place forbidding any contractor from touching the system.
DEO’s role is linited ic ensuring the plant is operating to state standards and the water If
produces meets potabiliiy standards. The aesthetic issues drawing concern from residents --
color, odor, taste — stem from a variety of things. Age of the system and prolonged lack of
upkeep is ihe leading factor. Bui in some areas, another contributing factor is changes in water
flow - Source used to come from the south, now comes from the north, so sarne pipes are
flawing in reverse, stirring up whatever was settled for a long time. in sorne sections, large
pipes that historically served large communities are now serving a much smaller customer
bese, contributing to water siagnating in the system. In sorne areas, househoid connections
are old and worn, so iwo neighbors may be having dramatically different experiences. My point
is, the challenge takes many forms and there's no single solution that will bring sweeping
change. The two consullants hired by the city have, as [understand it, both reinforced this mea
in their assessments, so that’s good.
The fix for this will be years in the making, truly. Even if full funding were available, ‘big dig’
prascts cant ail happen at once. The city needs to get an assesement of its infrastructure so if
cari orioritize iis needs, and | understand theyre working on thal. In the near term,
maintenance this soring / summer — things like cleaning the pipes in key sections and flushing
the systern via the nydrants - could offer some short term results. | know nobody wants to just
wait for soring, but thal is something important to keep in rind.
in the meartime, the group discussed possitdy making home water filters available somehow.
The National Safety Foundation is a Michigan company, neadquartered and founded in Ann
Arbor, that develoos standards for all kinds of infrastructure. They're a globally recognized
source for standard setting. A look ai their site reveais there are myriad filtration ogtions on the
market and within each type (eucet mounted, whole house ling fiters, etc) there are fters that
focus on diferent aspects of purification.
if this idea begins to get legs, ld suggest testing some different madels on the jocal water at
the customer level to see ifihey work. Pd also sugges! the idea be focused on tap-mounted
models to promote clean, appealing drinking water. And I'd suggest this program could be
funded in whole ar in pari by the state, but would need to be administered by the city
(reinforcing the fact that they own, operate and service the system). Pve got sorne information
on filler models below.
xxxEND_PAGE:executiveofficeemails20_b1554_3861_3863_1
Two more considerations: One, while the state has provided residents in some communities
with bottled water in the past, i always has to do with their water being somehow
conmiarminated — as in, some kind of chamical plume that impaired local drinking water sources.
This would be the first time the state took steps to deal with what is an aesthetic issue on a
system where the waier is meeting state drinking water standards.
Water filter info:
ANSI NSF Standard 42 Covers bacteriostasis, taste and odor (associated only with chlorine removal), and
other aesthetic conditions
hito//standards nsforg/apps/group public/dewnload php/T9syS/NSF 42-11% 20-%20watermarked pdf
ANSI NSF Standard 53 Covers health effects removal
htte//standarcds nsfercv/apps/group public/download pho/T9S9S/NSF §3-11a%20-%20watermarked pa
It is important to note that the filters are not required to meet all aspects of the standard, only the portions they
want to make claims for. So product information for each filter must be reviewed to determine its applicability.
Most of these point of use filters are basic activated carbon filters that simply remove taste and odor
specifically associated with chlorine, not other things like iron, manganese, hydrogen sulfide, etc. that can also
impact taste and odor as well as color.
It is important to recognize that taste and odor is generally an individual preference and such standards have
for the most part not been developed because groups of individuals may still consider taste and odor issues to
exist even after levels for such a standard have been met.
Other considerations are that the test water for such filters attempting to meet the standard uses hardness
levels of 170 mg/L or less. Flint’s water at times may be above this level, which could then impact filter
performance and longevity.
Most of these filters are designed to be replaced after 100 gallons or less of use, a period of about 3 months
for most households. In addition the tests allow for initial pressure drops of up to 15 psi. This may limit use in
households that already rely on minimum pressure within their household plumbing.
Regarding the health effects standards, as the Flint water system already meets such requirements, with the
exception of the current TTHM locational running annual average, there is little point to the use of these filters
for such a purpose.
To the paint you'd asked abaul the other day, while Flint and Detroit are leacing examples of
unmainieined infrastructure, Flint is not alone by any means.
This recent infrastructure report card
nitoAwww infrastructurererorteard
Lists Michigan with a $13.8 Billion need over the next 20 years.
Nitoc/Awww infrastructurereportcard
Here’s a link to the 2009 Report Card for Michigan Infrastructure
hito Awww. michiganreporicard. com/