Effectiveness of Prevailing Flush Guidelines to Prevent Exposure to Lead in Tap Water

Adrienne Katner, Kelsey Pieper, Komal Brown, Hui-Yi Lin, Jeffrey Parks, Xinnan Wang, Chih-Yang Hu, Sheldon Masters, Howard Mielke and Marc Edwards
Additional contact information
Adrienne Katner: School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Kelsey Pieper: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
Komal Brown: School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Hui-Yi Lin: School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Jeffrey Parks: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
Xinnan Wang: School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Chih-Yang Hu: School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Sheldon Masters: Corona Environmental Consulting, Philadelphia, PA 19146, USA
Howard Mielke: Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
Marc Edwards: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA

IJERPH, 2018, vol. 15, issue 7, 1-22

Abstract: Flushing tap water is promoted as a low cost approach to reducing water lead exposures. This study evaluated lead reduction when prevailing flush guidelines (30 s–2 min) are implemented in a city compliant with lead-associated water regulations (New Orleans, LA, USA). Water samples ( n = 1497) collected from a convenience sample of 376 residential sites (2015–2017) were analyzed for lead. Samples were collected at (1) first draw ( n = 375) and after incremental flushes of (2) 30–45 s ( n = 375); (3) 2.5–3 min ( n = 373), and (4) 5.5–6 min ( n = 218). There was a small but significant increase in water lead after the 30 s flush (vs. first draw lead). There was no significant lead reduction until the 6 min flush ( p < 0.05); but of these samples, 52% still had detectable lead (≥1 ppb). Older homes (pre-1950) and low occupancy sites had significantly higher water lead ( p < 0.05). Each sample type had health-based standard exceedances in over 50% of sites sampled (max: 58 ppb). While flushing may be an effective short-term approach to remediate high lead, prevailing flush recommendations are an inconsistently effective exposure prevention measure that may inadvertently increase exposures. Public health messages should be modified to ensure appropriate application of flushing, while acknowledging its short-comings and practical limitations.

Keywords: drinking water; lead; Pb; flush; exposure prevention; intervention; lead service line (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1537/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1537/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:7:p:1537-:d:158982

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().