Paul Schwartz (continued)

“EPA has signaled in the proposed LCRI that it wants to get the lead out of water. This important task will be aided or undercut depending on whether or not EPA takes the public education portion of the treatment technique seriously. Public ed could be the glue that reenforces, supports and plugs the holes that EPA acknowledges exist in other parts of the LCR such as LSLR, regulatory compliance monitoring etc., or if it is not done adequately or in alignment with EPA’s own science, be the Achilles heel that guarantees generations more of lead-in-water exposure at the tap.

EPA and the Biden Administration are pumping billions of dollars into LSLR and associated accelerator and technical assistance programs which is, even though not adequate to meet the challenge, commendable. Americans, however, by and large, are being misguided about the ubiquity of lead in water exposure. In part this is because EPA’s own messaging on lead in water is not on the mark and needs serious correction.  EPA encourages people to turn to professionals, from the medical and public health community, and technical assistance providers to understand lead exposure at the tap and how to protect themselves.  But these professionals and organizations are leaning on, and amplifying EPA’s problematic messaging. These trusted messengers along with influential information-sharing networks, impact how people, the media, policy makers in government and the public in general understand lead in water and what to do about it. As we adumbrated in our November 20 letter to EPA, this messaging could actually increase lead exposure at the tap.

Americans have the right-to-know and to how to protect themselves from these truly preventable exposures. We have the right to know that whether or not our water authority meets the lead action level, we need to take precautionary measures such as using lead certified filters to ensure lead free water at their tap.”