Christina Liu, B.S. | Hydroviv Science Team

Tampa Bay Water is an alliance between the six governments in west-central Florida: Hillsborough County, Pasco County, Pinellas County, New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa. These municipalities, in turn, provide drinking water to more than 2.5 million people in the Tampa Bay region. For Hydroviv’s assessment of Tampa Bay Region’s drinking water, we aggregated water quality test data from Tampa Bay Water, the 6 municipal suppliers listed above, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Environmental Working Group, and the US Geological Survey. Our Water Nerds then cross referenced these data with toxicity studies in the scientific and medical literature, as well as upcoming regulatory changes. The custom water filters that we build for our customers in the Tampa Bay Region are optimized with this research in mind.

Source of the Tampa Bay Region’s Drinking Water

Tampa Bay Water’s supply is a blend of treated groundwater, river water and desalinated seawater. Groundwater comes from 12 wellfields pumping water from the Floridan Aquifer. River water is withdrawn from the Alafia River, Hillsborough River and the Tampa Bypass Canal. Surplus river and canal water is stored in the C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir, which supplies the surface water treatment plant during dry times. Hillsborough Bay is the source of seawater for the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination Plant.

What Are The Major Concerns in Tampa Bay Drinking Water?

Contaminants of concern in the Tampa Bay Region’s drinking water include Lead, PFAS, Disinfection Byproducts, Radium, and Uranium. Low amounts of Arsenic and Chromium 6 were also detected in the water. Chloramine is used to disinfect the water.

Lead In Tampa Bay Region’s Drinking Water

Lead enters into the consumer's tap water through old lead service pipes and lead-containing plumbing. When corrosion control measures fail (as witnessed in Flint, Michigan), lead leaches into the drinking water, reaching toxic levels. 2020 lead sampling by Tampa Bay Water detected levels as high as 4 parts per billion. EPA, CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics all recognize that there is no safe level of lead for children. In addition, Federal regulations cannot take into account levels measured at an individual tap.

PFAS or 'Forever Chemicals' in Tampa Bay Water

Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are a category of emerging contaminants commonly used in firefighting foam, Teflon, non-stick surfaces, stain-resistant surfaces, and food packaging. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has determined that PFAS exposure is associated with various adverse health effects, including an increased risk of cancer, lowered fertility rates, and developmental issues in infants and young children. A new study out of The Yale School of Public Health recently found that exposure to PFAS increases the risk of miscarriage by 80-120% in pregnant women. The Centers for Disease Control also issued a disclosure regarding a potential intersection between PFAS and COVID-19.

Even small amounts of PFAS are extremely toxic. PFAS are measured in parts per trillion, and one part per trillion is equivalent to one drop of water in 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

PFAS have been detected in a growing number of municipalities across the United States. Most municipalities are not required to test for or remove PFAS from drinking water, including the Tampa Bay Region. Not all water filters are designed to remove PFAS from tap water. If you'd like to find water filters that remove PFAS from tap water, check out this Duke/NC State PFAS study.  Hydroviv filters are NSF/ANSI Standard 53 certified for PFOA/PFOS removal.

Disinfection Byproducts (DBPs) In Tampa Bay Drinking Water

DBPs are a category of emerging contaminants that form when chlorine-based disinfectants (added to the water supply to protect consumers) react with naturally-occurring organic matter. EPA regulates two categories of DBPs: Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and Haloacetic Acids (HAA5). The EPA has stated that DBPs have been associated with increased risk of bladder cancer, as well as kidney, liver, and central nervous system problems. Haloacetic Acid levels in Hillsborough and Pinellas County ranged as high as 47.2 parts per billion, nearing the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level of 60 parts per billion.  Total Trihalomethane levels ranged as high as 107 parts per billion, exceeding the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level of 80 parts per billion.

Radium and Uranium in Tampa Bay Region’s Drinking Water

Radium is formed when uranium and thorium undergo radioactive decay in the environment. Two of the main radium isotopes found in the environment are radium-226 and radium-228. Radium in drinking water is of primary concern because this radiation may cause cancer, kidney damage and birth defects.  Radium levels in Hillsborough County were as high as 2.04 ppb with the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level Goal 5 ppb. Uranium levels in Pasco County water measured at 0.54 ppb in 2019, with the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level Goal set at 30 ppb.

Use Of Chloramine In Tampa Bay Region’s Tap Water

While most cities use chlorine as the primary disinfectant, all of the municipalities within Tampa Bay Water use chloramine, which is made by combining chlorine and ammonia. Chloramine is frequently the issue when customers report a “bad taste” in their tap water, and unlike chlorine will not fade away if left in the fridge overnight. The 2020 chloramine running annual average for the City of Tampa Bay was 3.5 parts per million, with samples ranging as high as 5.3 ppm; the maximum residual disinfectant level, in comparison, is only 4.0 ppm. Most one-size-fits-all water filters use filtration media that don’t adequately remove chloramine, but the filters that Hydroviv builds for Tampa Bay Area water use special filtration media that are purpose-built to remove chloramine as well.

Arsenic in Tampa Bay Region’s Drinking Water

Arsenic is a hazardous heavy metal that can cause cancer and other health problems. Arsenic originates in source water naturally. In the Tampa Bay Water region, low amounts of arsenic were detected in the different areas, ranging from 0.11 ppb to 0.43 ppb. While Tampa Bay Region’s Arsenic levels were comparatively low when measured to EPA water quality standards, consumers should know that the U.S. EPA's standard balances toxicity against the costs of removing arsenic from drinking water. 

Chromium 6 Levels In Tampa Bay Region’s Drinking Water

Chromium 6 is a highly toxic metal that is not regulated by the EPA. Tampa Bay Water was measured to have Chromium 6 levels ranging from 47 parts per trillion to 140 parts per trillion. California has determined that 20 parts per trillion is the contaminant level below which there is minimal health risk. The Chromium 6 levels in the Tampa Bay water system range from about 2 to 7 times the level generally accepted as safe.

How Can Hydroviv Help Me?

Hydroviv is a water filtration company that uses water quality data to optimize water filters for each customer's water. The contaminants that we list above are what we consider to be major “points of emphasis” that we use to build water filters that are built specifically for Tampa Bay Area water, but all of our filters also include broad protection against a wide range of contaminants.

If you’re interested in learning more about water filters that have been optimized for Tampa Bay tap water, or just have questions about water quality in general, feel free to visit www.hydroviv.com, reach out by email (hello@hydroviv.com) or through our live chat. We post water-related news on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. 

Hydroviv's drinking water filters carry NSF certifications to Standard 42 (aesthetic effects--Chlorine Removal) and Standard 53 (health effects--Lead, VOCs, and PFOA/PFOS removal), and are independently tested to remove hundreds of contaminants.

Analies Dyjak & Matthew Krug

February 14th 2019: The Department of the Army and the Environmental Protection Agency posted the newly proposed “Waters of the United States” rule to the Federal Register. At its core, the proposed EPA WOTUS rule limits the water that EPA can regulate and monitor. By narrowing the scope of WOTUS definitions, this basically gives industries a roadmap of where it’s okay to pollute without the need for permitting. This is a big deal for the 45 million Americans who rely on well water for drinking and bathing. So, why should you care about the definition of waters of the United States?

"Waters of the United States"

This definition, also known as “WOTUS” has been up for debate for decades, and it’s interpretation has seen several Supreme Court cases. This proposed rule determines what waters the federal government is able to regulate and monitor. Generally, “waters” have traditionally been navigable waters such as oceans, rivers, ponds, and streams. As our scientific understanding of hydrology has improved, the scope of what are considered “waters” has expanded.

What Is Not Protected Under The Proposed Rule?

WOTUS definitions name certain waters as “excluded,” which, in this case, means they do not have a surface water connection. This means that groundwater, ephemeral streams, ditches, prior converted cropland and some wetlands and ponds are not included. This is a continued rollback of environmental regulations - and the 2019 EPA WOTUS rule proposal may have the farthest-reaching implications of all.

How Does This Proposed Rule Affect Drinking Water?

This rule puts the 45 million Americans that use private wells as a primary source of drinking water at risk. Private wells are not regulated by federal, state, or local governments, and agencies are not required to test for contaminants or ensure “compliance.” A 2006 study by the USGS concluded that private wells are already contaminated with various types of agricultural runoff, solvents, fumigants and inorganic compounds, the most common being arsenic and nitrates. Arsenic is a naturally occurring organic compound, that enters groundwater as bedrock weathers overtime. However, nitrates are used in fertilizers and enter both surface and groundwater from agricultural runoff. 8.4% of the wells tested in this study were in exceeded the federal standard for nitrates (we have an article dedicated specifically to nitrates in groundwater). Further, EPA does not provide recommended criteria or standards for private well users. By rolling back protections, private well users are being further kept in the dark.

How Did They Arrive At this Rule?

The proposed EPA WOTUS rule is primarily based off a majority opinion by Justice Scalia in the Supreme Court case Rapanos v. United States. Scalia’s interpretation favored “traditional waters,” and steered away from Justice Kennedy’s “significant nexus theory.” In his majority opinion, Scalia wrote that federal protections should cover:

“...only those wetland with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are waters of the United States.”

Who’s Driving?

The American Farm Bureau dominated the conversation at the press conference for the proposed EPA WOTUS rule in early December of 2018. Industries lobbied hard to limit the scope of jurisdictional waters. In a political landscape where there is an abundance of legislation grandfathered in to protect the chemical, fossil fuel, and agricultural industries, it should come as no surprise that the current administration did not break from tradition. The agricultural industry is not the only institution who will benefit from this proposed rule. Chemical manufacturing companies have to go through a rigorous permitting process determined by state or federal governments (NPDES) which regulate pollution. But now, with a clearly defined and reduced scope of what constitutes a water of the United States, these companies are able to map out how to circumvent regulation.

The federal government has designated this as “economically significant”

This means that the proposed rule with have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. 

Our Take:

This proposed WOTUS definitions puts the 15% of the country at further risk of groundwater contamination. This population of people are now on their own in terms of monitoring their drinking water and keeping up with land use changes. Our science team will be submitting public comments on this proposed rule, which will be available on our website in the upcoming weeks. We encourage our readers to do the same thing! CLICK HERE for the link to the WOTUS public comment page.

Analies Dyjak, M.A | Head of Policy and Perspectives   

Whenever severe water contamination impacts a community, people (and media outlets) tend to jump to bottled water as the only water contamination solution. The bottled water industry has managed to convince vulnerable consumers that their product is inherently safer than what’s coming out of their taps. Oftentimes, this isn’t the case. So why is bottled water bad? The reality is that bottled water is associated with a host of ethical, environmental and regulatory problems. Drinking bottled water is not a long-term solution to water contamination, and we should critically examine its role as water quality crises continue to pop up across the country. Here are our main problems with the bottled water industry to give you a better idea of why bottled water is bad.

1)  Bottled Water Companies Use The Same Source As Tap Water

According to the FDA, bottled water companies are permitted to package and sell water from municipal taps, artesian wells, mineral water, natural springs, and drilled wells. Surprisingly enough, they aren’t required to disclose the source water itself. If you’re looking for transparency, municipal systems are required to publish an annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) that discloses characteristics about the source water, treatment techniques, and other distribution information. The bottled water industry also frequently packages and distributes groundwater from dug wells. Groundwater can often be more susceptible to pollution than surface water because it’s not regulated by the federal government. Groundwater acts as a catchment for surface water runoff and agricultural pollution, not to mention its increased risk of arsenic contamination.

2)  Bottled Water and Tap Water Have Almost Identical Standards

People are often surprised to learn that there’s virtually no difference between the regulations for bottled water and tap water. The Environmental Protection Agency regulates tap water and the Food and Drug Administration regulates bottled water. The allowable concentrations of contaminants are identical for both, with the exception of lead. The standard for lead in bottled water is 5 parts per billion, as opposed to 15 parts per billion in tap water. This is because during bottling production, water should never come in contact with older lead service pipes the same way municipal water does. Arsenic can be present in groundwater as a result of natural weathering of bedrock. Exposure to arsenic in drinking water can result in cancers in various organs, including skin, bladder, lung, kidney, liver, and prostate. Non-cancerous health effects include neurological damage, such as peripheral neuropathy.

3)  Impacts On The Environment

It’s well-documented that single-use plastic water bottles wreak havoc on the environment. Plastics are made from petroleum, which is a fossil fuel and a non-renewable resource. Companies often tout their commitment to reducing plastic consumption by weight, but this has no bearing on the volume at which it’s produced. You may be familiar with “Trash Island,” in the Northern Pacific Ocean. This phenomenon is the result of decades of poor waste management and excessive production of various types of plastic. According to a 2016 study by the Ellen Macarthur Foundation, the ocean will contain more plastic by weight than fish by the year 2050. Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) is the main ingredient in plastic water bottles. PET takes over 400 years to decompose in the environment and its constituents can often take longer to degrade. Chemicals like Bisphenol A (BPA) have since been phased out of plastic production, but are still very much present in the environment and will continue to be released as older plastics degrade.

4)  False Advertising

Marketing schemes deceive consumers into believing that companies use pristine source water. The packaging uses carefully curated images of mountain-top creeks and streams to suggest pure, untainted products. The reality is bottled water hardly ever comes from the sources depicted on the label.

5)  Ethical Dilemma

Nestle, a company with a long track record of unscrupulous business practices, owns deep aquifers throughout California, a state which has been experiencing drought-like conditions for several decades. The expensive equipment purchased by Nestle allows the company to extract water in a way that tribes and municipalities cannot afford to do. Similar companies have been known to use their purchasing power to acquire land, pushing tribes and municipalities out of the conversation. Problems arise when drought-stricken or contaminated communities are unable to afford the same resources as bottled water companies.

Our Take:

While bottled water offers some measure of immediate relief to a severe drinking water crisis, it is in no way a long-term water contamination solution. Companies often sell the same water that’s feeding municipal systems. Not to mention, EPA and FDA have almost identical regulations for both tap and bottled water. There’s also an inherent cost associated with bottled water, which varies depending on the brand. Finally, a huge part of why bottled water is bad is that scientific data confirms the importance of reducing plastic pollution on a global scale. Municipal providers offer greater transparency and are required to disclose information about the source water.

Analies Dyjak, M.A.  |  Water Nerd

For Hydroviv’s assessment of Omaha, Nebraska drinking water, we collected water quality test data from the city’s Consumer Confidence Report and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. We cross referenced Omaha's water quality data with toxicity studies in scientific and medical literature. The water filters that we sell at Hydroviv are optimized to filter out contaminants that are found in Omaha's drinking water.

Where Does Omaha Source Its Drinking Water? 

Omaha draws its tap and drinking water from the Missouri River, Platte River, and the Dakota Sandstone aquifer.

Lead in Omaha’s Drinking Water

Lead enters tap water through older lead service pipes and lead-containing plumbing, soldered joints, and fixtures. Based on the 2017 water quality report, lead levels in Omaha ranged from 0.5 to 14.9 parts per billion. 10% of taps had levels over 6.4 parts per billion, which is barely in compliance with the loose EPA standard of 15 parts per billion. However, if you were to ask toxicologists, pediatricians, or the CDC they would all tell you that there is no safe minimum level of lead. Lead is a neurotoxin that can have serious developmental effects on children.

Arsenic in Omaha’s Drinking Water

Arsenic is a heavy metal that typically leaches into groundwater as surrounding bedrock naturally weathers overtime. According to the most recent data, Arsenic concentrations ranged from 1 to 3.93 parts per billion in Omaha drinking water. EPA set a Maximum Contaminant Level of 10 parts per billion for Arsenic, but several health and regulatory agencies believe this level should be reduced to 1 or even 0 parts per billion. Arsenic is a toxic substance that is linked to a long list of health problems in humans. For example, arsenic can cause a number of different cancers (e.g. skin, bladder, lung, liver, prostate), as well as create non-cancerous problems with cardiovascular (heart/blood vessels), pulmonary (lungs), immune, neurological (brain), and endocrine (e.g. diabetes) systems. Hydroviv recommends purchasing a filter that is optimized to remove Arsenic from your drinking water, especially if you’re serviced by a private well.

Disinfection By-Products in Omaha’s Drinking Water

When water treatment facilities sanitize the water with chemicals such as chlorine, different contaminants can be created. These types of contaminants are called Disinfectant by products or DBPs. They are split into two categories: Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and Haloacetic Acids-5 (HAA5). Concentrations of TTHMs averaged 40.2 parts per billion but were detected as high as 66.5 parts per billion. HAA5 concentrations averaged 19.6 parts per billion but were detected as high as 37.6 parts per billion. For a bit of perspective, EPA set a Maximum Contamination Level of 80 parts per billion for TTHMs and 60 parts per billion for HAA5.

Chromium 6 In Omaha’s Drinking Water

Chromium 6 is an unregulated toxic metal that's associated with metal processing, tannery facilities, chromate production, stainless steel welding, and pigment production. Concentrations of Chromium 6 were found to be ranging from 130 parts per trillion to 1400 parts per trillion. These levels are nearly 70 times higher than the concentration determined to have a negligible impact on cancer risk. EPA has acknowledged that Chromium 6 is a known human carcinogen through inhalation, but is still determining its cancer potential through ingestion of drinking water. Lung, nasal and sinus cancers are associated with Chromium 6 exposure. Ingestion of extremely high doses of chromium 6 compounds can cause acute respiratory disease, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hematological, hepatic, renal, and neurological distress which may result in death.

Synthetic Organic Contaminants in Omaha's Drinking Water

Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate was also detected in Omaha's drinking water. This chemical is known for its ability to make plastic flexible. A toxicology report has shown that this chemical is known to cause reproductive problems in young males, stomach pains, and is labeled as a probable carcinogen. EPA set a Maximum Contaminant Level of 6 parts per billion for this contaminant. The Omaha water quality problem report detected concentrations of these chemicals ranging from less than 2 parts per billion to 3.11 parts per billion.

Other Articles We Think You Might Enjoy:
Lead Contamination In Drinking Water
Disinfection Byproducts In Drinking Water: What You Need To Know
5 Things To Know About Arsenic In Drinking Water