Overview
Legal does not necessarily equal safe.
- Getting a passing grade from the federal government does not mean the water meets the latest health guidelines.
- Legal limits for contaminants in tap water have not been updated in almost 20 years.
- The best way to ensure clean tap water is to keep pollution out of source water in the first place.
AquaPura's analysis shows 11 contaminant(s) detected in City of Grand Forks's water exceed recommended health guidelines, though they may be within legal limits set by the EPA.
Contaminants Detected
This Utility: 0.569 ppb
Legal Limit: 10 ppb
5.7x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.1 ppb
0.1 ppb
Bromodichloromethane
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 1.93 ppb
No Legal Limit
32x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.06 ppb
0.06 ppb
Chloroform
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 14.9 ppb
No Legal Limit
37x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.4 ppb
0.4 ppb
Chromium (hexavalent)*
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 0.381 ppb
No Legal Limit
19x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.02 ppb
0.02 ppb
Dibromochloromethane
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 0.346 ppb
No Legal Limit
3.5x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.1 ppb
0.1 ppb
Haloacetic acids (HAA5)
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 14.5 ppb
Legal Limit: 60 ppb
145x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.1 ppb
0.1 ppb
Haloacetic acids (HAA9)*
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 26.9 ppb
No Legal Limit
449x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.06 ppb
0.06 ppb
This Utility: 0.483 ppm
Legal Limit: 10 ppb
3.4x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.14 ppb
0.14 ppb
Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs)
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 17.2 ppb
Legal Limit: 80 ppb
115x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.15 ppb
0.15 ppb
Trichloroacetic acid
Potential Effect: cancer
This Utility: 0.89 ppb
No Legal Limit
8.9x
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.1 ppb
0.1 ppb
This Utility: 0.085 ppm
Legal Limit: 10 ppm
EWG's Health Guideline:
0.14 ppm
0.14 ppm
This Utility: 8.27 ppt
No Legal Limit
EWG's Health Guideline:
1000 ppt
1000 ppt
Find a Filter
See which water filtration technologies are effective at reducing the contaminants detected in this utility's water supply.
Carbon Filters
Filters 9 contaminants exceeding guidelines (+6 others)
Can reduce the levels of many common contaminants.
Pros
- Lower upfront cost
- Reduced maintenance
Cons
- Does not remove all contaminants
Reverse Osmosis
Filters 11 contaminants exceeding guidelines (+11 others)
Can reduce the levels of many common contaminants.
Pros
- Most effective
Cons
- Higher upfront cost
- Requires more maintenance
- Wastes water
Other Considerations
Ion Exchange
PROS: Softens hard water, Reduces some contaminants
CONS: Doesn't remove all contaminants
Whole-House Filters
PROS: Useful for reducing radiologicals and TCE
CONS: Expensive to install and maintain, Risk of bacterial contamination
Explore filter options for each contaminant. See which technologies are effective at reducing specific contaminants.
| Contaminant | Activated Carbon | Reverse Osmosis | Ion Exchange |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contaminants Above Health Guidelines | |||
| Bromate* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Bromodichloromethane | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Chloroform | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Chromium (hexavalent)* | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dibromochloromethane | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Dichloroacetic acid | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Haloacetic acids (HAA5) | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Haloacetic acids (HAA9)* | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Nitrate and nitrite | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Trichloroacetic acid | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Other Contaminants Detected | |||
| Atrazine* | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Bromide | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Dibromoacetic acid | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Lithium | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Manganese | ✕ | ✕ | ✓ |
| Molybdenum | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Monobromoacetic acid* | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Monochloroacetic acid | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Nitrate | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Nitrite | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Perfluorobutanoic Acid (PFBA) | ✓ | ✓ | ✕ |
| Strontium* | ✕ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Vanadium* | ✕ | ✕ | ✓ |
Protect your family's health.
Don't wait for your utility to improve. Get a free water analysis from AquaPura and find the right filtration system for your home.