THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
PROGRAM
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NSF International
ETV Joint Verification Statement
TECHNOLOGY TYPE:
APPLICATION:
PRODUCT NAME:
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
EMAIL:
POINT-OF-USE DRINKING WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
REMOVAL OF CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING
WATER
PALL/KINETICO PUREFECTA™
KINETICO INCORPORATED
10845 KINSMAN ROAD PHONE: 800-944-9283
NEWBURY, OH 44065 FAX: 440-564-9541
CUSTSERV@KINETICO.COM
NSF International (NSF) manages the Drinking Water Systems (DWS) Center under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program. The
DWS Center recently evaluated the performance of the Pall/Kinetico Purefecta™ point-of-use (POU)
drinking water treatment system. NSF performed all of the testing activities, and also authored the
verification report and this verification statement. The verification report contains a comprehensive
description of the test.
EPA created the ETV Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative or improved environmental
technologies through performance verification and dissemination of information. The goal of the ETV
Program is to further environmental protection by accelerating the acceptance and use of improved and
more cost-effective technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high-quality, peer-
reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in the design, distribution, permitting,
purchase, and use of environmental technologies.
ETV works in partnership with recognized standards and testing organizations, stakeholder groups
(consisting of buyers, vendor organizations, and permitters), and with the full participation of individual
technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of innovative technologies by developing
test plans that are responsive to the needs of stakeholders, conducting field or laboratory tests (as
appropriate), collecting and analyzing data, and preparing peer reviewed reports. All evaluations are
conducted in accordance with rigorous quality assurance protocols to ensure that data of known and
adequate quality are generated and that the results are defensible.
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-i
-------
ABSTRACT
The Pall/Kinetico Purefecta™ POU drinking water treatment system was tested for removal of aldicarb,
benzene, cadmium, carbofuran, cesium, chloroform, dichlorvos, dicrotophos, fenamiphos, mercury,
mevinphos, oxamyl, strontium, and strychnine. The Purefecta™ employs several components: a reverse
osmosis (RO) membrane, carbon filters, and a bacteria/virus removal filter to treat drinking water.
Treated water is stored in a three-gallon storage tank. The system was first tested with only the RO
membrane component in place. The target challenge concentration of each chemical for each RO
membrane test was 1 mg/L. Following the RO membrane challenges, the post-membrane carbon filter
component was challenged alone with each chemical that the RO membrane did not remove to below 10
Hg/L, except for cesium, which is not well removed by carbon. The target feed concentration of each
chemical to a carbon filter component was the maximum effluent level measured during the RO
membrane tests.
A total of 20 RO membrane components were tested, divided into ten pairs. Each pair of membranes was
tested with only one of the ten organic chemicals because of concern that a chemical could compromise
the integrity of the membrane material or membrane seals. One pair of RO membrane components was
also challenged with the inorganic chemicals. Each RO membrane chemical challenge was conducted
over a one-day period. Influent and effluent samples were collected during the operation period, and also
the next morning. Post-membrane carbon filter challenges were conducted over a 15-hour duration. Two
filters were tested for each chemical challenge, and each pair was only used for one challenge. Influent
and effluent samples were collected at the beginning, middle, and end of the challenge period.
The Purefecta™ system as a whole, considering both the RO membrane challenge and post-membrane
carbon filter challenge results combined, reduced all of the challenge chemicals by 99% or more, except
for cesium.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The following technology description was provided by the manufacturer, and has not been verified.
The Purefecta™ is a five-stage POU drinking water treatment system. It employs activated carbon filters
and an RO membrane to remove chemical contaminants from drinking water, and a mechanical filtration
"biofilter" to remove microorganisms. The system includes a three-gallon maximum capacity pressurized
bladder tank for storing the treated water, and a faucet to mount on the kitchen sink. The biofilter is
manufactured by the Pall Corporation and supplied to Kinetico, who manufactures the system.
The influent water first passes through a pre-membrane sediment or carbon filter, and then through the
RO membrane. The permeate water travels through the first stage of the Pall biofilter for virus removal,
and then into the storage tank. When the flow of water into the system is started, treated water will be
continually produced until the storage tank is nearly full. At that time, the water pressure in the tank
activates an automatic shut-off device, stopping the flow of water through the system. After a portion of
the water is dispensed from the storage tank, the shut-off device deactivates, allowing water to again flow
into the system until the storage tank is nearly full. When the user opens the faucet, the partially treated
water exits the storage tank, passes through the post-membrane carbon filter, and finally through the
bacteria removal portion of the Pall biofilter. The Purefecta™ is designed to produce approximately four
gallons of reject water for every gallon of treated water.
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-ii
-------
VERIFICATION TESTING DESCRIPTION
Test Site
The testing site was the Drinking Water Treatment Systems Laboratory at NSF in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
A description of the test apparatus can be found in the test/QA plan and verification report. The testing
was conducted August through November of 2004.
Methods and Procedures
Verification testing followed the procedures and methods detailed in the Test/QA Plan for Verification
Testing of the Pall/Kinetico Purefecta™ Point-of-Use Drinking Water Treatment System for Removal of
Chemical Contamination Agents. Because any contamination event would likely be short-lived, the
challenge period for each chemical lasted only one day. Long-term performance over the life of the
membrane was not investigated.
The system was first tested with only the RO membrane component in place. The complete Purefecta™
system, including the storage tank, was used for these tests, but empty cartridges were used in place of the
carbon and bacteria/virus filters. A total of 20 RO membranes were challenged with the chemicals in
Table 1. The target challenge concentration for each chemical was 1 mg/L. The 20 RO membrane
components were divided into ten pairs. Each pair was tested with only one of the ten organic chemicals
because of concern that a chemical, especially benzene or chloroform, could compromise the integrity of
the membrane material or membrane seals. One pair of the RO membrane components was also
challenged with the inorganic chemicals. The inorganic chemical challenges were conducted prior to the
organic challenges to eliminate the possibility of damage to the membranes that could bias the inorganic
chemical challenge results. Reduction of total dissolved solids (TDS) was also measured to evaluate
whether any organic chemicals damaged the membrane material or membrane seals during the challenges.
Table 1. Challenge Chemicals
Organic Chemicals Inorganic Chemicals
Aldicarb Cadmium Chloride
Benzene Cesium Chloride (nonradioactive isotope)
Carbofuran Mercuric Chloride
Chloroform Strontium Chloride (nonradioactive isotope)
Dicrotophos
Dichlorvos
Fenamiphos
Mevinphos
Oxamyl
Strychnine
Prior to chemical challenge testing, the RO membrane components were service-conditioned for seven
days by feeding the systems test water without any chemical spikes. After completion of the conditioning
period, the membranes were subjected to a TDS reduction test using sodium chloride to verify that they
were operating properly. Each RO membrane chemical challenge was conducted over a one-day period.
The systems were operated for six tank-fill periods, and then were allowed to rest overnight. Influent and
effluent samples were collected at start-up, after the 3rd tank fill, after the 5th tank fill, and the next
morning after the membranes rested under pressure overnight.
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-iii
-------
Following the RO membrane challenges, post-membrane carbon filters were challenged with the
chemicals that the RO membrane did not remove to below 10 |o,g/L, except for cesium, which is not well
removed by carbon. The carbon filters were attached to a separate manifold that was of the same design
as the manifold in the full system. The pre-membrane carbon filter was not tested because it is only
designed to remove chlorine to protect the RO membrane. Two carbon filter components were tested for
each chemical challenge, and each filter was only used for one challenge. The target challenge
concentrations were the maximum effluent levels measured during the RO membrane tests.
Prior to testing, each carbon filter was service-conditioned by feeding water containing chloroform to
simulate the potential chemical loading on the carbon halfway through the filter's effective lifespan. The
target chloroform concentration was 300 ± 90 |o,g/L, which is the influent challenge concentration for the
VOC reduction test in NSF/ANSI Standard 53 (chloroform is the surrogate challenge chemical for the
test). The filters were operated at a flow rate of 0.5 gallons per minute (gpm) for 250 gallons (Kinetico's
design capacity for the filter is 500 gallons).
The post-membrane carbon filter challenges were 15 hours in duration. Influent and effluent samples
were collected at the beginning, middle, and end of the challenge period. The carbon filters were
operated on an "on/off operation cycle where the "on" portion was the time required to empty the system
storage tank when full, and the "off portion was the time required to fill the storage tank.
VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
The results of the RO membrane challenges are presented in Table 2. The RO membrane treatment
process removed 96% or more of all challenge chemicals except mercury and chloroform. The TDS
reduction by each membrane component for all challenge tests was 94% or higher, and the TDS levels in
the treated water samples did not increase through any of the challenge periods. This indicates that none
of the chemicals compromised the performance of the membrane components to a degree that could be
detected.
Table 2. RO Membrane Challenge Data
Mean Influent Mean Effluent Percent
Chemical (|ag/L) (|ag/L) Reduction (%)
Cadmium
Cesium
Mercury
Strontium
Aldicarb
Benzene
Carbofuran
Chloroform
Dichlorvos
Dicrotophos
Fenamiphos
Mevinphos
Oxamyl
Strychnine
1000
1000
1100
850
950
1100
950
1100
1100
790
740
1400
980
1100
1.9
40
680
2
7
48
6
170
23
ND(10)
2
19
5
18
>99
96
38
99
>99
96
>99
85
98
99
>99
99
>99
98
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-iv
-------
The post-membrane carbon filter components were challenged with mercury, benzene, chloroform,
dichlorvos, mevinphos, and strychnine, based on the criteria that the RO membrane challenge effluents
were above 10 |o,g/L. The target challenge levels were the maximum effluent levels measured during the
RO membrane challenges. The carbon filters were operated at 0.8 gpm on an operation cycle where the
"on" portion was four minutes and thirty seconds, and the "off portion was one hour and ten minutes.
The carbon challenge results are shown below in Table 3. The carbon filters reduced all substances to
non-detectible levels, except for mercury. However, the mean effluent value for mercury was only 2.7
Hg/L, which still gives a percent reduction greater than 99%. Note that the percent reduction of
strychnine was limited by the detection limit for the chemical.
The RO membrane and carbon challenge data combined shows that the two treatment technologies
working in concert within the Purefecta™ system removed 99% or more of all of the challenge chemicals,
except for cesium.
Complete descriptions of the verification testing results are included in the verification report.
Table 3. Post-Membrane Carbon Filter Challenge Data
Mean Influent Mean Effluent Percent
Chemical (Mfi/L) (M£/L) Reduction (%)
Mercury
Benzene
Chloroform
Dichlorvos
Mevinphos
Strychnine
960
83
320
29
20
31
2.7
ND (0.5)
ND (0.5)
ND (0.2)
ND (0.2)
ND(5)
>99
>99
>99
>99
99
84
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)
NSF ETV and QA staff monitored the testing activities to ensure that the testing was in compliance with
the test plan. NSF also conducted a data quality audit of 100% of the data. Please see the verification
report referenced below for more QA/QC information.
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-v
-------
Original signed by Andrew A vel, 9/26/05 Original signed by Robert Ferguson, 10/5/05
Andrew P. Avel Date Robert Ferguson Date
Acting Director Vice President
National Homeland Security Research Center Water Systems
United States Environmental Protection NSF International
Agency
NOTICE: Verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific,
predetermined criteria and the appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA and NSF make no expressed
or implied warranties as to the performance of the technology and do not certify that a technology will
always operate as verified. The end-user is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable
federal, state, and local requirements. Mention of corporate names, trade names, or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use of specific products. This report is not an NSF
Certification of the specific product mentioned herein.
Availability of Supporting Documents
Copies of the test protocol, the verification statement, and the verification report (NSF report # NSF
04/13b/EPADWCTR) are available from the following sources:
(NOTE: Not all of the appendices are included in the verification report. The appendices are available
from NSF upon request.)
1. ETV Drinking Water Systems Center Manager (order hard copy)
NSF International
P.O. Box 130140
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140
2. NSF web site: http://www.nsf.org/etv/dws/dws_reports.html, and from
http://www.nsf.org/etv/dws/dws_project_documents.html (electronic copy)
EPA web site: https://www.epa.gov/etv (electronic copy)
NSF 05/13b/EPADWCTR The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement. September 2005
VS-vi
------- |