{"id":191,"date":"2026-08-30T05:00:48","date_gmt":"2026-08-30T05:00:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/water-quality-month-lab-testing"},"modified":"2026-08-30T05:00:48","modified_gmt":"2026-08-30T05:00:48","slug":"water-quality-month-lab-testing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/water-quality-month-lab-testing","title":{"rendered":"How to Use Accredited Lab Data for Water Quality Claims"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>Written by: Scott Steveson, Specialist, Wellness Quality Institute<\/em><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"key-takeaways\">Key takeaways for using lab data in real claims<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Water quality lab testing is defensible only when the lab holds current accreditation for the exact method, matrix, and analyte you need.<\/li>\n<li>The four-step process of collection, preservation, analysis, and reporting must be followed precisely, or the data cannot support market claims.<\/li>\n<li>Sample preservation and holding times are specific to each parameter. Errors here cannot be fixed later and often lead to rejected samples.<\/li>\n<li>A complete laboratory report must include blanks, spike recoveries, chain-of-custody documentation, and method detection limits before any claim can be substantiated.<\/li>\n<li>Turn real lab data into a claim you can support, and talk to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\" target=\"_blank\">The Wellness Quality Institute<\/a> about Plastic-Free Pathway Verification.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Who this guide is for and how accreditation protects your claims<\/h2>\n<p>This guide serves quality managers, sustainability leads, and procurement teams at US companies that already hold, or plan to commission, laboratory data on water or liquid-product quality. These teams often receive a laboratory report full of numbers, yet no one inside the organization can say with confidence what those numbers prove for a market claim.<\/p>\n<p>Accreditation is the starting point for answering that problem. An accredited laboratory has been independently assessed against a defined standard, not only for the tests it runs but for the specific methods, matrices (the type of sample being tested, such as drinking water), and analytes (the substances being measured) it is approved to analyze. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/dwlabcert\/learn-about-laboratory-certification-drinking-water\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">The EPA requires that laboratories analyzing drinking water compliance samples from public water systems be certified by the EPA or the relevant state<\/a>. Certified laboratories must use EPA-approved methods, pass periodic on-site audits, and successfully analyze proficiency testing samples at least annually for each method and analyte they are certified to run.<\/p>\n<p>Several accreditation tiers may apply to your situation. California\u2019s Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP), administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, is one example of a state-level program that <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/dictionary\/term\/elap-certification\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">accredits laboratories for specific matrix, analyte, and method combinations<\/a>. A lab may hold accreditation for metals in drinking water while holding none for volatile organics. NELAP accreditation, operated through The NELAC Institute (TNI) and built on ISO\/IEC 17025 requirements, is another tier widely used across state drinking-water and environmental programs. ISO\/IEC 17025 accreditation on its own covers a laboratory\u2019s technical capability and management system but remains a separate credential from state drinking-water certification, and <a href=\"https:\/\/etrlabs.com\/what-makes-a-water-testing-lab-certified\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">one does not substitute for the other<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Teams must identify which tier applies to their testing purpose and then verify that the laboratory\u2019s current certificate covers the exact method, matrix, and analyte they need. That decision forms the first step in any defensible testing program. Once you confirm the laboratory\u2019s accreditation status, the next step is understanding how the testing process itself unfolds.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\" target=\"_blank\">Already have accredited lab data? See if it qualifies for Plastic-Free Pathway Verification.<\/a><\/p>\n<h2>How to select an accredited lab and follow the four-step testing process<\/h2>\n<p>The standard sequence for water quality testing follows four steps: sample collection, sample preservation, laboratory analysis, and results reporting. Each step has specific requirements that, if missed, can invalidate the data produced at every later stage. Selecting an accredited water testing lab before any sample is collected is not a formality. It determines whether the resulting dataset is reviewable at all.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 1, sample collection.<\/strong> Collection procedures vary by parameter. <a href=\"https:\/\/health.state.mn.us\/communities\/environment\/water\/sampproc.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">The Minnesota Department of Health maintains parameter-specific collection procedures for Safe Drinking Water Act compliance<\/a>, with separate written instructions for contaminants ranging from arsenic and nitrate to PFAS and volatile organic compounds. General principles include using only containers supplied or approved by the laboratory, avoiding contact with the interior of the container or cap, and flushing the tap for a defined period before collection. Typical guidance is about five minutes for distribution-system samples, or at least thirty minutes for well-water samples after pumping.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 2, sample preservation.<\/strong> Preservation requirements are parameter-specific and time-sensitive. Metals samples generally require acid preservation, typically to pH below 2 with nitric acid, <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/guides\/epa-method-200-8-vs-200-7-vs-6020\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">with holding times commonly up to six months for most metals under EPA Methods 200.8, 200.7, and 6020<\/a>. Microbiological samples operate on much shorter windows and often require rapid cooling and delivery.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 3, laboratory analysis.<\/strong> The laboratory must hold current accreditation for the specific method and matrix being analyzed. As noted earlier, accreditation is scope-specific, and a corporate-level badge does not automatically cover every site, method, or analyte the lab offers.<\/p>\n<figure style=\"text-align: center\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.aigrowthmarketer.co\/1784829434095-0fc8fbcf29fa.webp\" alt=\"Scientists in white coats working with samples and microscopes in a laboratory.\" style=\"max-height: 500px\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><em>Only a small number of laboratories can genuinely test for microplastics, and capability varies by instrument and method. WQI reviews a company&#039;s existing third-party laboratory data against a defined standard \u2014 it does not run the tests itself.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>Step 4, results reporting.<\/strong> A defensible report includes not only results but the quality control data surrounding them, such as blanks, spike recoveries, method detection limits, and chain-of-custody documentation. Results that arrive without this supporting information cannot be independently assessed for reliability.<\/p>\n<p>For organizations commissioning testing to support plastic-related claims, the laboratory qualification tier matters from the outset. The Wellness Quality Institute (WQI), formally known as The Wellness Quality Institute, is an independent verification body that reviews companies\u2019 existing third-party laboratory data on plastic and microplastic content. WQI qualifies laboratories by accreditation tier. California ELAP-accredited labs for the applicable microplastics method form the preferred tier. ISO\/IEC 17025-accredited labs with the method and matrix explicitly within the accredited scope are accepted. Other qualified independent laboratories may be conditionally accepted through a documented method-equivalence review. Confirming laboratory qualification before commissioning testing helps avoid paying for data that cannot support a verification review.<\/p>\n<figure style=\"text-align: center\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.aigrowthmarketer.co\/1784829410323-fb401fc7b1e4.webp\" alt=\"Colorful plastic fragments in water inside a laboratory petri dish.\" style=\"max-height: 500px\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><em>Microplastics are particles smaller than five millimeters. Current methods can count and identify them at the upper end of that range, but reliable measurement falls away as particles get smaller \u2014 a limit that shapes every honest claim.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>Sample preservation and holding times that keep your data usable<\/h2>\n<p>Sample preservation is the step most frequently overlooked by organizations new to formal water testing programs, and errors here cannot be corrected later. Preservation aims to stop biological activity and chemical change between collection and analysis so that the laboratory measures what was in the water at the time of collection.<\/p>\n<p>Containers must match the parameter being tested and should be supplied by the accredited laboratory to ensure compatibility with preservation requirements. Because many parameters degrade rapidly at room temperature, samples must be transported in an insulated cooler containing an appropriate refrigerant. Samples should never be frozen or exposed to conditions that could cause freezing, since ice crystal formation can alter sample chemistry.<\/p>\n<p>Holding times, meaning the maximum period between collection and analysis, vary significantly by parameter. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ceaeq.gouv.qc.ca\/documents\/publications\/echantillonnage\/methode-echantillonnage-eau-piscines-bassins-artificiels-en.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">Qu\u00e9bec guidance<\/a> requires free or total residual chlorine within 30 minutes, pH within 2 hours, and temperature within 3 minutes. Total coliforms, E. coli, and turbidity must be analyzed within 48 hours. Nitrates often allow up to 28 days, and many metals up to 180 days, with other parameters varying by matrix and document.<\/p>\n<p>For microbiological samples specifically, <a href=\"https:\/\/cmdhd.org\/waterlab\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">some laboratory programs require samples to arrive within 30 hours of collection<\/a>, while others set a stricter 24-hour window. <a href=\"https:\/\/fieldreport.caes.uga.edu\/publications\/B939\/water-quality-and-common-treatments-for-private-drinking-water-systems\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">The University of Georgia Water Testing Laboratory requires microbiological samples to be received within 24 hours of collection<\/a>, which affects shipping logistics as much as laboratory scheduling.<\/p>\n<p>Temperature control during transport is non-negotiable for most parameters. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tgalabs.com\/sampleAcceptance.php\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">Nitrate water samples must typically be kept refrigerated at approximately 4\u00b0C (or within 0\u20136\u00b0C)<\/a> during transport and storage. Laboratories typically reject samples submitted in unapproved containers or received outside holding-time windows, which leaves you with no usable data from that collection effort.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\" target=\"_blank\">Concerned your samples were handled correctly? WQI reviews preservation protocols as part of verification.<\/a><\/p>\n<h2>How to verify NELAP and other lab accreditations before you pay<\/h2>\n<p>Verifying a laboratory\u2019s accreditation before contracting is a straightforward step that many organizations skip. Skipping this check can lead to unusable data and wasted testing budgets. The verification steps below apply to any accreditation tier and can be completed before a purchase order is issued.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 1, confirm scope match.<\/strong> Request the laboratory\u2019s current published scope of accreditation and confirm that your exact method, matrix, and analyte appear on it. <a href=\"https:\/\/etrlabs.com\/what-makes-a-water-testing-lab-certified\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">Approval for one test such as coliform bacteria does not extend to others such as PFAS or volatile organic compounds<\/a>. For California ELAP, <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/dictionary\/term\/elap-certification\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">the State Water Resources Control Board maintains a searchable public list of currently certified laboratories<\/a> that you can check for the exact matrix, analyte, and method required.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 2, check certificate currency.<\/strong> Confirm the certificate expiration date and next renewal date. An expired or suspended certificate means the laboratory is not currently authorized to produce accredited results for that scope. <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/dictionary\/term\/nelac-national-environmental-laboratory-accreditation-conference\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">A laboratory claiming to be \u201cNELAC compliant\u201d without holding a current, verifiable NELAP accreditation certificate from a recognized Accreditation Body is making a self-declared conformance claim that has not been independently assessed<\/a>. That claim is not equivalent to accredited status.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 3, review proficiency testing history.<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/guides\/epa-method-200-8-vs-200-7-vs-6020\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">Request recent proficiency testing results, including pass or fail history, for the specific method and analyte group<\/a>, not just overall accreditation status. Proficiency testing, often called PT, involves analyzing blind samples of known concentration. Consistent passing results indicate that the laboratory can reliably produce accurate data under real conditions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Step 4, request the method detection limit study.<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/casrai.org\/guides\/epa-method-200-8-vs-200-7-vs-6020\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">A laboratory may be accredited for a method but have a validated method detection limit that is too high to demonstrate compliance against a specific permit limit or claim threshold<\/a>. The method detection limit (MDL) is the lowest concentration a laboratory can reliably distinguish from zero under its actual conditions. <a href=\"https:\/\/waterinsights.hach.com\/detection-limits\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">An MDL is lab-specific and must be determined experimentally, so two laboratories using the same method may report different MDLs because of differences in instruments, reagents, operators, and environment.<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\" target=\"_blank\">Planning to commission testing? Learn what WQI requires before you contract with a lab.<\/a><\/p>\n<h2>Red-flag checklist for reports that support real claims<\/h2>\n<p>A laboratory report that contains only results, meaning numbers next to analyte names, is incomplete for claim-substantiation purposes. The following elements must appear in or accompany any report intended to support a market claim related to water quality or plastic content.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Blank results.<\/strong> Method blanks confirm that the laboratory&#8217;s own equipment, reagents, and environment did not introduce contamination into the sample. A report without blank data cannot rule out laboratory-sourced contamination as the origin of any detected substance.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Spike recoveries.<\/strong> Matrix spike recoveries, where a known quantity of the target analyte is added to the sample and the recovery percentage is measured, confirm that the method performed correctly in the specific sample matrix. Acceptance criteria typically require recoveries within a defined range, such as 75\u2013125%.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Chain-of-custody documentation.<\/strong> A complete chain-of-custody record documents every transfer of the sample from collection through analysis, with signatures, dates, times, and preservation conditions. Gaps in this record undermine the legal and scientific defensibility of the data.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Reporting limits, not just results.<\/strong> The reporting limit, meaning the lowest concentration the laboratory will report as a quantitative value, must be stated alongside every result. A finding of &#8220;none detected&#8221; means none found above the reporting limit, not none present. <a href=\"https:\/\/waterinsights.hach.com\/detection-limits\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">Results below the MDL cannot be reported as quantitative values and must be reported as &#8220;below detection limits.&#8221;<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>Particle-size range and polymer panel for microplastics testing.<\/strong> For any plastic-related claim, the report must state the particle-size range analyzed and the specific polymers screened. A result of &#8220;none detected&#8221; is bounded entirely by those parameters and says nothing about particle sizes or polymer types outside the tested scope.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Teams need a clear view of what &#8220;none detected&#8221; actually proves. That phrase proves that no target substance was found above the reporting limit, using the tested method, in the analyzed sample. It does not prove absence.<\/p>\n<h2>Testing frequency guidelines by water source<\/h2>\n<p>Testing frequency depends on the water source, the parameters of concern, and the regulatory context. The following schedules represent examples that organizations may choose to adopt based on their specific circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>For private wells, annual testing for bacteria, specifically total coliform, and nitrate or nitrite is a commonly recommended baseline. <a href=\"https:\/\/health.ri.gov\/private-wells\/testing-your-well-water\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">The Rhode Island Department of Health recommends private well owners test every year for coliform bacteria, nitrate or nitrite, color, chloride, sodium, and turbidity<\/a>. Metals, corrosivity, and hardness are recommended every three to five years, and volatile organic compounds every five to ten years. <a href=\"https:\/\/fieldreport.caes.uga.edu\/publications\/C858-2\/testing-for-water-quality\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">University of Georgia Extension recommends an initial comprehensive water chemistry panel for private wells followed by retesting every three years<\/a>, with annual microbial and basic chemistry checks in between. Retesting is also warranted after flooding, well damage, or installation of a treatment system.<\/p>\n<p>For municipal water users, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/cfr\/text\/40\/141.153\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">community water systems are required to provide annual Consumer Confidence Reports<\/a> summarizing detected contaminants and their levels. Supplemental testing by individual organizations, for example at the point of use or for parameters not covered by the Consumer Confidence Report, may be appropriate when specific contamination concerns exist, when products are manufactured using municipal water, or when a plastic-related claim requires data on parameters the Consumer Confidence Report does not address.<\/p>\n<p>Under <a href=\"https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/CFR-2025-title21-vol2\/pdf\/CFR-2025-title21-vol2-part129.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">21 CFR Part 129<\/a>, bottled water producers must conduct recurring source-water analyses for chemical contaminants at least once each year and for radiological contaminants once every four years. Weekly total coliform testing is required for source water obtained from other than a public water system.<\/p>\n<h2>When raw lab data needs independent review<\/h2>\n<p>A laboratory report and a defensible market claim are not the same thing. Many organizations sit in the gap between them, holding data they paid for but unable to use it. No independent party has assessed whether the method suited the matrix, whether the reporting limits are adequate, whether the controls were run correctly, or what the data can actually support as a claim.<\/p>\n<p>This gap becomes especially sharp for plastic-related claims. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.waterworld.com\/drinking-water-treatment\/news\/55388787\/epa-proposes-ucmr-6-monitoring-rule-leaves-microplastics-off-testing-list\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noindex nofollow\">The EPA excluded microplastics from its proposed UCMR 6 monitoring rule because no validated EPA or consensus-based analytical method exists that can consistently detect and characterize microplastics in drinking water across laboratories to produce nationally consistent results.<\/a> In the absence of a federal standard, the California State Water Board\u2019s drinking-water microplastics framework represents the most stringent credible public reference currently available. That framework defines microplastics as solid polymeric material with particles having at least three dimensions greater than 1 nanometer and less than 5,000 micrometers.<\/p>\n<figure style=\"text-align: center\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.aigrowthmarketer.co\/1784829388732-c6255482b477.webp\" alt=\"Fragments of plastic suspended in blue water below the surface.\" style=\"max-height: 500px\" loading=\"lazy\"><figcaption><em>Plastic doesn&#039;t disappear \u2014 it fragments. These secondary microplastics are the breakdown products of everyday objects, and independent research now detects them across the water supply. Detection, though, establishes presence, not absence.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>The Wellness Quality Institute, through its core program Plastic-Free Pathway Verification (PFPV) governed by the standard WQI-CS-01, independently reviews a company\u2019s existing laboratory dataset, testing methodology, product scope, and supporting controls against defined criteria aligned with that California framework. The Wellness Quality Institute does not run laboratory tests. Its role is to assess whether the data a company already holds meets defined review criteria and to issue approved claim language tied specifically to what that data supports. Each verification is scope-locked and cannot be extended to other products, production periods, or untested parameters. A single assessment fee covers review, verification decision, and public registry listing, while laboratory testing is arranged and billed separately.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\" target=\"_blank\">Request a verification assessment to find out what your existing data can support.<\/a><\/p>\n<h2>Frequently asked questions about water quality testing<\/h2>\n<h3>How do you test water quality in a lab?<\/h3>\n<p>Laboratory water quality testing starts with sample collection using containers and procedures specified by the laboratory for the parameters being analyzed. The sample is preserved through refrigeration, chemical addition, or both, and transported to the laboratory within the required holding time. At the laboratory, analysts run the sample through the appropriate analytical method, which may include techniques such as ion chromatography, mass spectrometry, infrared spectroscopy, or microbiological culture, depending on what is being measured. Quality control samples, including blanks, spikes, and duplicates, are run alongside every batch to confirm that the method is performing correctly. Results are reported alongside those quality control data points and the method detection limit. For plastic and microplastic testing specifically, the report must also state the particle-size range analyzed and the polymer types screened, because a result of &#8220;none detected&#8221; is bounded entirely by those parameters.<\/p>\n<h3>How often should water quality be tested?<\/h3>\n<p>Testing frequency depends on the water source and the parameters of concern. Private well owners are commonly advised to test annually for bacteria and nitrate, with less frequent comprehensive chemical panels every three to five years and retesting after any event that could affect the well, such as flooding, nearby construction, or installation of a treatment system. Municipal water users receive annual Consumer Confidence Reports from their water system, but organizations using municipal water in product manufacturing may need supplemental testing for parameters the Consumer Confidence Report does not cover. Bottled water producers operating under FDA regulations are required to conduct source-water analyses for chemical and radiological contaminants at least every four years, with more frequent microbiological monitoring. For plastic-related claims, a single test result reflects only the production lot and time period sampled, so ongoing monitoring is necessary to maintain a defensible claim over time.<\/p>\n<h3>What are the signs of poor water quality?<\/h3>\n<p>Observable signs of water quality problems include unusual color, cloudiness or turbidity, odor, and taste changes. Discoloration such as yellow, brown, or reddish tints can indicate elevated iron or manganese. A rotten-egg smell often points to hydrogen sulfide. Cloudiness may reflect suspended particles, bacterial contamination, or treatment byproducts. Many water quality concerns, including nitrate contamination, PFAS, and microplastics, produce no visible, odor, or taste signal at concentrations that may be relevant for testing purposes. Laboratory analysis remains the only reliable method for detecting these parameters. Relying on sensory indicators alone does not provide an adequate basis for a water quality claim.<\/p>\n<h3>What are the three types of water quality testing?<\/h3>\n<p>Water quality testing is commonly grouped into three broad categories. Microbiological testing measures the presence of bacteria, viruses, and other biological contaminants, with total coliform, E. coli, and enterococci as common parameters. Chemical testing covers inorganic compounds such as metals, nitrate, and fluoride, as well as organic compounds including pesticides, volatile organics, PFAS, and disinfection byproducts. Physical testing measures properties such as pH, turbidity, conductivity, hardness, and temperature. For plastic and microplastic content, a fourth category, particle characterization, applies. Particle characterization uses spectroscopic methods such as infrared or Raman spectroscopy to identify polymer types and count particles by size fraction. Each category requires different analytical methods, different preservation procedures, and different laboratory capabilities, so a laboratory accredited for one category is not automatically qualified for another.<\/p>\n<h3>Can I test my own water quality?<\/h3>\n<p>Consumer test kits and strips are available for a limited range of parameters, such as pH, hardness, chlorine, and some metals, but their detection limits are generally too high to be useful for regulatory compliance or claim substantiation. For PFAS, for example, consumer immunoassay strips have detection limits in the range of 20 to 70 parts per trillion, which is insufficient to detect contamination at the federal standard of 4 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS. For microplastics, no consumer-grade test exists that produces chemically confirmed, size-fractionated results. Self-collected samples submitted to an accredited laboratory can produce defensible data, but only when the collection procedure, container, preservation, and holding time requirements specified by the laboratory are followed exactly. A sample collected incorrectly, whether through the wrong container, wrong preservation, or collection outside the holding time, will either be rejected or produce results that cannot be relied upon.<\/p>\n<h3>What are the 5 main indicators of water quality?<\/h3>\n<p>The five parameters most commonly used as baseline water quality indicators are pH, turbidity, total coliform bacteria, nitrate, and total dissolved solids. pH measures acidity or alkalinity, with drinking water typically maintained between 6.5 and 8.5. Turbidity measures water clarity, where higher values indicate suspended particles. Total coliform bacteria serve as an indicator of potential microbial contamination. Nitrate is a chemical contaminant associated with agricultural runoff and septic systems, with an EPA maximum contaminant level of 10 mg\/L. Total dissolved solids measure the combined content of all inorganic and organic substances dissolved in water. These five parameters provide a useful starting point but do not constitute a comprehensive water quality assessment. Parameters such as PFAS, heavy metals, disinfection byproducts, and microplastics require separate, method-specific testing and are not captured by any single indicator. A report showing acceptable values for these five parameters says nothing about the presence or absence of plastic particles.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p><em>The Wellness Quality Institute Plastic-Free Pathway Verification does not certify that a product contains zero plastic, microplastics or nanoplastics. It shows that the company is on a verified pathway toward plastic-free standards. Verification applies only to the reviewed products, submitted datasets, tested ranges, polymer panels, production or sampling periods, and supporting controls. The Wellness Quality Institute verification is not a California approval, government certification, or health or safety certification.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Pick an accredited lab, preserve your samples, and make claims that hold up. The Wellness Quality Institute guides you through every step. Start here.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":117,"featured_media":190,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-191","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-water-quality"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=191"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/190"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=191"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=191"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wellnessqualityinstitute.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=191"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}