Filters certified for chloramine — the 137, and the categories with none

By Andrew Bates, FounderPublished 2026-09-10Updated 2026-09-11

Far fewer than for chlorine, and not in the formats most people buy. NSF's listing held 137 distinct models with a chloramine reduction claim on 2026-09-10 against 3,479 with a chlorine claim. No pitcher and no whole-house product held the chloramine claim at all. It concentrates in plumbed-in and counter-top systems.

The gap is not what most people expect

Chlorine reduction and chloramine reduction are two separate claims under the same standard, NSF/ANSI 42. Certification for one is not evidence about the other.

Reading both listings the same way on 2026-09-10:

	Chloramine	Chlorine
Rows NSF returned	216	5,565
Distinct model designations	137	3,479
Companies	31	176

About twenty-five to one. But the ratio is the least useful part, because the gap is not spread evenly across the things people actually buy.

Where the certified products are, and are not

Distinct models holding each claim, by category:

Category	Chloramine	Chlorine
Pour-through (pitcher)	0	437
Point-of-entry (whole-house)	0	58
Refrigerator filter, integrated	5	946
Refrigerator filter, aftermarket	11	452
Faucet mount	2	42
Plumbed-in	34	1,038
Plumbed-in to separate tap	29	169
Counter-top connected to sink faucet	22	43
Commercial modular	33	253

Two categories hold no certified chloramine product. A pitcher and a whole-house system are the two formats a household is most likely to reach for, and neither has a certified example in this listing.

One category barely moves. Counter-top systems go from 43 to 22 — the claim is held by about half that category, against roughly four percent overall.

That is the practical finding: a chloramine household is not looking for a rarer product in the usual categories. It is looking in different categories.

The decision framework

1. Confirm the disinfectant before anything else

The annual report your utility must send you by July 1 names it. Reports also carry educational statements and detected contaminants, so it is worth reading properly rather than scanning for one word.

→ How to read your water quality report

If it names chlorine, nearly the whole catalogue is open to you and this page does not apply.

If it names chloramine, continue.

If you cannot tell, ask the utility. Buying against the wrong disinfectant is the expensive version of this mistake.

2. Rule out the categories with no certified example

Pitchers and whole-house systems are out on certification grounds in this listing. Not because they cannot work — because no model in NSF’s listing holds the claim, so there is nothing to verify.

If a supplier offers you either, the question is which accredited body certified it and for which claim. That is answerable, and a good supplier will answer it.

→ How to read an NSF listing, footnotes included

3. Choose the format where the claim concentrates

Counter-top connected to a sink faucet holds the claim most often relative to its size — 22 of 43.

Plumbed-in and plumbed-in to separate tap hold the most in absolute terms, 34 and 29.

Both mean a fitted unit rather than a jug, which is a budget and installation decision as much as a water one.

4. Verify on the model, not the brand

Claims vary by product. A brand with one certified model does not certify its range, and some NSF entries carry the footnote “conforms to the material requirements only” — a listing under a standard with no reduction claim at all.

Applying the framework: who holds the claim

The certified population, grouped by company. This is not a ranking and carries no recommendation — it is the set any recommendation would have to come from.

Company	Models	Categories
Access Business Group (Amway)	26	Plumbed-in to separate tap 13, counter-top 13
Everpure LLC	25	Commercial modular 18, plumbed-in 7
Solventum Purification	13	Plumbed-in 9, separate tap 2, commercial 2
Heeyoo Purification Technology	10	Refrigerator filter, aftermarket 10
Mavea LLC	7	Plumbed-in 7
SHURflo Pump Manufacturing	6	Plumbed-in 6
Multipure	5	Plumbed-in to separate tap 5
Amway (China)	4	Counter-top 2, separate tap 2
Nano Smart Technology	4	Plumbed-in 4
Tupperware Brands	4	Counter-top 4
Watpure International	4	Separate tap 3, counter-top 1
Microfilter Co., Ltd.	3	Refrigerator filter, integrated 3

The remaining 19 companies hold one or two models each.

Notes tied back to the criteria

Everpure holds 25 models, second only to Amway in this set, and 18 of the 25 are commercial modular. Household buyers should read that column before assuming availability.
Heeyoo holds ten of the eleven aftermarket refrigerator-filter claims. If you want chloramine reduction in a fridge filter, that is where most of the certified population sits.
Tupperware’s four are all counter-top, which is consistent with the category pattern rather than an exception to it.
Commercial modular is 33 of the 137. Roughly a quarter of the certified chloramine population is not household equipment at all, so the household- relevant set is smaller than the headline figure.

The decision path

Your situation	What decides it	Where that lands you
Report names chlorine	Wrong page	Nearly the whole catalogue
Report names chloramine, want a pitcher	No certified example	Change format, or ask for another certifier
Want whole-house chloramine treatment	No certified example	Ask which body and which claim
Want a fridge filter	16 models across both fridge types	Look up your exact model
Willing to fit a unit	Where the claim concentrates	Plumbed-in or counter-top
Concerned about taste only	Claim still has to match	Chloramine reduction, not chlorine
Unsure of the disinfectant	Everything depends on it	Read the report, or ask the utility

Choose a counter-top system if

You want the format where the claim is least rare, at 22 of 43 models.
You can give up counter space and prefer not to alter plumbing.

Choose a plumbed-in system if

You want the widest choice of the household categories here, at 34 plumbed-in and 29 to a separate tap.
You are willing to install, or to pay someone to.

Choose to stop and ask first if

You cannot confirm your disinfectant. Every criterion above depends on it.
A supplier has offered you a pitcher or whole-house unit for chloramine. Neither has a certified example in this listing, so ask which body certified theirs and for which claim before paying.

Mistakes that cost the most money

Buying a pitcher for chloramine taste. The most common version of this mistake, and the pour-through category held no certified chloramine model at all on the capture date against 437 for chlorine.

Reading a chlorine claim as covering chloramine. They are separate claims under one standard. The label often says chlorine because that is the claim the product holds.

Buying whole-house for it. No point-of-entry model held the claim here, and EPA’s own framing puts whole-house treatment where a contaminant is inhaled or where the problem is scaling, staining or odour.

→ Point-of-use or whole-house, by exposure route

Assuming a brand’s range is certified. Claims are listed per model. One certified model does not certify a family.

Ignoring the commercial column. A third of the certified population is commercial modular equipment, so the household-relevant set is smaller than 137.

Forgetting the cartridge schedule. EPA states carbon filters have a specified shelf life and should be replaced on schedule. A claim describes a cartridge inside its rated life.

Three situations, and what changes

You switched to a pitcher and the taste did not change. The likely explanation is that the pitcher holds a chlorine claim and your utility uses chloramine. Check the report and the model’s claim list before replacing the pitcher with another pitcher.

Your utility switched from chlorine to chloramine. A common change, and EPA explains why systems make it — chloramines are less reactive with organic material and produce substantially lower byproduct concentrations. Your existing filter’s claim may no longer match your water.

→ Disinfection byproducts, and the trade the switch is making

Black or greasy particles appeared after the switch. EPA notes chloramines react with certain types of rubber hoses and gaskets, such as those on washing machines and hot water heaters, and that such particles may appear as those materials degrade. That is a plumbing question rather than a filter one.

The objections worth answering

“Only 137? That cannot be the whole market.” It is NSF’s listing on one date, for one claim, counting distinct model designations. NSF’s own row count was 216. Other accredited bodies publish separately and this page does not cover them.

“My pitcher says it reduces chloramine.” Then ask which body certified that claim and look it up. A marketing statement and a listed claim are different artefacts, and only one is checkable.

“Chloramine is harmless, so why filter it?” EPA sets a maximum residual disinfectant level of 4.0 mg/L for both chlorine and chloramines and lists eye and nose irritation and stomach discomfort, with anemia additionally for chloramines. Most people filtering it are doing so for taste, which is a legitimate reason and does not need a health argument.

“These figures will move.” They will. NSF dates its listings and asks readers to confirm status at source, which is why the capture date sits beside every figure here.

Who this is for

Households on a chloraminated supply choosing a filter, and anyone who bought one for the taste and found it unchanged.

It is not for chlorine systems, where almost the entire catalogue is a candidate, and it names no recommended product.

What to settle first

Does my report say chlorine or chloramine, and does my exact model list that claim?

Two lookups. Between them they explain most disappointed filter purchases on a chloraminated supply.

→ Chlorine and chloramine: the chemistry, and why the claims differ → Which claims exist at all, and how populated each is → How to read an NSF listing, footnotes included → Shower filters hold no chloramine claim at all

The bottom line

Confirm your disinfectant in the annual report first, because chlorine and chloramine are separate claims and a filter proven against one has not been proven against the other. If it is chloramine, expect the field to be narrow and shaped differently: 137 distinct certified models against 3,479 for chlorine, with no pitcher and no whole-house product holding the claim at all. The claim concentrates in plumbed-in and counter-top systems, so budget for a fitted unit rather than a jug. Then verify the claim on the exact model rather than the brand.

Who this is not for

This is NSF's listing on 2026-09-10 and nothing else. WQA and IAPMO certify to the same NSF/ANSI standards and publish separate listings, so a category showing zero here may hold certified products elsewhere. It is not a ranking, makes no recommendation, and says nothing about how well any model performs a claim it holds. It also cannot tell you which disinfectant your utility uses — the annual report names that.

Questions

How many filters are certified for chloramine?

NSF's listing search returned 216 rows for chloramine reduction under NSF/ANSI 42 on 2026-09-10, resolving to 137 distinct model designations from 31 companies. The same search for chlorine reduction returned 5,565 rows and 3,479 distinct models.

Is there a water pitcher certified for chloramine?

None appeared in NSF's listing on 2026-09-10. The pour-through category held 437 distinct models with a chlorine reduction claim and none with a chloramine claim. That is an absence in one certifier's listing on one date rather than a statement about the technology.

Is there a whole-house filter certified for chloramine?

Not in this listing. The point-of-entry category held 58 distinct models with a chlorine reduction claim and none with a chloramine claim on 2026-09-10. Ask any supplier offering one which body certified it and for which claim.

Does a chlorine filter remove chloramine?

They are separate claims under the same standard, so a chlorine certification is not evidence about chloramine. EPA notes chloramines are not as reactive as chlorine with organic material, which is part of why the two behave differently in treatment.

Which filters are most likely to carry the claim?

Plumbed-in and counter-top systems. Counter-top is the category where the claim is least rare: 22 of the 43 distinct counter-top models holding a chlorine claim also held a chloramine claim on 2026-09-10.

Do refrigerator filters remove chloramine?

Very few. On 2026-09-10, integrated refrigerator filters held five chloramine claims against 946 chlorine claims, and aftermarket refrigerator filters held 11 against 452. Looking the specific model up is the only way to know.

How do I find out whether my utility uses chloramine?

The annual water quality report names the disinfectant used. EPA requires community water systems to deliver one to customers each year by July 1. Where that report is not to hand, the utility can state which disinfectant it uses on request.

Why does my utility use chloramine at all?

EPA states that because chloramines are less reactive with organic material than chlorine, they produce substantially lower concentrations of disinfection byproducts in the distribution system, and systems using chloramine tend to see fewer taste and odour complaints.

Sources — 14 claims

NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, NSF/ANSI 42 chloramine reduction and chlorine reduction claim searches (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
NSF’s listing search returned 216 rows for chloramine reduction under NSF/ANSI 42 and 5,565 rows for chlorine reduction on 2026-09-10, resolving to 137 distinct model designations from 31 companies for chloramine and 3,479 from 176 companies for chlorine. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: Both are claims under the same standard, counted the same way on the same date. NSF lists some models on several rows, so row counts and distinct-model counts measure different things and both are reported. NSF listings only; other accredited bodies publish separately.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, NSF/ANSI 42 chloramine reduction and chlorine reduction claim searches (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
No pour-through and no point-of-entry product held a chloramine reduction claim in NSF’s listing on 2026-09-10, against 437 pour-through and 58 point-of-entry distinct models holding a chlorine reduction claim under the same standard. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: An absence in one certifier’s listing on one date, not a statement that the technology cannot work in those formats. A product in either category may hold the claim through another accredited body, or may simply not have sought it.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, NSF/ANSI 42 chloramine reduction and chlorine reduction claim searches (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
Distinct models holding a chloramine reduction claim against a chlorine reduction claim by category on 2026-09-10: plumbed-in 34 against 1,038; commercial modular 33 against 253; plumbed-in to separate tap 29 against 169; counter-top 22 against 43; aftermarket refrigerator filter 11 against 452; integrated refrigerator filter 5 against 946; faucet mount 2 against 42. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: Category labels are NSF’s own, normalised for spelling variants in its data (Commerical and Commericial read as Commercial, plural Refrigerator Filters as singular, and a bare Refrigerator Filter as Integrated). Counts are distinct model designations after stripping NSF footnote markers from model names.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, NSF/ANSI 42 chloramine reduction and chlorine reduction claim searches (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
Counter-top systems connected to a sink faucet are the category where chloramine certification is least rare, with 22 of the 43 distinct models holding a chlorine claim also holding a chloramine claim on 2026-09-10. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: A ratio within one category on one date. It says nothing about performance, price or availability, and counter-top products are a small category overall.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, reduction-claim search (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
NSF offers seven selectable reduction claims under NSF/ANSI 42: bacteriostatic effects, chloramine reduction, chlorine reduction, Filter First, nominal particulate reduction, taste and odor reduction, and zinc reduction. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: The claims selectable in NSF’s own search on the capture date. It bounds what a product certified to NSF/ANSI 42 alone can be claiming, and says nothing about how well any product performs a claim it does hold.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units, reduction-claim search (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
NSF’s listing search reported these certified product counts on 2026-09-10: chlorine reduction 5,565 and taste and odor reduction 5,504 under NSF/ANSI 42 against chloramine reduction 216; cyst reduction 1,746, lead reduction 1,003, TTHM reduction 317, PFOA reduction 60 and total PFAS reduction 49 under NSF/ANSI 53; TDS reduction 371, fluoride reduction 145, hexavalent chromium reduction 138, pentavalent arsenic to 300 ppb 126 and nitrate/nitrite reduction 84 under NSF/ANSI 58; microplastics reduction 1,099 under NSF/ANSI 401; and free available chlorine reduction 10 under NSF/ANSI 177. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: A dated snapshot of NSF’s own match count per claim, taken one claim at a time on 2026-09-10. NSF counts listed model rows, which include replacement components as separate products, so these are not counts of distinct consumer models. NSF dates its listings and asks readers to confirm status at source, so any figure here can move.
NSF — NSF/ANSI 42, 53 and 401: Filtration Systems Standards (page dated 2025-12-16)
Under NSF/ANSI 42 and NSF/ANSI 53, certification claims vary by product; certification to the standard does not mean a product carries every claim available under it. (captured 2026-09-09)
Limits: NSF does not print 'claims vary by product' under NSF/ANSI 401. See certification-nsf-0008 for the 401 position, which rests on weaker source language.
NSF Official Listings — Drinking Water Treatment Units (listings current as of Thursday, September 10, 2026, 12:15 a.m. Eastern Time)
NSF Official Listings mark some entries "Conforms to the material requirements only", meaning the product appears under a standard without any contaminant reduction performance claim having been certified. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: The footnote states what was evaluated, not what the product does. It does not say the product performs badly, only that performance was not the basis of this listing. A separate listing for the same model can carry performance claims.
EPA — National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
EPA sets a Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level of 4.0 mg/L as Cl2 for both chlorine and chloramines, with noticeable effects listed as eye and nose irritation and stomach discomfort, and anemia additionally for chloramines. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: An MRDL is a limit on a deliberately added disinfectant, not a contaminant to be eliminated. EPA Region 9 states the concern behind these limits is control of disinfection byproducts rather than the toxicity of the disinfectants at these levels.
EPA Region 9 — Chloramine (page as archived in EPA’s 19 January 2017 web snapshot)
EPA states that because chloramines are less reactive with organic material than chlorine, they produce substantially lower concentrations of disinfection byproducts, and that systems using chloramine tend to see fewer taste and odour complaints. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: A statement about aggregate system experience, not about how any individual perceives their own water. Some people report the opposite, and this claim does not contradict that.
EPA Region 9 — Chloramine (page as archived in EPA’s 19 January 2017 web snapshot)
EPA states that chloramines react with certain types of rubber hoses and gaskets, such as those on washing machines and hot water heaters, and that black or greasy particles may appear as those materials degrade. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: This identifies a material compatibility problem, not a water quality failure. Replacement hoses and gaskets rated for chloramine address it.
EPA — CCR Information for Consumers (page last updated 2025-11-21)
EPA states a Consumer Confidence Report must include the water source, a summary of source contamination risk, regulated contaminants detected, the potential health effects of any contaminant detected in violation of a health standard, actions taken to restore safe water, a Cryptosporidium statement for vulnerable populations, and educational information on nitrate, arsenic or lead where they may be a concern. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: Health-effects language is required for contaminants detected IN VIOLATION of a standard. A contaminant detected below its limit can therefore appear as a bare number with no health context. The report also covers REGULATED contaminants, so unregulated substances may not appear at all.
EPA Office of Water — Home Water Treatment Facts / Filtration Facts (published November 2005)
EPA states that an activated carbon filter by itself is not designed to remove all disease-causing organisms, and that carbon filters have a specified shelf life and should be replaced regularly per the manufacturer instructions. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: Concerns activated carbon as a class. Some carbon blocks carry certified cyst reduction claims, which is a model-specific capability rather than a property of carbon.
EPA Office of Water — Home Water Treatment Facts / Filtration Facts (published November 2005)
EPA states that for most contaminants a point-of-use device treats only the water consumed, but that contaminants such as radon, disinfection byproducts and some organic chemicals easily turn into gases and may pose a risk when inhaled, such as when showering, which a point-of-entry device can reduce. (captured 2026-09-10)
Limits: States when whole-house treatment is warranted by exposure route. It does not establish that any particular home has volatile contaminants, which requires a test.