E.P.A. to abandon new arsenic limits for water supply

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/21/politics/21ENVI.html

March 21, 2001

E.P.A. to Abandon New Arsenic Limits for Water Supply

By DOUGLAS JEHL

WASHINGTON, March 20 — The

Environmental Protection Agency said today that it intended to withdraw a new drinking-water regulation approved by the Clinton administration, saying it did not believe that the decision was supported by the best available science.

The rule, which would have reduced by 80 percent the permissible standard for arsenic in drinking water, had been a priority of environmental groups for more than a decade. It had been vigorously opposed by the mining industry and by some municipalities on grounds that the cost of compliance could reach into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

The decision, announced by Christie Whitman, the E.P.A. administrator, leaves in place, at least for now, an arsenic standard established in 1942. It is the Bush administration's most significant departure from the environmental policies of the Clinton administration.

The withdrawal came just days before the new rules, approved in President Bill Clinton's last week in office, were to become final. The agency's decision turns on the question of whether there is sufficient evidence to determine the level at which arsenic poses an unacceptable risk to human health when it is in drinking water. Arsenic, a naturally occurring substance, is also a known carcinogen.

A 1999 study by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that the current arsenic standard of 50 parts per billion "could easily" result in a 1-in-100 risk of cancer. The report went on to recommend that the acceptable levels be revised downward "as promptly as possible." The 10 parts per billion standard approved by the Clinton administration is identical to the one adopted several years ago by the European Union and the World Health Organization.

A former E.P.A. official who helped draft the Clinton policy used strong words in condemning today's action. "I'm stunned," said the ex-official, Chuck Fox, who until January was the agency's assistant administrator for water. "This action will jeopardize the health of millions of Americans, and it compromises literally a decade's worth of work on behalf of developing a public health standard."

The action was the second victory in a week for the mining industry, which was a big contributor to President Bush and the Republican party and which had sued to block the Clinton rules. Last week, coal producers embraced the administration's decision not to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

John Grasser, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, called the administration's decision to withdraw the drinking-water rule a source of significant relief.

"The Clinton administration rushed this out in the midnight hour," Mr. Grasser said. "We felt all along that it was really a political decision unsupported by the science."

Advocates for the mining and chemical industries, along with some people representing cities that would have been affected by the new rule, argued that the new standards were arbitrary and would have exacted a huge financial cost.

Ms. Whitman cited that argument in explaining today's decision. "It is clear that arsenic, while naturally occurring, is something that needs to be regulated," Ms. Whitman said in a written statement today. But, she continued, "certainly, the standard should be less than 50 p.p.b., but the scientific indicators are unclear as to whether the standard needs to go as low as 10 p.p.b."

Earlier, in announcing the decision in a speech to the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, Ms. Whitman pledged, "When we make a decision on arsenic, it will be based on sound science and solid analysis."

At least 11 million Americans, most of them in small towns and rural areas but some in cities as large as Albuquerque, rely on drinking water that contains more arsenic than the 10 parts per billion that would have been allowed under the Clinton rules, officials of the environmental agency said.

But they would not be immediately affected by the Bush administration's decision to withdraw the Clinton rules, the officials said, because the new standard would not have begun to take effect for three years.

A senior E.P.A. official said the administration hoped to come up with its own recommendation by sometime this summer. The rules on arsenic in drinking water fall under the Safe Drinking Water Act, and Congress had set a deadline of June 2001 for the E.P.A. to come up with a new standard.

The Associated Press reported tonight that the administration would seek to suspend another environmental action taken under President Clinton. The change would set aside stricter rules on hardrock mining that required compliance with tightened environmental standards.

On the arsenic rule, among lawmakers who had been most outspoken in urging the Bush administration to withdraw the Clinton rules was Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, whose state has high naturally occurring arsenic levels.

In a letter to Ms. Whitman earlier this year, Senator Domenici said the rules would impose "an excruciating financial burden" on his state, affecting one in four municipal water systems, imposing a price of compliance of $400 million to $500 million.

Congressional Democrats reacted bitterly today to reversal of the Clinton policy. "This is another example of a special interest payback to industries that gave millions of dollars in campaign contributions," said Representative Henry A. Waxman, the California Democrat who was the author of the safe drinking water legislation.

Arsenic is a common byproduct of mining operations, so stricter standards for its content in drinking water would translate into stricter standards for many mining sites.

The wood products industry also supports the administration's ruling because arsenic is used to pressure- treat lumber. The industry's trade association, the American Wood Preservers Institute, which had supported the mining industry in a lawsuit welcomed the news today.

"We're very relieved and delighted about what we hear," said Mel Pine, the organization's spokesman.

-- Swissrose (cellier3@mindspring.com), March 21, 2001

Answers

A poison is a poison is a poison. Irresponsibility and greed will, in the end, kill us all.

-- Swissrose (cellier3@mindspring.com), March 21, 2001.

400-500 million is peanut to the health care costs!.
Why not setup a second set of water lines, and have it carry 'drinking water' only. That would be a great public works project.

As I've said before go buy a Reverse Osmosis water filter. Even Sears is now selling them and fairly inexpensively <$200 .

-- (perry@ofuzzy1.com), March 21, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ