EPA Won't Remove Rocket Fuel From Water
The Environmental Protection Agency has decided there is no need to rid drinking water of a toxic rocket fuel ingredient that has fouled public water supplies around the United States.
EPA reached the conclusion in a draft regulatory document not yet made public but reviewed Monday by The Associated Press.
The ingredient, perchlorate, has been found in at least 395 sites in 35 states at levels some scientists say could interfere with thyroid function and pose developmental health risks, particularly for babies and fetuses.
The EPA document says that mandating a cleanup level for perchlorate would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public-water systems."
The conclusion, which caps years of dispute over the issue, was denounced by Democrats and environmentalists who accused EPA of caving in to pressure from the Pentagon.
"This is a widespread contamination problem, and to see the Bush EPA just walk away is shocking," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, a Democrat who chairs the Senate's environment committee.
Lenny Siegel, director of the Center for Public Environmental Oversight in Mountain View, Calif., added: "This is an unconscionable decision not based upon science or law but on concern that a more stringent standard could cost the government significantly."
The Defense Department used perchlorate for decades in testing missiles and rockets, and most perchlorate contamination is the result of defense and aerospace activities, congressional investigators said last year.
The Pentagon could face liability if EPA set a national drinking water standard that forced water agencies around the country to undertake costly cleanup efforts. Defense officials have spent years questioning EPA's conclusions about the risks posed by perchlorate.
The Pentagon objected strongly Monday to the suggestion that it sought to influence EPA's decision.
"We have not intervened in any way in EPA's determination not to regulate perchlorate. If you read their determination, that's based on criteria in the Safe Drinking Water Act," Paul Yaroschak, Pentagon deputy director for emerging contaminants, said in an interview.
Yaroschak said the Pentagon has been working for years to clean up perchlorate at its facilities. He also contended that the Pentagon was not the source of as much perchlorate contamination as once believed, noting that it also comes from fireworks, road flares and fertilizer.
Benjamin Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water, said in a statement that "science, not the politics of fear in an election year, will drive our final decision."
"We know perchlorate in drinking water presents some degree of risk, and we're committed to working with states and scientists to ensure public health is protected and meaningful opportunities for reducing risk are fully considered," Grumbles said.
Grumbles said the EPA expected to seek comment and take final action before the end of the year. The draft document was first reported Monday by the Washington Post.
Perchlorate is particularly widespread in California and the Southwest, where it has been found in groundwater and in the Colorado River, a drinking-water source for 20 million people. Its also has been found in lettuce and other foods.
In absence of federal action, states have acted on their own. In 2007, California adopted a drinking water standard of 6 parts per billion. Massachusetts has set a drinking water standard of 2 parts per billion.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. EPA reached the conclusion in a draft regulatory document not yet made public but reviewed Monday by The Associated Press.
The ingredient, perchlorate, has been found in at least 395 sites in 35 states at levels some scientists say could interfere with thyroid function and pose developmental health risks, particularly for babies and fetuses.
The EPA document says that mandating a cleanup level for perchlorate would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public-water systems."
The conclusion, which caps years of dispute over the issue, was denounced by Democrats and environmentalists who accused EPA of caving in to pressure from the Pentagon.
"This is a widespread contamination problem, and to see the Bush EPA just walk away is shocking," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, a Democrat who chairs the Senate's environment committee.
Lenny Siegel, director of the Center for Public Environmental Oversight in Mountain View, Calif., added: "This is an unconscionable decision not based upon science or law but on concern that a more stringent standard could cost the government significantly."
The Defense Department used perchlorate for decades in testing missiles and rockets, and most perchlorate contamination is the result of defense and aerospace activities, congressional investigators said last year.
The Pentagon could face liability if EPA set a national drinking water standard that forced water agencies around the country to undertake costly cleanup efforts. Defense officials have spent years questioning EPA's conclusions about the risks posed by perchlorate.
The Pentagon objected strongly Monday to the suggestion that it sought to influence EPA's decision.
"We have not intervened in any way in EPA's determination not to regulate perchlorate. If you read their determination, that's based on criteria in the Safe Drinking Water Act," Paul Yaroschak, Pentagon deputy director for emerging contaminants, said in an interview.
Yaroschak said the Pentagon has been working for years to clean up perchlorate at its facilities. He also contended that the Pentagon was not the source of as much perchlorate contamination as once believed, noting that it also comes from fireworks, road flares and fertilizer.
Benjamin Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water, said in a statement that "science, not the politics of fear in an election year, will drive our final decision."
"We know perchlorate in drinking water presents some degree of risk, and we're committed to working with states and scientists to ensure public health is protected and meaningful opportunities for reducing risk are fully considered," Grumbles said.
Grumbles said the EPA expected to seek comment and take final action before the end of the year. The draft document was first reported Monday by the Washington Post.
Perchlorate is particularly widespread in California and the Southwest, where it has been found in groundwater and in the Colorado River, a drinking-water source for 20 million people. Its also has been found in lettuce and other foods.
In absence of federal action, states have acted on their own. In 2007, California adopted a drinking water standard of 6 parts per billion. Massachusetts has set a drinking water standard of 2 parts per billion.
Popular in SciTech
- Calif. teen wins Intel Science Research competition Play Video
- Computer visionary says he knows who invented Bitcoin
- New Flickr comes with 1 terabyte free storage
- One woman's journey to save the white lions
- Canada trying to lure Silicon Valley tech workers
- Apple's next iPhone may be coming in June
- Alternatives to Google Reader
- Four things you need to know about tornado season
The Democrats simply sat on it for years - dropping the bomb while Bush was in office.
What are they doing to do about it now? Not a darmed thing. It's you people that put those pesky road flares up when you get flat tires - can't you read? And you wonder why we're a dying nation where the elderly are outliving their children. We use Britas. : )
They both hired women from NJ to head their EPA - how much do you really think is going to change? Ever been there? Phew!
This is about the government deciding on ''acceptable risk'', and rolling dice with your wellbeiing. If you want to drink fertilizer, lead, rocket fuel, mercury, microbes, and arsenic, that''s up to you.
Considering all the run-offs of nitrate fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides from the agricultural industry; groth hormones and antibiotics from the meat and poultry industry; and the wasted cardiac and other medications we pee and p00p out daily from the health care; what is another chemical in our water supply?
The way I figure it, in about 30 or so years we won''t need to fertilize our yards/gardent, need to take one pill to make us p00p, another to make us pee, another to lower cholesterol, one to decrease blood pressure, nitroglycerin for angina pectoris, a pill to control heart rate, a pill to control birth, a pill for dementia, another for psychotic disorders, a pill to help us sleep and another to awaken us, or a pill to control pain. All of these we will be able to get by drinking 6-8 glasses of water every day, something we should be doing anyway.
As has been said before, I want to die peacefully in my slppe like my grandfatehr did, not screaming in terror and fear like his passengers!
Posted by caliengineer
There''s no such thing as fluoride perchlorate. Both terms refer to negative ions that need positive ions to bond with. Thus you can have ammonium perchlorate or sodium fluoride but not fluoride perchlorate. This is Junior High chemistry - you can''t be an engineer.
"The ingredient, perchlorate, has been found in at least 395 sites in 35 states at levels some scientists say could interfere with thyroid function and pose developmental health risks, particularly for babies and fetuses."
"The EPA document says that mandating a cleanup level for perchlorate would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public-water systems."
________________
Not to mention that this will also help keep big pharma going doing additional research and selling more drugs to cure the ills caused by these "spills".
Must be a lot of it in the water in Texas and Wash. D.C.