WASHINGTON, Sept. 22, 2008

EPA Won't Remove Rocket Fuel From Water

Agency Says Health Risks Are Low, Critics Say EPA Is Protecting The Pentagon From Liability

  •  (AP / CBS)

  • Interactive Eye On The Environment

    Find out how global warming, air pollution and alternative forms of energy impact our world.

(CBS/AP)  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.

© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 36 Comments
by anthonysfire June 20, 2009 10:52 PM EDT
Republicans? It was in the water during the Clinton administration, and it is still in the water now under yet another Democrat administration - so that means it'll get treated now, right?

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. : )
Reply to this comment
by anthonysfire June 20, 2009 12:20 AM EDT
Well, let's see if the Obama administration does anything differently.
They both hired women from NJ to head their EPA - how much do you really think is going to change? Ever been there? Phew!
Reply to this comment
by darkfyreaol September 25, 2008 4:09 PM EDT
I don''t know about you, but the only water I drink is dihydrogen monoxide (H20), not potassium perchlorate (KClO4) or ammonium perchlorate (NH4ClO4)

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.
Reply to this comment
by viscor September 24, 2008 5:34 AM EDT
There are no studies that link perchlorates, at those levels, to ANY illness. Any suggestions to the contrary are speculation only and therefore meaninglesss.

Reply to this comment
by docpeter1953 September 23, 2008 1:24 PM EDT
I posted something here earlier, but I have had some additional time to consider it -I have flip-flopped.

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!
Reply to this comment
by godseyesore-2009 September 23, 2008 12:26 PM EDT
Is anyone surprised at another bush administration atrocity? President palin will have an even worse regime.
Reply to this comment
by usclimey September 23, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
Potassium perchlorate has a 50% oral toxicity level of 2100 mg/kg body weight. Average human is around 70 kg, thus you need to eat around 140 g or about 4 oz of perchlorate for it to be toxic. At 6 ppm in water you''d need to drink a little over 6150 gallons of water to reach toxic levels of perchlorate. If any can do this, more power to them.
Reply to this comment
by usclimey September 23, 2008 12:11 PM EDT
A more likely source is fluoride perchlorate- but they don''''t want you to know that they are poisoning us purposely.

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.
Reply to this comment
by docpeter1953 September 23, 2008 11:55 AM EDT
From the above articel, "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." ...

"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".
Reply to this comment
by pirmin3 September 23, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
"Fluoride shrinks brains permanently and reduced IQs 10 to 20 points. Posted by caliengineer"

Must be a lot of it in the water in Texas and Wash. D.C.
Reply to this comment
by myopinion1 September 23, 2008 10:31 AM EDT
There canNOT be anyone surprised by this right? The government couldn''t care less about you and the poisons in your water. There is no such thing as "acceptable levels" when it comes to rocket fuel in the water and I don''t need to be a rocket scientist to know this.

Have you ever noticed that children are reaching puberty earlier and earlier? Girls at 9 starting their cycles? Whatever happened to 14? Between the junk they pump into our meat, the pesticides they put on our produce and the junk in our water, there is no reason needed why there is so much cancer and disease in our society. But wait! There are plenty of drugs out there to keep us "healthy" once all that overtakes us right? People are so blind to what is going on around them. Reminds me of how people were oblivious to their lives in the Matrix. Sheeple
Reply to this comment
by ofbyfor2 September 23, 2008 10:22 AM EDT
Hey GOPers--
EPA is supposed to stand for the Envrironmental Protection Agency, not the Envrironmental Pollution Agency
Reply to this comment
by September 23, 2008 9:09 AM EDT
If you would have read "Poisoned Nation" this would not have been new to you.
Reply to this comment
by juwboy September 23, 2008 8:37 AM EDT
Why don`t all of you spend some time learning the facts about perchlorate toxicity instead of wasting ours with your ignorant opinions?

Yes, if you swallowed pure sodium or potassium perchlorate it would be harmful, but doses a MILLION times more concentrated than the "safe" levels set by California or Massachusetts (see end of the report) have been experimentally shown to have absolutely no effect whatsoever on thyroid function.

This is only to be expected. Perchlorate is simply a more powerful form of the chlorine/hypochlorite that`s already added to drinking water to make it SAFE.

In the meantime, all of you worrywarts who spend your lives creating problems where none exist can carry on wringing your hands until they`re raw :-) :-) :-)
Reply to this comment
by caliengineer September 23, 2008 8:34 AM EDT
spadeisaspade: Malcolm X''s comment, "by any means necessary" was about defending his wife and children from Louis Farrakhan''s hit men.

After Malcolm X traveled to the mideast and saw there was no racism, he went against the original charlatan, "Elijah Mohammed". That split the Nation of Islam, but Farrakhan wanted it all, and so his bodyguards eventually murdered Malcolm X.
Reply to this comment
by caliengineer September 23, 2008 8:31 AM EDT
And besides, how did so much ROCKET fuel get in water???

A more likely source is fluoride perchlorate- but they don''t want you to know that they are poisoning us purposely.

Fluoride shrinks brains permanently and reduced IQs 10 to 20 points.
Reply to this comment
by caliengineer September 23, 2008 8:29 AM EDT
People! Remember all those people tricked into judging a situation- then found out it was their own judgment??
Don''t judge such harsh judgments like "seeing their grandchildren die"- that could end up YOUR fate.

Put it in God''s hands. We know He is fair.
Reply to this comment
by tootall10142 September 23, 2008 8:19 AM EDT
IHOPE THEY ALL ROT AND HELL BUT LIVE LONG ENOUGH TO SEE THIER CHILDREN AND GRAND CHILDREN DIE FROM DISEASE AND SLOW DEATH.
Reply to this comment
by oneworldusa September 23, 2008 6:10 AM EDT
Where is Erin Brockovich these days?
Reply to this comment
by incog-nito September 23, 2008 5:49 AM EDT
Top officials from the Pentagon have maintained that rocket fuel in drinking water was not pollution, but part of a secret project to provide free energy drinks to the American people.
Reply to this comment
See all 36 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Can the Postal Service be Saved?

    (282 recent comments)

Exclusive Webshow

The road ahead in Afghanistan, and the crucial decision Obama faces.
Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: