Jump to Navigation

water quality

Alum Creek Research Project

Contact for this study: Mark Walker, Ph.D., Professor/Researcher UNCE / UNR: (775) 784-1938

That Tap Water Is Legal but May Be Unhealthy

By CHARLES DUHIGG, NY Times
Published: December 16, 2009

The 35-year-old federal law regulating tap water is so out of date that the water Americans drink can pose what scientists say are serious health risks — and still be legal.

Only 91 contaminants are regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act, yet more than 60,000 chemicals are used within the United States, according to Environmental Protection Agency estimates. Government and independent scientists have scrutinized thousands of those chemicals in recent decades, and identified hundreds associated with a risk of cancer and other diseases at small concentrations in drinking water, according to an analysis of government records by The New York Times.

But not one chemical has been added to the list of those regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act since 2000.

Other recent studies have found that even some chemicals regulated by that law pose risks at much smaller concentrations than previously known. However, many of the act’s standards for those chemicals have not been updated since the 1980s, and some remain essentially unchanged since the law was passed in 1974.

All told, more than 62 million Americans have been exposed since 2004 to drinking water that did not meet at least one commonly used government health guideline intended to help protect people from cancer or serious disease, according to an analysis by The Times of more than 19 million drinking-water test results from the District of Columbia and the 45 states that made data available.

In some cases, people have been exposed for years to water that did not meet those guidelines. But because such guidelines were never incorporated into the Safe Drinking Water Act, the vast majority of that water never violated the law.

Some officials overseeing local water systems have tried to go above and beyond what is legally required. But they have encountered resistance, sometimes from the very residents they are trying to protect, who say that if their water is legal it must be safe.

Dr. Pankaj Parekh, director of the water quality division for the City of Los Angeles, has faced such criticism. The water in some city reservoirs has contained contaminants that become likely cancer-causing compounds when exposed to sunlight.

To stop the carcinogens from forming, the city covered the surface of reservoirs, including one in the upscale neighborhood of Silver Lake, with a blanket of black plastic balls that blocked the sun.

Then complaints started from owners of expensive houses around the reservoir. “They supposedly discovered these chemicals, and then they ruined the reservoir by putting black pimples all over it,” said Laurie Pepper, whose home overlooks the manmade lake. “If the water is so dangerous, why can’t they tell us what laws it’s violated?”

Dr. Parekh has struggled to make his case. “People don’t understand that just because water is technically legal, it can still present health risks,” he said. “And so we encounter opposition that can become very personal.”

Some federal regulators have tried to help officials like Dr. Parekh by pushing to tighten drinking water standards for chemicals like industrial solvents, as well as a rocket fuel additive that has polluted drinking water sources in Southern California and elsewhere. But those efforts have often been blocked by industry lobbying.

Drinking water that does not meet a federal health guideline will not necessarily make someone ill. Many contaminants are hazardous only if consumed for years. And some researchers argue that even toxic chemicals, when consumed at extremely low doses over long periods, pose few risks. Others argue that the cost of removing minute concentrations of chemicals from drinking water does not equal the benefits.

Moreover, many of the thousands of chemicals that have not been analyzed may be harmless. And researchers caution that such science is complicated, often based on extrapolations from animal studies, and sometimes hard to apply nationwide, particularly given that more than 57,400 water systems in this country each deliver, essentially, a different glass of water every day.

Government scientists now generally agree, however, that many chemicals commonly found in drinking water pose serious risks at low concentrations.

For entire article, please visit website below.

Chalk Creek Weekly Monitoring

Chalk Creek Continuous Monitoring

Chalk Creek west of Reno between Int. 80 and West 4th St. Weir coordinates: 39 30' 50.96" x 119 52' 19.17"

Washoe water officials could ban toxic solvent

By Jeff DeLong • jdelong@rgj.com • February 17, 2009

Future efforts to control groundwater pollution from a toxic solvent, including a possible ban in Washoe County, will be discussed Thursday by the area's largest water purveyor.

Directors of the Truckee Meadows Water Authority will be updated on a program to deal with the spread of underground plumes of perchloroethylene, or PCE, a degreaser still used by many dry cleaners in the area.

"It is the single most important groundwater issue we face in this community. Are we doing everything that is appropriate to address it?" said Paul Miller, manager of operations and water quality for the utility. Miller said "all options are on the table," including a PCE ban similar to those enacted statewide in California and New Jersey.

The substance, linked to several types of cancer and other human health conditions after long-term exposure, started showing up in drinking water wells in the Truckee Meadows in the 1980s. Groundwater contamination was confirmed by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection in 1994.

Five of the water authority's groundwater wells are tainted by PCE, with "hits" of the substance found in a couple of others, Miller said. The utility is able to remove the substance from drinking water by costly treatment. Since 1995, 58,800 acre-feet of water, or 19.2 billion gallons, has been treated for PCE at a cost of about $17.5 million, said Chris Benedict, manager of a Washoe County program established in 1995 to deal with the situation.

Much of the problem relates to practices many years ago, when PCE was used to degrease auto parts and was often then dumped down the drain or on the ground. The toxic substance has migrated into the groundwater aquifer, with six plumes of contamination identified in the central Truckee Meadows.

Experts are now studying four particular "hot spots" of contamination -- downtown Sparks, Mill/Kietzke in Reno, Vassar/East Plumb in Reno and West Fourth Street in Reno.

As recently as 2001, officials found suspiciously high levels of PCE in the sewer system that officials suspected was caused by the deliberate and illegal discharge of solvents into the sewer by some dry cleaners. Once in a sewer, PCE can seep from the line and mix with groundwater.

Benedict said he doubts any deliberate discharges are still occurring but the substance continues to make its way into the sewers nonetheless. It only takes about two teaspoons of PCE to contaminate 1 million gallons of water, Benedict said.

"Is it more cost effective to treat the water or fix the problem?" Benedict asks. "I think the question becomes: Can we confidently say we can eliminate PCE releases into the environment? There's always the human element. We can't engineer that out."

There are alternatives to the use of PCE for dry cleaners, making a ban of the solvent a potentially reasonable move, Benedict said. He estimated that of about 40 dry cleaners in the Reno-Sparks area, the majority still use the chemical. Between four and six use alternative technology, he said.

"Something like a PCE ban might ultimately be a practical solution," Benedict said.

Such an action would come at a significant cost to the region's dry cleaning industry, said Kevin Leid, vice president of Bobby Page's Dry Cleaners & Shirt Laundry, which operates more than a dozen stores across the Truckee Meadows, in Carson City, Lake Tahoe, Gardnerville and Dayton.

"It would affect us pretty badly," Leid said, adding that he knows several out-of-state dry cleaner operators who will go out of business once California's phased ban of PCE is fully in place. "How far do you want to take it, and to what degree do you want to have an impact on business, especially now in a poor economy?" Leid said.

PCE is still by far the most effective dry-cleaning agent available, Leid said, adding that a ban would hurt the industry and the quality of cleaning available to customers. "The alternatives aren't really out there yet," Leid said. "(PCE) just works the best." Leid said his business uses an "air-tight, self-contained" system that prevents any release of PCE into the environment. "If it's properly handled, it's a clean process. It shouldn't be a problem," Leid said.

But Norm Davis, owner of the Peerless Cleaners and a "green" certified operation, said there are less toxic solvents that can be used. He uses Eco-Solv and said another popular alternative is DF-2000, an Exxon product.

"It all depends on perspective," Davis said. "If you go to Treehugger.com or the Greenpeace Web site, they pretty much say (the alternatives) are slightly better than (PCE)." But both are hydrocarbon- and petroleum-based, which the Green Cleaners Council does not list as "organic" or totally environment friendly.

The council evaluates recycling hangers, whether a cleaner uses recyclable bags, water use, electricity, delivery vehicles, alternative energy and pipe insulation.

In eight years of business, All Clean on site cleaners has not used PCE, said owner Lori Baier. "It's just so toxic, and I really don't want any of our customers around it," said Baier, who noted that her service cleans drapes, furniture and fabrics in clients homes with the Exxon product.

Mike Carrigan, the Sparks councilman who chairs the Truckee Meadows Water Authority board of directors, said the situation posed by PCE is troubling.

"Even with all the regulations, it's still a problem. Maybe it should be banned altogether," Carrigan said. But he doesn't want to take any action harming area businesses.

"I know (PCE) is bad, but we don't want to put dry cleaners out of business," Carrigan said. "We have to look at both sides."

Water Locator Tool

This "Water Locator Tool" website is designed to help you locate your receiving water and to determine whether that waterbody is considered "impaired" under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.

This information is needed to properly fill out your NOI. You will be using your facility address and/or facility lattitude-longitude to determine which waterbodies are closest to your facility location.

The Water Locator Tool leads you through a series of steps to help you answer the questions in your Notice of Intent (NOI) regarding your receiving water.

Visit the website for the NOI form.

Budget woes freeze Tahoe projects

By Adam Jensen / Tahoe Daily Tribune
12/23/08

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE — Numerous South Shore projects were put on indefinite hold last week following a suspension of critical payments by California officials due to the state budget crisis.

On Dec. 17, the three-member Pooled Money Investment Board voted 3 - 0 to suspend approximately $4 billion in state funds for an estimated 2,000 infrastructure projects throughout California.

“The PMIB took this action to preserve necessary cash resources to pay the day-to-day operational needs of the state for the balance of the fiscal year pending further PMIB action in January,” according to a letter to state agencies from Department of Finance Director Michael Genest. “If loan reimbursement continues at the current pace, the state’s portion of the Pooled Money Invested Account is projected to run out of liquid cash before the end of the current fiscal year.”

The 56-acre project, Sawmill Bike Path, Upper Truckee River Restoration Project, Bijou Area Erosion Control Project, Sierra Tract Erosion Control Project, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency’s best management practices program and numerous erosion-control projects along state highways are among the Lake Tahoe projects that depend on bond funding suspended by the board’s decision, according to Lake Tahoe Basin officials.

Future funds will only be approved once the state budget crisis is resolved, according to the letter.

The sudden suspension caused anxiety at basin agencies.

About 90 percent of the approximately $20 million the California Tahoe Conservancy has invested annually in the basin during recent years comes from bond funding that’s now suspended, said Conservancy Deputy Director Ray Lacey.
Lacey remains hopeful the funding will return, but said unknowns about the national and global economy persist, and it is “difficult if not impossible” to sell bonds at this time.

“It’s a little frustrating right now for us. We were given a halt order without any follow-up,” said Cindy Wise, a grant coordinator for the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, adding details from the state about how affected agencies should proceed is lacking.

“I’m sure we’ll get that direction, but we haven’t gotten that right now,” she said.
The suspension affected nine projects administered by the water board, including seven projects in the Lake Tahoe and Truckee River watersheds totaling $20 million, Wise said.

Groups like the Tahoe Resource Conservation District and the Sierra Nevada Alliance — a South Lake Tahoe-based network of conservation groups throughout the Sierra Nevada range — implement the projects, Wise said.

Alliance Executive Director Joan Clayburgh said she was forced to lay off several employees because of the suspension of payments.

“It basically just dissolved our watershed program,” Clayburgh said.

The program included various programs to protect water quality, including volunteer water-quality monitoring days and native landscaping programs at Lake Tahoe.
While Clayburgh hoped the program could eventually be rebuilt, she said she was “devastated” by the board’s decision.

Clayburgh said the suspension of payments comes at a particularly bad time, since stimulating the economy through the development of green jobs has been discussed by government officials.

For entire article, please visit website.

Waxman Report: EPA ‘Decimated’ Clean Water Act

By Mike Lillis 12/16/08, The Washington Independent.

California Rep. Henry Waxman (D) might be headed for the chairmanship of the House energy committee, but not before he gets a final shot at the Bush administration from atop the oversight panel.

A report released today from Waxman’s office — a joint effort with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, headed by Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) — found that the Environmental Protection Agency has shown a lax interest in enforcing the Clean Water Act in recent years, leading to hundreds of instances when investigations have been neglected and waterways have been threatened. From Waxman’s statement:

Our investigation reveals that the clean water program has been decimated as hundreds of enforcement cases have been dropped, downgraded, delayed, or never brought in the first place. We need to work with the new Administration to restore the effectiveness and integrity to this vital program.

The controversy surrounds a 2006 Supreme Court ruling on the Clean Water Act (Rapanos v. United States), which restricted traditional interpretations of the law by requiring the EPA and other federal agencies to show that a waterway is a “significant nexus” to “traditional navigable waters” before officials can apply the environmental protections under the act. Following the Bush administration’s interpretation of that vague ruling, Waxman found, the EPA has whitewashed hundreds of potential violations.

The effects, according to the findings, are nationwide. The EPA branch in Dallas, for example, reported in January that it had 76 cases of confirmed oil spills, “but no follow-up for penalties or corrective action has been sought due to difficulties asserting jurisdiction post-Rapanos.”

That same month, officials in the EPA’s Denver office sent notice to the agency’s headquarters that, “We literally have hundreds of OPA [Oil Pollution Act] cases in our ‘no further action’ file due to the Rapanos decision, most of which are oil spill cases.”

Another example: Last February, an official in the EPA’s San Francisco office announced that the agency was abandoning a case against a potential Clean Water Act violator, explaining the reason thusly:

It is time to pull the plug on keeping this case on life support. With the march of time largely attributable to the impact on the case by Senor Rapanos and his merry band of supreme court justices we had lost many many violations due to statute of limitations . . . . So we will withdraw the referral, and save our ammo for another fight.

USGS: Chemicals Remain in Public Drinking Water After Treatment

WASHINGTON, DC, December 9, 2008
Environmental News Service

Low levels of manufactured chemicals remain in public water supplies even after they have been treated in selected community water facilities across the country, according to new research conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and released today.

Water from nine selected rivers used as sources for public water systems was analyzed for the study. The populations in communities served by these water treatment plants vary from 3,000 to over a million. Testing sites include the White River in Indiana; Elm Fork Trinity River in Texas; Potomac River in Maryland; Neuse River in North Carolina; Chattahoochee River in Georgia; Running Gutter Brook in Massachusetts; Clackamas River in Oregon; Truckee River in Nevada; and Cache La Poudre in Colorado.

Scientists tested water samples for about 260 commonly used chemicals, including pesticides, solvents, gasoline hydrocarbons, personal care and household products, disinfection by-products, and manufacturing additives.

Low levels of about 130 of the chemicals were detected in streams and rivers before treatment in the source water at the public water facilities. Nearly two-thirds of those chemicals were also detected after treatment.

The most commonly detected chemicals in the source water were herbicides, disinfection by-products, and fragrances. Most of the chemicals found were at levels equivalent to one thimble of water in an Olympic-sized pool.

"Low level detection does not necessarily indicate a concern to human health, but rather indicates what types of chemicals we can expect to find in different areas of the country," said USGS lead scientist, Gregory Delzer.

"Recent scientific advances have given USGS scientists the analytical tools to detect a variety of contaminants in the environment at low concentrations; often 100 to 1,000 times lower than drinking-water standards and other human-health benchmarks," he explained. Delzer said that chemicals included in this study serve as indicators of the possible presence of a larger number of commonly used chemicals in rivers, streams, and drinking water.

Many of these chemicals are among those often found in ambient waters of 186 rivers and streams sampled by USGS since the early 1990s, and are correlated with the presence of upstream wastewater sources or upstream agricultural and urban land use. About 120 chemicals were not detected at all. Measured concentrations of chemicals detected in both source water and treated water were generally less than 0.1 part per billion.

For entire article, please visit website below.

Federal Agencies Revise Guidance to Protect Wetlands and Streams

*Agencies Revise Guidance to Protect Wetlands and Streams *

**EPA Contact: Enesta Jones, (202) 564-7873 or 4355 / jones.enesta@epa.gov
Army Contacts: Doug Garman, (202) 761-1807 or Gene Pawlik, (202) 761-7690

(Washington, D.C. - Dec. 3, 2008) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army are issuing revised guidance to ensure America's wetlands, streams and other waters are better protected under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The guidance clarifies the geographic scope of jurisdiction under the CWA.

"We are providing improved guidance today to ensure the information is in place to fully protect the nation's streams and wetlands under the Clean Water Act," said Benjamin H. Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water. "The guidance builds upon our experiences and provides consistent direction to our staff and the public."

"We are committed to protecting America's aquatic resources as required by the Clean Water Act and in accordance with the Supreme Court decision," said John Paul Woodley Jr., Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). "This revised interagency guidance will enable the agencies to make clear, consistent, and predictable jurisdictional determinations within the scope of the Clean Water Act."

The revised guidance replaces previous policy issued in June 2007 and clarifies a June 2006 Supreme Court decision in Rapanos v. United States regarding the scope of the agencies' jurisdiction under the CWA. The guidance follows the agencies' evaluation of more than 18,000 jurisdictional determinations and review of more than 66,000 comments.

For more information on this guidance, please visit website below.

Syndicate content