Bush To Tighten Arsenic Standard By JOHN HEILPRIN : Associated Press Writer
Apr 19, 2001 : 5:46 am ET

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration is promising to set new standards for arsenic in drinking water, but critics say scrapping former President Clinton's standard and asking for a new study means unjustified delay.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman said Wednesday she would establish a new standard within nine months, and she asked the National Academy of Sciences for an expedited study looking at the impact of a range of possible reductions.

The new standard could be tougher or less stringent than that set by Clinton shortly before he left office. The Bush administration already is under heavy fire from environmentalists and others for killing Clinton's standard, which would have limited arsenic to no more than 10 parts per billion in drinking water. Rescinding Clinton's standard restored a 50 ppb limit that has been in effect since 1942.

"This further delay is updating a nearly 60-year-old standard for arsenic in drinking water is unhealthy and unacceptable," said Grant Cope, a staff attorney for U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

Whitman said she wanted a panel of scientists at the academy to examine a standard in the range of 3-20 ppb.

"The Bush administration is committed to protecting the environment and the health of all Americans," Whitman said in a written statement, promising a final regulation within nine months.

She said the decision to seek a report from the academy would "ensure that a standard will be put in place in a timely manner that provides clean, safe and affordable drinking water for the nation and is based on the best science."

Whitman argued that there was insufficient scientific evidence to justify the $200 million annual cost to municipalities, states and industry of meeting the new Clinton standards by 2006.

"I have said consistently that we will obtain the necessary scientific review ... and that we will establish that standard in a timely manner," she said Wednesday.

The administration plans to issue a new regulation that still meets the same time frame for compliance as the Clinton standard.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the EPA was bound by law to establish a new arsenic standard by June 22. Reid, the senior Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said he was "troubled by the notion that EPA would ignore" the law.

In 1999, the National Academy of Sciences said arsenic in drinking water can cause bladder, lung and skin cancer, and might cause liver and kidney cancer.

Arsenic is both a naturally occurring substance and industrial byproduct, entering the water supply from natural deposits and pollution. It is found at high concentrations in Western mining states and other areas heavy with coal-burning and copper smelting.

Physicians for Social Responsibility said the new study will only confirm what science has already shown: the lower the standard, the better.

"There is no safe level of arsenic," said Robert K. Musil, the group's director. "A mountain of existing research -- including a new report on the dangers of low-levels of exposure published just last month -- shows that the safest standard the United States can adopt is the lowest one: three parts per billion."

The Clinton EPA initially had proposed setting the standard at 5 ppb last year in response to a lawsuit by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"We're outraged that this is going to assure a year of delays for protection of public health for millions of Americans," said Erik D. Olson, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

-- Anonymous, April 19, 2001

Answers

Arsenic Poisoning

by Neil Dey and Graham Clark, Department of Chemistry, University of Aberdeen

Mobilisation of Arsenic

Arsenic has a high mobility in the environment which can be attributed to its chemical characteristics. It has a wide range of reactivity indicative of Group V elements. Thus arsenic will form alloys, and participate in oxidation-reduction, methylation-demethylation and acid-base reactions. It is no uncommon for important reaction pathways in nature which reduce arsenic concentration to be non-existent; therefore we need to address the problem ourselves.

How does it get into the water systems?

Most arsenic accumulates in the water systems naturally by leaching and soil erosion, accounting for 612 ´ 108 and 2380 ´ 108 g/year respectively. It can filter into effluent streams from mountain rocks. Areas with a past history of the mining of arsenical ores and metals by smelting have been known to have elevated arsenic presence and have more cases of poisoning.

Arsenic Cycling in the Environment

Contamination of the River Ganges

Some parts of the River Ganges which are used as public water supplies in Bangladesh and West Bengal are naturally polluted with arsenic. Arsenic is usually released by reductive dissolution of iron oxyhydroxides, but the common arsenic pyrites and minerals are not present here. More likely, arsenic is co-precipitated or scavenged by Fe(III) or Mn(IV) in the sediment.

The arsenic possibly originates from coal seams (up to 200 ppm) or isolated sulphide patches (~0.8% As) in the upper areas of the Ganges.

Arsenic can be removed from water by co-precipitation with ferrihydrates or adsorption onto iron-coated sand. This can be done by aeration of anoxic water, but depends on the oxidation state of arsenic and the ratio of Fe:As.

Map shows affected area (shaded), coal seams (C) and sulphide patches (SO).

Where is it found?

Arsenic and related compounds can occur naturally in granite and mountains (arsenopyrites). Other sources include microbiological activity, pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers, treatments of human waste and even volcanic eruptions. Other contaminations in the main come from industrial sources.

Did you know?

The following medical problems have been linked to ingestion of arsenic:

White lines in finger nails
Rashes
Seizures
Changes in mental status
Coma
Death

Epidemiology

The results were obtained from a study of 17 villages in the Xinjiang area of China, which is a place known to have arsenic in the water sources due to arsenopyrite present in the surrounding mountains.

Rate (%) = cases diagnosed/subjects examined. The relationship between arsenic levels in drinking water and morbidity rate is clearly exponential. The rate rises sharply for arsenic concentrations above 0.4 mg/L.

Graph showing correlation between arsenic level in drinking water and human morbidity rate from poisoning.

INFORMATION

Arsenic

Atomic symbol: As
Atomic number: 33
Atomic weight: 75
Elemental form occurs as a shiny grey solid
Most compounds are metallic arsenides, with most common being arsenopyrites (FeAsS).
Most forms are TOXIC!

-- Anonymous, April 19, 2001

I like the crayola picture. You can tell it wasn't done by a lawyer cause you can still read it.

I wonder whose kid colored it in?

I think I understnad that arsenic occurs naturally, as well as by human activities as mentioned. Are the ratios they seek less or more than what nature provides? That I didn't get. Guess I can read it again....

-- Anonymous, April 19, 2001

The reason I chose that info site over others was precisely because of that crayola picture!

-- Anonymous, April 19, 2001

Published Thursday, April 19, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News

Fallon's water laced with arsenic

BUT BLASÉ NEVADANS SHRUG OFF EPA ORDER TO CUT NATURALLY HIGH LEVELS

BY TOM GORMANNKE
Los Angeles Times

FALLON, Nev. -- Fallon, population 8,300, is the arsenic capital of America.

A study last year of Environmental Protection Agency data from 25 states by the Natural Resources Defense Council found that Fallon's water system delivered more arsenic to its customers than any other similar-sized system in the country.

Yet without complaint, generations of Fallon residents have been drinking water with arsenic levels twice as high as the federal limit -- 50 parts per billion set by the EPA in 1975.

In Fallon, about 60 miles east of Reno, water out of the faucet contains about 90 ppb of arsenic. EPA officials ordered the city to cut its arsenic levels in half by September 2003 or face fines of $27,500 a day.

State Assemblywoman Marcia DeBraga, whose district includes Fallon, wishes the city would address the arsenic problem without further delay.

``I don't know if they're in denial, or firmly believe that since Grandpa Jones drank it all his life it's not a serious problem,'' she said. ``But they need to bite the bullet.''

The city grudgingly has begun designing a treatment plant and is looking for ways to pay for it.

Whatever steps the city takes, they won't help residents just outside city limits who rely on private wells in which the arsenic frequently reaches 700 ppb and, in some cases, more than 2,000 ppb.

Even when nine Fallon children were diagnosed in 1999 with acute lymphocytic leukemia no one began worrying about the arsenic. The state epidemiologist maintains that no link has been established between the two.

Tim Miller, 46, a heavy-equipment operator and second-generation Fallon native, looks at it this way: ``I'll die of something. It's called life. Once you're born, you start dying.''

Even residents who have been stricken with arsenic poisoning, or have skin cancer that may have been triggered by years of drinking arsenic-laced water, seem resigned.

Longtime Fallon resident Melba Gabiola and her daughter, Terry Bennett Jackson, have skin cancer they attribute to arsenic.

``I've had it for so long, when one shows up, I just have it removed,'' Gabiola said.

Her daughter, now 48, said she's not angry. ``It's in the well water,'' she said. ``They couldn't do anything about it.''

The family's well, outside the city, contained 2,750 ppb of arsenic.

No government agency at any level has oversight over private wells, and none warns such well users of possible risks.

Besides, said the state's health officer, Dr. Mary Guinan, some homeowners don't want to know what's in their water. ``If they knew, they'd have to disclose it when they sell their home, and they don't want to reduce their property values,'' she said.

And to test well water for all possible contaminants, as municipal water providers are required to do, costs about $3,000, she said.

``This is Nevada,'' Guinan said. ``It's the people's choice whether they test their water. They don't want to feel government is intruding in their lives.''

Scientists' findings notwithstanding, even one of the town doctors contends that the water is safe.

``I've been here for 20 years, seeing 30 patients a day, and I don't see a problem,'' said Dr. Gary Ridenour, an internist.

`` . . . I tell people ``that we eat cactus and rattlesnakes and spit poison darts.''

-- Anonymous, April 19, 2001