EPA Launches NAS Study of Arsenic Levels In Water
DATE: May 7, 2001
BACKGROUND: Environmental extremists criticized the Bush
administration for scrapping a last-minute Clinton EPA regulation
reducing the allowable arsenic in drinking water from 50 parts
per billion to 10 ppb. However, what the EPA has actually done
is delay the rule for nine months to give the National Academy
of Sciences time to determine, scientifically, what the standard
should be.
TEN SECOND RESPONSE: The Clinton 10 parts per billion(ppb)
rule was a political compromise with the National Resources Defense
Council which wanted 5 parts per billion. Administrator Whitman
should be applauded for basing decisions on sound science.
THIRTY SECOND RESPONSE: The Clinton rule mandating a 10 ppb arsenic limit in drinking water would not have taken effect until the year 2006. Recognizing that, as well as the fact that it will cost taxpayers billions of dollars to meet any new standard, it makes sense to take a few months to scientifically determine what standard is correct. A major difference between the last administration and the of President Bush is that under Mr. Bush sound science will be used to protect our environment, not the political agendas of extremist groups.
DISCUSSION: "I have said consistently," EPA
administrator, Christine Todd Whitman, told reporters in announcing
the new study, " that we will obtain the necessary scientific
review to ensure a standard that fully protects the health of
all Americans and that we will establish that in a timely manner.
This is precisely what we are doing today [in launching the NAS
study of arsenic]."
It should also be noted that the current maximum level of 50 ppb
for arsenic in drinking water was established in 1942.
Whitman, in announcing the study, said that EPA would likely set
the new standard somewhere between 3 ppb, well below the level
that Clinton picked, and 20 ppb, depending on the results of the
NAS study.
While those on the far left of the Democratic Party, such as Senator
Barbara Boxer, have called the EPA action on arsenic "a huge
step backward," the point should be made that exactly the
opposite is true. Levels of arsenic will still be reduced in the
same time frame as they would have under the Clinton rule, the
major difference is that the new limits will be set by science,
not because of politics.
by Tom and Gretchen Randall, Directors
John P. McGovern, MD Center for Environmental and Regulatory Affairs
The National Center for Public Policy Research
Contact the authors at: 773-857-5086 or [email protected]
The National Center for Public Policy Research
Chicago office
3712 North Broadway - PMB 279
Chicago, IL 60613