Home > Family & kids, Hot topics, Policy watch, Politics > Playing Politics with your drinking water

Playing Politics with your drinking water

January 4th, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

Lisa Jackson’s DEP ignored scientists’ warnings to regulate a chemical that is poisoning drinking water supplies of millions of people
[Update: this smoking gun confirms that the problem is worse than I initially suggested. Back on November 2005, DEP pledged:
The DEP anticipates proposing a regulation reflecting the recommendation prior to January 31, 2006″
http://www.newjersey.gov/dep/watersupply/perchlorate.htm
This shows that Jackson affirmatively abandoned Commissioner Campbell’s plan to regulate based on NJ Drinking Water Quality Institute recommendation.]
Earlier this year, the Bush EPA was correctly denounced for bowing to political pressure, rejecting scientists’ recommendations, and deciding not to regulate the chemical perchlorate, a persistent potential carcinogen found in drinking water supplies across the country, including right here in New Jersey. According to a Washington Post story that sparked public outcry:
EPA Unlikely to Limit Perchlorate in Tap Water
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 22, 2008
“The Environmental Protection Agency, under pressure from the White House and the Pentagon, is poised to rule as early as today that it will not set a drinking-water safety standard for perchlorate, a component of rocket fuel that has been linked to thyroid problems in pregnant women, newborns and young children across the nation.
According to a near-final document obtained by The Washington Post, the EPA’s “preliminary regulatory determination” — which was extensively edited by White House officials — marks the final step in a six-year-old battle between career EPA scientists who advocate regulating the chemical and White House and Pentagon officials who oppose it. The document estimates that up to 16.6 million Americans are exposed to perchlorate at a level many scientists consider unsafe; independent researchers, using federal and state data, put the number at 20 million to 40 million

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/21/AR2008092102352.html
(continued)


But very few know that NJ DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson also ignored even stronger warnings by scientists from the NJ Drinking Water Quality Institute, who recommended that DEP adopt regulations for perchlorate, even lower than those considered by EPA, way back in October of 2005.
See: “Maximun Contaminant Level Recommnendation for Perchlorate” (October 7, 2005)
http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/perchlorate_mcl_10_7_05.pdf
For more than 3 years, Jackson ignored those scientific recommendations and failed to act to protect drinking water from this toxic chemical..
As a result, thousands of people in NJ unknowingly may be drinking unsafe levels of cancer causing chemicals. Pregnant women and infants are considered to be sensitive subpopulations for perchlorate’s effects, as hypothyroidism can have serious consequences on neurodevelopment. Animal studies suggest that perchlorate causes tumors. The full extent of human exposure and health and environmental risks are not well known.
Amazingly, for more than 3 years, Jackson was given a pass on the issue by NJ environmental groups and media. This could not be due to ignorance, because a lead NJ environmentalist chairs the NJ Drinking Water Quality Institute’s Health Effects Subcommittee that wrote portions of the October 2005 Report to DEP.
(In contrast to this silence, does anyone recall the widespread outcry over Bush first term moratorium and Whitman EPA attempt to rollback the Clinton Administration’s arsenic drinking water standard?)
In the wake of the recent public outcry of the Bush EPA decision not to regulate perchlorate, the political leaders of the NJ DEP realized that they also were vulnerable to the same criticism. (Note: those same political appointees at DEP were interviewing for jobs at EPA during this time, and a blowup on the perchlorate issue would not be well received).
So, in a transparent effort to blunt any criticism and avoid the controversy like the Whitman experienced on arsenic, in a November 10, 2008 letter to EPA, the NJ DEP acknowledged the problem and pledged to finally regulate perchlorate by the end of 2008. In their CYA letter, DEP advised EPA:
“On October 7, 2005 the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ( NJDEP) received from the New Jersey Drinking Water Quality Institute (NJDWQI), a legislatively created public advisory body, a recommendation to establish an MCL for perchlorate of 5 ug/L. The Department plans to propose such an MCL including monitoring and compliance determination requirements before the end of 2008 with adoption later in 2009
(See DEP letter: Download file
Well, the year 2008 is OVER – DEP has NOT proposed a drinking water standard for perchlorate (See: http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/notices.html
So, how widespread a problem and health risk is perchlorate? At the national level, EPA found unsafe levels of perchlorate in 1.9% of 28,179 samples. That could expose from 20 – 40 million americans.
Here in NJ, DEP data show even higher rates. DEP found unsafe levles in 6 of 123 public water systems sampled (a 4.9% rate, more than twice the national rate). DEP also found detectable levels in 11 of 67 individual wells, an astonishing rate of 16%, or over 8 times the national level. (see page 4: http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/perchlorate_mcl_10_7_05.pdf
DEP also is aware of limited testing of the state’s drinking water found high levels at a few sites in Middlesex County, but the full extent of the problem could be more widespread, with several sources from federal military installations and at least six companies manufacturing chemicals and explosives in the state that use and dispose of perchlorate.
Maybe Jackson will be asked about her record on failing to regulate perchlorate at her upcoming Senate Confirmation hearings. But, I wouldn’t count on it – at least not by the lapdogs at the NY Times. In a story this week, the Times had the chance to look into Jackson’ record but looked the other way, and instead actually set the stage for Jackson to look like a hero (when she reverses the Bush decision next year):
Error Seen in E.P.A. Report on Contaminant
By FELICITY BARRINGER
Published: December 31, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/washington/01epa.html
“The E.P.A. has not completed its proposal on whether to set drinking water standards for perchlorate. Lisa P. Jackson, President-elect Barack Obama’s choice to be the agency’s administrator, will most likely decide what course to take on the issue.”
So, let’s summarize:
1) The Bush EPA ignores scientists recommendations and is rightly criticized in media and by environmental groups. This adverse reaction echoes the Bush first term moratorium and Whitman EPA attempt to rollback the arsenic drinking water standard:
2) Lisa Jackson’s DEP ignores even sterner scientific recommendations but is praised by environmental groups.
3) the Washington Post and the NY Times BOTH miss the story.
What is wrong with this picture?
[Update 1 – Did some Googling and it’s actually worse than I had thought. Check out this WaPo story, that finds reporters actually cheerleading for the Obama transition team’s diligent inquiry of, among other issues, perchlorate! You’d think that one of the WaPo reporters on the story at least would have asked Jackson how she handled in NJ? Pathetic!
The team also has focused on drinking-water standards, asking about how to reduce children’s and mothers’ exposure to perchlorate, a chemical in rocket fuel that is leaching into groundwater near military bases.”
Obama Teams Are Scrutinizing Federal Agencies
Smooth Transition Is Goal

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/02/AR2008120203489.html

  1. nohesitation
    January 4th, 2009 at 13:52 | #1

    I wonder who told Felicity Barringer of the NY Times that the perchlorate ball was in Lisa Jackson’s Court? That was not the thrust of her story, so someone had to feed her that line.
    My theory is it was someone in the Jackson camp – as a set up for the story next year when she reverses the Bush decision.
    This will make Jackson look like a hero, while at the same time covering up her failures in NJ.
    A twofer.
    These people are slick.

  2. ESTPhoneHome
    January 4th, 2009 at 15:06 | #2

    I don’t what the big deal is?. All you have to do is install a water filter
    treatment into your home. The cost..under $100 dollars…there are
    several name brand filters you can do it yourself. Why drink bottled
    water, when you can drink free water filtered from your tap…no chemicals no after taste.. just pure water.

  3. Blarneyboy
    January 4th, 2009 at 18:05 | #3

    Because, EST, the public water supply is SUPPOSED to be safe and is not. We pay a lot of money to make it safe, but “connected” bureaucrats are more interested in moving themselves along nicely, than protecting the environment. They don’t do their job, and then lie about it. Then, they get rewarded for lying about it. Wolfe’s articles are a poignant case in point.
    Chemicals, endless plastic degradation problems, birth-control residue etc. CHANGE life radically for all animal life, people included, forever. Important parts don’t show up in the embryo, or there’s an extra set.
    Wolfe’s absolutely right. We need to “filter” the public officials so we don’t have to filter the water supply at every tap. Heck, is the water supply for the cow, soon to be your hamburger pattie, filtered?

  4. disseddep
    January 5th, 2009 at 19:43 | #4

    Home water filters do not remove perchlorate. They also don’t remove PFOA, a more pervasive chemical than perchlorate that Jackson does not want to regulate in drinking water.

  5. JerseyOpine
    January 6th, 2009 at 16:54 | #5

    I thought Obama was supposed to have a rigorous vetting process. Lisa Jackson seems to be flying under that radar, at least as far as environmental issues are concerned.

  1. December 8th, 2009 at 16:40 | #1
You must be logged in to post a comment.