State to Reconsider Drinking-Water Standard

Redlands Daily Facts, Jason Pesick
Published December 28, 2008

The state will take another look at the drinking-water standard for a common Inland Empire contaminant. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment will review the public health goal for perchlorate - an ingredient in explosives and some fertilizers - in 2009, Sam Delson, the office's deputy director for external and legislative affairs, said via e-mail. The public health goal is the first step in setting a drinking- water standard. Environmentalists, who complained the last public health goal of 6 parts per billion set in 2004 was too high, welcomed the news. One part per billion translates into a drop of water in an Olympic-size swimming pool. "We're happy, but really how happy we will remain depends on what number theyup with and how long it takes them to get there," said Renee Sharp, director of the nonprofit Environmental Working Group's California office. When setting a public health goal, regulators only take into consideration a substance's effect on health. The state Department of Public Health sets the final standard after also considering cost and technical feasibility. Perchlorate is found throughout the country and in Southern California at old industrial sites. Some agricultural areas also have relatively low levels of perchlorate because it was found in some fertilizers. The chemical affects the thyroid gland, which is involved in metabolism, mental and physical development. Environmentalists say they are particularly concerned about the impacts on unborn babies and small children. While the state is required to review public health goals every five years, Sharp said that in reality officials aren't always able to follow through. A number of new studies about perchlorate have been published in recent years that are relevant to the public health goal, including a 2006 study by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found low levels of perchlorate can affect thyroid hormone levels in women, Delson wrote in the e-mail. But requiring all water purveyors in the state to remove even more perchlorate from water could be pricey. Many purveyors can mix contaminated water with clean water to get the concentration down, but that work would be more difficult if the standard were around 1 ppb or 2 ppb. Systems that remove perchlorate from water aren't cheap. Anthony "Butch" Araiza, general manager of the Rialto-based West Valley Water District, said he doesn't mind if the standard is reduced because he already tr'eats water contaminated at low levels. The West Valley district, home to one of the nation's most perchlorate-contaminated sites, will soon have five wells with treatment systems, Araiza said. He expects the state standard to stay around 6 ppb. "I think if they go below that, they'll probably have a hue and cry from some of those agencies," he said. At the national level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is in the final stages of making a formal determination not to set a standard for perchlorate in drinking water. In 2002, EPA scientists developed a draft protective level of 1 ppb, assuming all perchlorate intake comes through water. That level would have to be lower for drinking water to take into account other sources for perchlorate, like milk and lettuce. Environmentalists have criticized White House involvement in the process to set a standard since that time.