Rocket Fuel in Drinking Water

Drinking water for more than 20 million Americans is contaminated with a toxic legacy of the Cold War: A chemical that interferes with normal thyroid function, may cause cancer and persists indefinitely in the environment, but is currently unregulated by state or federal authorities. Perchlorate, the explosive main ingredient of rocket and missile fuel, contaminates drinking water supplies, groundwater or soil in hundreds of locations in at least 43 states, according to Environmental Working Group’s updated analysis of government data. EWG’s analysis of the latest scientific studies, which show harmful health effects from minute doses, argues that a national standard for perchlorate in drinking water should be no higher than one-tenth the level the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency currrently recommends as safe.

Perchlorate Pollution Spreading Nationwide

Drinking water for more than 20 million Americans is contaminated with a toxic legacy of the Cold War: A chemical that interferes with normal thyroid function, may cause cancer and persists indefinitely in the environment, but is currently unregulated by state or federal authorities.

Perchlorate, the explosive main ingredient of rocket and missile fuel, contaminates drinking water supplies, groundwater or soil in hundreds of locations in at least 43 states, according to Environmental Working Group’s updated analysis of government data. EWG’s analysis of the latest scientific studies, which show harmful health effects from minute doses, argues that a national standard for perchlorate in drinking water should be no higher than one-tenth the level the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency currrently recommends as safe.

Perchlorate is a powerful thyroid toxin that can affect the thyroid’s ability to take up the essential nutrient iodide and make thyroid hormones. Small disruptions in thyroid hormone levels during pregnancy can cause lowered IQ and larger disruptions cause mental retardation, loss of hearing and speech, or deficits in motor skills for infants and children.

In California, Arizona and Nevada, where testing has been most extensive, well over 20 million people drink water from public and private sources known to be polluted with perchlorate. This estimate includes millions of customers of 81 contaminated public water systems in California and aproximately 20 million customers in the three states who get at least part of their drinking water from the perchlorate-tainted Colorado River. (Because there is some overlap between systems that are supplied by groundwater sources and those supplied by the Colorado River, a total cannot be calculated by adding the two figures.)

Link: Perchlorate-contaminated drinking water sources in California.

Link: More than 20 million people in California, Arizona and Nevada get at least part of their drinking water from the perchlorate-contaminated Colorado River.

On March 3, 2003, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-CA, introduced legislation that would mandate that the federal government set a drinking water standard for perchlorate by July 1, 2004. California health officials are working toward setting a state drinking water standard sometime in 2004, but the EPA is not expected to set enforceable national standards before 2008, if then.

California’s current provisional drinking water standard, which is only advisory, is 2 to 6 parts per billion (ppb). The EPA’s current draft standard is equivalent to 1 ppb. Boxer’s legislation does not specify what the standard should be but mandates that it be set at a level that will protect the most sensitive populations. EWG’s analysis of new studies, showing harmful effects from very low doses, argues that to protect children the standard should be no higher than one-tenth the EPA’s recommendation, or 0.1 ppb.

Link: New Studies Show Harm From Much Lower Doses of Perchlorate.

EWG’s analysis of the latest federal and state data shows:

• Outside of California, perchlorate contamination has been found by testing in more than 100 drinking water sources in 19 states.
  
  Link: Perchlorate contamination of drinking water sources outside of California.
• Perchlorate contamination of soil or of groundwater sources, not all of which are used for drinking water, has been found at more than 50 sites in 17 states.
  
  Link: Perchlorate contamination of soil or groundwater nationwide.
• Perchlorate is known to have been made, used or stored at more than 150 sites in 36 states. At some of these locations, water or soil contamination has already been detected by testing, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says it is certain that further tests would confirm contamination at all of the sites.
  
  Link: Sites of known perchlorate use in 36 states.
• Perchlorate testing is urgently needed on at least 63 military sites in 32 states where rockets, missiles or munitions have been developed, produced, tested, stored, maintained, or disposed of. To date, testing is planned at only a few of these sites.
  
  Link: Military sites where perchlorate testing is urgent.

Perchlorate is used in fireworks, safety flares, matches and car air bags, but 90 percent of it goes into solid rocket fuel for military missiles and the NASA space shuttle. American Pacific Corp. of Las Vegas and Kerr-McGee Corp. of Oklahoma City were the sole U.S. producers until 1998, when American Pacific bought out its rival.

National data is still spotty, but extensive drinking water testing is now taking place under the federal Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, which requires testing by all large water systems and some smaller ones. As the data comes in, perchlorate contamination is being found in many places where there was no record of the chemical’s use.

Once thought to affect only Air Force facilities and contractors, more recently perchlorate contamination has been found in tests at many Army and Navy sites as well, especially where munitions have been disposed of by open burning or detonation. Among known contaminated sites is the McGregor Naval Weapons Plant in central Texas, just a few miles from President Bush’s ranch. Underground plumes of perchlorate have also been found spreading from non-military industrial sites, such as an abandoned flare factory in San Martin, Calif., formerly operated by Olin Corp. of Norwalk, Conn., that has polluted more than 100 private wells.

Although the majority of known and suspected perchlorate-contaminated sites are operated by the military or contractors such as St. Louis-based Lockheed Martin, the Department of Defense and the aerospace and defense industry are stubbornly resisting the efforts of regulators to set adequate safety standards or clean up contaminated sites.

Despite volumes of new evidence showing that very low doses are harmful to fetuses, infants and children, the Pentagon and its contractors argue that the risks of perchlorate should be assessed on the basis of a single study, funded by the defense industry, on short-term exposure of a handful of adult men and non-pregnant women. Last year, Kerr-McGee and Lockheed Martin successfully sued California health authorities to reconsider the state’s provisional drinking water standard, which likely will force the state to miss a January 2004 deadline, mandated by state law, for setting an enforceable standard.

Both the Defense Department and Lockheed Martin, which is being sued by 800 residents of San Bernardino, Calif., for cancer and other illnesses they believe were caused by decades of drinking perchlorate-contaminated water, maintain that perchlorate is safe at levels 200 times higher than the EPA’s current recommendation. In fact, there is strong evidence that the EPA’s recommended level of 1 ppb is far too high.

Neither the EPA nor the state of California have taken into account the numerous common anti-thyroid chemicals which may worsen the effects of perchlorate, notably the drinking water contaminant nitrate. Neither the EPA nor California have taken note of epidemiological studies that found effects on infant thyroid hormone levels at 1 to 6 ppb.

And neither the EPA nor California have adequately considered the extra perchlorate that may be consumed by eating lettuce or other produce grown with contaminated water. Documents obtained and published by EWG in December 2002 showed that a 1997 study in San Bernardino, Calif., of leafy vegetables growing in perchlorate-contaminated water found that the crops took up and stored perchlorate and concentrated it by an average factor of 65. This high rate of bioaccumulation means that a pregnant woman who ate a two-ounce serving of the vegetables would get a dose of perchlorate more than 100 times higher than what the EPA recommends as safe in a liter of drinking water.

Link: High Levels of Toxic Rocket Fuel Found in Lettuce.

Known Health Effects

Rocket Fuel in Drinking Water: New Studies Show Harm From Much Lower Doses

Perchlorate was first discovered to affect the thyroid 50 years ago, but only recently has research focused on its effects at low levels. The trend in the findings is both clear and ominous: The more scientists look, the lower they find the threshold for adverse effects.

Perchlorate’s main effect is on the thyroid gland, which is responsible for controlling growth, development and metabolism. Perchlorate inhibits the thyroid’s ability to take up iodide, a necessary nutrient, which is important in the production of thyroid hormones. An underactive thyroid gland in adults can lead to fatigue, depression, anxiety, unexplained weight gain, hair loss, and low libido.

More serious, however, are the effects of thyroid hormone disruption in the developing fetus and child: Small changes in maternal thyroid hormone levels during pregnancy have been associated with reduced IQs in children. Fetuses, infants and children who experience more significant changes in hormone levels may suffer mental retardation, loss of hearing and speech, abnormal testicular development or deficits in motor skills. In older children, depressed thyroid levels have been associated with lower motivation to learn and attention deficit disorder. (Haddow et al. 1999, Pop et al. 1999.)

As recently as 1998, only one study had shown any adverse effect of perchlorate at levels as low as 0.01 micrograms per kilogram of drinking water a day. More recent research has shown that even at this very low dose level, perchlorate induces significant effects on the levels of thyroid hormones in the mother, fetus and offspring. (Crofton 2001.) And similar low dose studies have found “a large number of significant effects” on brain structure and thyroid structure. (Argus 2001, EPA 2002.)

A clear trend among the most recent perchlorate studies is more profound effects were seen in laboratory animals who were exposed in utero. This is unsurprising, given that research has shown that marginal iodine deficiency has significant effects on the fetal thyroid even if no effects are seen in the mother. One study, for instance, found that the thyroids of pregnant rats were able to compensate for marginal iodide deficiency in the diet but that such compensation did not take place in the fetal offspring which showed a 50 percent decrease in iodide uptake. (Versloot et. al. 1997.)

One recent study found thyroid tumors in second-generation exposed rats at extremely young ages. In fact, out of thirty rat pups which were exposed to perchlorate both in utero and as pups, two developed thyroid tumors after just 19 weeks. (Argus 1999.) These types of thyroid tumors are extremely rare, especially when seen this early: The National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) had estimated the probability of this occurring at less than two-tenths of one percent. (EPA 2002.) Although the dose tested was significantly higher than what might be consumed in drinking water, the findings are troubling because they point to the possibility of in utero programming. This phenomenon, in which fetal exposure leads to a higher susceptibility to hormone perturbation during development and adulthood, has been seen in other cases of endocrine disruption. (Prins et al. 2001, Phillips et al. 1998. Seckl 1997.)

Because iodide is concentrated not only by the thyroid gland, but also by the mammary gland, one of the questions lingering after the peer review of EPA’s 1998 provisional reference dose was whether perchlorate would be found or concentrated in breast milk. Recent technological improvements made it possible to look into this question and the results were troubling. Perchlorate was found in the milk of rats that were given very low doses of perchlorate in drinking water (0.01 mg/kg-day), leading the EPA to conclude that rat pups “are in fact exposed to significant levels of perchlorate through the maternal milk.” (Yu 2000, EPA 2002.)

Of several epidemiological studies looking at the effects of perchlorate exposure on newborn infants, only two were funded by entities that did not have a significant stake in the outcome of the results. One study, conducted by the Arizona Department of Health Services, found differences in infant thyroid hormone levels among babies in Arizona born to mothers who had consumed perchlorate-tainted Colorado River water as compared to mothers who had not been exposed to perchlorate during pregnany. (Brechner et al. 2000.)

These findings were confirmed by another recent study of California newborns which found that concentrations of perchlorate at about the same level proposed as a drinking water standard may affect infant thyroid hormone levels. The looked at the hormone levels of all infants born in California in 1996 and compared the hormone levels of infants whose mothers had drunk perchlorate-contaminated water to those whose mothers had not. The study found a statistically significant effect on infant thyroid hormone levels from perchlorate exposure by the mother of only 1 to 2 ppb. The effects were more pronounced at higher dose levels. (Schwartz 2001.)

Studies looking at the ecological effects of perchlorate contamination also raise red flags. For example, one study exposed frog embryos to perchlorate at levels found in some surface and groundwaters. The frogs were found to have inhibited forelimb emergence, significantly lower percentages of animals completing tail resorption, reduced hind limb development, and a skewed sex ratio. (Goleman et al. 2002.) The study notes: “These effects were observed at concentrations at or below concentrations reported in surface waters contaminated with ammonium perchlorate, suggesting that this contaminant may pose a threat to normal development and growth in natural amphibian populations.”

Despite all this new evidence, the Department of Defense and the aerospace and defense industry have been trying to get state and federal officials to base perchlorate risk assessments on the results of a single industry-funded human study. This study (Greer et al. 2002) was designed to characterize the effects of a 14-day exposure on adult males and non-pregnant females. How much its results can be extrapolated to the real world is severely limited by several factors.

• First, the study subjects had healthy thyroids and high iodine intake levels relative to the normal population — whereas 15 percent of U.S. women of reproductive age may have low iodide consumption. (OEHHA 2002.)
• Second, adult humans have an extensive reserve of thyroid hormones which would limit the effects of a short-term exposure, but not the harm from the lifelong perchlorate exposure that most people would experience.
• Third, the study was not conducted on the population of concern: pregnant women, children and infants. Because pregnancy puts stress on the thyroid, and the hormone reserves that exist in adults are smaller in children and virtually nonexistent in infants and neonates, these populations are much more susceptible to inhibition of iodide uptake (Delange and Ermans 1991.)
• Finally, although the lowest dose tested was designated as a no-effect level in this study, decreased iodide uptake was in fact observed. The EPA has concluded that the study was statistically underpowered to detect significant effects at the lowest dose level, due in part to the small sample size of just seven people. (EPA 2002.)

Despite these numerous and obvious flaws, the Pentagon and industry have used these results to argue for a drinking water standard of 200 ppb.

While state and federal authorities inch towards establishing the first enforceable drinking water standard for perchlorate, an array of proposed standards, action levels” and other proto-standards are circulating. Understandably, this has led to a considerable amount of confusion and frustration within the water-supply industry, which is left with contaminated water and little firm guidance on what level of perchlorate is safe to serve their customers. Unfortunately, none of the proposed standards are likely to be adequate to protect children’s health.

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is explicitly directed to draft Public Health Goals that protect public health including sensitive subpopulations “with an adequate margin of safety.” Yet in its most recent draft, OEHHA relies solely on the results of the small industry-funded human study and uses an inadequate uncertainty factor of only three to account for such considerable uncertainties as the variability between individuals, extrapolating from short-term exposure to long-term exposure, extrapolating from the study population to the population of concern and questions of whether perchlorate concentrates in breast milk. (OEHHA 2002.) Of the 35 other Public Health Goals OEHHA has developed for other contaminants, only four have used uncertainity factors of less than 30. Of those four, one is an essential nutrient (copper), one is deliberately added to water (flouride), and the other two have extensive databases on chronic human effects (lead and nitrate).

In developing its provisional reference dose, the EPA has used a wide base of short-and medium-term animal studies which look at the populations of concern, rather than relying on the single short-term human used by OEHHA. The EPA has also proposed an uncertainty factor of 300 — which, given the considerable uncertainty remaining, still may not be large enough. However, the EPA continues to assert that infant body weight and drinking water figures do not need to be used in the calculation of a drinking water standard. (EPA 2002, EPA 2003.) This is unacceptable.

Neither the EPA nor OEHHA have taken into account the numerous common anti-thyroid chemicals that may worsen the effects of perchlorate, notably the drinking water contaminant nitrate. Neither the EPA nor OEHHA seem to be concerned that epidemiological studies have found effects on infant thyroid hormone levels at about the same perchlorate concentrations which have been proposed as a drinking water standard. And neither have the EPA nor OEHHA adequately taken into consideration the extra perchlorate that may be consumed by eating food grown with contaminated water or fertilizer. (EWG 2002.) To adequately protect the health of the nation’s children a drinking water standard for perchlorate must be set no higher than 0.1 part per billion.

Table 1. There are hundreds of perchlorate-contaminated drinking water sources in California.

Source: EWG 2003

Table 1 notes:

1. California Department of Health Services (CADHS). 2003. California’s experience with perchlorate in drinking water. February 5, 2003. http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwem/chemicals/perchl/monitoringupdate.htm
2. Sweeney, F. 2003. Contamination may have spread; more San Martin wells to be tested. February 23, 2003. San Jose Mercury News.
3. EWG analysis of California Department of Health Services (CADHS) drinking water quality database from June 2002 (CADHS 2002).
4. Number includes 4 public drinking water wells and 129 private wells. A large new perchlorate plume in the San Martin area of Santa Clara County was discovered in late 2002, but testing of all potentially affected wells has not been completed. Wells that tested positive for perchlorate contamination but had concentrations lower than the "reporting limit" of 4 ppb were not included in this number.

Table 2. More than 20 million people drink perchlorate-contaminated water from the Colorado River.

(1) Underestimate: Does not include systems with fewer than 2,500 customers or those serving Native American tribes.

Table 2 notes

1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003a. Safe Drinking Water Information System. http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/sdwis/sdwis_ov.html.
2. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). 2002. Member agency profiles. http://www.mwd.dst.ca.us/mwdh2o/pages/memberag/member02.html

Table 3. Outside California, more than 100 drinking water sources in 19 states are known to be contaminated with perchlorate.

*Parentheses indicates unconfirmed detections. PPB = parts per billion.
**Number of contaminated sources in these systems not available

Source: EWG 2003

Table 3 notes:

1. Associated Press (AP). 2002. High levels of chemical found in West Texas drinking water. April 23, 2002.
2. Clean Water Report (CWR). 2002. Possible perchlorate lessons to learn as pollutant progresses to city wells; Maryland. August 12, 2002.
3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. Memorandum re: Perchlorate occurrence table and maps. March 2, 2001.
4. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003b. Data downloaded from EPA’s Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule database. Data as of January 2003. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/ucmrgetdata.html.
5. Gullick, RW; Lechevallier, MW; Barhorst, TS. 2001. Occurrence of perchlorate in drinking water sources. American Water Works Association Journal. Jan 2001: 66-76.
6. Rogers, K. 2003. Company seeks help with cleanup. Las Vegas Review-Journal. January 11, 2003.
7. Sweeney, F. 2003. Contamination may have spread; more San Martin wells to be tested. February 23, 2003. San Jose Mercury News.

Table 4. More than 50 sites nationwide have high levels of perchlorate contamination of ground water or soil.

NA = not available.
Source: EWG 2003

Table 4 notes:

1. Associated Press (AP). 2003. Army wants company to pay for Redstone cleanup. January 20, 2003.
2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). ND. Public Health Assessment: Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant. Karnack, Harrison County, Texas.
3. Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger (CFSWAB). 2002. The potential for perchlorate contamination. A case study: Badger Army Ammunition Plant. May 2002. Merrimac, WI.
4. Clean Water Report (CWR). 2002. Possible perchlorate lessons to learn as pollutant progresses to city wells; Maryland. August 12, 2002.
5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. Memorandum re: Perchlorate occurrence table and maps. March 2, 2001.
6. McGuire, K. 2001. Rocket fuel peril studied Arkansas site's concentration among top in US. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, August 12, 2001.
7. Oswald, M. 2002. Springs tested for chemical. Albuquerque Journal. January 29, 2002.
8. Robertson, J. 2003. Another toxin found in wells at Lake City cleanup site. Kansas City Star. January 28, 2003.
9. Speckman, S. 2001. Plume of 'dirty' water is moving. The Desert News. June 18, 200.
10. Tollefson, J. 2003. Contaminated spring found near LANL. The Santa Fe New Mexican, February 9, 2003.

Table 5. At least 162 sites in 36 states have known manufacturers or users of perchlorate.

Source: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. Memorandum re: Perchlorate occurrence table and maps. March 2, 2001.

Table 6. Perchlorate testing is urgently needed at 63 Department of Defense sites.

Source: EWG 2003