Een 1-op-600 kans op blaaskanker is binnen de limiet

[Cees Binkhorst]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Dus de grootste democratie ter wereld beschermt zijn burgers niet?
Waar en wanneer hebben we dat meer gehoord?
Landbouw anybody?

Groet / Cees

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/business/energy-environment/08water.html
December 8, 2009
Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show
By CHARLES DUHIGG
More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have
violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last
five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.

That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local
residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million
people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or
radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often
found in sewage.

Regulators were informed of each of those violations as they occurred.
But regulatory records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water
systems that broke the law were ever fined or punished by state or
federal officials, including those at the Environmental Protection
Agency, which has ultimate responsibility for enforcing standards.

Studies indicate that drinking water contaminants are linked to millions
of instances of illness within the United States each year.

In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and
probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal
contamination persisted for years, records show.

On Tuesday, the Senate Environment and Public Works committee will
question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about the agency’s enforcement
of drinking-water safety laws. The E.P.A. is expected to announce a new
policy for how it polices the nation’s 54,700 water systems.

“This administration has made it clear that clean water is a top
priority,” said an E.P.A. spokeswoman, Adora Andy, in response to
questions regarding the agency’s drinking water enforcement. The E.P.A.
administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, this year announced a wide-ranging
overhaul of enforcement of the Clean Water Act, which regulates
pollution into waterways.

“The previous eight years provide a perfect example of what happens when
political leadership fails to act to protect our health and the
environment,” Ms. Andy added.

Water pollution has become a growing concern for some lawmakers as
government oversight of polluters has waned. Senator Barbara Boxer,
Democrat of California, in 2007 asked the E.P.A. for data on Americans’
exposure to some contaminants in drinking water.

The New York Times has compiled and analyzed millions of records from
water systems and regulators around the nation, as part of a series of
articles about worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’
response.

An analysis of E.P.A. data shows that Safe Drinking Water Act violations
have occurred in parts of every state. In the prosperous town of Ramsey,
N.J., for instance, drinking water tests since 2004 have detected
illegal concentrations of arsenic, a carcinogen, and the dry cleaning
solvent tetrachloroethylene, which has also been linked to cancer.

In New York state, 205 water systems have broken the law by delivering
tap water that contained illegal amounts of bacteria since 2004.

However, almost none of those systems were ever punished. Ramsey was not
fined for its water violations, for example, though a Ramsey official
said that filtration systems have been installed since then. In New
York, only three water systems were penalized for bacteria violations,
according to federal data.

The problem, say current and former government officials, is that
enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority.

“There is significant reluctance within the E.P.A. and Justice
Department to bring actions against municipalities, because there’s a
view that they are often cash-strapped, and fines would ultimately be
paid by local taxpayers,” said David Uhlmann, who headed the
environmental crimes division at the Justice Department until 2007.

“But some systems won’t come into compliance unless they are forced to,”
added Mr. Uhlmann, who now teaches at the University of Michigan law
school. “And sometimes a court order is the only way to get local
governments to spend what is needed.”

A half-dozen current and former E.P.A. officials said in interviews that
they tried to prod the agency to enforce the drinking-water law, but
found little support.

“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that
I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one
longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested
anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and
million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”

The majority of drinking water violations since 2004 have occurred at
water systems serving fewer than 20,000 residents, where resources and
managerial expertise are often in short supply.

It is unclear precisely how many American illnesses are linked to
contaminated drinking water. Many of the most dangerous contaminants
regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act have been tied to diseases like
cancer that can take years to develop.

But scientific research indicates that as many as 19 million Americans
may become ill each year due to just the parasites, viruses and bacteria
in drinking water. Certain types of cancer — such as breast and prostate
cancer — have risen over the past 30 years, and research indicates they
are likely tied to pollutants like those found in drinking water.

The violations counted by the Times analysis include only situations
where residents were exposed to dangerous contaminants, and exclude
violations that involved paperwork or other minor problems.

In response to inquiries submitted by Senator Boxer, the E.P.A. has
reported that more than three million Americans have been exposed since
2005 to drinking water with illegal concentrations of arsenic and
radioactive elements, both of which have been linked to cancer at small
doses.

In some areas, the amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000
percent higher than the legal limit, according to E.P.A. data.

But federal regulators fined or punished fewer than 8 percent of water
systems that violated the arsenic and radioactive standards. The E.P.A.,
in a statement, said that in a majority of situations, state regulators
used informal methods — like providing technical assistance — to help
systems that had violated the rules.

But many systems remained out of compliance, even after aid was offered,
according to E.P.A. data. And for over a quarter of systems that
violated the arsenic or radioactivity standards, there is no record that
they were ever contacted by a regulator, even after they sent in
paperwork revealing their violations.

Those figures are particularly worrisome, say researchers, because the
Safe Drinking Water Act’s limits on arsenic are so weak to begin with. A
system could deliver tap water that puts residents at a 1-in-600 risk of
developing bladder cancer from arsenic, and still comply with the law.

Despite the expected announcement of reforms, some mid-level E.P.A.
regulators say they are skeptical that any change will occur.

“The same people who told us to ignore Safe Drinking Water Act
violations are still running the divisions,” said one mid-level E.P.A.
official. “There’s no accountability, and so nothing’s going to change.”

Readers comments:

2.
Marc
Beaverton, OR
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
Could you please publish a detailed list of all violations, including
location, time period, checmicals involved, and health risk? The damage
has been done; now please help us assess the damage.
 Recommend  Recommended by 112 Readers
24.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Outraged
Oakland
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
This should take priority over unemployment, the wars, everything.

It makes me grieve that people can't even trust American water anymore.

We are falling apart and are doing nothing about it.

This country will have to spend trillions in the next century to
replace/repair our infrastructure. Especially sewage, water treatment,
energy, roads, electricity, garbage/landfill, etc.
 Recommend  Recommended by 96 Readers
6.
Max Gysi
Washington, DC
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
What the hell has happened to this country? It's as if people in power
don't care about laws or the public good, just as long as they get their
money.

Can it really be that hard to keep our water clean and punish polluters?
Clean water is one of the most fundamental public health requirements.
This should be a top priority for the EPA.
 Recommend  Recommended by 93 Readers
23.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
sam
brooklyn, ny
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
So now we know why Palin has such a strong following: there's something
in the water. Seriously, the republicans want to get government so small
they can drown it in a bathtub. After Katrina, we realized they were
drowning us. Now we realize, it's dirty water in the bathtub.
Can we indict those responsible for this all the way up the ladder? If
it was China, there's be executions for this sort of nonsense.
 Recommend  Recommended by 83 Readers
9.
Brian
Madison, WI
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
Thanks for the analysis, but why not give us more of the raw data or
provide an interactive map so that we can know where these violations
are occurring?
 Recommend  Recommended by 80 Readers
128.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Abby
Western Washington
December 8th, 2009
9:01 am
Why would people who have no interest in protecting American water
supplies from polluters hold upper level jobs at the EPA? Shouldn't a
critical criteria for hiring at the EPA be to screen people for their
drive to rid the country of polluters? Is this really so hard? Here's an
idea: How about we give the political lackeys and self-aggrandizing
posers the boot, and hire somone who actually wants to protect our
environment. Then, let's support them. That means: don't get in the way
when they go after your big money donors and the favorite employer in
the area. Give the EPA the big stick to clean up the mess and make the
polluters pay to fix the damage they have done. And, yes, we all may
have to pay more for clean water and clean air. P.S. To big and small
business polluters: cleaning up your mess is expensive. Rather than keep
polluting 'til you get caught and have to declare bankruptcy, why not
just do the right thing and include the cost of properly managing your
mess as a cost of doing business? I know, your profits will be smaller,
but you won't be getting rich off the sickness of your neighbors and the
fouling of your community. Think of it that way. Or, have fun in prison.
And to the individual polluters out there: wake up, you live in a
society. Here's what you can do: keep your car's systems maintained so
you're running as clean as you can, take advantage of your utilities'
home energy efficiency programs, take your leftover household chemicals,
paints, and electronics to a hazardous waste disposal site, get your
septic systems fixed, pick up and properly dispose of your animal's
waste, and recycle. Thanks.
 Recommend  Recommended by 74 Readers
133.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Simone
Oak Park, IL
December 8th, 2009
9:21 am
This story is missing an important point. The EPA should focus on the
source of the pollution. While the municipalities should deliver clean
water, there shouldn't be arsenic in the water supply in the first
place.
 Recommend  Recommended by 62 Readers
3.
Mike
NY
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
May we please have the list, with info re the defects?

This will enable people affected to complain to their system.
 Recommend  Recommended by 54 Readers
7.
Arthur
Butler, PA
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
It would be nice to provide the readers with some information explaining
which localities have good or bad water, or at least which localities
have the worst water.

With the way the information is provided in the article pretty much
everybody in the US has a reason to be scared. But if only more specific
information were provided perhaps only the ones who should be scared
actually would be.
 Recommend  Recommended by 53 Readers
92.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Patricia
Basking Ridge, NJ
December 8th, 2009
8:24 am
To find the quality of water I receive, I went to the web site of my
water supplier and searched on the term "water quality report" to get
the 2008 report. It's not hard to interpret the report. Since the EPA
isn't demanding compliance, it's up to us to do so!
 Recommend  Recommended by 46 Readers
43.
Anonymous BE
Belgium
December 8th, 2009
7:09 am
A first-world country provides safe, potable tap water to all of its
citizens and all citizens have equal access to health care irrespective
of their income.

A third-world country does not provide safe, potable tap water to all of
its citizens, causing the wealthy to purchase large quantities of
drinking water and causing the poor to be sickened. A third-world
country only gives medical care to those who have the financial
resources to pay for it.

Which of these two categories more closely corresponds to the United
States of America?
 Recommend  Recommended by 42 Readers
18.
RP
Santa Monica, CA
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
Your reporter and editor did the public a dis-service by *not*
publishing a list of municipalities whose water supply is contaminated.
 Recommend  Recommended by 41 Readers
8.
Getthegoofgun
Wisconsin
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
How do we find out if our municipality has broken the requirements?
 Recommend  Recommended by 40 Readers
4.
tom
deposit, NY
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
Money over the truly important things in life. Like water!

And now the NY DEC wants to permit hydro-fracture gas drilling in the
Delaware/Catskills watershed and the Delaware River Basin-- even without
a long-term impact study, or provisions for above board, resident
accessible, monitoring. I mean when does anyone find out somethings
wrong? And who's responsible?

Give me clean water and air; or give me death.
 Recommend  Recommended by 38 Readers
22.
Somebody
Somewhere
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
... and this article doesn't tell me where these millions are located
and if I am one of them
 Recommend  Recommended by 34 Readers
130.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
alice06443
Bluffton, S.C.
December 8th, 2009
9:03 am
In order to find out if your drinking water is contaminated - go to
EPA.gov/safewater/index.html and then look up your state. They have the
answer.
 Recommend  Recommended by 33 Readers
1.
Your Name
Oak Park, IL
December 8th, 2009
6:30 am
And this doesn't hurt national security? Come on guys - move some of
that stimulus money to fix this looming catastrophe.
 Recommend  Recommended by 24 Readers
13.
Chris F.
Roanoke, VA
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
Those in the US continue to pay one of the world's lowest prices for
water, and we're getting what we pay for. If you would like to not drink
radium or arsenic, you'll be forced to use much more extensive treatment
technologies. Demand and vote for progressive improvements in your
water, but also expect to pay a few cents more for it. Water suppliers
(and the regulators) are not going to make any changes unless the
customer demands it.
 Recommend  Recommended by 22 Readers
11.
Jenise
Florida
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
Just a small bit of curiosity on my part, **BUT** if it is dangerous to
drink bottled water because of the chemicals in the plastic, and the tap
water is not safe either, what are we left with? Wine, beer, and booze,
and those are all bad for our health also. Just wondering.
 Recommend  Recommended by 21 Readers
5.
Wentworth
New York, NY
December 8th, 2009
7:06 am
Perhaps we should figure out a way to fix this before we spend billions
and billions on heath care for those of us who will become sick from
drinking this toxic waste.
 Recommend  Recommended by 21 Readers
20.
Shrinagesh
Chennai, India
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
This is shocking news. It should be on front page of every US newspaper
but it isn't. Are we taking lives for granted? Does even American
leadership becoming like Namibian leadership? People should wake up NOW
or they may have to sleep permanently. The choice is ours!
 Recommend  Recommended by 19 Readers
187.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
Cumberland River
Clarksville, TN
December 8th, 2009
1:09 pm
For those complaining that there is no data in this report about your
town's water quality: You receive a Consumer Confidence Report every
year from the city/water district from whom you purchase water. It tells
you if there have been violations. If there are violations you should be
calling your city council and mayor and complaining. If you do have
violations, your city/town is probably using the 200 plus year old
method of running the water through sand rather than membrane
filtration. And/or they are not maintaining their system. They are
probably spending the profits from the water bill you pay on buying fire
trucks and police cars because that is what they hear the most
complaints about from their constituents...not the quality of the
drinking water. If you think drinking bottled water or installing a
filtration system in your house is better than complaining to your local
government, then you are abandoning your fellow man that can't afford a
personal filtration system or bottled water. From experience I have
found that the personal filtration systems are breeding grounds for
bacteria. If you are buying bottled water you are contaminating the
environment through too many ways to list here. You can't avoid drinking
water, it's in the beer, it's in the soda, it's in the wine. Stop
complaining and putting your head in the sand waiting for someone else
to save us, get involved!
 Recommend  Recommended by 17 Readers
19.
Michael
Gahanna, Ohio
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
Cash strapped municipalities can't pay because citizens will bear the
brunt of fines? Make the identities of the affected communities known to
each and every consumer. A letter from the EPA in plain english
concerning the nature of the contamination, its effects and timeline for
clean-up should do. The outrage will cover the costs. The consumer is
going to pay anyway.
 Recommend  Recommended by 17 Readers
15.
as
Chicago, Ill
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
How can the public find out which municipalities have safe drinking
violations? Personally, I would like to know if my community has OK
water or not.
 Recommend  Recommended by 14 Readers
12.
emedwriter
80012
December 8th, 2009
7:07 am
Is there a way to find out how safe our local water is? any online
resources by state, perhaps, that clearly provide this information in
layperson's language?
 Recommend  Recommended by 14 Readers

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********