Now that the Environmental Protection Agency has reverted back to a nearly 60-year-old drinking water regulation, a few people are breathing a sigh of relief — at least for now.
"I was elated," said Neil Forster, Delta public works director, after reading a recent EPA press release on acceptable levels of arsenic in drinking water. The release stated that the 10 parts per billion standard set in January would again be 50 ppb. Forster sees the reversal as only temporary, though. "If sound science says 10 parts per billion is a good decision . . . then it will stay."
Had the new EPA standard stayed at 10 ppb, Utah communities could have had to spend as much as $55 million to bring water systems into compliance, said Russ Donoghue, executive director of the Rural Water Association,
As many as 50 systems in the state in as many communities would be affected by the 10 ppb standard. The Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, which serves 800,000 customers along the Wasatch Front, and Salt Lake City Public Utilities Water Department would not be impacted because their sources already test well below 10 ppb. The problems would arise primarily in communities with histories of mining or volcanic activity.
In Delta, where there are still active hot springs, studies have found naturally occurring levels of arsenic in drinking water sources at levels between 11ppb and 22 ppb. The city is already in the midst of a $50,000 study to determine what types of technology it would take to bring those levels below 10 ppb, Forster said. Donoghue thinks that level is too low.
"We think (the EPA) has had a rush to judgment," he said. "There hasn't been many studies on the effects on humans." Each level the EPA lowers the standard, he said, would require a different, potentially more costly type of filtering system.
The EPA decided to revert back to the original standard set in 1942 while it reviews the matter. The Clinton administration set the 10 ppb standard.
"I am moving quickly to review the arsenic standard so communities that need to reduce arsenic in drinking water can proceed with confidence once the permanent standard is confirmed," EPA Administrator Christie Whitman said in a press release. At unsafe levels, the release stated, arsenic causes cancer and other diseases.
Scientists agree the 50 ppb standard should be lowered, but experts have not reached a consensus on a particular safe level. The tentative new 10 ppb standard, though, has already caused a reaction in Utah.
Old mining communities with larger populations, such as Park City, have begun to at least look at what actions would be needed where some sources are testing at 15 ppb.
"I think it's a general consensus that if science can show that low levels of arsenic are harmful to human health, then we'll do what we can," said Donoghue. But at least three identifiable state funding sources would not be enough to cover the costs, he cautioned.
Donoghue said he will use the expertise of researchers at resort communities such as Snowbird and Alta, where there were mining cars before ski lifts, to look at tests they have done on using different filter media on their water supplies.
E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com