As a member of Maine's Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Task Force and parent of a lead poisoned child, there was no way I could ignore this story on page one of the Washington Post this morning:
Water in D.C. Exceeds EPA Lead Limit
Random Tests Last Summer Found High Levels in 4,000 Homes Throughout CityBy David Nakamura
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 31, 2004; Page A01Tap water in thousands of District houses has recently tested above the federal limit for lead contamination, a new phenomenon that has baffled the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority and forced the agency to begin replacing service pipes.
Two-thirds of the 6,118 residences that WASA tested last summer, or 4,075 homes, had water that exceeded the lead limit of 15 parts per billion set by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1991. This is the first time the city's water has shown significant lead contamination since the late 1980s, officials said.
WASA officials said they are not sure what has caused the spike in lead levels. They are investigating whether changes in the way water is treated at the Washington Aqueduct could have a corrosive effect on lead pipes.
According to the Post, of the thousands of homes which exceeded the 15 pp/mil EPA action, over half had levels over 50 pp/mil, and more than a hundred registered over 300 pp/mil. It's important to note that the 15pp/mil is the EPA's action level, i.e., the level "set at 15 parts per billion (ppb) because EPA believes, given present technology and resources, this is the lowest level to which water systems can reasonably be required to control this contaminant should it occur in drinking water at their customers home taps." It is not the level the EPA has declared to be "safe" - that level is 0 pp/mil, as no level of lead has been proven to be safe in pregnant women and young children, again, according to the EPA.
My biggest beef with the DC Water and Sewer Authority is its obvious footdragging in the face of such a public health threat:
Although the extent of the water problem and its public health implications are just coming to light, WASA officials have been aware of the contamination since random tests on a small number of houses revealed a problem in 2002. Although agency officials discovered a more extensive problem last summer, they did not begin to notify homeowners about the results until November. WASA held a public meeting about the issue in December, but its advertisements did not reveal the lead problem. Instead, they simply stated that the purpose of the meeting was "to discuss and solicit public comments on WASA's Safe Drinking Water Act projects."
According to federal regulations passed in the mid-90s, the EPA requires drinking water providers to take action when 10% of the homes tested exceed the 15 pp/mil level. Although the Post doesn't address that specifically, it's highly likely that in light of the high percentage of contaminated residential water samples (over 66%) in last summer's expanded tests, that the tests from the summer of 2002 saw a failure rate higher than ten percent.
Which means that at the very least, homeowners in DC were exposed to excessively contaminated drinking water for at least three months, possibly eighteen months, with the full knowledge of WASA. At the very least, when lead levels exceed the threshold, EPA requires extensive testing every six months. It appears even those basic safety measures were ignored.
It's no surprise neither Mayor Williams or the DC city council were kept in the dark. WASA is an independent agency, overseen by the D.C. Council's Committee on Public Works and the Environment, headed by Republican Carol Schwartz. Schwartz is perhaps best known more recently for her adamant opposition to the DC Council's "Smokefree Workplaces Act".
The irony is that I suspect the vast majority of homes affected are in more well-to-do or "gentrified" areas. Historic single-family homes with lead pipes now vulnerable to corrosion by DC's reformulated water purification system. How many DC lawmakers and lobbyists will now be pounding down Ms. Schwartz' door. And how soon before we see an appropriations bill out of the House for replacement of DC's antiquated lead pipes.
But I'm most interested to see how far the pork will extend. As the Post noted, homeowners are responsible for replacing pipes in their own residences, just as homeowners are responsible for all other lead paint abatement costs. Here in Maine, the average per unit cost for lead abatement is now $20,000. While landlords can tap into various loans and grants, there has been no attempt by the federal government to help with these costs for moderate income homeowners.
Now that it's there own pockets which will feel the pinch, will Washington legislators suddenly discover the benefits of lead abatement?
The type of fluoride that most cities add to drinking water, silicofluorides, have been shown to leach lead from pipes:
In their analysis, the investigators found that levels of lead in children's blood was significantly higher in Massachusetts communities using the silicofluorides fluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride than in towns where water is treated with sodium fluoride or not fluoridated at all. Compared to a matched group of 30 towns that do not use silicofluorides, children in 30 communities that use these chemicals were over twice as likely to have over 10ug/dL of blood lead.
Silicofluorides are used because they are cheaper than sodium fluoride.
Posted by: Bernie Simon at January 31, 2004 07:18 PM