The Bush administration has given the public an appallingly short time period of only14 days to officially be heard on its plan to yank the new rule that reduced the acceptable level of arsenic in our drinking water and re-open the issue to further study. Please email and / or write the EPA now.
On March 20th Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christie Todd Whitman announced that the Bush administration would suspend the revised arsenic standard for drinking water issued by the outgoing Clinton administration in January. More than a month passed, however, until the EPA announced an official comment period concerning it's decision. To make matters worse, the agency is giving the public an absurdly short time frame of only 14 days to speak out on this critical issue.
The current U.S. arsenic-in-drinking-water standard of 50 parts per billion (ppb) was set in 1942, before health officials knew that arsenic causes cancer. The revised rule would have lowered the acceptable arsenic level to 10 ppb, the same international standard adopted several years ago by the World Health Organization and the European Union.
The National Academy
of Sciences has determined that arsenic in water causes bladder, lung
and skin cancer, and may cause kidney and liver cancer, birth defects
and reproductive problems. Arsenic also harms the central nervous system
Send your letter
with this message to the official EPA comment address:
Dear Administrator Whitman and EPA staff,
I strongly oppose your decision to suspend the new 10 parts per billion arsenic-in-drinking-water standard and re-open this issue to further study. The new standard was a result of more than a decade of scientific reviews, public hearings, and discussions with health experts and industry. In addition, the 10 ppb level is the international standard adopted several years ago by the World Health Organization and the European Union.
Delaying implementation of the standard only serves to increase profits for polluters, such as the mining industry and other corporate interests, at the expense of the public's health. I urge you to reverse your decision and immediately implement the 10 ppb standard. If you do decide to re-open this issue for further study, however, you should adopt an even stronger standard (3 ppb), not a weaker one.
your name and full address