ISSUESAIR/WATER/HEALTHADVERTISEMENT

Government Approved Pollution
Find out what the government is doing to make our pollution problems worse


Politics of Energy
A secret energy task force with no viable solutions to the energy crisis, find out what's really going on with the energy policy


Bush and Big Business
The truth about Bush's special interest agenda, and the big businesses he serves


Media Censorship
Think you're getting the straight facts when you turn on the news?



Previous Water Next

What's On Tap?
Press Release
Natural Resources Defense Council
June 11, 2003

WASHINGTON -- Deteriorating water works, pollution, and outdated treatment technology are combining to deliver drinking water that might pose health risks to many residents in 19 of America's largest cities, according to a report issued today. Bush administration proposals to weaken the Clean Water Act and other laws would exacerbate these risks, the study warned.

The report, "What's On Tap? Grading Drinking Water in U.S. Cities," by NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), reviewed tap water quality in 19 municipalities, focusing on the effects of aging infrastructure and source water pollution. The report rated three problem areas -- water quality and compliance, source water protection, and right-to-know compliance -- on a scale of excellent, good, fair, poor and failing for 2000 and 2001. For water quality in 2001, only Chicago rated excellent, five cities rated good, eight rated fair, and five rated poor. None failed. (See the table below for rankings).

"Most Americans take it for granted that their tap water is pure and their water infrastructure is safe," said Erik Olson, the report's principal author. "Our report shows that they shouldn't."

The report found apparent or confirmed violations of enforceable tap water rules in five cities over the two years reviewed (Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Fresno and Phoenix), and violations of non-enforceable "action levels" or "health advisories" in many other cities. The report authors concluded that infrastructure and other water supply problems in these and other municipalities might pose health risks to some residents. Although the report does not advise residents to stop drinking tap water, it cited medical experts who suggest that pregnant women and parents of infants consult with health care providers. Echoing recommendations by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NRDC also urged that people who have serious immune system problems (such as those on chemotherapy or people with HIV/AIDS) consult with health care providers regarding the safety of their tap water.

"Clean drinking water has been one of the major public health triumphs of the past 100 years," said Dr. David Ozonoff, a professor at Boston University's School of Public Health. "We've figured out how to build very efficient water delivery systems. But these systems can either provide safe drinking water, or deliver poisons and harmful organisms into every home, school and workplace. One misstep can lead to disaster, so we must vigorously protect our watersheds and use the best technology to purify our tap water."

The report found that recent Bush administration actions threaten the purity of U.S. tap water. For example, the administration has proposed to limit the scope of the Clean Water Act, refused to strengthen tap water standards or issue new ones for contaminants, and has refused to reinstate a Superfund law provision that forces corporations to pay into a fund to clean up hazardous waste sites.

"The Bush administration is more concerned about protecting corporate polluters than protecting public health," said Olson. "Proposals to end Clean Water Act protection for most streams, creeks and wetlands will jeopardize city efforts to provide pure drinking water for its residents."

The report also evaluated efforts to protect lakes, streams and groundwater serving as drinking water sources. Seattle has adopted excellent protection measures, four cities had good protection, four had fair protection, seven had poor protection, and Fresno failed.

Additionally, the study reviewed each of the cities' mandated right-to-know reports, which are designed to inform residents about water system problems. Although NRDC did find some informative reports, many were little more than public relations efforts that downplayed key information about contaminants and the problems they cause. No city received an excellent rating for its report. NRDC rated eight good, six fair, three poor, and two -- Newark and Phoenix -- failed.

To protect drinking water, the report recommended that states and cities upgrade drinking water treatment facilities, invest in water conservation measures, and replace or update pipes and water distribution system components. The report also recommended that state and municipal authorities adopt standards, and purchase land or easements -- which restrict land use to safeguard water -- to protect watersheds and areas above aquifers draining into water supplies.


City Water Quality & Compliance Right to Know Source Water Protection
Albuquerque Poor Good Poor
Atlanta Fair Fair Poor
Baltimore Good Good Fair
Boston Poor Poor Good
Chicago Excellent Good Fair
Denver Good Good Good
Detroit Good Good Poor
Fresno Poor Poor Failing
Houston Fair Fair Poor
Los Angeles Fair Good Poor (import)
Fair (local)
Manchester Good Good Good
New Orleans Good Good Poor
Newark Fair Failing Fair
Philadelphia Fair Good Poor
Phoenix Poor Failing Poor
San Diego Fair Fair Poor (import)
Fair (local)
San Francisco Poor Fair Good
Seattle Fair Fair Excellent
Washington, D.C Fair Fair Fair

Previous Water Next


 
Activities l Advertising l Eco-Points l House & Garden l Our Network
Classifieds l Eco-Romance l Fonathon l Fundraising l Tec Magazine
Tickets l Eco-Travel l Privacy Policy l Seniors l Work From Home
Rethink Reality
Copyright © 2005, All Rights Reserved