Close this Advertisement

How Should EPA Improve Drinking Water Protection?

  • Aug 17, 2010
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is launching a Web-based discussion forum to gather public input on how the agency can improve protection of drinking water. The information will be used in implementing EPA’s new drinking water strategy announced by Administrator Lisa P. Jackson in March.

“We look forward to reviewing the ideas and feedback from the public,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water. “This online discussion is for anyone who wants to share their input on protecting drinking water and improving public health.”

EPA seeks input from water professionals, advocates, and anyone interested in drinking water quality issues about best solutions for issues facing our nation’s drinking water — planning, developing scientific tools, controlling water pollution and use of resources.

The discussion forum will feature topics based on the four segments of the drinking water strategy:

  • addressing contaminants as groups rather than one at a time,
  • fostering development of new technologies,
  • using the existing authority of several statues to protect drinking water, and
  • partnering with states to share more complete data.

The forum will be open for discussion for about a month, with each topic area being discussed separately.

Comments

Tue, Aug 31, 2010 Texas

Public water system officials are well aware that flouride is a toxic poison that is required to be monitored and reported to their regulatory agencies. So why is it added to water and toothpaste "to prevent cavaties"? Good daily oral hygience practices will do that. To safeguard your family's health, consider investing in a home water filtration system that filters out flouride.

Thu, Aug 19, 2010 Thomas Paine II

The issue of adding fluorides to drinking water is even more of a concern since the source of the fluorisicates is air pollution scrubber waste derived. Arsenic is a known "by product" pollutant in this waste stream that is added to drinking water, occurring in 43% of samples, according to a NSF study found at: http://www.nsf.org/business/water_distribution/pdf/NSF_Fact_Sheet.pdf The use of this material in drinking water is very puzzling. Even the EPA's own Headquarters Union opposes fluoridation, as noted here: http://www.fluoridealert.org/hp-epa.htm They note, "The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA's standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation's drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry." Call your Senator or Congressman and ask for a review.

Wed, Aug 18, 2010

The majority of countries in the European Union and Japan have reviewed the positives and negatives of water fluoridation, and decided to ban addition of fluorides to drinking water, as fluorides are far more toxic than lead. Perhaps new fluoride toxicity studies should be done by the EPA to review the old, "it prevents cavities" justification. How can the scientists on most of a continent and all of Japan be wrong?

Wed, Aug 18, 2010 Scott Burlingame City of Park Rapids

The City has completed the work to define our well head area and have isolated the root of our nitrate problem as required by MDH. The problem is we do not have any authority to protect the recharge area as it is outside our city limits. Our only option at this time appears like we will be drilling new wells outside the agriculture area, which could very well take care of our issue, (very costly)but does nothing with the existing pollution taking place.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above