EPA, NRDC Agree to Six-Month Delay of Perchlorate Standard

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Natural Resources Defense Council have agreed to extend the deadline for the agency to finalize a rule on perchlorate in drinking water by six months, reports Inside EPA ... In an October 1 filing with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, EPA and NRDC say, “the parties have stipulated to extend the deadline ... for perchlorate from December 19, 2019, to June 19, 2020” ... Last May, EPA proposed an MCLG and Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 56 parts per billion (ppb), notes Inside EPA; “in that proposal, the agency also asked the public to comment by Aug. 26 on a variety of other options including setting levels more and less stringent or not regulating the chemical at all in drinking water, given new information on occurrence levels.”  When EPA proposed the perchlorate rule, “it sought comment on setting the MCL and MCLG at 18 ppb, 90 ppb, or withdrawing EPA’s 2011 determination to regulate perchlorate at all in drinking water,” writes the newsletter.  “As such, the proposal could test the agency’s discretion under Safe Drinking Water Act to forgo setting an enforceable standard, an area of that law that sources say is still evolving,” says Inside EPA.
Mark Gibson
American Chemistry Council
October 11, 2019

 Proposed 56 ppb rule is "too lax" (Vorel)

The Environmental Protection Network appreciates the opportunity to provide a statement on our comments on the EPA’s proposed new drinking water standard for perchlorate ... On August 26, 2019, EPN submitted comments to EPA raising serious concerns about its proposed new drinking water standard for perchlorate ... Due to serious questions about the scientific defensibility of the EPA perchlorate regulation and the validity of the monitoring and cost-benefit analysis, EPN strongly recommends that EPA: (1) submit a new proposal that does not include an option to withdraw from the 2011 regulatory determination; (2) recalculate the MCLG and MCL with an appropriately sensitive endpoint, an adequate margin of safety, and a peer-reviewed RSC; and (3) develop cost-effective monitoring recommendations and a cost-benefit analysis that accounts for co-benefits.
Environmental Protection Network
Statement to National Drinking Water Advisory Council
November 22, 2019

 

Kreeger Bldg. well on AU campus detected 

perchlorate over twice the MCL [pg. 36]

This week, the Sierra Club joined dozens of environmental and health scientists and advocates in demanding that the EPA protect women and children from perchlorate — an industrial chemical that contaminates drinking water for millions of people in the United States.  After years of studying the impact of perchlorate exposure, the EPA is proposing a drinking water standard that is too lax and would put millions of American children at risk of developing long-term health problems.  The EPA proposes to set a water standard of 56 ppb for perchlorate, which is completely insufficient.  For comparison, the state of Massachusetts requires water utilities to treat water with more than 2 parts per billion, and advocates insist that 1 part per billion is a scientifically sound, safer limit.  Advocates’ concerns are backed up by the EPA’s own research, which confirms that perchlorate is harmful to the thyroid during pregnancy and infancy.  Perchlorate blocks the thyroid’s ability to take up iodine and alters thyroid hormones.  Exposure to perchlorate during short periods of pregnancy can impair fetal brain development and have lasting effects on children’s attention, intelligence and behavior.
Sonya Lunder
Sierra Club
September 4, 2019

Corps Ready to Excavate Under Public Safety Bldg. Foundation

American University is committed to keeping our community informed on the status of the remediation efforts being performed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) within the boundaries of the Spring Valley Formerly Used Defense Site (SVFUDS) and, specifically, work that involves AU property ... The project history goes back to 1917 - 1918, when over 661 acres in northwest Washington, including the AU campus, were used by the U.S. government and the U.S. Army to support the war effort as a site to develop and test chemical agents, weapons, and munitions ... In the early 1990s, in an adjacent Spring Valley neighborhood, the discovery of materials left over from that research and testing resulted in the USACE returning to the area to conduct extensive environmental testing and cleanup operations ... Currently, there are two locations where USACE is conducting remediation efforts.  One is an off-campus residential property and an adjacent lot owned by AU at 4825 and 4835 Glenbrook Road.  The other location is on the south side of campus where the former Public Safety Building once stood ... The former Public Safety Building, which stood on the south side of campus near Fletcher Gate, was demolished in 2017 ... Previous USACE activities in this area confirmed the presence of some AUES related glassware and contaminated soil.  With the building removed from the site, USACE will test the underlying soil, and then proceed to remove and replace it, if necessary.
Dan Nichols, Asst. VP
American University
September 27, 2019

Waiting to look under Public Safety Bldg foundation

Between 2002 and 2006, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers excavated debris from around the former Public Safety Building.  This area is referred to as the former Lot 18 disposal area.  In 2006, the debris from Lot 18 was found extending toward the Public Safety Building ... With work plans in place, excavations around the PSB were conducted from June 2008 to June 2010.  Contaminated soil and some suspected AUES-related glassware, several munition debris items, and one intact munition item were removed from around the building’s foundation ... The Army Corps’ current goal is to ensure that no suspected AUES debris continued under the PSB foundation ... Since AU had separate plans to remove the old building, the Army Corps is taking this opportunity to investigate the soil underneath the former building and remove any contamination encountered ... The team’s efforts to remove the cement foundation slab of the former Public Safety Building, investigate the soils underneath the foundation, and remove any potentially contaminated soils are tentatively scheduled to begin in the fall.  The team began mobilizing this summer for set up and personnel trainings.  The work is anticipated to take 2 - 4 months to complete.
US Army Corps of Engineers
PSB Fact Sheet
September 11, 2019

Public Safety Bldg foundation cross section (pg. 15)

Medical Experts Confirm There's No Safe Level for Perchlorate

EPA [wants] to set a drinking water limit for perchlorate that treats a loss of two IQ points as a "no-effect level."  The Trump EPA is proposing to set the enforceable drinking water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 56 parts per billion (ppb) ... In 2016 NRDC sued EPA to set a health-protective drinking water standard for perchlorate ... Fifty pediatricians and other doctors, health scientists, and environmental advocates joined together to tell EPA Administrator Wheeler that, "The EPA proposal for this widespread and hazardous drinking water contaminant is deeply concerning ... We urge the agency to establish a standard based on the best available science" ... In addition, NRDC submitted lengthy detailed technical-legal comments to EPA letting it know that we are strongly opposed to its proposal ... EPA’s proposal fails to meet the legal requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).  This unlawful proposal should be withdrawn, and without any more delays EPA should set an enforceable drinking water standard of 1 - 2 ppb ... Perchlorate is found in the water at almost 70 percent (248) of military installations that have been tested.
Jennifer Sass
National Resources Defense Council
August 26, 2019

EPA proposes 56 ppb limit for perchlorate (pg. 7)

Extensive research demonstrates that exposure to perchlorate disrupts the thyroid hormone balance, thus posing a risk to the fetus and the young child.  Fetal and childhood exposure to perchlorate can impair cognitive development, which can cause lifelong harmful consequences.  Several states have set legal standards and public-health benchmarks for perchlorate in water.  The most protective regulation is in Massachusetts, which set a legal limit of 2 ppb.  In 2015, California published a public health goal value of 1 ppb for perchlorate in drinking water, which accompanies a legal maximum contaminant level of 6 ppb for perchlorate ... EWG is especially concerned that the EPA is considering withdrawing the agency’s 2011 determination to set a national drinking water standard for perchlorate ... EWG urges the EPA to incorporate into its revised perchlorate standard considerations of a wide variety of neurodevelopmental risks due to perchlorate, such as changes in behavior and learning, motor development and control, and emotions – the type of adverse effects that may be independent of alterations more readily measured by IQ.
Olga V. Naidenko, Ph.D.
Environmental Working Group
August 26, 2019

Groundwater dispute is paused at Tier 2 (pg. 6)

The agency proposes to set a perchlorate MCL at 56 ppb, nearly 4 times what EPA previously said is safe in its previous Lifetime Health Advisory.  The agency further stated that it may set a standard as high as 90 ppb, six times higher than its health advisory, and even proposed the possibility of establishing no standard at all ... Not only is EPA’s proposal a clear threat to the health of millions of people, it is also a manifest violation of the SDWA.  The Act requires EPA to use the “best available peer reviewed science” (SDWA §1412) ... EPA solicited the peer review and advice of the Science Advisory Board (SAB), as required by the SDWA.  But then EPA explicitly decided not to follow some of the most important recommendations of the SAB.  The best available science, as recommended by the SAB, requires consideration of multiple lines of evidence ... EPA should set the MCL Goal at zero based on the extensive evidence of harm at extremely low doses, the lack of a clear threshold for these effects, and the need for an adequate margin of safety to protect the most vulnerable populations, as required by the SDWA.
50 Medical Experts
Letter to EPA
August 26, 2019

EPA's Long-Awaited Perchlorate Standard Will Make You Sick

The Environmental Protection Agency issued a proposed standard to limit perchlorate in drinking water that will gravely threaten public health.  The agency’s plan comes after a decade of delay and a lawsuit by NRDC compelling it to set a standard.  Perchlorate, a toxic chemical that is a component of rocket fuel [and explosives], has been detected in the drinking water systems that serve up to 16.6 millions Americans.  Even at low levels, it can present serious health risks to children and pregnant women.  The following is a statement by Erik Olson, senior director for Health and Food at the Natural Resources Defense Council:

    "... Millions of Americans will be at risk of exposure to dangerous levels of this toxic chemical in their drinking water.  Fetuses and infants are especially vulnerable to harm from perchlorate.  EPA has more than tripled the amount of perchlorate it now recommends allowing in water.  Scientists recommend a limit that is 10 to more than 50 times lower than what the agency is proposing ...”

EPA is proposing a standard of 56 parts per billion [ppb] — more than 3 times its own previous limit of 15 ppb.  State standards based on scientists’ recommendations set the limit dramatically lower — 2 ppb (Massachusetts) and 6 ppb (California).  Perchlorate impairs hormone production critical to brain development.  It has been widely used by the military and defense industries ... It is highly soluble in water, and can move quickly into ground and surface water when it contaminates soil.  The EPA has revised drinking water standards since the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, but this is the first new standard the agency is putting forward for an unregulated contaminant in more than 23 years. 
Anne Hawke
NRDC
May 23, 2019

 EPA's proposed perchorate standard (5/23/19)

Agency Abandons Peer-Review
Process at Behest of Big Water
EPA’s scientists developed a sophisticated model that considers the impact of perchlorate on the development of the fetal brain in the first trimester when the fetus is particularly vulnerable to the chemical’s disruption of the proper function of the maternal thyroid gland ... In April, a consulting firm published a study critiquing EPA’s model.  The authors acknowledged the model as a valuable research tool but did not think it is sufficient to use in regulatory decision-making due to uncertainties. Therefore, the authors concluded that EPA should discard the peer-reviewed model and rely on a 14-year old calculation of a “safe dose” that does not consider the latest scientific evidence and has even greater uncertainties ... In 2016, EPA developed a Biologically-Based Dose Response Model (BBDR) that focused on the third trimester and breast-fed infants.  A peer review panel, convened by the agency, provided positive feedback but challenged the agency to focus on the first trimester when the fetus is most vulnerable to hypothyroxinemia.

In 2017, EPA rose to the challenge and refined the BBDR model for the first trimester after conducting a rigorous review of the science.  It also drew on five distinct children studies showing a quantitative relationship between perchlorate exposure, low [levels of a thyroid hormone known as "free T4" or] fT4 and harm to the developing brain ... In March 2018, the panel gave what amounts to high praise coming from independent scientists convened to be critical of the agency’s work ... The American Water Works Association, a 501c(3) technical and education organization representing drinking water professionals and utilities that would be affected by the rule, funded a consulting firm, Ramboll, to evaluate EPA’s model. 

The authors of the report ... proposed ignoring new, compelling evidence that perchlorate exposure during pregnancy harms the developing brain.  Instead, they called for EPA to use an RfD [reference dose] developed in 2005 that was estimated using a study of healthy non-pregnant adults ... The authors’ conclusion is at direct odds with those made by EPA’s independent peer-review panel through a multi-year transparent public process, which acknowledged the uncertainties but deemed them adequately addressed by the agency’s model.  The recommendations appear to be an unrealistic demand for perfection.  EPA’s model represents the “best-available, peer reviewed science,” which the Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to base its decisions upon ... Therefore, based on our calculations, the RfD should be 0.03 µg/kg-bw/day – about 20 times more protective than the current reference dose.

Tom Neltner

EDF Blog

May 7, 2019 

AWWA groundwater policy statement

Corps Will Update 4-Year-Old Data with New Groundwater Sampling

Brian Barone (Agency Rep - DC Dept. of Energy & Environment ) provided an update on the Dispute Resolution between USACE, DOEE, and Environmental Protection Agency.  DOEE and EPA do not want to rely solely on Land Use Controls (LUCs) as a remedy for the Spring Valley Groundwater issue.  The Dispute Resolution process has paused at Tier 2 while USACE and the Partners discuss potentially conducting additional groundwater data collection.  USACE agreed to move forward with a new round of sampling as a data gap study to identify any areas that may require more information for an assessment of remedial options at the site.  The Groundwater data is now several years old at this point, therefore any decision made on remediation approaches would be based on old data. DOEE wants to see new data ...

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act (CERCLA) site directives state that LUCs should not be the first and only way to remedy a problem.  Other remediation options should be implemented, and there are several different technologies available.  That's why DOEE wants to sample to determine current levels and utilize additional geochemical parameters to help decide on the best remedy ... The plan needs to include a remediation that is known to be effective.  The worst thing to do is spend a lot of money and not conduct the research up-front and have zero result.  At this point, DOEE believes that Institutional LUCs are not enough ...

DOEE may file lawsuit if Dispute Resolution process fails.

Allen Hengst (audience member): Let's say they conduct the additional testing and perchlorate is over EPA's forthcoming new standard, which might very well be lower than 15 parts per billion ... The Army doesn't want to clean it up.  They don't care what the level is, they don't think it needs to be cleaned up.  So, you're headed for Tier 1 and then the lawsuit, I guess.  Because USACE is never going to give in on this.  It's not up to them.  It's up to the Department of Defense and they have perchlorate sites all over the country that they don't want to clean up ... Right now the hazardous locations are based on 15 parts per billion.  If the standard goes down to 10 or 5 or 2 — or like California where it's 1 part per billion — you're going to have a lot more wells that need to be tested ...

Barone: If the first round of sampling is completed and a new standard comes out, another round of sampling can be conducted.  Barone does not believe anyone wants to get to the point where the Partners say, "this is all taken care of," and then a new standard comes out and testing must be resumed ... 

Hengst: EPA is coming out with a new standard and your 15 parts per billion is going to be ancient history.

Greg Beumel (RAB Co-Chair): If it's ancient history, we have two people sitting in the room right now who will then direct us to the new standard, okay? ... The Army Corps cannot conduct a year’s worth of quarterly tests until they start them.
Spring Valley FUDS 
RAB Meeting Minutes 
March 12, 2019 (pgs. 3 - 5)

Army to Mail 'Munition Education' Brochures Across Spring Valley

Ensuring the community remains informed about the past military use of the area encompassed by the Spring Valley Formerly Used Defense Site [FUDS] is part of the overall Site-Wide recommendations developed to reduce risks to members of the community.  That means that in addition to the cleanup activities, like removal of contaminated soils and investigations to find and remove potential buried munitions, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will also promote munition education and awareness in order to further reduce risks in the event a munition item is encountered.  This will be through letters and brochures sent to all residents and institutions within the boundary of the Spring Valley FUDS once a year.  They will include information about the 3Rs (Recognize, Retreat & Report) of explosives safety.
The Corps'pondent
December 2018 (pg. 1)

 Mailings will be sent every spring (RAB #10)

USACE Baltimore will engage with the community and conduct a continuing education program indefinitely ... Mailings will be sent to the community once a year in the spring with information about the boundaries of the FUDS, the potential possibility that a munition could be encountered, and instruction on what to do if a munition is found.  The Department of Defense 3Rs explosive safety brochure has been customized for the Spring Valley site to include site-specific background information and photos of munitions found in Spring Valley from the WWI era ... The draft mailing documents have been reviewed by DOEE and EPA; no comments were submitted by the regulators.  [Project Mgr. Dan] Noble invited the RAB to review the two draft mailing documents and submit comments by the next RAB meeting in early March. 

 Draft Spring Valley brochure

USACE expects to address any comments and send out the first mailing at the end of March ... USACE must then inform and remind the public that the residual risk of finding munitions is an ongoing possibility in the area and what to do if a munition is found ... Noble explained that over the years there have been instances of what is termed "Amnesty Rounds," munitions that people have found, picked up, moved, and left in an obvious place for someone to find, instead of contacting 911.  Sometimes the munitions have been anonymously brought directly to USACE.  Munitions have been left at the USACE gate at the Federal Property; one was left out on the sidewalk on Nebraska Avenue alongside the AU Campus.  Finding a munition can happen anywhere.
Spring Valley FUDS 
RAB Meeting Minutes 
January 8, 2019 (pgs. 9 -11)   

Partners Begin 'Dispute Resolution' to Resolve Groundwater Impasse

Todd Beckwith [USACE Baltimore] said potential unacceptable risk for future receptors would occur if groundwater is used as a drinking water source in the future within Exposure Unit 2 — the area next to [American University’s] Kreeger Hall and adjacent to the Glenbrook Road disposal areas.  The main contaminants of concern are perchlorate and arsenic ... Steve Hirsh [EPA Region III] and Kathy Davis [EPA geologist] explained that EPA would have been okay with anything other than “No Action” or “Land Use Controls" ...  EPA would prefer to see the groundwater cleaned up, so the groundwater could be used as a potential drinking water source in the future ... Based on the Groundwater Feasibility Study, the Army Corps selected LUC/LTM  [Land Use Control/Long Term Monitoring] as the preferred alternative.  The preferred alternative is identified in the current Groundwater Proposed Plan (PP) ... Physical construction of treatment systems would be very challenging in this residential/campus neighborhood.  American University has gone on record that AU is opposed to the installation of treatment systems on AU property …

Thomas Smith [community member]: Can you explain why AU would not want the installation of treatment systems?  Is it because it is too big, or what?  It takes up too much space, or what is the issue?

Beckwith explained that AU stated that AU did not have the space and had other plans for AU property ...

Mary Bresnahan [community member]: Yes, that is what I thought.  If it is coming from their property, they should be willing to help out ... They do not want to take any responsibility at all?  That is what it sounds like …

Groundwater Feasibility Study alternatives

Mary Douglas [community member]:  Is there any provision for adjusting this remedy if EPA lowers the perchlorate standards?

Beckwith explained that contingency would be a factor USACE would have to consider.  He asked Steve Hirsh to share the status of establishing the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for perchlorate.  Hirsh explained that EPA is under a court order to establish an MCL for perchlorate.  He had no information on what the perchlorate MCL might be; the level might be below or above 15 ppb ...
 
Allen Hengst [audience member]: The problem is that under the court order which Steve just mentioned, EPA is supposed to come out with the new standard by December 2019.  That is when you are still going to be in the area, that is when you are still going to be working with groundwater … [The MCL] is probably going to go down, it is not going to go up … In Massachusetts it is 2 ppb and in California it is 1 ppb.  [In Spring Valley] you are talking about 15 ppb.

3-Tier dispute resolution process

Beckwith: After receipt of the draft final Groundwater PP, DOEE [DC Dept. of Energy & Environment] submitted a formal request for dispute resolution under the Department of Defense (DoD)/District Memorandum of Agreement (DDMOA), … which includes provisions for a three-tier dispute resolution process: Tier 1 — Baltimore District Commander, Deputy Director DOEE; Tier 2 — Headquarters-USACE Environmental Division Chief, Director DOEE; and Tier 3 — Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environment, Safety & Occupational Health, DC Mayor.  The Tier 1 meeting [was] held on November 5: USACE/DOEE reiterated their positions on this issue; DOEE offered an alternative to collect more data for current conditions or proceed to Tier 2 ...

John Wheeler [community member]: What happens if there is no resolution in Tier 3?

Beckwith explained that no resolution in Tier 3 is a possibility.  DOEE is prepared to take legal action and may file a lawsuit.
Spring Valley FUDS
RAB Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2018 (pg. 14 - 22)