CQR Drinking Water Safety - Goucher College

Drinking Water SafetyCan the nation’s aging water infrastructure be fixed?

While water-quality experts deem most of the

nation’s drinking water safe, the recent crisis

over lead-tainted water in Flint, Mich.,

dramatized the problems that plague com-

munities nationwide: Lead and other toxic substances continue to

pose a threat, and government agencies responsible for monitoring

water safety sometimes fail to protect the public. Investigations

conducted since the Flint crisis came to light last year have found

that thousands of water systems nationwide have failed to meet

federal safety standards for lead and other harmful substances.

Moreover, environmentalists warn that tens of thousands of indus-

trial pollutants and pharmaceutical compounds slip through water-

treatment systems without being tested or regulated. The Environ-

mental Protection Agency sets water-safety standards, but the

sourcing, treatment and distribution of water is left to local utilities,

some dealing with polluted water sources, old pipes or shrinking

budgets. Cost estimates to fix the aging U.S. water infrastructure

include $30 billion to replace lead pipes and $1 trillion to upgrade

water mains.

Demonstrators march for clean water in Flint, Mich.,on Feb. 19, 2016. After learning the city’s watercontained dangerous lead levels, local officials waited seven months to tell the public. Lead-

contaminated water has been found in thousands of communities throughout the country.

CQ Researcher • July 15, 2016 • www.cqresearcher.comVolume 26, Number 25 • Pages 577-600

RECIPIENT OF SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AWARD FOR

EXCELLENCE � AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL AWARD

I

N

S

I

D

E

THE ISSUES ....................579

BACKGROUND ................586

CHRONOLOGY ................587

CURRENT SITUATION ........590

AT ISSUE........................593

OUTLOOK ......................595

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................598

THE NEXT STEP ..............599

THISREPORT

Published by CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. www.cqresearcher.com

578 CQ Researcher

THE ISSUES

579 • Is America’s drinking watersafe?• Should the federal govern-ment help localities upgradetheir water infrastructure?• Is the Safe Drinking WaterAct effective at protecting thepublic?

BACKGROUND

586 Public WaterworksAncient Rome’s water systemset a precedent for publicdrinking water.

586 Protecting WaterAs cities became crowded,waste and water oftencomingled.

586 Lead Pipes and HealthDespite concerns, lead waslong preferred for water pipes.

588 Water Safety LawsLaws passed in the 1970sregulated chemicals found indrinking water.

CURRENT SITUATION

590 Flint FalloutDespite assurances that Flint’swater is safe, residents con-tinue to report health effects.

592 Legal ActionsSeveral lawsuits have beenfiled to try to force drinking-water improvements.

594 Congressional ActionA new law strengthens theEnvironmental ProtectionAgency’s authority.

OUTLOOK

595 Water and PoliticsThe presidential electioncould reshape U.S. drinkingwater policy.

SIDEBARS AND GRAPHICS

580 Water Infrastructure CostsHighest in SouthThe South needs the largestinvestment to upgrade itswater mains.

581 How Lead Gets IntoDrinking WaterIn older houses, corrosion inlead pipes causes lead toleach into water.

584 Child Lead-Poisoning RatePlummetsThe percentage of youngchildren with lead poisoninghas fallen steeply in recentyears.

587 ChronologyKey events since 1801.

588 Lead’s Childhood Legacy:A Lifetime of Problems“The kids will not be assmart and will make lessmoney in their working life.”

590 Thousands of Cities FaceWater-Quality ProblemsPoor communities with slimbudgets are hardest hit.

593 At Issue:Is the federal governmentdoing enough to keep America’s drinking water safe?

FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

597 For More InformationOrganizations to contact.

598 BibliographySelected sources used.

599 The Next StepAdditional articles.

599 Citing CQ ResearcherSample bibliography formats.

DRINKING WATER SAFETY

Cover: Getty Images/Bill Pugliano

EXECUTIVE EDITOR: Thomas J. [email protected]

ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITORS: Kenneth Fireman, [email protected],Kathy Koch, [email protected],

Chuck McCutcheon,[email protected],

Scott Rohrer, [email protected]

SENIOR CONTRIBUTING EDITOR:Thomas J. Colin

[email protected]

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Brian Beary, Marcia Clemmitt, Sarah Glazer, Kenneth Jost,Reed Karaim, Peter Katel, Barbara Mantel,

Tom Price

SENIOR PROJECT EDITOR: Olu B. Davis

FACT CHECKERS: Eva P. Dasher, Michelle Harris, Nancie Majkowski,

Robin Palmer

An Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc.

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,GLOBAL LEARNING RESOURCES:

Karen Phillips

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ONLINE LIBRARY AND REFERENCE PUBLISHING:

Todd Baldwin

Copyright © 2016 CQ Press, an Imprint of SAGE Pub-

lications, Inc. SAGE reserves all copyright and other

rights herein, unless pre vi ous ly spec i fied in writing.

No part of this publication may be reproduced

electronically or otherwise, without prior written

permission. Un au tho rized re pro duc tion or trans mis -

sion of SAGE copy right ed material is a violation of

federal law car ry ing civil fines of up to $100,000.

CQ Press is a registered trademark of Congressional

Quarterly Inc.

CQ Researcher (ISSN 1056-2036) is printed on acid-free

paper. Pub lished weekly, except: (March wk. 4) (May

wk. 4) (July wks. 1, 2) (Aug. wks. 2, 3) (Nov. wk. 4)

and (Dec. wks. 3, 4). Published by SAGE Publications,

Inc., 2455 Teller Rd., Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Annual

full-service subscriptions start at $1,131. For pricing,

call 1-800-818-7243. To purchase a CQ Researcher report

in print or electronic format (PDF), visit www.cqpress.

com or call 866-427-7737. Single reports start at $15.

Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing

are also available. Periodicals postage paid at Thousand

Oaks, California, and at additional mailing offices. POST -

MAS TER: Send ad dress chang es to CQ Re search er, 2600

Virginia Ave., N.W., Suite 600, Wash ing ton, DC 20037.

July 15, 2016Volume 26, Number 25

July 15, 2016 579www.cqresearcher.com

Drinking Water Safety

THE ISSUESBy the time officials in

Flint, Mich., warnedresidents last October

to stop drinking city waterbecause of dangerous leadcontamination, it was too late:The lead levels in children’sblood had already spiked toharmful levels. 1

The Centers for Disease Con-trol and Prevention (CDC) foundthat the risk of excessive bloodlead levels among Flint childrenunder age 6 had risen 50 percentduring the months the city usedimproperly treated Flint Riverwater for drinking. 2

Young children are partic-ularly sensitive to lead exposure:Even small doses can lower IQand cause lifelong learning dis-abilities, attention disorders andviolent behavior. 3 (See sidebar,p. 588.)Flint’s water contamination likely

had begun 18 months before residentswere notified by local officials, whohad learned of the problem in Februarybut waited seven months to tell thepublic. 4 The problem developed afterthe city, to save money, stopped buyingtreated water from Detroit and begandrawing water from the polluted FlintRiver. To kill bacteria, Flint had to treatthe river water with more chlorine thanusual, which corroded the lead pipes.Three officials — two from the stateand one from the city — have beencharged with evidence tampering con-cerning the reporting of Flint’s leadlevels to the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA). 5

The Flint crisis prompted reporters,watchdog organizations and public of-ficials to analyze the effectiveness ofcity, state and federal management ofa key public safety sector. But thewater-safety situation in other cities is

even worse than in Flint, according totwo recent investigations. USA Todayand the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil (NRDC), an environmental ad-vocacy group, found in separate ex-aminations that between 2,000 and5,000 water systems nationwide —serving up to 18 million people —have failed to meet federal lead safetystandards. 6

“There’s no question we have chal-lenges with lead in drinking wateracross the country [involving] millionsof lead service lines in thousands ofsystems,” said Joel Beauvais, deputyassistant administrator for the EPA’s Of-fice of Water. 7

And lead contamination is not theonly threat to America’s drinking water.Thousands of industrial pollutants andpharmaceutical compounds slipthrough municipal water treatment, hav-ing never been tested or regulated bythe EPA. And, while the agency sets

federal water safety standards,the sourcing, treatment anddistribution of water is leftto thousands of local utilities,many of which are dealingwith polluted water sources,aging pipes or shrinking bud-gets. As the Flint crisis re-vealed, economic distress andpoor regulatory oversight canendanger the quality of drink-ing water in many cities.“Maintenance is a chronic

problem for public water util-ities,” says Leonard Gilroy, di-rector of government reformat the Reason Foundation, afree-market think tank in LosAngeles. “And with govern-ment ownership, the processis politicized. There’s incen-tive to keep rates low, whilethe investment needs con-tinue to stack up.”What happened in Flint

was “so preventable,” saysJeffrey Griffiths, a professor

of public health at Tufts University andformer chair of the EPA’s DrinkingWater Committee. He assigns “99.5 per-cent of the blame to the people whodecided to use river water and decidednot to use [proper] corrosion control— and lied to the EPA about it.”To keep America’s drinking water

safe, says Howard Neukrug, who servedas CEO of Philadelphia’s water utilityfor 37 years, infrastructure must be up-graded, creative and efficient treatmentsystems must be established, and sci-entific research on the health effectsof toxic chemicals in drinking watermust be beefed up.Many older cities still use lead-containing

water pipes because a 1986 ban onleaded water pipes applied only tonew construction. Water is lead-freewhen it leaves municipal treatmentplants, which filter and disinfect water,but lead can leach into the water fromlead service lines — pipes that connect

BY JILL U. ADAMS

Get

ty Im

ages

/Aar

on P

. Ber

nste

in

A sign warns bathers about algae infestation at MaumeeBay State Park in Ohio on Aug. 4, 2014. In nearby

Toledo, excessive algae in Lake Erie, caused by fertilizerrunoff, forced a temporary ban on drinking water. Drinkingwater contaminants include industrial and pharmaceutical

chemicals as well as lead and other toxins.

580 CQ Researcher

water mains to individual houses — orsometimes through a building’s plumbing.Lead is more likely to leach if pipesare corroded.While water officials usually know

when they have some lead pipes intheir systems, they rarely know exactlywhere the pipes are. Nor do they knowhow many: Estimates of the number oflead service lines nationwide range from3 million to 10 million. The AmericanWater Works Association, a Denver-based organization representing waterutility professionals, estimates there are6.1 million, but that is not based on“a hard inventory,” said the association’sdirector for government affairs, TracyMehan. Using an estimate of $5,000each, the association said replacementwould cost $30 billion. 8

To control corrosion, water treatmentplants add orthophosphate, a chemicalthat coats the inside of the pipes andprevents leaching. “Corrosion controlworks, but it’s not perfect,” says MaeWu, a senior NRDC attorney. “As longas there are lead service lines, leadwill continue to be a problem.”

When corrosion control doesn’twork, service lines must be replaced,with the cost typically shared withhomeowners. Some communities, suchas Madison, Wis., have found creativeways to pay for replacing pipes. (Seesidebar, p. 590.) But most cities mustraise water rates, borrow from the stateor partner with a private company.When cities partner with a private

firm, the company invests in new infra-structure in exchange for the right torun the system and collect the fees. Pri-vatization agreements can be an eco-nomic boon for a struggling municipality,especially if the company pays off thecity’s debt, but leasing a critical publicsafety utility such as water treatment toa profit-based system is controversial. 9

Besides lead, other problems plaguethe nation’s 54,000 community drinkingwater systems. As pipes age, their failurerates rise. About 650 water mains —the large pipes that run under citystreets — break down each day, andutilities must replace 4,000 to 5,000miles of mains per year. The AmericanSociety of Civil Engineers in 2013 gave

America’s drinking water infrastructurea grade of D+ and estimated it wouldcost $1 trillion over the next 25 yearsto replace leaking pipes and keep upwith growth. 10 (See graph, left.)In addition, utilities deal with other

contaminants besides lead. Last December,Hoosick Falls, N.Y., warned residents notto drink tap water due to dangerouslevels of the industrial pollutant perfluo-rooctanoic acid, a manmade chemicalused in nonstick cookware and stain-resistant carpeting. 11 And in 2014, res-idents in Charleston, W. Va., and Toledo,Ohio, were told not to drink city water.In Charleston a chemical storage tankhad leaked a coal-washing chemical, 4-methylcyclohexane methanol, into the ElkRiver, the city’s water source. 12 In Toledothe culprit was a bacterial toxin, micro-cystin, created from excessive algae inLake Erie, caused by farmland fertilizerthat washed into the lake. 13

Moreover, in regions near oil andgas drilling operations, some residentshave complained of drinking water con-taminated by hydraulic fracturing, orfracking, in which oil and natural gasare extracted from underground shaleby pumping chemically treated waterinto the rock formations under highpressure. An EPA study in 2015 con-cluded that the problem is not systemicor widespread. 14 However, a panelof scientists recommended that the EPAreview its findings. 15

Many water treatment plants are notequipped to remove certain pollutantsor toxins, and many chemicals foundin drinking water are not regulated.The toxins detected in Hoosick Fallsand Toledo are unregulated but arecandidates for EPA evaluation for po-tential health effects. The chemical inCharleston is neither regulated nor listedas a potential contaminant.Under the Safe Drinking Water Act

of 1974, the primary federal law gov-erning the quality of the nation’s drink-ing water, the EPA regulates a set of“actionable contaminants,” includinglead, arsenic, the herbicides atrazine


Water Infrastructure Costs Highest in SouthThe South needs the largest investment — $507 billion — to upgrade its water mains, followed by the West, at $237 billion, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. Most of the projected costs in those two regions stem from population growth. Cost increases projected in the Midwest and Northeast stem mostly from the need to replace aging pipes.

Source: “2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,” American Society of Civil Engineers, http://tinyurl.com/jpf9e5s

Cost of Updating Water Mains,by Region, 2011-35

$109 billion

0100200300400500

$600

WestSouth Midwest Northeast

(in $ billions)

New GrowthReplacement

$172 billion

$507 billion

$237 billion


and glyphosate (used in Roundup weedkiller) and the microbial pathogensLegionella and giardia. 16 Under thelaw, the EPA also maintains a list ofas-yet unregulated substances, knownas contaminants “of concern” — chem-icals or toxins found in rivers and lakesthat are candidates for EPA analysis todetermine unsafe levels. 17

Suspected contaminants can beadded to the list, but too often regu-lators don’t have enough data to act,says Rebecca Klaper, an expert onemerging water contaminants at theUniversity of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.Plus, the EPA review process can takedecades to complete, while Americanindustry is creating and using newchemicals at a rapid clip. Regulatorshave detected widely used pharma-ceuticals, pesticides and flame retardantsat low levels in many rivers and lakes,says Klaper, but water or wastewatertreatment systems fail to capture manyof these “emerging” contaminants.“We need more resources in order

to determine the long-term impacts ofexposure to small concentrations ofchemicals,” Klaper says. But “there’sno funding for this.”Over the past decade, Congress has

cut the EPA’s Office of Ground Waterand Drinking Water budget by 15 percentand its staff by 10 percent, diminishingits ability to regulate, monitor and enforcedrinking water regulations, critics say. 18

Further, the Safe Drinking Water Act isnot the only law governing pollutantsthat could end up in drinking water. 19

The others are:• The Clean Water Act of 1972 au-

thorizes setting quality standards forlakes and rivers (called “surface wa-ters”), including those used for drinkingwater, and allows states to prevent fac-tory or farm pollution from being dis-charged into those waters. 20

• The Toxic Substances Control Act(TSCA) governs the production, useand disposal — potentially into watersused for drinking water — of industrialchemicals.

In a rare bipartisan move in a peren-nially gridlocked Congress, lawmakersin June adopted the first major overhaulof the TSCA since its enactment 40years ago. 21

Some clean-water advocates alsowant tougher penalties for those whopollute “source water” — any waterthat flows into a drinking water treat-ment plant. “You and I are paying toget stuff out of the water that someoneelse puts in,” says the NRDC’s Wu.As cities, residents, environmentalists,

industry officials and lawmakers debatewhat to do about the nation’s agingwater systems, here are some of thequestions they are asking:

Is America’s drinking water safe?Overall, Americans enjoy some of the

world’s cleanest, safest tap water, saysNeukrug, the former Philadelphia WaterCEO who is a senior fellow at the U.S.Water Alliance, a nonprofit organization

that promotes sustainable water policy.Nevertheless, every year, unsafe water isfound across the country.“By and large, Americans drink safe

water, in that it doesn’t make themsick,” says Tuft’s Griffiths. “That doesn’tmean there are not threats.”In addition to the USA Today and

NRDC findings that thousands of watersystems have violated federal lead stan-dards, a recent review of EPA enforce-ment actions by University of Alabamalaw professor William Andreen discoveredthat in 2013 some 10,000 community-level water systems had at least one sig-nificant violation of federal drinking waterregulations. One-fourth of those violationsinvolved health-based standards, whilethe rest were monitoring and reportingviolations, says Andreen, a former EPAin-house counsel. About 5,000 water sys-tems had been flagged as priorities forenforcement because of serious or re-peated violations, Andreen adds.

* Ownership of service lines varies across water systems.

Source: Clean Water Action, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hvjf2la

How Lead Gets Into Drinking WaterDrinking water in homes with old water pipes is more likely to contain lead than water in newer homes with lead-free pipes. When drinking water leaves municipal treatment plants, it is lead-free. But it can be contaminated with lead when corrosion-control measures fail to keep lead pipes from leaching lead into drinking water.

582 CQ Researcher

“It’s just a snapshot, from 2013,” butit highlights the scope of the problem,he says.Under the Safe Drinking Water Act,

threats to water are managed in threeplaces: at the source of the water, inthe water treatment plant and in theunderground water distribution system.The law requires states to identify therisk of contamination from water sources— such as reservoirs, rivers or mountain

snowmelt. Yet, many communitiesstruggle to control contamination intheir source waters. In fact, tributariesor wetlands not covered by clean-water laws serve up to one-third ofAmericans. 22

The Obama administration soughtto address these gaps in 2015 by issuingthe Clean Water Rule, expanding thedefinition of rivers and wetlands coveredby the Clean Water Act. Advocates saythe protections were overdue becauseprevious interpretations of protectedwaters were far too narrow. “We areenormously grateful for the administra-

tion’s work to develop and defend theClean Water Rule from attacks that wouldweaken safeguards for clean water,” saidNRDC Director Rhea Suh. 23

But opponents, including farmersand manufacturers, say the rule repre-sents government overreach and thatregulations should not cover small wet-lands and streams on private property.“We all want clean water,” said Sen.Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. “This rule is not

about clean water. Rather, it is abouthow much authority the federal gov-ernment and unelected bureaucratsshould have to regulate what is doneon private land.” 24

But environmentalists say the ruledoesn’t deal with one of the biggestwater quality problems: unregulated con-taminants. “There’s a slew of chemicalspresent in the water,” such as pesticidesand pharmaceuticals, Griffiths says, thatmay well be in trace amounts but maystill have human health effects.The U.S. regulatory system works in

a reactionary, after-the-fact way, Griffiths

says. “Unless we have evidence of harm,[new chemicals] are OK,” he says. Inother words, a contaminant that harmshuman health could get into drinkingwater and not be identified or manageduntil government scientists deem the sub-stance harmful. In contrast, he says, Europeancountries operate under the “precautionaryprinciple,” in which industry scientists,rather than the government, must provethat a new chemical is safe before itenters the marketplace. 25

As a result, Griffiths says, “water treatmentin America doesn’t protect against the newstuff that might get into water.” And mostwater treatment uses century-old technolo-gies: filtration and disinfection.In addition, water treatment pro-

duces its own contaminants. Chlorineor similar disinfectant compounds, whilecheap and efficient, also are “associatedwith a small risk of [bladder] cancer,”Griffiths says. Water treatment likelycontributes to a few thousand of the30,000-50,000 cases of bladder cancereach year, but it also protects millionsof people from bacterial pathogens,he says. “These are the trade-offs.”Yet no one has analyzed the risks

and benefits of many new, unregulatedchemicals, says the University of Wis-consin’s Klaper.Bacteria pose another danger. Water

can pick up bacteria or other conta-minants as they pass through the dis-tribution pipes. “A lot of water pipesare laid next to sewer pipes,” says theNRDC’s Wu. If pipes are leaking, bac-terial contamination can enter the cleanwater supply, she says.

Should the federal governmenthelp localities upgrade theirwater infrastructure?Upgrading the nation’s water systems

— a largely underground infrastructurethat is out of sight and sometimes outof mind — is an enormous and under-appreciated task, said Janet Kavinoky,executive director of transportation andinfrastructure at the U.S. Chamber ofCommerce.


A physician draws a child’s blood to test for excessive lead levels in Flint, Mich.,on Jan. 26, 2016. The risk of lead poisoning among Flint children under age 6rose 50 percent during the months the city used improperly treated Flint Riverwater for drinking. In young children, even low exposure to lead can lower IQs

and cause learning disabilities, attention disorders or violent behavior.

Get

ty Im

ages

/Bre

tt C

arls

en


“People think water should be free,”she said. “My response is that, if you’rein Washington, D.C., you can go downto the Potomac with your bucket, carrythe water home, treat it, and whenyou’re done figure out a way to disposeof it. It’s hard to convince people thatthese things cost money, which is whyit’s hard to get investment in water in-frastructure.” 26

Many cities do not have the moneyto fix their crumbling water distributionsystems. Yet, as the Flint situation shows,skimping on utility costs can be dis-astrous. A cost-conscious decision“caused millions of dollars [worth] ofproblems, including health problems,”says Tufts professor Griffiths.But what if a municipality can’t

pay for needed improvements? asksLynn Broaddus, a nonresident seniorfellow at the Brookings Institution, acentrist think tank in Washington.When a town’s population drops, asin Flint, so do city tax revenues. Then“it becomes a social justice issue,”she says.For instance, small water utilities —

those with fewer than 3,300 customers— that cannot afford upgrades are fre-quently cited for violations. “They can’tafford the fix,” says the University ofAlabama’s Andreen, and then “theycan’t afford the penalty.”And the cost of water treatment varies

by community. Some places, such asLos Angeles and San Francisco, getmuch of their water from national parksin the Sierra Nevada Mountains. 27 “It’slow-cost water with no industry aroundit,” says Griffiths, so it doesn’t needmuch treatment. “One could say they’restealing it from the public.”Other communities, such as Orange

County, Calif., and desert communitiesin the Southwest, recycle their sewerwater. 28 And some customers are pay-ing more for intensive water treatment.Water bills in Washington, D.C., havedoubled in the past 10 years becausetreating the polluted Potomac Riverwater requires more treatment than in

cities that get water from a protectedreservoir, says the NRDC’s Wu.The federal government has helped

finance water infrastructure in the past,notes Neukrug, of the U.S. Water Al-liance. Construction grants for sewagetreatment plants and other infrastructureinitially were made available under the1972 Clean Water Act. “It changed thegame and it made our rivers and streamsmuch cleaner,” he says. “Now that fund-ing is gone.”The federal government maintains a

loan program, called the Drinking WaterState Revolving Fund, for states to pro-vide loans to cities needing to upgradewater systems. But many experts feelthe program is underfunded.“Typically, the federal government

appropriates $800 million to $850 millionper year,” Andreen says. In 2009, thatamount was bumped up to $2 billionas part of President Obama’s economicstimulus package, adopted in responseto the recession that began in 2007.“That was probably a very wise ex-penditure, but it didn’t continue at thatlevel,” he says.Over the past two decades, $20 bil-

lion has gone into the state revolvingfunds — one-fifth of the estimated$1 trillion experts say is needed formaintenance and upgrades of drinkingwater infrastructure. But the amountthe federal government spends on masstransit and roads dwarfs spending onwater utilities. Of 2014 federal infra-structure spending, 48 percent wentto highways and 16 percent to masstransit and rails, but only 5 percent towater utilities, according the Congres-sional Budget Office. 29

The NRDC’s Wu argues that fundinginfrastructure projects not only preventscrises but also creates jobs, a key goalof Obama’s stimulus package. However,not everyone agrees federal fundingis a good idea.“The federal government does a lousy

job of funding local issues,” says ChrisEdwards, director of tax policy studiesat the Cato Institute, a libertarian think

tank that advocates less regulation. In-stead, he says, “state and local govern-ments can issue debt. It’s the best wayto fund long-term investments such asinfrastructure.”A water infrastructure financing port-

folio should include raising water rates,writes Gregory Baird, an infrastructureasset management expert. “Everyonedislikes the need for higher rates, butthere are things that are feared morethan a rate battle — sinkholes and theloss of water services, contaminationand public health issues, unplannedrate shocks and moratoriums on growthand development.” 30

“Rate payers have the primary re-sponsibility and bear most of the cost,”says Mehan, of the American WaterWorks Association. “Our rates [for drink-ing water] are half those in NorthernEurope and far less than typical cell-phone data plans, cable television orelectric bills.” Moreover, he says, “Thefederal government has its own fiscalissues. Its ability is limited.”Public-private partnerships are an-

other option. “This has been done forhighways, such as the Capital Beltwayin Virginia,” Edwards says. “A companyadded four lanes for a 15-mile stretchand gets to collect the tolls for a setperiod of time. Anything with a usercharge can be privatized — or madehalf private. A local government mightneed $1 billion to upgrade. A privatecompany funds this and gets a 50-year lease on the system. They get areturn from rate-payers over time.”About 2,000 municipalities have

entered public-private partnerships toupgrade their water systems. 31 Critics,such as Food and Water Watch, an or-ganization that promotes safe and sus-tainable food and water supplies, sayprivate partners will not put publichealth and safety above profit. Indeed,the group found that between 2007and 2011, about 16 percent of privatelyheld water systems reverted to publicownership, with quality a top complaint.And rates typically rise with privatiza-

584 CQ Researcher

tion, which can reflect truer marketvalue but can also have a dispropor-tionately negative effect on low-incomecustomers. 32

Edwards argues that when a re-source is provided too cheaply, itleads to wastefulness: People usemore than they need and don’t botherinvesting in the resource’s future.“Water should be in the marketplaceat market price,” he says. “It ensuresefficiency.”As for Mehan’s comparison of water

privatization to highways or cable TV,safe drinking water seems different,say advocates such as Public Citizen,because society considers it a need —a basic human right. 33

But Edwards says that for low-incomefamilies who cannot afford higher waterrates, “it’s better to give them cash,through the Earned Income Tax Credit,for instance. But don’t distort the watermarket.”

Does the Safe Drinking Water Acteffectively protect the public?The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act

authorized the EPA to establish qualitystandards for clean drinking water andensure that local utilities’ disinfection andfiltering methods met those standards.Neukrug, the former Philadelphia

Water CEO, says the act and the CleanWater Act “are 1970s designs [that] didan incredible job.” But today’s water en-vironment “needs new rules,” he says.Congress has amended the Safe

Drinking Water Act twice. In 1986, itbanned the use of lead in water pipesand fittings in new houses and build-ings. In 1996, lawmakers expanded theEPA’s regulatory responsibilities to in-clude protecting the quality of entirewater systems, including rivers andlakes, that supply drinking water. Theamendments also required utilities tobetter inform customers about problemsand established the “contaminant can-

didate” list, or “chemicals of concern”found in water that may need to beregulated. 34

Environmentalists say these amend-ments, while good, are not enough.What’s more, they say, enforcement isslow or sometimes weak.For example, progress in identifying

dangerous new chemicals has been slow,critics say. Five years ago, for example,the EPA determined that perchlorate,used in rocket propellants, fireworksand matches, “has an adverse healthimpact, especially in fetuses, and thatmillions of Americans are exposed toit,” NRDC’s Wu says. EPA officials “haven’tproposed a standard yet. They’ve blownthrough their deadline. And that’s justone chemical.”Despite having promised to publish

a proposed rule on perchlorate in2013, the agency is seeking scientificexperts to convene a panel to deter-mine at what level perchlorate shouldbe regulated. 35

“There are 85,000 chemicals in usein the U.S., many of them in high vol-ume,” says Laura Orlando, executivedirector of the Resource Institute forLow Entropy Systems, a nonprofit inBoston that advocates for sustainableprotection of public health and theenvironment. “How do we addressthat?” she asks. “Are they in sourcewater? How much can we demand ofindustry to stop using them? These arepolitical questions.”Given all the new chemicals intro-

duced since the Safe Drinking WaterAct was written, or even since it waslast amended, the law’s “framework isnot protective,” she says.For instance, she says, under the act,

the EPA in 1991 established the Leadand Copper Rule, which required utilitiesto test for those metals in tap water. Iflevels exceeded maximum standards,utilities were required to fix the problem.However, NRDC researchers recentlyfound that 5,000 water systems had vi-olations or enforcement actions relatedto the rule, including poor testing meth-


Child Lead-Poisoning Rate PlummetsThe percentage of children, ages 1 through 5, with lead poisoning has fallen steeply in recent years, from nearly 8 percent in 1997 to 0.5 percent in 2014, the most recent year for which data are available. A child with at least 10 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood is considered to have lead poisoning, which can lower IQs and cause attention disorders, violent or other antisocial behavior or delinquency.

Sources: “Lead: Standard Surveillance Definitions and Classifications,” Centers for Disease Control and Preven-tion, http://tinyurl.com/hsfwesd

Percentage of Children With Lead Poisoning,and Numbers of Children Tested,

1997-2014

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8%

2014201320122011201020092008200720062005200420032002200120001999199819970

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

201420132012201120102009200820072006200520042003200220012000199919981997

Number testedPercent confirmed

No. of Children Tested (in millions)

% of Children confirmed


ods, failure to report contamination andinappropriate corrosion control. AndFlint was not on the list of violators:Michigan state officials had not officiallyreported the too-high lead contaminationto the EPA. 36

Moreover, newspaper investigationshave found many cities test for leadusing procedures that do not detectproblems. In Chicago, for instance, tapwater testing is often done in the homesof the water utility staff and rarely inareas where recent water main work,known to increase the risk of leadcontamination, has occurred. 37

Such practices worry public healthadvocates. “Often, utilities test the samehomes over and over,” says Tom Neltner,director of Environmental Defense Fund(EDF) chemicals policies. “If you don’tknow where your lead service linesare, you could be testing in the wronghouses.”Chicago’s water utility said the pro-

cedures comply with EPA regulationsand that the utility’s management ofthe city’s pipes is above reproach.Testing staff homes allows consistencyin monitoring lead contamination, thedepartment said, adding, “Chicago’scorrosion control has been so suc-cessful that the U.S. EPA has placedthe city on a reduced monitoringprogram.” 38

An investigation by the British news-paper The Guardian found that someU.S. cities, such as Detroit and Philadel-phia, frequently use testing methodsthat underestimate the extent of leadcontamination. 39

Tufts’ Griffiths says that under theSafe Drinking Water Act’s framework,the federal government sets drinkingwater standards but state governmentsusually have oversight. “The state makesofficial reports about this stuff,” he says.“The EPA gets access [to reports] butcannot do anything without an invi-tation from the state,” unless egregiousviolations occur, such as in Flint.The University of Alabama’s Andreen

complains that “federal enforcement is

not exercised very often.” Even whena literal reading of the safe water actseems to provide a means for the EPAto swoop in when violations are sus-tained or serious, he says, the currentpractice is far more deferential to states’primacy. “I think the EPA should bethe gorilla in the closet that helps statesbe on their toes.”Some have suggested that rather

than amending the act, updating theLead and Copper Rule could fix thelead problem. In 2015 an EPA advisorygroup recommended amending therule to make replacement of lead ser-vice lines a priority over continuingto manage lead levels through corro-sion control.In most cities, “we only replace lead

service lines when something else fails,”says Neltner, who served on the ad-visory group. Thus, when a water mainbreaks, utilities might take advantageof a dug-up street to replace adjacentlead service lines. But the workinggroup found that approach unaccept-able because systems fail unpredictably.“Removing them is worth doing,” Nelt-ner says. “Not just in emergency situ-ations. It’s a long-term view.”

But critics say if the EPA were to pri-oritize replacement over corrosion control,it would be prohibitively expensive forsome local governments. “It’s appropriatefor the federal government to set stan-dards, as long as their doing so doesn’tend up being an unfunded mandate,”says Adrian Moore, vice president ofpolicy at the free-market Reason Foun-dation think tank.The EPA is not bound to follow the

advisory group’s advice, but its recom-mendations have been endorsed by manywater-related groups and associations,such as the American Water Works As-sociation, the largest organization of waterutilities and water professionals.Tuft’s Griffiths would like to see

utilities improve their treatment process-es. “If I were the czar, I would dowater treatment more comprehensively”by requiring activated charcoal and re-verse osmosis, he says. Charcoal “ab-sorbs trace chemicals and is not thatexpensive,” he says, while reverse os-mosis involves “a membrane filter thatcomplex chemicals and metals don’tget through.” But reverse osmosis is“expensive because it’s energy intense,”he says.

A geyser erupts from a broken water main in Los Angeles on July 29, 2014. The costs of upgrading the nation’s aging water-distribution system include

$30 billion to replace all lead service lines, $500 billion to repair leaking watermains and another $500 billion to meet growth demands over the next 25 years.

Get

ty Im

ages

/Los Angeles Times

/Jay

L. C

lend

enin

586 CQ Researcher


BACKGROUNDPublic Waterworks

In 312 B.C., Rome built the first stoneaqueduct to carry large volumes ofclean water to the city’s bathhouses. Overthe next 500 years, at least 10 otheraqueducts were built, some up to 50miles long, providing more than 30 mil-lion gallons of fresh water daily to thecity for fountains, gardens and drinkingwater. Water in public basins was free,but those who piped it into their housesor baths paid a tax. 40

Rome’s water system set a precedentfor public drinking water through theages: It was “a public good providedby right though imperial beneficenceon the one hand, and as a private goodfor domestic consumption, on the other,”wrote author James Salzman. 41

In colonial America, Dutch settlerscollected rainwater in cisterns and shal-low wells in New York City becausethe rivers around Manhattan were toosalty. Later, the British dug deeper wells,but they soon became polluted. En-terprising businessmen began deliveringclean water from distant springs orwater pumps. 42

Around the time of the RevolutionaryWar other American cities recognizedthe need for safe drinking water whena yellow fever epidemic — actuallycaused by mosquitoes but blamed atthe time on foul water — promptedaction. By 1801, Philadelphia had com-pleted a public water system that in-cluded two pumping stations to pullwater from the Schuylkill River. 43

Protecting Water

Many early civilizations createdrules and rituals for keeping

drinking water supplies safe from con-tamination, including collecting and

disposing of human waste away fromwater sources. But as cities becamemore crowded, waste and water oftencomingled, causing repeated diseaseoutbreaks.London was a prime example, with

open sewers lining streets and an ex-tremely polluted River Thames. 44 Thecity’s 1854 cholera epidemic initiallywas blamed on foul air. But physicianJohn Snow proved that the disease’srapid but localized spread occurredaround a particular public water pump.“Snow’s findings supported the germ

theory, as did the later realization thatthe mother of an infant suffering fromcholera had disposed of the child’s soileddiaper in a cesspit directly adjacent theBroad Street Pump just days before thecholera outbreak,” wrote Salzman. 45

In the United States, Chicago’s publicworks system in the early 1900s keptwater and waste separate. It drewwater from Lake Michigan for drinkingand piped sewage into the MississippiRiver via a canal. Typhoid fever rateswent down in Chicago, but downriverin St. Louis disease rates rose. Missourisued Illinois but, with no clear proofthat Chicago’s waste was the cause,lost the case.Even with protected water sources,

humans used various methods —straining, siphoning, aerating and dis-tilling — to further clean their drinkingwater. Boiling water was not generallyused until the germ theory of diseasewas discovered in the 19th century.Growing cities often used sand filtra-tion; Glasgow, Scotland, installed sandfiltration in 1827. Some American cities,however, resisted filtration, fearing itwould give their water a bad reputa-tion: If it has to be cleaned, it mustbe bad water, they reasoned. 46

Jersey City, N.J., in 1908 became thefirst American city to use chlorine treat-ment. The method quickly caught onbecause it was inexpensive, effective andrelatively simple to implement. By 1941,85 percent of the country’s water treat-ment systems were using chlorine. 47

Chlorine instilled faith in municipaldrinking water as outbreaks of water-borne diseases practically vanished. “Ithas been claimed that chlorination ofdrinking water saved more lives than anyother technological advance in the historyof public health,” Salzman wrote. 48

Lead Pipes and Health

In ancient times, water pipes wereconstructed from stone, hollow logsand clay. Later, concrete, iron, steel,copper and lead were used.In 1767, a British doctor connected

the malady known as Devonshirecolic to lead. He described a “sharponset and recurrent spasms in whichthe patient writhes in pain, retracts hislegs spasmodically to his abdomen,groans, clenches his hands, grits histeeth, with beads of sweat on his brow.”The doctor theorized that lead weightsused to crush apples for cider conta-minated the cider. 49

In the 1800s, several individuals inthe United States and Europe suspect-ed lead-tainted water was damaginghealth. A New York City doctor in1851 traced four cases of lead poi-soning to tap water. In 1889, a Britishdoctor attributed several miscarriagesand cases of infertility to lead in drink-ing water, but his reports were gen-erally dismissed. 50

Lead remained a preferred materialfor water pipes, primarily because it waspliable, less prone to corrosion than othermaterials and durable: A 1917 reportcomparing pipe materials found that leadpipes lasted an average of 35 years (andup to 100 years), whereas those madefrom steel lasted, on average, for 16 years,galvanized iron 20 years and pipes linedwith cement, 28 years. 51 Long-livedmaterial is preferred for undergroundpipes because of the difficulty of ac-cessing them for repair or replacement.By the early1900s most large cities usedlead piping.

Continued on p. 588


Chronology1800s Cities begin ad-dressing need for clean drinkingwater. Physicians begin linkinglead in water to certain healthconditions.

1801Philadelphia completes a publicwater system with two pumpingstations and a reservoir.

1827Glasgow, Scotland, installs a sand-filtration system in its water plant.

1837New York City begins dammingthe Croton River to supply waterfor the city.

1854A London cholera epidemic kills616; British doctor John Snowproves the disease is water-borne.

1851A New York City doctor traces fourcases of lead poisoning to tap water.

1855Philadelphia purchases land alongthe Schuylkill River to buffer itsclean water supply from pollution.

1889A British doctor attributes miscarriagesand infertility to lead in drinkingwater, but his reports are generallydismissed.

1890Massachusetts Board of Health rec-ommends against lead water pipes.

•

1900s Chlorine disin-fection programs are established,and Congress passes landmarklegislation to ensure cleandrinking water.

1900Chicago begins using different waterbodies for its water intake andsewage output, leading to a decreasein typhoid fever but an outbreak ofdisease further downriver.

1902Middelkerke, Belgium, installs firstknown chlorine disinfection system.

1908Jersey City, N.J., becomes first U.S.city to use chlorine.

1930sLead pipes begin losing their appeal,although some cities — includingBoston, Milwaukee, Philadelphia,Denver and Chicago — continueto install them.

1950Philadelphia begins building thefirst of three sewage-treatmentplants and a sewer system to alle-viate industrial and domestic wastepollution.

1960sScientists develop a test to detectlead in human blood and beginmonitoring exposure and settingsafety thresholds for workers.

•

1970s-1990sFederal government takes actionon clean water.

1970sU.S. public health officials estimatethat 250,000 children are affectedby lead poisoning each year.

1970Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) established.

1972Congress passes Clean Water Act.

1974Congress passes Safe DrinkingWater Act to protect drinkingwater supplies.

1978U.S. Consumer Product SafetyCommission bans lead from mostconsumer paint.

1986Amendment to Safe Water DrinkingAct bans lead pipes in buildingsserved by a public water system.

1991Lead and Copper Rule sets per-missible levels for drinking water.

•

2000s Cities strugglewith water contamination.

2001Washington, D.C., water is foundto have high lead levels.

2014To save money, Flint, Mich., be-gins using Flint River for drinkingwater, without using appropriatepipe-corrosion controls.

2015Flint officials urge residents to stopdrinking tap water after testingshows high lead levels. . . . Con-gress enacts law to allow greaterfunding flexibility for public utili-ties that accept federal water infra-structure grants.

2016Congress adopts landmark over-haul of the Toxic Substances Con-trol Act, requiring more informa-tion on health risks fromchemicals found in drinking water.. . . Studies show thousands ofcities’ water systems have leadproblems as bad as Flint’s.

588 CQ Researcher

Gradually, however, science beganto link lead exposure to a variety ofailments — anemia, palsy, joint pain,encephalopathy, blindness and colic.Women working in industries thatused lead knew that it caused mis-carriages; in fact, the substance wasoften used to perform illegal abor-tions. 52 As early as 1890 the Mass-achusetts State Board of Health rec-ommended that lead piping beabandoned because of health risks.New Hampshire took up a similarcause shortly after that. 53 Efforts alsoemerged to prevent workplace ex-posure to lead, especially for thoseusing white lead paint — either paint-ing with it or scrubbing a paintedsurface clean. 54

By about 1930 lead pipes beganlosing their appeal, although some cities— including Boston, Milwaukee,Philadelphia, Denver and Chicago —continued to install them. 55

In the late 1960s, scientists devel-oped a blood test to detect lead ex-posure. At the time, an adult levelbelow 60-80 micrograms per deciliterof blood was considered safe. For manyyears, 10 micrograms was consideredthe threshold level for safety. 56 Butthe CDC, which periodically reassessesthe safety level, lowered it to 5 micro-grams per deciliter in 2012. 57

In the 1970s, U.S. public healthofficials estimated that 250,000 chil-dren developed lead poisoning eachyear, and campaigns aimed to increaseblood monitoring and reduce expo-sure, mostly from lead paint in oldhouses. 58 In addition, the federalgovernment began phasing out leadedgasoline in the 1970s. Unleaded gaso-line became the law of the land in1996.In 1986, Congress banned further

installation of lead water lines whenit amended the Safe Drinking WaterAct. 59

Water Safety Laws

Starting in the 1970s, the newly cre-ated Environmental Protection

Agency began enforcing new laws onwater pollution, including the CleanWater Act of 1972, which regulatedpollution discharges into rivers andlakes that serve as sources of drinkingwater. It also funded the constructionof sewage treatment plants.As concern over polluted waters grew,

so did worries about the health effectsof chemicals found in drinking water.A U.S. Public Health Service survey ofwater systems in 1969 had found thatonly 60 percent of the systems deliveredwater that met existing safety standards,set by the service. The survey also founddeficiencies in water treatment facilitiesand distribution pipes that led to cloudi-ness and poor pressure, in addition tocontamination. 60

In 1974 Congress passed the Safe


Continued from p. 586

The tiny town of Sebring, Ohio, issued a water advisorythis past January after learning that routine testing hadfound excessive lead in tap water samples. Schools in

the town, population about 4,400, were closed, and childrenand pregnant women were told not to drink the water. 1

The following week, the Ohio Department of Health foundelevated blood lead levels in five Sebring children, three ofwhom lived on the same street. 2

In Pennsylvania, several cities this year have reported higherrates of lead poisoning among children than occurred in Flint,the Michigan city notorious for its ongoing lead contaminationcrisis. Flint’s average exposure rate was 3.2 percent of childrentested, and its highest rate was 6.3 percent. Seventeen Pennsylvaniacities had rates higher than 10 percent, based on 2014 datafrom the state’s health department. 3

About 500,000 American children aged 1 through 5 haveexcessive lead levels in their blood, according to the Centers forDisease Control and Prevention (CDC). While that may soundhigh, the figure is actually considered a great public health success.The percentage of youngsters in that age range with excessivelead levels fell from nearly 8 percent in 1997 to 0.5 percent in2014, the most recent year for which data are available. 4

And yet, no amount of lead is safe. Even small exposures— from soil, paint chips or contaminated water — accumulatein the bones and organs, potentially damaging the brain, heartand kidneys. Exposure can lower children’s IQs and cause be-havioral problems, especially in adolescence, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD), antisocial or violent be-havior and delinquency. 5

The effects of lead poisoning are most devastating in youngchildren because their bodies are smaller and their brains stilldeveloping. Yet exposure is usually highest in young children,especially toddlers, who tend to put foreign matter like soil orpaint flakes into their mouths, or infants who ingest formulamade with lead-tainted tap water.No quick treatment is available for children with excessive

blood lead levels. At very high levels, above 45 microgramsper deciliter, lead can be pulled out of the blood by administeringdrugs called chelating agents, but such therapies can be dangerousfor a child. 6

“A child during chelation needs close monitoring to makesure their kidneys are able to handle the lead burden as it’sbeing metabolized in the body, make sure their liver is OK,make sure their white blood cell count is OK,” says nurse prac-

Lead’s Childhood Legacy: A Lifetime of Problems“The kids will not be as smart and will make less money in their working life.”


Drinking Water Act, which focused onensuring the safety of America’s drinkingwater, as opposed to controlling pol-lution in wetlands, lakes and rivers, ascovered by the Clean Water Act. Thedrinking water act authorized the EPAto set standards for harmful contami-nants in drinking water and establisheda federal grant program to help watersystems modernize equipment.Amendments to the Safe Drinking

Water Act in 1986 required the EPAto set maximum levels for 83 conta-minants, including microbial pathogensand chemicals, and banned lead pipingfor new construction. Under the law,the EPA in 1991 issued its Lead andCopper Rule, which required cities totake remedial action if 15 parts perbillion of lead were detected in morethan 10 percent of the taps sampled.In 1996, lawmakers again amended

the act, authorizing the EPA to protectthe quality of water in rivers and lakesif they were the source of drinking water

and to establish a list of candidate chemicalsfound in water that were suspected ofharming health and potentially needed tobe regulated. 61 It was a list from whichto work out future regulations and stan-dards for drinking water. The amendmentsalso required water utilities to report tocustomers on water quality and establisheda revolving fund to provide grants tostates for upgrading water systems.In 1976, Congress passed the Toxic

Substances Control Act, which autho-rized the EPA to regulate the production,importation, use and disposal of chem-icals to protect the environment fromnew and potentially toxic chemicals.While the Clean Water Act had protectedagainst pollutants in rivers and lakesand the Safe Water Drinking Act focusedon keeping pollutants out of municipaldrinking water sources, the toxic controlact aimed to protect against harmfulsubstances before they become wide-spread environmental pollutants.Controlling chemicals under the act

differed from how drugs and pesticideswere regulated, in that chemical man-ufacturers did not have to show theirproducts were safe. They needed onlyto notify the EPA that they have a newcompound. The burden of proving harmfell on the federal agency. For years,critics had seen this provision as a majorweakness, because the EPA was unableto keep up with testing existing andnew chemicals for potential safety prob-lems. A widely cited 2006 GovernmentAccountability Office report found that30 years after the law was enacted,only 200 of the 62,000 chemicals listedunder the act had been tested. 62

While complaints about the ToxicSubstances Control Act’s weaknesses con-tinued, calls for updating the Clean WaterAct emerged in 2015, when the Obamaadministration sought to clarify — andexpand — the types of water sourcesprotected under the act to any waterthat served as a source for public drinkingwater. The new Clean Water Rule would

titioner Barbara Moore, who runs the lead clinic at Mount Wash-ington Pediatric Hospital in Baltimore.However, research has shown that chelation doesn’t work

for those with lower blood lead levels. Good nutrition — dietsrich in iron, calcium and vitamin C — can help, as can early-childhood education and regular visits to a pediatrician tomonitor for emerging health problems. 7

Harvard University neurologist David Bellinger has examinedstudies of American children to assess how damage to IQcaused by lead exposure compares with damage from otherchildhood stressors, such as preterm birth, Type 1 diabetes andiron deficiency. He found that lead was second only to pretermbirth in affecting childhood IQ. 8

Flint’s children were exposed to lead in their drinking waterfor 18 months after city officials decided to save money byswitching to the Flint River as a source of drinking water, whichcaused the lead contamination. That decision will affect Flint’schildren throughout their lives, says Jeff Griffiths, a professorof public health and community medicine at Tufts Universityand former chair of the EPA’s Drinking Water Committee.“The kids will not be as smart, will get less schooling, will make

less money in their working life,” he says. “And they’ll need medical

services. The cost of the screw-up is borne by the public.”But Tom Neltner, chemicals policy director at the Environmental

Defense Fund, an environmental advocacy group, says, “Don’twrite these kids off.” Even though they are at risk for behavioralproblems, he says, “You can offset the damage, but it takes alot of effort.”

— Jill U. Adams

1 “Sebring’s water system has high levels of lead,” CantonRep.com, Jan. 22,2016, http://tinyurl.com/h6gdewh.2 Mark Gillispie and John Seewer, “High lead levels in 5 kids in town withtainted water,” The Associated Press, Jan. 27, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/z2g37ra.3 Sarah Frostenson, “18 cities in Pennsylvania reported higher levels of leadexposure than Flint,” Vox, Feb. 3, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hj8ecd2.4 “Lead,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/.5 T. I. Lidsky and J. S. Schneider, “Lead neurotoxicity in children: basic mechanismsand clinical correlates,” Brain, Jan. 1, 2003, http://tinyurl.com/hu54pp9.6 April Fulton, “Flushing Out Lead, Metals With Chelation Therapy,” NPR,Jan. 3, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/2at7ohm.7 Lizzie Wade, “Flint’s High Lead Levels Have Doctors Struggling For Answers,”Wired, Jan. 14, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/z3uy9kk.8 David C. Bellinger, “A Strategy for Comparing the Contributions of EnvironmentalChemicals and Other Risk Factors to Neurodevelopment of Children,” Envi-ronmental Health Perspectives, Dec. 19, 2011, http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1104170/.

590 CQ Researcher

bring an additional 2 million miles ofstreams and 20 million acres of wetlandsunder the EPA’s protective purview.The Clean Water Rule also stirred

controversy. Industry, farmers, small-business groups and real estate devel-opers claimed the rule interfered in pri-vate landowners’ rights. Congress soughtto block the rule, but President Obamavetoed the resolution Congress used totry to block it. Now federal courts willdecide the matter. 63

CURRENTSITUATIONFlint Fallout

In early June, the EPA warned cityofficials that Flint faced new risks

to its drinking water because of thearrival of summer. In warm weather,bacteria that cause Legionnaire’s diseasecan grow, and the bacteria has beendetected in Flint, especially if chlorineis not kept consistently at appropriatelevels throughout the water distribu-tion system. Correct pH levels, a mea-sure of acidity, must be maintainedthroughout the system so corrosioncontrol can be effective, the EPA haswarned. 64


When Madison, Wis., found lead concentrations in itswater to be dangerously high in the early 1990s,the city took a radical approach to solving the

problem: It spent $20 million to replace all the lead pipes intown, even paying part of the cost to replace pipes buried inhomeowners’ front yards. 1

But as the state capital and home of the University of Wis-consin’s main campus, Madison is more affluent than many lo-calities around the country. Some communities such as Bayonne,N.J., and St. Joseph, La. — both afflicted with water systemwoes — face sometimes overwhelming circumstances to providebasic services.As many municipalities struggle to maintain, repair and

upgrade water facilities, some experts say it’s a social justiceissue. “It is the nonwhite suburbs that are the poorest placesin metro America, with the smallest tax bases,” said MyronOrfield, director of the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunityat the University of Minnesota Law School. “There are thousandsof them, and they are all going to have Flint problems.” 2

The city of Flint, Mich., is now notorious for its poorlymanaged public water system, in which a decision to savemoney ended up corroding old pipes and contaminating thewater of thousands of homes with lead.For Madison, replacing the 2,500 pipes owned by the utility

was the easy part. Getting water customers to replace their5,500 lead service lines was tougher. But it had to be done,experts said, because partial pipe replacement can worsen leadcontamination: Metal fragments inside service pipes can dislodgeduring replacement work, according to the utility’s water qualitymanager, Joe Grande. 3

In Madison, however, financing the massive project was rel-atively manageable. The water utility paid for half the $1,400cost, on average, for replacing each homeowners’ pipes, andthe city offered loans for the remainder, which could be paidback via higher property taxes. 4

Over a decade, 8,000 lead pipes were replaced by copper

ones. 5 Madison raised some of the money by renting spaceon city water tanks and towers to cell phone companies toinstall their antennas. 6

“It costs the same in Madison to replace the pipes as itdoes in Flint,” says Lynn Broaddus, nonresident senior fellowwith the Brookings Institution. “It certainly helped that Madisonis a relatively affluent city with a median household income of$50,000. Homeowners could afford to pay their share.”Most water utilities, when faced with lead-tainted water,

adjust their corrosion control methods. For Madison, the chemicaltreatment approach — adding orthophosphate to the water toprevent lead from leaching out of the pipes — posed anotherproblem. The city’s sewage treatment plant was under stateorders to remove phosphates from city water to keep thechemicals out of the region’s lakes. Phosphates trigger algaeblooms, which befoul lakes. 7 So, while chemically treating thewater would have been cheaper and easier, it would have madesewage treatment more expensive because the phosphate wouldhave to be removed.Madison’s systems approach to water treatment — looking

at drinking water, waste water and storm water as interconnectedparts of a greater whole — is advocated by experts such asHoward Neukrug, a senior fellow at U.S. Water Alliance, an or-ganization that promotes sustainable water systems. In mostcities, these parts are managed and regulated separately. “It’scritically important to not look at one thing at a time, but atthe overall system,” Neukrug says.Madison is a success story. But, says Broaddus, “they made

their decision when the rules [about using phosphates] werechanging. For communities who have put in the capital investmentfor an orthophosphate treatment program, well, what are theygoing to do now?”Poor communities face high hurdles. In St. Joseph, a town

of about 1,200 in northeastern Louisiana, residents are worriedabout tap water filled with rust sediment, frequent servicestoppage and frequent advisories to boil their drinking water

Thousands of Cities Face Water-Quality ProblemsPoor communities with slim budgets are hardest hit.


Officials recently told Flint residents,who have been using bottled watersince October, that the city’s tap waterwas safe to wash with and to drink,if filtered first. Obama drank a glass ofFlint tap water during a May visit to thecity. 65 But customers still report problems,such as burning sensations and rashes,even from very short showers. 66

Meanwhile, a pilot program to replacelead service lines in the city has beencompleted on 30 of an estimated 10,000

sites. But costs have averaged $7,500per line, almost double initial estimates.The city has received $2 million fromthe state of Michigan, and on June 29,Gov. Rick Snyder signed a state budgetbill with $240 million in funds for theFlint water crisis. 67 The city also isslated to get another $128 million infederal funds if approved in the pendingcongressional budget deal. 68

Three government workers in April— a Flint employee and two state em-

ployees assigned to monitor water qual-ity — face criminal charges for thecity’s water debacle, including miscon-duct and tampering with evidence.Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuettesaid, “These charges are only the be-ginning. There will be more to come— that I can guarantee you.” 69

More fallout is highly likely, expertssay. Some 8,000 Flint children underage 6 have been exposed to dangerouslevels of lead for extended periods, a

because of bacterial contamination. The town’s tiny $1.5 millionbudget leaves little or no money to fix frequent breaks in the1930s-era water mains. The state allocated $6 million for waterinfrastructure repairs three years ago, but it won’t release the fundsuntil the town submits a financial audit, which was due in 2013,but the town has had difficulty securing an audit firm. 8

Meanwhile, the water distribution system continues to de-teriorate and about half of the treated water leaks into theground. “This is typical of communities probably all over theU.S., especially poor communities,” said Davis Cole, a civilengineer working to redesign St. Joseph’s system. 9

Bayonne, a city of about 66,000 east of Newark, tried anotherroute to solve its perennial drinking water and wastewater prob-lems. The aging water system already had been prone tooperating problems and often ran afoul of environmental reg-ulations even before it was hit hard in 2012 by Hurricane Sandy,which devastated the local energy grid.Once the hurricane crisis was over, the Bayonne Municipal

Utilities Authority started looking for solutions in earnest. Thecity’s high debt level made borrowing expensive, so it chosea path that 2,000 other water utilities in the United States havetaken: They entered a partnership with a private company. 10

The private firm made an initial payment to help the citypay off much of its debt, and pledged $157 million to upgradeboth the drinking water and wastewater utilities. Water ratesinitially jumped by 8.5 percent and three years later by another4 percent, which likely would have happened anyway, accordingto the public half of the partnership.One analysis estimated that the city will save $35 million

over the 40-year contract. 11

“Public-private partnerships are the ideal solution for thefiscal problems plaguing many American cities,” wrote energyand infrastructure lawyer Kent Rowey, in a New York Timesopinion column. 12

— Jill Adams

1 Darryl Fears and Brady Dennis, “One city’s solution to drinking watercontamination? Get rid of every lead pipe,” The Washington Post, May 10,2016, http://tinyurl.com/zncxk6k.2 Quoted in Jake Blumgart, “The Next Flint,” Slate, Jan. 28, 2106, http://tinyurl.com/gnln2xx.3 Fears and Dennis, op. cit.4 Adam Rodewald, “Lead pipe replacement: Who pays for it?” Green Bay PressGazette, March 25, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hj49aea.5 Fears and Dennis, op. cit.6 Maya Dukmasova, “To remove lead pipes, Chicago can learn from Madison’sexample,” The Chicago Reporter, May 2, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zvtfkw2.7 Ibid.8 Lauren Zanolli, “Water woes: Tap runs brown in Louisiana’s impoverishednortheast,” Al Jazeera, Feb. 7, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h4m5yfj.9 Quoted in ibid.10 Mindy Fettermen, “As Water Infrastructure Crumbles, Many Cities SeekPrivate Help,” Stateline, March 30, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jgxeqs6; “A Taleof Two Public-Private Partnership Cities,” Knowledge, June 10, 2015,http://tinyurl.com/ortsldg.11 Ibid.12 Kent Rowey, “Public-Private Partnerships Could be Lifelines for Cities,” TheNew York Times, July 15, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/hyfurpw.

Chemical storage tanks sit beside the Elk River inCharleston, W. Va. In 2014 a tank leaked a coal-washing

chemical that is neither regulated nor listed as acontaminant into the river, the city’s water source.

Get

ty Im

ages

/Tom

Hin

dman

592 CQ Researcher


public health disaster that will requireextra health care support for familiesand additional educational support forschools. 70

The debacle in Flint has promptedthe rest of the country to look for lead-tainted water. Parents across the countryare pressuring school districts to checkfor lead in the drinking water at theirchildren’s schools. “Before Flint, we’dget a call maybe once a month froma school,” said Robert Barrett, the chiefoperating officer for Aqua Pro-Tech Lab-oratories, an environmental testing labin New Jersey. “Now it’s daily.” 71

In Portland, Oregon’s largest publicschool district, parents demanded thatthe superintendent resign after officialsfailed to promptly notify parents thathigh lead levels had been detected inschool water. In New Jersey, afterdozens of schools were found to havelead-tainted water, Republican Gov.Chris Christie ordered that every schoolin the state test for lead. Schools thatget their water from public water utilities— about 90 percent of the nation’sschools — are not required to testregularly for lead.

“Every parent assumes that someonemust have taken care of this problemdecades ago,” said Virginia Tech en-gineering professor Marc Edwards, whodocumented the first high lead readingin a Flint resident’s home. “They’re al-ways shocked to discover that it hasn’tbeen fixed.” 72

Even Congress is not immune. Inlate June, drinking water in the CannonHouse Office Building was found toviolate EPA lead standards. Rep. DennisRoss, R-Fla., expressed outrage, espe-cially on behalf of pregnant staffersworking in the building. “Even more

distressing is the fact the signs posteddue to this matter simply state ‘out oforder,’ with no explanation whatsoever,rather than informing the public as tothe reason,” he said. 73

The USA Today and NRDC investi-gations of EPA records found lead con-tamination of the drinking water in thou-sands of communities in every state.Among other findings, the NRDC said1,000 water systems serving 4 millionpeople had excessive lead levels. 74 USAToday reporters found that only about10 percent of the 8,225 schools and day

care centers with their own small watersystems are required to test for lead. Ofthose that do test, 350 detected unsafelead levels in the past three years. 75

An investigation by the Vox onlinemedia website found that children inat least 18 Pennsylvania cities, includingPhiladelphia, Allentown and Harrisburg,were found to have significant lead ex-posure — as high as or higher than inFlint. But it is unknown whether theculprit is tainted water or lead paint. 76

The latest tainted water discoveriesadd to a long list of lead-contaminateddrinking water incidents: Washington,D.C., in the early 2000s; Columbia,S.C., in 2005; Durham and Greenville,N.C., in 2006; Brick Township, N.J., in2011; Jackson, Miss., last July; and Se-bring, Ohio, last August. 77

Legal Actions

Several lawsuits have been filed totry to force improvements in the

regulation, monitoring and treatmentof America’s drinking water.One — filed in January by the

NRDC, the American Civil LibertiesUnion of Michigan, Concerned Pastorsfor Social Action and Flint residentMelissa Mays — seeks federal inter-vention to fix Flint’s water situation,including the replacement of all leadservice lines.“The water in Flint is still not safe

to drink because city and state officialsare violating the federal law that protectsdrinking water,” said Dimple Chaudhary,a senior NRDC attorney. “We are askinga federal court to step in because thepeople of Flint simply cannot rely onthe same government agencies thatoversaw the destruction of its infra-structure and contamination of its waterto address this crisis.” 78

In February, three Chicago residentssued that city, charging that for years itfailed to warn residents about lead intheir drinking water — especially when

Continued on p. 594

Utility workers in Syracuse, N.Y., repair a broken water main on Sept. 21, 2015.The Environmental Protection Agency sets national water-safety standards, but the sourcing, treatment and distribution of water is left to local utilities, some dealing with polluted water sources, aging pipes or shrinking budgets.

AP

Pho

to/M

ike

Gro

ll

no


At Issue:Is the federal government doing enough to keep America’sdrinking water safe?yes

yes

ADRIAN MOOREVICE PRESIDENT, REASON FOUNDATION

WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, JULY 2016

t he federal government is doing enough. It sets minimumwater-quality standards and should play a role in inde-

pendently monitoring state and local government compliancewith standards.But the call for more federal funding is wrongheaded.

Water infrastructure is entirely local in nature, and problemswith safe drinking water are almost entirely local in nature.People in Maryland don’t benefit from Flint, Mich., improvingits water infrastructure, so they shouldn’t be asked to pay forit. The same goes for localities all over the nation.When Congress starts funding local projects, several bad

things happen. First, Congress can’t target money to whereit is most needed. Instead, every member thinks his districtshould get a fair share of the funds, and the most powerfulmembers can earmark big chunks of funds for their districts.Second, even if Congress does allocate funds based onneed, that approach simply rewards jurisdictions that failedto invest in their own infrastructure, paid for by taxpayerswhose jurisdictions did make adequate local investments.Finally, the prospect of free federal money is a powerfuldisincentive for local governments to adequately spendtheir own resources on water infrastructure. It is much moreappealing to lobby for federal funding than to pay for aproject out of the local budget.We have seen all three of these problems play out over

and over with federal infrastructure funding programs.Many, many local governments are responsibly managing

their water infrastructure all on their own. Rather than ask fora federal handout, other local governments should emulatethem. The responsible localities allocate property taxes, impactfees or other revenues to build new capacity as needed. Theybuild into water rates the real costs of maintenance and in-clude a capital fee to build up a fund to replace major facili-ties that reach the end of their lifespan. When there is a needfor spending on water infrastructure, they move that to thetop of the budget list, ahead of many “nice to have” spendingitems. Thousands of local governments use public-private part-nerships to keep costs down and improve performance, oreven rely on regulated private water utilities to provide safedrinking water.The responsible path is for local water users to pay for the

infrastructure they use, not to ask people far across the nationto fund it for them.no

TOM NELTNERCHEMICALS POLICY DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND

WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, JULY 2016

a mericans expect safe, affordable drinking water deliv-ered to their homes on demand. But our water infra-

structure suffers from an out-of-sight, out-of-mind problem. Webuild it, but we all too often fail to maintain it. At every levelof government, we need smarter investment, stricter oversight,regular coordination and more public transparency to ensuresafe drinking water.According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2011

Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey, the nation’s agingwater infrastructure needs about $400 billion in capital im-provements over the next 20 years. That is 12 times moremoney than the federal government has invested in water in-frastructure since it created the Drinking Water State RevolvingLoan Fund in 1997.While the burden for these upgrades ultimately rests with

the local utility and its customers, Congress needs to do more.This is particularly important in places where customers likelyare unable to cover the costs of infrastructure loans. Congress,the Obama administration, states and municipalities must worktogether to create funding alternatives to help these communi-ties make the necessary improvements and have the technical,managerial and financial capacity to run the systems effectively.State oversight agencies that must ensure the work is done

right are understaffed. In 2013, the Association of State DrinkingWater Administrators estimated that states have an average of3,100 people inspecting its water utilities. That’s 1,300 fewerpeople than are needed to provide basic oversight. With some150,000 public water suppliers operating across the country, in-creasing state staffing will prove a costly, if essential, safeguard.Water officials and utilities need a reliable federal partner,

too. The Environmental Protection Agency must provide moreguidance to its state and local partners. And its approach ofregulating chemicals on an individual basis cannot keep pacewith the thousands of commercial chemicals potentially enteringour drinking water. As a result, too many water systems areill-prepared to address emerging problems.Finally, we need an honest, open dialogue regarding the state

of our nation’s water infrastructure. Infrastructure improvementshave been postponed, operating budgets cut and staff sizes re-duced, at the risk of safe drinking water. Only by working to-gether, committing to investing additional capital, updating oldpolicies and practices and improving technical and operatingprocedures can we keep America’s drinking water safe.

594 CQ Researcher

construction work to fix and replacewater mains was in progress — as doc-umented in a 2013 EPA study. 79 Theresidents are asking the court to orderthe city to replace lead water pipes.“We believe the city of Chicago

knew well the risks and dangers oftoxic lead contamination associatedwith these construction projects butchose to turn a blind eye to its own,

allowing this mounting problem tobecome a widespread public healthissue across the city of Chicago,” saidSteve Berman, the attorney for theplaintiffs. 80

The NRDC sued the EPA in Feb-ruary, demanding action on setting astandard for perchlorate in drinkingwater. 81

Congressional Action

On June 22, Obama signed into lawthe Lautenberg Chemical Safety

Act, a massive overhaul of the 40-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act and

the first major environmental legislationenacted in more than 20 years.The law enhances the EPA’s authority

to regulate new chemicals found ineverything from consumer products toindustrial manufacturing. It requires theagency, for the first time, to test allchemicals before they go on the marketand to prioritize those chemical studiesbased on their health hazard and their“proximity to drinking water sources.”

The additional information about dan-gerous chemicals can provide scientificevidence needed to prompt standard-setting under the Safe Drinking WaterAct as well. The new chemical billhad opponents, mostly from industrygroups that fear increased costs, butwas passed with bipartisan support inCongress and with the support of chem-istry groups such as the AmericanChemistry Council. 82

Meanwhile, congressional Democ-rats have introduced several bills aimedat helping to fix the drinking waterproblem. In the House, Rep. JohnConyers, D-Mich., proposed a dedicatedfund to upgrade the nation’s water in-

frastructure. In the Senate, DemocratsDick Durbin of Illinois and Ben Cardinof Maryland introduced legislation torequire expanded testing and reportingfor lead through an updated Lead andCopper Rule. 83

Sen. Cory Booker and Rep. DonaldPayne Jr., both New Jersey Democrats,introduced a bill to require public utilitiesto test drinking water in schools as partof their lead testing programs and tonotify parents within two days whenlevels are too high. Sen. Chuck Schumer,D-N.Y., and Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J.,introduced measures to establish a grantprogram to pay for lead testing at schoolsand day care centers. 84

So far, only Democrats are support-ing the proposals. In New Jersey, Re-publican Gov. Christie — in additionto ordering mandatory testing for leadcontamination in all public schools inthe state — plans to lower the state’sthreshold blood-lead level that warrantsmedical attention. 85

Republicans were the primary spon-sors of a provision, adopted by Con-gress last December, to allow citiesthat receive federal stimulus funds underthe Water Infrastructure Finance andInnovation Act (WIFIA) to supplementthat money with tax-exempt bonds. 86

“It’s creative financing that allows mu-nicipalities to get more bang for theirbuck,” says Mehan, of the AmericanWater Works Association, which stronglysupported the bill.After praising Congress for freeing

the federal infrastructure funds to ad-dress America’s “enormous water in-frastructure challenge,” water associationCEO David LaFrance said, “We nowurge Congress to move swiftly to ap-propriate the necessary funds for WIFIAto do its important work.” 87

Obama has requested an additional$20 million and 12 staff members toexpand the water infrastructure fundsprogram and $2 billion for the twostate revolving funds, which are federallow-interest loan programs to help fundwater infrastructure upgrades. 88


Continued from p. 592

Staffers have access to free bottles of water in the Cannon House OfficeBuilding in Washington, D.C., on July 7, 2016, where drinking water fountains

are “out of order” due to excessive levels of lead.

Get

ty Im

ages

/Mar

k W

ilson


OUTLOOKWater and Politics

The fall presidential election couldset the tone for new drinking water

policy.Presumptive GOP nominee Donald

J. Trump has called the Flint water crisisa “total breakdown in government”caused by “gross incompetence” and“another example of bad government.”In an interview with a Grand RapidsTV station on the morning of the Michiganpresidential primary, Trump said, “Therewere a lot of mistakes made here fromthe city and the state and probably eventhe federal government. If I were pres-ident, I would be there to help.” 89

Trump also has said repeatedly thathe would abolish the EPA, in favor ofletting states manage environmental is-sues. “Environmental protection — wewaste all of this money,” he said in aFebruary debate. “We’re going to bringthat back to the states.” 90

Meanwhile, presumptive Democraticnominee Hillary Clinton, who has visitedFlint residents and city officials, haspromised to eliminate lead as a publichealth threat in the next five years.She plans to create a presidential com-mission to recommend solutions, andshe has pledged to deliver $5 billiontoward lead abatement from all sources,including those most likely to affectchildren: water and paint. 91

The Flint crisis and subsequent in-vestigations of lead-tainted drinkingwater have generated plenty of hand-wringing, legal action and condemna-tion of water mismanagement, but long-term change is uncertain.Several challenges remain. The EPA

estimates that $384 billion is neededthrough 2030 to maintain and upgradewater distribution pipes and water treat-ment plants. Replacing lead servicelines would be costly, but the only

way to solve the problem once andfor all. “There’s a huge problem withpolitical will,” said Tufts professor Grif-fiths. “We have neglected our own in-frastructure.” 92

Crises often spur change, but thewater association’s Mehan says educa-tion also is key, because few membersof the public appreciate “the sheertechnical expertise, the complexity andthe staggering cost involved in the col-lecting, treating, delivering and recyclingor disposing of water.” Water profes-sionals are realizing that they must bemore than good engineers, he says.“They’ve got to be good at strategiccommunication, they’ve got to educatethe public about the expertise and thecosts behind safe drinking water.”While new contaminants will continue

to be a challenge, the overhauled ToxicSubstances Control Act promises to com-plement the Safe Drinking Water Act byassessing the health hazards of newchemicals entering the market. That willenable drinking water officials to setstandards for more potentially harmfulcontaminants. “I’ve been working on thisfor 15 years,” said Richard Denison, asenior scientist at the Environmental De-fense Fund. “It fixes every major problemwith the current law.” 93

If upheld by the courts, the CleanWater Rule will help EPA regulate pol-luters and industrial and agriculturalpractices that threaten the purity ofdrinking water sources. Obama advo-cated for the rule when he vetoedcongressional action to overturn it. “Toomany of our waters have been leftvulnerable,” Obama said. “Pollutionfrom upstream sources ends up in therivers, lakes, reservoirs and coastal wa-ters near which most Americans liveand on which they depend for theirdrinking water, recreation and eco-nomic development.” 94

Climate change also threatens drink-ing water. More frequent droughts, es-pecially in the water-scarce Southwest,pose challenges not only to water sup-plies but also to keeping them clean

and safe. Lower water levels can meanhigher concentrations of contaminants.And extreme weather, predicted to in-crease in frequency and intensity dueto climate change, can overload storm-water systems, a common path for watercontamination. 95

Americans are accustomed to turningon their taps and getting safe drinkingwater. Indeed, says Lynn Thorp ofClean Water Action, “every drop ofwater that comes out of your tap isan engineering marvel.”But maintaining that level of safety

will require that citizens prioritize watersafety, says Neukrug, of the U.S. WaterAlliance. “Our water is safer than atany time in history anywhere in theworld,” he says “And then there areFlint, Toledo and West Virginia.” Safewater is “too important of an issue notto solve,” he says.

Notes

1 Todd Spangler, “CDC confirms kids’ blood-lead levels went up in Flint,” Detroit Free Press,June 24, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/j3hmqk8.2 Ibid.3 “Lead poisoning and health fact sheet,” WorldHealth Organization, updated July 2016, http://tinyurl.com/oppuccq.4 Monica Davey, “Flint Officials Are No LongerSaying the Water Is Fine,” The New York Times,Oct. 7, 2015, http://tinyurl.com/pfvkbr8. ToddSpangler and Paul Egan, “E-mails: EPA inde-cision led to inaction in Flint crisis,” DetroitFree Press, May 13, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hbr32e9.5 Monica Davey and Richard Pérez-Peña, “FlintWater Crisis Yields First Criminal Charges,”The New York Times, April 20, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jdstndw.6 Alison Young and Mark Nichols, “Beyond Flint:Excessive lead levels found in almost 2,000 watersystems across all 50 states,” USA Today, March11, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jfv7vlh. Also see“What’s in Your Water?” Natural Resources DefenseCouncil, June 6, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zj4zkoc.7 Young and Nichols, ibid.8 John Wisely and Todd Spangler, “Whereare the lead pipes? In many cities, we just

596 CQ Researcher


don’t know,” Detroit Free Press, Feb. 28, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/hvlfk2b. “Replacing all leadwater pipes could cost $30 billion,” WaterTech Online, March 11, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zdg7kpg.9 Rachel Dovey, “4 Things to Know BeforeYour Water Is Privatized,” Next City, Jan. 7,2015, http://tinyurl.com/jeus9on.10 “Buried No Longer: Confronting America’sWater Infrastructure Challenge,” AmericanWater Works Association, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/bou9svq.11 Jesse McKinley and Vivian Yee, “Water Pol-lution in Hoosick Falls Prompts Action by NewYork State,” The New York Times, Jan. 27, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/jshursx.12 Tim Friend, “Water in America: Is It Safeto Drink?” National Geographic News, Feb. 17,2014, http://tinyurl.com/po9nakt.13 Codi Kozacek, “Toledo Issues Emergency‘Do Not Drink Water’ Warning to Residents,”Circle of Blue, Aug. 2, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/gq38vbk.14 Kate Sheppard, “EPA Finds Some Cases OfWater Contamination Related To Fracking, ButSays It’s Not Widespread,” The Huffington Post,June 4, 2015, http://tinyurl.com/ofn6qs4.15 Jon Hurdle, “EPA science panel, in newdraft, repeats concerns about fracking report,”NPR, Feb. 17, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jk8rra4.16 “Table of Regulated Drinking Water Con-taminants,” Environmental Protection Agency,http://tinyurl.com/gvgnd6q.17 “Draft Candidate Contaminant List 4,” En-vironmental Protection Agency, http://tinyurl.com/hxsmkfd.18 Michael Wines and John Schwartz, “UnsafeLead Levels in Tap Water Not Limited toFlint,” The New York Times, Feb. 8, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hmff3rz.19 “Understanding the Safe Drinking WaterAct,” Environmental Protection Agency, June2004, http://tinyurl.com/jgnsuvw.20 “A Brief History of the Clean Water Act,”PBS, undated, http://tinyurl.com/mumj8lz.21 Juliet Eilperin and Darryl Fears, “Congressis overhauling an outdated law that affects

nearly every product you own,” The WashingtonPost, May 19, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zwlu78f.22 Wines and Schwartz, op. cit.23 Robert Pore, “Obama vetoes resolution ofdisapproval of WOTUS,” AgNet, Jan. 20, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/htp997j.24 Gregory Korte, “Obama vetoes attempt tokill clean water rule,” USA Today, Jan. 19,2016, http://tinyurl.com/h72hgz8.25 For background, see Jennifer Weeks, “RegulatingToxic Chemicals,” CQ Researcher, July 18, 2014,pp. 601-624.26 “America’s Neglected Water Systems Facea Reckoning,” Knowledge@Wharton, June 10,2015, http://tinyurl.com/jlqe6m7.27 Charles Duhigg, “That Tap Water Is Legalbut May Be Unhealthy,” The New York Times,Dec. 16, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/japxfz6.28 John Schwartz, “Water Flowing From Toiletto Tap May Be Hard to Swallow,” The New YorkTimes, May 8, 2015, http://tinyurl.com/pmqcaey.29 Danny Vinik, “Is Washington creating moreFlints?” Politico, May 25, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hbykm6m; “Public Spending on Trans-portation and Water Infrastructure, 1956-2014,”Congressional Budget Office, March 2015,http://tinyurl.com/hlqr47v.30 Gregory Baird, “A game plan for agingwater infrastructure,” Journal AWWA, April 2010,http://tinyurl.com/gs83s2u.31 Mindy Fetterman, “As Water InfrastructureCrumbles, Many Cities Seek Private Help,” State-line, March 30, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jgxeqs6.32 Dovey, op. cit.; “Top 10 Reasons to OpposeWater Privatization,” Public Citizen, undated,http://tinyurl.com/ztzlxbz.33 “Top 10 Reasons to Oppose Water Priva-tization,” ibid.34 “Safe Water Drinking Act,” EnvironmentalProtection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sdwa.35 “Perchlorate,” Environmental ProtectionAgency, http://tinyurl.com/h33kl9a. Also see“Perchlorate in Drinking Water Raises HealthConcerns,” Scientific American, Dec. 21, 2012,http://tinyurl.com/j6uqvq9.36 “What’s in Your Water?” op. cit.; Davey and

Pérez-Peña, op. cit.37 Michael Hawthorne and Jennifer SmithRichards, “Chicago often tests water for leadin homes where risk is low,” Chicago Tribune,Feb. 26, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zpfboou.38 Ibid.39 Oliver Milman, “US authorities distorting testto downplay lead content of water,” The Guardian,Jan. 22, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/gkqtsl9.40 James Salzman, Drinking Water (2012), pp.53-54.41 Ibid., pp. 57-60.42 Ibid.43 Michael Wang, “Cool, Clear Water: TheFairmount Water Works,” Pennsylvania StateUniversity Libraries, Fall 2010, http://tinyurl.com/hg2lkat.44 Salzman, op. cit., pp. 85-87.45 Ibid., p. 98.46 Ibid.47 Ibid., pp. 99-100.48 Ibid.49 Sven Hernberg, “Lead Poisoning in a HistoricalPerspective,” American Journal of IndustrialMedicine, 2000, http://tinyurl.com/z8quoav.50 Werner Troesken, The Great Lead WaterPipe Disaster (2006), pp. 7, 62-63.51 Ibid., pp. 151-152.52 Hernberg, op. cit.53 Troesken, op. cit., p. 202. Also see Hernberg,op. cit.54 Hernberg, ibid.55 Richard Rabin, “The Lead Industry andLead Water Pipes: A Modest Campaign,” Amer-ican Journal of Public Health, September 2008,http://tinyurl.com/h89spn7.56 Hernberg, op. cit.57 “What do parents need to know to protecttheir children?” Centers for Disease Controland Prevention, March 15, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/j8dlhod.58 Ibid.; Hernbug, op. cit.59 “EPA Takes Final Step in Phaseout of LeadedGasoline,” press release, Environmental Pro-tection Agency, Jan. 29, 1996, http://tinyurl.com/zo3bd59.60 “25 Years of the Safe Drinking Water Act:History and Trends,” Environmental ProtectionAgency, 1999, http://tinyurl.com/he5svso.61 “Safe Water Drinking Act,” EnvironmentalProtection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sdwa.62 “Chemical Regulation: Actions Are Neededto Improve the Effectiveness of EPA’s ChemicalReview Program,” Government AccountabilityOffice, Aug. 2, 2006, http://tinyurl.com/hjjyc4b.63 Robert Pore, “Obama vetoes resolution ofdisapproval of WOTUS,” The Grand Island

About the AuthorJill U. Adams writes a health column for The WashingtonPost and reports on health, biomedical research and envi-ronmental issues for magazines such as Audubon, ScientificAmerican and Science. She holds a Ph.D. in pharmacologyfrom Emory University.


Independent, Jan. 20, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/he76o69; Todd Neeley, “WOTUS Conflict,”DTN/The Progressive Farmer, June 27, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/jffgv8b.64 Amanda Emery, “EPA concerned about ‘urgent’situation with chlorine levels in Flint water,”MLive, June 4, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/grz6vgy.65 Gregory Korte, “Obama drinks Flint wateras he urges children be tested for lead,” USAToday, May 4, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/huxhrv3.66 T. J. Raphael, “After months, the Flint watersituation is finally getting a little bit better,”PRI, June 3, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zlu9cfa.67 David Eggert, “Michigan Governor SignsBudget With $165M More for Flint,” The As-sociated Press, June 29, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/j8xwtyq.68 Matthew Dolan, “Replacing Flint’s lead pipesis double the estimate,” Detroit Free Press,May 28, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/z53zrq2.69 Davey and Pérez-Peña, op. cit.70 Abby Goodnough, “Flint Weighs Scope ofHarm to Children Caused by Lead in Water,”The New York Times, Jan. 29, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zfs5zdk.71 Brady Dennis, “Schools often lag on leadtesting,” The Washington Post, July 5, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/heh8kv8.72 Ibid.73 Quoted in Warren Rojas, “Water in HouseOffice Building Too Dangerous to Drink,”Roll Call, June 29, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h2vf4ew.74 Brady Dennis, “More than 5,300 U.S. watersystems violated lead-testing rules last year,”The Washington Post, June 28, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h7zsgxt.75 Laura Ungar, “Lead taints drinking waterin hundreds of schools, day cares across USA,”USA Today, March 17, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hlw7lyg.76 Sarah Frostenson, “18 cities in Pennsylvaniareported higher levels of lead exposure thanFlint,” Vox, Feb. 3, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hj8ecd2.77 Wines and Schwartz, op. cit.78 “Groups File Federal Lawsuit to Secure SafeDrinking Water in Flint,” press release, AmericanCivil Liberties Union of Michigan, Jan. 27, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/jgzcg2x.79 Michael Hawthorne, “Lawsuit seeks removalof lead pipes in Chicago,” Chicago Tribune,Feb. 18, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hx4ke2q.80 Ibid.81 “NRDC Sues EPA to Force it to Limit ToxicChemical in Drinking Water,” press release,Natural Resources Defense Council, Feb. 18.2016, http://tinyurl.com/hod88lo.

82 Eilperin and Fears, op. cit.; Richard Denison,“Why passage of the Lautenberg Act is areally big deal,” Environmental Defense Fund,June 10, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h6gk8xg.83 Laura Ungar, “With nation at risk, lawmakerstarget lead in drinking water,” USA Today,April 14, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zm2l8ue;Dolan, op. cit.84 Helena Bottemiller Evich, “Avoiding the nextFlint: Testing school water,” Politico, April 22,2016, http://tinyurl.com/j7mmbtf.85 David Giambusso, “Christie to require leadtesting in all public schools,” Politico, May 2,2016, http://tinyurl.com/jf9ch92.86 “AWWA celebrates Congressional fix toWIFIA,” issue statement, American WaterWorks Association, undated, http://tinyurl.com/9wzc23j.87 Ibid.88 “EPA’s FY 2017 Budget Request IncreasesSupport for Communities to Deliver CoreEnvironmental and Health Protection,” press

release, Environmental Protection Agency,Feb. 9, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zzkbwnp.89 “Trump on FOX 17: Flint caused by ‘grossincompetence,’ mass shootings a mental healthissue,” Fox17 News, March 8, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jelr4ak.90 Oliver Milman, “Republican candidates’ callsto scrap EPA met with skepticism by experts,”The Guardian, Feb. 26, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zowabrr.91 Natasha Geiling, “Hillary Clinton Just Re-leased A Plan To Target This Often-IgnoredEnvironmental Issue,” ThinkProgress, April 13,2016, http://tinyurl.com/gw8pmrr.92 Wisely and Spangler, op. cit.; Wines andSchwartz, op. cit.93 Quoted in Eilperin and Fears, op. cit.94 Quoted in Korte, op. cit., “Obama vetoesattempt to kill clean water rule,” op. cit.95 “Adaptation Strategies Guide for Water Utilities,”Environmental Protection Agency, February 2015,http://tinyurl.com/hyfkybz.

FOR MORE INFORMATIONAmerican Society of Civil Engineers, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA20191; 800-548-2723; www.asce.org. Publishes report cards on water and otheraspects of U.S. infrastructure.

American Water Works Association, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235;303-794-7711; www.awwa.org. Membership association of water utility professionals.

Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20001; 202-842-0200; www.cato.org. Libertarian think tank advocating greater private oversight ofdrinking water.

Clean Water Action, 1444 I St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005; 202-895-0420;www.cleanwateraction.org. Environmental advocacy group focused on clean water.

Environmental Defense Fund, 275 Park Ave., South, New York, NY 10010; 800-684-3322; https://www.edf.org. Environmental group calling for greater oversightof drinking water.

Natural Resources Defense Council, 20 West 20th St., 11th Floor, New York, NY10011; 212-727-2700; https://www.nrdc.org. Environmental group that has filedlawsuits seeking to improve drinking water safety.

Reason Foundation, 5737 Mesmer Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90230; 310-395-2245;http://reason.org. Conservative, free-market think tank advocating less direct federalinvestment in drinking water.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., MailCode 4606M, Washington, DC 20460; 202-272-0167; https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water. Federal agency responsible for drinking water standardsand regulations.

U.S. Water Alliance, 1816 Jefferson Place, N.W., Washington, DC 20036; 202-533-1810; http://uswateralliance.org/. Nonprofit group that seeks to improving water-system policies.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

598 CQ Researcher

Selected Sources

BibliographyBooks

Salzman, James, Drinking Water, Overlook Duckworth,2012.A Duke University law professor follows water from sourceto tap, creating a popular history of the resource throughthe prism of a single commodity.

Troesken, Werner, The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster,MIT Press, 2006.A University of Pittsburgh history professor argues that leadpipes are a long-running environmental and public healthcatastrophe.

Wilson, H. W., The Transformation of American Cities,Grey House Publishing, 2015.A publisher of reference books issues a compilation ofnewspaper articles on how U.S. cities are surmounting short-comings with water infrastructure and other problems.

Articles

Friend, Tim, “Water in America: Is It Safe to Drink?”National Geographic News, Feb. 17, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/po9nakt.A journalist looks at whether a chemical spill in WestVirginia that sickened residents reveals broader holes in thesafety net for unregulated pollutants in drinking water.

Hernberg, Sven, “Lead Poisoning in a Historical Perspec-tive,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 2000,http://tinyurl.com/z8quoav.A Finnish research physician documents lead exposure incidentsand knowledge about lead’s toxicity throughout history.

McKinley, Jesse, and Vivian Yee, “Water Pollution inHoosick Falls Prompts Action by New York State,” TheNew York Times, Jan. 27, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jshursx.A small village in New York scrambles to understand therisks posed by a monitored but unregulated drinking-watercontaminant.

Schwartz, John, “Water Flowing From Toilet to Tap MayBe Hard to Swallow,” The New York Times, May 9, 2015,http://tinyurl.com/pmqcaey.A science journalist take a close look at recycling wastewaterinto drinking water, a method becoming more common inthe drought-stricken Southwest.

Vink, Danny, “Is Washington creating more Flints?”Politi-co, May 25, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hbykm6m.A journalist analyzes the government’s response and failuresto the threats posed to safe drinking water.

Wines, Michael, and John Schwartz, “Unsafe Lead Levels

in Tap Water Not Limited to Flint,” The New York Times,Feb. 9, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hmff3rz.Two reporters examine lead and other contaminants indrinking water in communities across America.

Wisely, John, and Todd Spangler, “Where are the leadpipes? In many cities, we just don’t know,” Detroit FreePress, Feb. 28, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hvlfk2b.Two reporters write that hundreds of American cities cannotlocate their lead service lines, which means regular watertesting may miss some homes.

Young, Alison, and Mark Nichols, “Beyond Flint: Excessivelead levels found in almost 2,000 water systems acrossall 50 states,” USA Today, March 11, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jfv7vlh.Two investigative journalists identify almost 2,000 water sys-tems in all 50 states where recent testing has shown highlevels of lead contamination.

Reports and Studies

“2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,”AmericanSociety of Civil Engineers, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/c6rxtef.An engineers’ organization gives the United States a D-plusgrade on drinking water quality as part of its comprehensiveassessment of the nation’s roads, bridges, pipelines and otherinfrastructure.

“The State of Public Water in the United States,” Food andWater Watch, February 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h4dcnht.An environmental advocacy group analyzes forces that keepwater utilities in the public sector.

“What’s in Your Water?”Natural Resources Defense Coun-cil, June 6, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/zj4zkoc.Researchers from the environmental advocacy group dugthrough the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2015 recordsand found 5,000 water systems, serving 18 million Americans,with violations or enforcement actions relating to the agency’srule governing lead and copper contaminants in water.

Curtis, Tom, “Water Infrastructure: The Last and Next100 years,” Journal AWWA, August 2014, http://tinyurl.com/hhzh6fp.A water expert details the history of water infrastructure inthe U.S. and looks ahead to the challenge of keeping wateroperations effective.

Varghese, Shiney, “Privatizing U.S. Water,” The Institutefor Agriculture and Trade Policy, July 2007, http://tinyurl.com/zjcvr35.The report surveys privatized water utilities in the UnitedStates and analyzes the political and economic context inwhich privatization occurs.


Flint

Carah, Jacob, “Lawmaker criticizes Flint for not takingplastic pipes,”Detroit News, June 27, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hugrsuv.A Michigan state representative says Flint should considera California-based company’s offer of free plastic water pipesas a humanitarian gesture, though Flint officials say they areconcerned the pipes may not be durable enough.

Livengood, Chad, “Schuette seeks approval of extra$3.4M for Flint probe,”Detroit News, June 28, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/z2vpkvk.Michigan’s attorney general is asking a state board to approvean extra $3.4 million to pay private attorneys and investigatorslooking into Flint’s water situation.

Swift, Jaimee A., “The media may have stopped talkingabout it, but the Flint water crisis is far from over,” Salon,June 19, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/h88w42s.A pediatrician who helped draw attention to Flint’s elevatedlead levels says she is leading several efforts to help childrenaffected by the crisis.

Infrastructure Funding

“House committee advances water-infrastructure fundingbill,” Transportation Infrastructure News Daily, June 4,2016, http://tinyurl.com/hmjf2kk.The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committeepassed a bill to address states’ water project funding needsby spelling out how much should be spent for dams, harborsand other marine areas.

Cisneros, Henry, “A National Water Crisis,” U.S. News &World Report, June 29, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/gwhscuc.A former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Departmentsecretary urges consideration of new ways to finance waterimprovements, such as using private-sector capital.

Lead Pipes

Bichell, Rae Ellen, et. al., “Do you have lead pipes in yourhome?” NPR, June 25, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/jtartej.A group of reporters provides a step-by-step explanationof how homeowners can identify lead pipes.

Maass, Brian, “Denver Water Steps Up Lead Pipe Removal,”CBS Denver, June 13, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/gmkrlbu.Denver’s water utility has begun to replace lead servicelines from water meters to homes at no cost to propertyowners when it finds lead pipes during construction projectsor leaks.

Phaneuf, Taryn, “IL EPA to issue first loan specificallyto replace lead pipes from water system, expects moreto come,” Cook County Record, June 2, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hfb598z.The western Illinois city of Galesburg is the state’s firstcommunity to receive state money to replace privately ownedlead service lines connecting properties to the municipalwater system.

Public-Private Partnerships

“P3 Bills in Play in Two States,” National Council forPublic-Private Partnerships, June 2, 2016, http://tinyurl.com/hs6lhqx.Massachusetts and Pennsylvania lawmakers are consideringbills to establish public-private partnerships for water andother services.

Deane, Michael, “Public-private partnerships: a critical pieceof the water infrastructure puzzle,”The Hill, May 13, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/z7qfgyw.The National Association of Water Companies’ executive di-rector says public-private partnerships on water distributioncan provide communities with enhanced expertise and newtechnologies.

Machi, Sara, “Bossier City approves public-private part-nership for water system,”Shreveport Times, June 21, 2016,http://tinyurl.com/jjs3xrj.A city council in northern Louisiana approved a public-private partnership for water and sewer services, saying itsought to avoid hiking consumer rates.

The Next Step:Additional Articles from Current Periodicals

CITING CQ RESEARCHER

Sample formats for citing these reports in a bibliography

include the ones listed below. Preferred styles and formats

vary, so please check with your instructor or professor.

MLA STYLEJost, Kenneth. “Remembering 9/11.” CQ Researcher 2 Sept.

2011: 701-732.

APA STYLEJost, K. (2011, September 2). Remembering 9/11. CQ Researcher,

9, 701-732.

CHICAGO STYLEJost, Kenneth. “Remembering 9/11.” CQ Researcher, September

2, 2011, 701-32.

ACCESSCQ Researcher is available in print and online. For access, visit yourlibrary or www.cqresearcher.com.

STAY CURRENTFor notice of upcoming CQ Researcher reports or to learn more aboutCQ Researcher products, subscribe to the free email newsletters, CQ Re-searcher Alert! and CQ Researcher News: http://cqpress.com/newsletters.

PURCHASETo purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronic format(PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737. Single reports startat $15. Bulk purchase discounts and electronic-rights licensing arealso available.

SUBSCRIBEAnnual full-service CQ Researcher subscriptions—including 44 reportsa year, monthly index updates, and a bound volume—start at $1,131.Add $25 for domestic postage.

CQ Researcher Online offers a backfile from 1991 and a number oftools to simplify research. For pricing information, call 800-818-7243 or805-499-9774 or email [email protected].

Upcoming Reports

In-depth Reports on Issues in the News

?Are you writing a paper?

Need backup for a debate?

Want to become an expert on an issue?

For 90 years, students have turned to CQ Researcher for in-depth reporting on issues inthe news. Reports on a full range of political and social issues are now available. Followingis a selection of recent reports:

Mosquito-Borne Disease, 7/22/16 Nuclear Weapons, 7/29/16 Diversity in Hollywood, 8/5/16

Civil LibertiesPrivacy and the Internet, 12/15Intelligence Reform, 5/15Religion and Law, 11/14

Crime/LawDecriminalizing Prostitution, 4/16Restorative Justice, 2/16The Dark Web, 1/16Immigrant Detention, 10/15Fighting Gangs, 10/15Reforming Juvenile Justice, 9/15Police Tactics, 12/14

EducationFree Speech on Campus, 5/15Teaching Critical Thinking, 4/15Race and Education, 9/14

Environment/SocietyNanotechnology, 6/16Social Security, 6/16Women in Combat, 5/16Solar Energy Controversies, 4/16Managing Western Lands, 4/16Future of the Middle Class, 4/16Racial Conflict, 1/16

Health/SafetyVirtual Reality, 2/16Vaccine Controversies, 2/16Fighting Cancer, 1/16Dietary Supplements, 10/15

Politics/EconomyReforming the U.N., 6/16Arbitrating Disputes, 3/16U.S.-Iran Relations, 3/16Unrest in Turkey, 1/16Robotics and the Economy, 9/15European Migration Crisis, 7/15

Documents

CQR Drinking Water Safety - Goucher College