Editorial: Arsenic rules are resurrected

Friday, Nov. 2, 2001 | 8:51 a.m.

This week the Bush administration adopted tougher standards for the amount of arsenic that can be allowed in drinking water. Arsenic, which often is naturally occurring in the West, can increase a person's risk of coming down with some types of cancer. The tougher standards that Bush now has endorsed, by the way, are identical to the Clinton-era rules that Bush denounced earlier this year. So why did Bush come full circle?

The primary reason for the president's reversal is political. Public opinion polls showed that he took a beating for blocking the new requirements, which hadn't been updated since 1942. In an effort to deflate the criticism, Bush said that he would seek the advice of the National Academy of Sciences, which investigated the matter and released its findings last month in a report that suggested that even tougher guidelines could be imposed. Bush's standard allows arsenic in 10 parts per billion of drinking water, but the NAS noted that even at levels as low as 3 parts per billion there is an increased risk of bladder and lung cancer.

Now that Bush finally has done the right thing after months of dithering, there is another important issue to address -- the cost of complying with the new rules. Water systems in the rural West, including here in Nevada, often are run by small companies. The Bush administration estimates that it could cost as much as $200 million for all the water companies to comply. The Environmental Protection Agency wants to offer $20 million for research to find the most cost-effective technologies to meet the standards. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., meanwhile, wants to set aside $750 million so that towns and tribes can upgrade their water systems.

The federal government should provide sufficient funding so water companies don't have to take huge financial hits to comply. The cost to rid our water supplies of much of the arsenic that contaminates them will be high, but it must be done.

archive