By Mary Kerr (202) 225-6260
Statement of The Honorable James L. Oberstar
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
Hearing on“Emerging Contaminants in U.S. Waters”
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for holding this hearing on a topic of growing concern within the scientific and public health communities: the increased awareness of “emerging contaminants” in our nation’s waters. These chemical compounds, which can include pharmaceuticals, persistent organic pollutants, pesticides and herbicides, flame retardants, and other industrial by-products, are showing up more and more frequently in the nation’s surface waters and ground water.
The question boils down to: where are these chemicals coming from; what is the likely impact to human and ecological health; and what should and can be done to protect us from harm?
This issue garnered significant national attention this past summer in a series of Associated Press news articles on pharmaceuticals and “personal care products” in our nation’s drinking water supply. Much of the nation’s drinking water supply comes from our surface and ground waters, so it is appropriate that this Committee expands the focus to what chemicals compounds and other pollutants are found in surface and ground waters that feed our nation’s drinking water supply, and how these pollutants are addressed (or not addressed) through the Clean Water Act.
In many ways, the Clean Water Act has been successful in improving the overall quality of the nation’s waters. For example, in 1972, only one-third of the nation’s waters were entirely safe for fishing and swimming. However, after over 35 years of Clean Water Act authority, today two-thirds of the nation’s assessed waters meet the fishable and swimmable standard.
In just over three decades, we have doubled the number of waters meeting water quality standards, but we are only half-way in meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act – that all waters meet fishable and swimmable standards. What concerns me is that we seem to have reached a plateau in improving water quality. The statistic that two-thirds of the nation’s assessed waters meet fishable and swimmable standards has remained relatively unchanged for over a decade. We need to start asking why.
Is it simply a question of funding needed wastewater improvements and upgrades, as some would suggest? Or is it something more? Has modern technology finally surpassed the regulatory capabilities of the Clean Water Act, to where the Act can no longer address emerging threats to the nation’s waters, and in turn, to the nation’s overall ecological and human health?
The focus of today’s hearing explores one of the water quality challenges that require further attention. Recent Federal studies have revealed the growing presence of “emerging contaminants” in our nation’s waters, including the presence of pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals, pesticides, and other chemical compounds. Unfortunately, the vast array of treatment technologies available today may be ill-suited (or incapable) of removing these chemical pollutants from the nation’s waters, exposing the natural environment to a potential low-dose toxic soup.
Recent news reports have demonstrated the potential effects of these chemical mixtures on the natural environment, including intersex fish in the Chesapeake Bay, deformed alligators in Florida lakes, greater incidence of fish tumors and declining fish populations, including native lake trout, in the Great Lakes. What is less apparent is the potential impact of these chemical mixtures on human health.
Human exposure to waterborne pollutants can come in many forms, such as direct exposure through recreational contact or consuming potentially-contaminated fish. Yet, the most common “pathway” of exposure comes from the water directly out of the tap, either directly from drinking the water or through inhaling pollutants in steam during a bath or shower. Ironically, even individuals who believe that bottled water is a safer alternative may be unaware that a 10-minute shower contributes to a greater dosage of chemical compounds than drinking a half-gallon of tap water.
The anecdotal evidence on human health impacts is growing, including studies on decreased fertility rates, increased incidence of breast, ovarian, prostate, and uterine cancers, and statistically-significant reports on low-male birth rates. Yet, what is striking is how much we do not know about the potential short term and long-term effects of exposure to these chemical compounds. However, because the potential human health implications are so great, it is clear that more attention needs to be placed on this issue.
I am pleased we are holding this important hearing to learn more about the challenges that remain in reaching our goal of fishable and swimmable waters. I look forward to a continuing dialogue on whether a “next generation” of the Clean Water Act is necessary to meet the water quality challenges of the upcoming century. I welcome our witnesses here today, and look forward to their testimony.
Statement of The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
Hearing On “Emerging Contaminants in U.S. Waters”
Today’s hearing looks at the extensive range of emerging contaminants that are present in our surface waters. Many of these substances are either unregulated or under-regulated, and include toxic chemicals, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and nano-materials.
As many of you know, I spent my early professional years as a nurse. It’s from this experience that I have been very mindful of threats – especially unnecessary threats – to human health. However, I am concerned with the growing body of evidence on the presence of toxic chemicals and their by-products in the nation’s waters, and question just how safe our waters actually are, especially to human health over the long term.
While the Clean Water Act was successful in controlling some substances, it is clear that today’s contaminants of concern are not the pollutants of yesteryear. For example, there are currently 80,000 chemicals in use. This is a three-fold increase from 1941 to 1995. 8,000 of these are known to be carcinogens. One would hope that all of these 8,000 cancer-causing poisons are somehow addressed under Federal and state authorities, including the Clean Water Act. Shockingly, this is not the case. It seems that less than 300 chemicals have permit limits. Today’s hearing provides us with the opportunity to ask why this is the case.
It’s not as if emerging contaminants are new issues of concern for either the Congress or EPA. In 1996, through the Food Quality Protection and the Safe Drinking Water Acts, the Congress instructed EPA to develop a screening program to determine if certain chemicals and compounds disrupt hormones in humans. In the 12 years since this mandate was put forward, the Agency has not begun to test any chemicals under this program, despite the potential for these chemicals and compounds to cause great harms to individuals – especially to children and pregnant women.
Testimony from the U.S. Geological Survey will demonstrate that these endocrine disrupting chemicals, and many other toxic substances, are in our surface waters. Not only have they been demonstrated to harm aquatic life, they have the grave potential to harm humans. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about how these chemicals, these emerging contaminants, are getting into our waters.
Our former Defense Secretary, Don Rumsfeld, famously stated:
There are known knowns…there are known unknowns…but there are also unknown unknowns.
While perhaps a clever quip, we certainly saw how a reliance on such platitudes rendered our situation in Iraq during his tenure. We would certainly hope that our nation’s Environmental Protection Agency is not taking the same approach with regards to unregulated toxic chemicals.
###
