When the Safe Drinking Water Act was passed in 1974 many Americans took the purity of their drinking water for granted. Today, reports of cryptosporidium, disinfection byproducts, MTBE and other contaminants fouling our drinking water undermine public trust in that water.
The 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments set us on a course to reversing this lack of public confidence. One way of addressing that problem was to give the public the right-to-know about the contamination threats to its drinking water.
My consumer confidence reports provision, patterned after a similar requirement of California law, was designed to provide that right. The provision requires public water systems to tell consumers where they get their drinking water from, and the contamination problems threatening that water.
I am very pleased to see that EPA has issued regulations to implement the consumer confidence provision. Thanks to that progress, by October 1999, citizens in the rest of the country will join Californians in receiving consumer confidence reports.
Although EPA has made significant progress implementing this and other provisions of the 1996 amendments, children, pregnant women and those with weakened immune systems may still face greater risks from drinking water than the rest of us do.
During the debate on the 1996 amendments, I fought to ensure that our drinking water standards specifically protect these groups. In this connection, so-called disinfection byproducts -- particularly trihalomethanes -- was a particular concern of mine.
As you may recall, in 1992, California's Department of Health Services (DHS) released health studies finding higher miscarriage rates among women who drank more tap water than bottled water in early pregnancy. A follow-up 1998 DHS study (A Prospective Study of Spontaneous Abortion: Relation to Amount and Source of Drinking Water Consumed During Pregnancy!, confirmed these earlier findings.
The study found that women who drank five or more glasses of tap water per day containing high levels of common disinfection byproducts -- particularly trihalomethanes -- were at greater risk of miscarriage during their first trimester than women with less exposure.
I understand that in December 1998, EPA released the first stage of its rule to deal with this threat. A second stage of that rule is now being prepared to deal with that threat more comprehensively. As EPA moves forward with that second stage, I would like to know whether it has a research agenda designed to build on the work performed in California.
In particular, I understand that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has identified some discrete studies it could perform to add to the body of California's work. What action is EPA planning to take to conduct such studies so that we can be sure that EPA's second rule on disinfection byproducts protects pregnant women?
More broadly speaking, I am also interested to learn how EPA is implementing my children's health provision of the 1996 amendments. That provision requires EPA to consider the risks drinking water contaminants present to children and other vulnerable subpopulations as it sets standards for those contaminants.
This provision was patterned after my own Children's Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) which would expand the application of that requirement to provide that all standards EPA establishes under our environmental laws protect children.
In addition, another provision I added to the 1996 amendments requires EPA to present a related study to Congress by August 6, 2000. That study must evaluate the extent to which children, pregnant women and other vulnerable subpopulations are likely to experience elevated health risks from contaminants in drinking water.
I would like to know what progress EPA has made in meeting this deadline.
Finally, one of the most significant threats facing nation's drinking water supply is contamination by the fuel additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE).
In January, Lake Tahoe closed its 13th drinking water well due to MTBE contamination. All told, Tahoe has lost over 20% of its drinking water supply due to this contamination. Just three days ago, the Boston Globe reported that MTBE was detected in 137 drinking water sources in New Hampshire.
On October 5, 1997, EPA placed MTBE on the Safe Drinking Water Act "Contaminant Candidate List." Once placed on this list, EPA determines whether or not to regulate that contaminant. I am interested to learn whether EPA has any immediate plans to regulate MTBE under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
I congratulate EPA and the state drinking water program administrators here today for their work to implement the 1996 amendments. I look forward to hearing the testimony today.
Thank you.