February 28, 2008
WASA Disputes Lead Spike Concerns
The D.C. Water and Sewer Authority sent us the following statement in reaction to this post we ran earlier this week, about how their practice of partial lead pipe replacement appears to have caused very large spikes in the tap water lead levels of hundreds of District homes.
To refresh your memory, the Washington Post reported last weekend on a set of test results from 2006 that show major lead level spikes in the tap water of hundreds of homes just after lead pipes near them were replaced. The test results were obtained through a freedom of information act request by Virginia Tech professor Marc Edwards, and were not made public by WASA before then.
Drinking water distributed in the District of Columbia meets all federal EPA regulations and standards for public health safety.Except, of course, for the tap water from 658 homes tested in 2006, within a week after the agency partially replaced their lead service lines. Edwards' analysis showed those homes had lead levels 17 times the amount the federal government considers unsafe in drinking water.
The implication that WASA has been withholding information about “dangerously high” lead levels is unfair and unfounded for several reasons – (1) temporary spikes in lead levels are not a system-wide problem in District drinking water; (2) the potential for a spike affects only about two percent (2%) of customers who are having a partial lead service line replacement (replacing the lead pipe on the public side of the property line with copper pipe), (3) this temporary (short-term) elevation in lead levels can occur in some cases when lead shavings come loose in the pipes after construction, and (4) the lead spike is short-term and can be reduced by flushing the lines, which customers are instructed on before and after partial lead service line replacement.The statement also detailed other instructions and advisements that are sent to property owners who are slated for partial lead pipe replacement, which do indicate that affected homeowners are given adequate information on the issue.
So what do you think of WASA's response?
|
Advertisement: DCist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
I don't appreciate WASA's response, but I bet the plaintiff's attorneys will. There's a whole group of legal alchemists who will likely succeed in turning lead into gold over this.
Pffft. Like WASA's really going to admit they've been trying to kill residents all these years. I tried that on the judge, and he threw the book at me. No, if the http://www.insidethex.co.uk/transcrp/scrp320.htm">X Files has taught us anything, it's that you deny EVERYTHING. "What is this 'lead' of which you speak? There was never any lead! Lead doesn't exist! It's a myth! What you saw was Venus! Your scientists have yet to discover how neural networks create self-consciousness, let alone how the human brain processes two-dimensional retinal images into the three-dimensional phenomenon known as perception. Yet you somehow brazenly declare seeing is believing? Mister Crikenson, your scientific illiteracy makes me shudder, and I wouldn't flaunt your ignorance by telling anyone that you saw anything last night other than the planet Venus, because if you do, you're a dead man.
I was a contractor on this project a few years back, I can assure you that detailed instructions are available to homeowners, as I stuffed what seemed like 5 million envelopes with them. That being said, that whole project is corrupt and has been caught up in lawsuits through its entirety. I wouldn't trust anything WASA says.
The whole thing is ridiculous. I've gone back and forth with WASA about getting the pipes on our street replaced and it seems we went from waiting another 3 years to being removed from the list altogether. DC water is NOT drinkable. Anyone who has taken a sip and gaged on the horrible metallic taste knows that. I ask you...can it really be up to EPA standards when the water coming out of your faucet even SMELLS bad???
<fail>Monkeyrotica</fail>
Well, if your water consisted purely of H2O and an allowable amount of sulfur, I reckon it'd be up to EPA standards and smell horrific.
i think that wasa's response was measured, careful, and gave no real sense of coming down strongly on one side of things or another.
in other words, inconclusive.
at least they didn't threaten to sue you (that we know of).
I've long since stopped listening to anything WASA has to say. I only consume Bottled/filtered water in the District. WASA is a proven bad faith actor with no remaining credibility.
So, the flushing is just necessary for 1-2 minutes once after the replacement, OR everytime for 1-2 after replacement?
To play devil's advocate, WASA didn't try to deny what happened and the key reason in their defense appears to be #4: "the lead spike is short-term and can be reduced by flushing the lines, which customers are instructed on". Were the tests conducted on lines that had not been flushed as instructed? If yes, no surprise about the dangerous levels. If no, and levels were still too high, well then WASA owes people some Brita filters.
I'm less concerned about the immediate after effects of lead line replacement than the persistent problems WASA continually ignores, such as promoting continuing testing (levels vary on same taps over time), gaming results by removing screen filters when they actually do test despite screens being known lead accumulators, and continually downplaying potential health effects with insufficient epidemiological evidence to support their claims. WASA continually passes the buck -- to the EPA, to DC government and DC/Arlington residents, and to the Army Corp of Engineers. What reason does anyone have to assume the veracity of WASA PR and not the substantial record of deeply problematic water safety management?
Here's my question on the lead: WASA will replace the lead pipes leading up to your property line. But they won't replace the lead pipes inside your property line unless you pay them to do so. So if you don't pay, you still have lead pipes AND you now have lead shavings that have been disturbed floating around in your water.
WASA's handling of this has been a total mess from the get-go. Their continued lack of providing people with accurate, useful and comprehensible information just keeps adding to the debacle. They will get sued and they will deserve to lose.