From: | pedal4mother@yahoo.com |
Date: | 12 Jun 2003 13:47:53 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] Dept of Homeland Security water monitor bill-monitors 'terrorism' =to |
But will it monitor military contamination of water? -sheila baker AB 1532 Talking Points . California=92s drinking water systems span thousands of miles of streams, rivers, reservoirs, treatment facilities, pipelines and local distribution networks all of which are vulnerable the accidental or intentional introduction of biological, chemical and radiological agents. =95 The Department of Homeland Security and US EPA believe that urban areas, with their large populations, present the most attractive targets to those who would intentionally contaminate drinking water supplies. =95 Currently, water monitoring is largely confined to maintaining =93water quality=94 within the system and does not attempt to detect the introduction of dangerous agents. =95 Several autonomous water monitoring devices designed to detect very low concentrations of biological or chemical agents have been developed and tested and a number have been deployed for the military and in actual domestic water systems. =95 Devices to transmit real time alarms of the presence of dangerous substances and routine periodic reports from water monitoring equipment have been developed and offer both cellular and satellite transmission. =95 Continuous and autonomous monitoring and reporting of water quality serves to leverage available manpower and resources in protecting the health and safety of the population and in protecting the environment. =95 FACTS =93According to the US Army, who examined the potential threat of biological agents to potable water concluded that on the basis of existing weaponization, stability in water, and known or potential resistance to chlorine, some of the bacterial agents (e.g. clostridium perfringens [that causes] plague) and all [emphasis added] of the biotoxins (botulinum, aflatoxin, ricin) where potential waterborne threats.=94 (Source: p9, Early Warning Monitoring to Detect Hazardous Events In Water Supplies, International Life Science Institute, December 1999) =95 According to W.D. Burrows and S.E. Renner, Biological Agents as Potable Water Threats, p 1-5 in Medical Issues Information Paper No. IP-31-017. U.S. Army Center For Heath Promotion and Preventive Medicine, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD (1998), most of the bio toxins are stable or probably so in water, most are resistant to treatment by chlorine at levels of 10 parts per million, and all are considered threats to the water supply. =95 According to Remote Monitoring and Network Modeling: Their Potential for Protecting the Nation=92s Water Supplies, by Robert M. Clark, Senior Research Engineer Advisor, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, USEPA, Cincinnati, OH, Water Supply and Water Resource Division, in reviewing the report of the Water Protection Task Force (WPTF) of the USEPA for the newly formed Office of Home Land Security, indicated that 80% of the US population is served by 14% of US water utilities (i.e. 54,000 communities with a population of 264 million people). According to Clark, =93In the report water distribution networks have been identified as a major area of vulnerability.=94 =95 According to the USEPA sponsored Workshop on Advanced Technologies in Real-Time Monitoring and Modeling for Drinking Water Safety and Security , June 27-28, 2002, =93The value of real-time environmental monitoring and prediction has to be appreciated anew given recent heightened interest in securing the safety of drinking water. =93=85. Real-time monitoring=85is helpful or necessary to deal with natural and deliberate or accidental human-caused conditions that may threaten health such as the deliberate dumping of biological or chemical contaminates, =85 Real-time monitoring and modeling is appropriate in reservoirs, rivers, and at water treatment plant intakes, and post-treatment within the water distribution network.=94 =95 According to Minimizing The Vulnerability of Water Supplies To Natural and Terrorist Threats, by Robert M. Clark, Senior Research Engineer Advisor, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, USEPA, Cincinnati, OH, Water Supply and Water Resource Division, =93 A number of factors make water supply systems vulnerable to terrorist attack: they are spatially distributed, susceptible to intrusion, and contain many components. Water tanks and storage reservoirs are particularly vulnerable to deliberate sabotage. =85 Water distribution systems are vulnerable to deliberate microbiological contamination, although residual chlorine provides some protection. A contaminant would move rapidly through the system and could cause widespread outbreaks of disease among the inhabitants of the area served=85 There are pathogens, however, which exhibit a high degree of resistance to chlorine.=94 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] EPA issues Public Involvement Policy Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Opponents trying to remove offshore inventory from energy bill | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] EPA issues Public Involvement Policy Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Opponents trying to remove offshore inventory from energy bill |