From: | CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 15 Sep 2003 14:17:48 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] Lockheed may face tighter pollution limit |
Colorado DENVER POST Lockheed may face tighter pollution limit By Jennifer Beauprez September 14, 2003 Colorado health officials may toughen the conditions of a permit allowing Lockheed Martin to discharge a cancer-causing chemical in Jefferson County. Under a state permit that is up for renewal Sept. 30, the defense contractor may discharge treated wastewater containing a hazardous chemical called N-nitrosodimethylamine, or NDMA, at levels 1,000 times higher than recommended for safe drinking water by the Environmental Protection Agency. At issue is whether Lockheed should be required to detect NDMA at significantly smaller amounts than it does now. The decision could affect nearby wildlife wetlands and ultimately the drinking water for hundreds of thousands of Denver-area residents, a handful of environmental activists argue. "At the time the permit was put in place five years ago, there was the practical problem of how low can you detect NDMA," said Howard Roitman, director of environmental programs at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. NDMA is a byproduct of rocket fuel and other industrial uses. It causes liver and lung cancer in animals. Lockheed's permit allows it to discharge 0.7 parts per billion of NDMA in treated water. The EPA - which bows to state authority in setting discharge- permit limits - recommends levels of 0.00069 parts per billion for safe drinking water. Lockheed Martin officials say the laboratory it uses cannot detect NDMA at anything less than 0.7 parts per billion. The company says it doesn't know how much NDMA it actually discharges, although it never has exceeded its permitted parts-per-billion level, Lockheed and state health officials say. But as many as six water quality laboratories worldwide claim they can test for NDMA at or below 0.002 parts per billion. The state now will be reviewing those laboratory methods to determine whether Lockheed Martin's processes should be held to a much higher standard. "If we find that there is a viable methodology out there, then they would be required to use it," said Dave Akers, the state health department's water quality protection manager. Because Lockheed Martin has no violations on its permit, it's virtually guaranteed that the company will get a new one, Akers said. But health officials are reviewing discharge standards to ensure they are setting safe conditions, he said. A draft of a new permit should be issued by late October, followed by a 30-day public review process and a public hearing, if one is requested. This article can be viewed at: http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~33~1630637,00.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CPEO: A DECADE OF SUCCESS. Your generous support will ensure that our important work on military and environmental issues will continue. Please consider one of our donation options. Thank you. http://www.groundspring.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2086-0|721-0 | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Biologist slams Fort Richardson fence plan Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] State, military interests converge on flight path | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Biologist slams Fort Richardson fence plan Next by Thread: Re: [CPEO-MEF] Lockheed may face tighter pollution limit |