Flint Water: A Political Football. Part 3

At this point in the timeline we are looking at June 24, 2015 as the date that data showing lead in the water and an increase in blood-lead levels (BLL) in the children who were exposed to that water is now known.  These folks were made aware of this based on the "cc" we see in that Del Toral EPA memo:

We can assume that the MDEQ is aware of these results:

• 104 ug/L that jumped to 397 ug/L after ferric chloride was added.
•  Children in this home with BLL that went from 2 to 3 ug/dL.

What is important to note here is this.  The protocol used by Flint for collecting samples is believed to under report the concentration of lead found at the tap.  EPA's Del Toral makes note of this in his memo:

The practice of pre-flushing before collecting compliance samples has been shown to result in the minimization of lead capture and significant underestimation of lead levels in the drinking water. Although this practice is not specifically prohibited by the LCR [Lead and Copper rule], it negates the intent of the rule to collect compliance samples under 'worst-case' conditions...

That result of 397 ug/L lead in the water the City of Flint reports appears to be the result obtained with the pre-flush:

The water is once again tested after pre-flushing for 3-4 minutes the night before but this time with the iron filter removed

So what happened next?

March 19, 2015: EPA Region 5 calls MDEQ expressing concern regarding the high lead levels found.

...and how did the MDEQ respond to this concern by the EPA?

The MDEQ response received via voicemail states that the high lead levels at the Walters’ home are due to lead sources in the homeowner’s plumbing. 

This is, in my opinion, one of many mistakes made by those responsible for public safety and an egregious one at that.

This mistake rests squarely on the shoulders of the MDEQ. It is why I have empathy for the Governor if these were the guys advising him.

The reason for those high levels of lead DOES NOT MATTER.

The MDEQ's response to the EPA indicates either a complete lack of understanding of the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), or...or...nope, that's all I can think of as the reason for that reply.

What's worse than this irrelevant response by the MDEQ is what the EPA memo states next:

In previous and subsequent conversations with Ms. Walters, she stated that the plumbing has always been all plastic. An inspection conducted by EPA Region on April 27, 2015, confirmed that all pipes, fittings and valves in the Walters’ home are NSF approved CPVC pipe (certified for drinking water use) and sequential sampling results following the replacement of the service line found that there are no sources of lead in the home plumbing.

Not only does the lead coming from the homeowner's plumbing NOT MATTER, the lead was not coming from this homeowner's plumbing period.

Let's look at what the LCR says about where the responsibility for lead found at the tap above action levels rests.

The treatment technique for the rule requires systems to monitor drinking water at customer taps. If lead concentrations exceed an action level of 15 ppb or copper concentrations exceed an action level of 1.3 ppm in more than 10% of customer taps sampled, the system must undertake a number of additional actions to control corrosion.

You see that word "must?" You see how it applies to the system?  Where the lead is leaching from DOES NOT MATTER.

I have been focusing on the data because the data is important as it relates to what should be done.

Let's go back and look at the lead results that the Flint water system, as well as the MDEQ, are aware of in the middle of March, 2015.

• 104 ug/L that jumped to 397 ug/L after ferric chloride was added.

What's the action level? 15 ppb (ug/L).  What's supposed to happen if that level is exceeded?

If the action level for lead is exceeded, the system must also inform the public about steps they should take to protect their health and may have to replace lead service lines under their control

See that word "must?"  Now we can argue if this one house really requires this to legally happen, you know, the "not enough data!"  You need to look at this one house in context with everything that was going on at that time in Flint.  You take corrosive water - which they knew about...

October 2014: A General Motors plant in Flint stops using municipal water, saying it corrodes car parts. [source]

...and you become aware that the plumbing in the house with lead levels at the tap of 397 ppb is new and cannot possibly leach lead, and, well, you should have done what the LCR required you to do.

That's March 19, 2015.  On September 25th we get the "political football" email:

The DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) and DCH (Department of Community Health) feel that some in Flint are taking the very sensitive issue of children's exposure to lead and trying to turn it into a political football claiming the departments are underestimating the impacts on the populations and particularly trying to shift responsibility to the state," said Muchmore. [source]

To me, and this is where I kind of feel sorry for the Governor, nobody in the know seems to be in the know about what needs to happen and who is to make it happen if it is not happening.

We have this term in the drinking water regulatory world called "primacy" under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Someone IS responsible and the finger pointing going on in the state is counter-productive.

What happened next?

Next post: Flint Water: A Political Football.  Part 4