Perchlorate
A System to Track Sampling and Cleanup Results Is Needed Gao ID: GAO-05-462 May 20, 2005Perchlorate, a primary ingredient in propellant, has been used for decades in the manufacture and firing of rockets and missiles. Other uses include fireworks, flares, and explosives. Perchlorate has been found in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, and soil in the United States. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) reviewed studies of perchlorate's health effects and reported in January 2005 that certain levels of exposure may not adversely affect healthy adults but recommended more studies be conducted on the effects of perchlorate exposure in children and pregnant women. GAO determined (1) the estimated extent of perchlorate in the United States, (2) what actions have been taken to address perchlorate, and (3) what studies of perchlorate's health risks have reported.
Perchlorate contamination has been found in water and soil at almost 400 sites in the United States where concentration levels ranged from a minimum reporting level of 4 parts per billion to millions of parts per billion. More than one-half of all sites were in California and Texas, and sites in Arkansas, California, Texas, Nevada, and Utah had some of the highest concentration levels. Yet, most sites had lower levels of contamination; roughly two-thirds of sites had concentration levels at or below the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) provisional cleanup standard of 18 parts per billion. Federal and state agencies are not required to routinely report perchlorate findings to EPA, and EPA does not centrally track or monitor perchlorate detections or the status of cleanup. As a result, a greater number of contaminated sites than we reported may already exist. Although there is no specific federal requirement to clean up perchlorate, EPA and state agencies have used broad authorities under various environmental laws and regulations, as well as state laws and action levels, to sample and clean up and/or require the sampling and cleanup of perchlorate by responsible parties. Further, under certain federal and state environmental laws, private industry may be required to sample for contaminants, such as perchlorate. According to EPA and state officials, private industry and public water suppliers have generally complied with regulations requiring sampling and agency requests to sample. The Department of Defense (DOD) has sampled and cleaned up perchlorate in some locations when required by laws and regulations, but the department has been reluctant to sample on or near active installations under other circumstances. Except where there is a specific legal requirement, DOD's perchlorate sampling policy requires the services to sample only under certain conditions. Cleanup is planned or under way at 51 of the almost 400 perchlorate-contaminated sites identified to date. Since 1998, EPA and DOD have sponsored a number of perchlorate health risk studies using varying study methodologies. We reviewed 90 of these studies that generally examined whether and how perchlorate affected the thyroid. About one-quarter concluded that perchlorate had an adverse effect. In January 2005, NAS reported on the potential health effects of perchlorate and concluded that a total exposure level from all sources, higher than that initially recommended by EPA (a dose equivalent to 1 part per billion in drinking water, assuming that all exposure came from drinking water) may not adversely affect a healthy adult. On the basis of NAS' report, EPA revised its reference dose to a level that is equivalent to 24.5 parts per billion in drinking water (if it is assumed that all exposure comes only from drinking water). The reference dose is not a drinking water standard; it is a scientific estimate of the total daily exposure level from all sources that is not expected to cause adverse effects in humans, including the most sensitive populations.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-05-462, Perchlorate: A System to Track Sampling and Cleanup Results Is Needed
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-462
entitled 'Perchlorate: A System to Track Sampling and Cleanup Results
Is Needed' which was released on June 21, 2005.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous
Materials, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives:
May 2005:
Perchlorate:
A System to Track Sampling and Cleanup Results Is Needed:
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-462]:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-05-462, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Environment and Hazardous Materials, House Committee on Energy and
Commerce:
Why GAO Did This Study:
Perchlorate, a primary ingredient in propellant, has been used for
decades in the manufacture and firing of rockets and missiles. Other
uses include fireworks, flares, and explosives. Perchlorate has been
found in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, and soil in the
United States. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) reviewed studies
of perchlorate‘s health effects and reported in January 2005 that
certain levels of exposure may not adversely affect healthy adults but
recommended more studies be conducted on the effects of perchlorate
exposure in children and pregnant women.
GAO determined (1) the estimated extent of perchlorate in the United
States, (2) what actions have been taken to address perchlorate, and
(3) what studies of perchlorate‘s health risks have reported.
What GAO Found:
Perchlorate contamination has been found in water and soil at almost
400 sites in the United States where concentration levels ranged from a
minimum reporting level of 4 parts per billion to millions of parts per
billion. More than one-half of all sites were in California and Texas,
and sites in Arkansas, California, Texas, Nevada, and Utah had some of
the highest concentration levels. Yet, most sites had lower levels of
contamination; roughly two-thirds of sites had concentration levels at
or below the Environmental Protection Agency‘s (EPA) provisional
cleanup standard of 18 parts per billion. Federal and state agencies
are not required to routinely report perchlorate findings to EPA, and
EPA does not centrally track or monitor perchlorate detections or the
status of cleanup. As a result, a greater number of contaminated sites
than we reported may already exist.
Although there is no specific federal requirement to clean up
perchlorate, EPA and state agencies have used broad authorities under
various environmental laws and regulations, as well as state laws and
action levels, to sample and clean up and/or require the sampling and
cleanup of perchlorate by responsible parties. Further, under certain
federal and state environmental laws, private industry may be required
to sample for contaminants, such as perchlorate. According to EPA and
state officials, private industry and public water suppliers have
generally complied with regulations requiring sampling and agency
requests to sample. The Department of Defense (DOD) has sampled and
cleaned up perchlorate in some locations when required by laws and
regulations, but the department has been reluctant to sample on or near
active installations under other circumstances. Except where there is a
specific legal requirement, DOD‘s perchlorate sampling policy requires
the services to sample only under certain conditions. Cleanup is
planned or under way at 51 of the almost 400 perchlorate-contaminated
sites identified to date.
Since 1998, EPA and DOD have sponsored a number of perchlorate health
risk studies using varying study methodologies. We reviewed 90 of these
studies that generally examined whether and how perchlorate affected
the thyroid. About one-quarter concluded that perchlorate had an
adverse effect. In January 2005, NAS reported on the potential health
effects of perchlorate and concluded that a total exposure level from
all sources, higher than that initially recommended by EPA (a dose
equivalent to 1 part per billion in drinking water, assuming that all
exposure came from drinking water) may not adversely affect a healthy
adult. On the basis of NAS‘ report, EPA revised its reference dose to a
level that is equivalent to 24.5 parts per billion in drinking water
(if it is assumed that all exposure comes only from drinking water).
The reference dose is not a drinking water standard; it is a scientific
estimate of the total daily exposure level from all sources that is not
expected to cause adverse effects in humans, including the most
sensitive populations.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that EPA work with federal agencies and the states to
establish a structure to track and monitor perchlorate detections and
cleanup efforts.
EPA agreed with our findings but DOD did not. Neither agency agreed
with our recommendation. GAO believes its findings are sound; further,
DOD‘s citation of sites not on EPA‘s list underscores the need for this
recommendation.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-462.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact John B. Stephenson at
(202) 512-3841 or stephensonj@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Perchlorate Has Been Found at Almost 400 Sites across the United
States:
EPA and State Environmental Agencies Use Federal and State
Environmental Laws and Regulations to Respond to Perchlorate:
DOD and EPA Sponsored Numerous Studies of Perchlorate Exposure, but
Findings about Perchlorate's Health Effects Are Inconsistent:
Conclusions:
Recommendation for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Appendix II: Facilities and Sites Where Perchlorate Was Found and
Concentration Levels, as of January 2005:
Appendix III: Perchlorate Health Risk Studies Published Since 1998:
Appendix IV: Summary of Certain Environmental Laws and Regulations:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act:
The Clean Water Act:
The Federal Facility Compliance Act:
The Safe Drinking Water Act:
Appendix V: Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency:
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
Figures:
Figure 1: Maximum Perchlorate Concentrations Reported in any Media and
Number of Sites, January 2005:
Figure 2: Activities Linked to Perchlorate, by Site:
Abbreviations:
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980:
DOD: Department of Defense:
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency:
NAS: National Academy of Sciences:
NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration:
NPDES: National Pollution Discharge Elimination System:
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act:
Letter May 20, 2005:
The Honorable Paul E. Gillmor:
Chairman, Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials:
Committee on Energy and Commerce:
House of Representatives:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Ammonium perchlorate (perchlorate) is a primary ingredient in solid
rocket propellant and has been used for decades by the Department of
Defense (DOD), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), and the defense industry in the manufacturing, testing, and
firing of rockets and missiles. Private industry has also used
perchlorate to manufacture products such as automobile airbags,
fireworks, flares, and commercial explosives. Perchlorate is a
naturally occurring and manufactured salt that is easily dissolved and
transported in water and has been found in groundwater, surface water,
and soil across the country. Perchlorate has also been found in
drinking water and food products, such as milk and lettuce. Recent
health studies have shown that perchlorate can affect the thyroid gland
and may cause developmental delays.
Due to questions and ongoing debate about the risks of exposing
children and pregnant women to low levels of perchlorate, four federal
agencies asked the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to review and
comment on recent studies of perchlorate and its health effects. In
January 2005, NAS concluded that existing studies did not support a
clear link between perchlorate exposure and adverse health effects. NAS
recommended a perchlorate reference dose--an estimated daily exposure
level from all sources that is not expected to cause adverse effects in
humans, including the most sensitive populations--of 0.0007 milligrams
per kilogram of body weight per day. The dose is equivalent to 2 liters
of drinking water per day containing 24.5 parts per billion of
perchlorate when consumed by an adult weighing 70 kilograms (or 154
pounds), assuming that all perchlorate exposure comes from drinking
water. In February 2005, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
adopted NAS' recommended reference dose for perchlorate, but it has not
established a national federal standard for perchlorate in drinking
water or other regulatory requirements to clean up perchlorate in
groundwater, surface water, or soil.
In this context, we identified (1) the estimated extent of perchlorate
found in the United States; (2) what actions the federal government,
state governments, and responsible parties have taken to clean up or
eliminate the source of perchlorate; and (3) what studies of the
potential health risks from perchlorate have been conducted and, where
presented, the author's conclusions or findings on the health effects
of perchlorate.
To provide an estimate of the extent of perchlorate found in the United
States, we compiled and analyzed data on perchlorate detections from
EPA, DOD, the U.S. Geological Survey, and state agencies. To identify
the actions governments and responsible parties have taken to clean up
and eliminate the source of the perchlorate, we (1) reviewed federal
and state laws, regulations, and policies on water quality and
environmental cleanup and (2) interviewed EPA officials and selected
state agency officials to identify the authorities they have used to
monitor and respond to instances of perchlorate. We also interviewed
EPA and state agency officials on whether responsible parties have
taken action to clean up perchlorate and reviewed and analyzed data
from federal and state agencies to determine the status and extent of
cleanup efforts. For the purposes of this report, "cleanup" refers to
ongoing efforts to remove perchlorate from water and/or soil. However,
our use of this term excludes pollution prevention efforts, such as the
removal of perchlorate from wastewater. To identify studies of the
potential health risks from perchlorate, who conducted them, and what
methodologies were used, we conducted a literature search for studies
of perchlorate health risks published since 1998, interviewed DOD and
EPA officials on what studies they considered important in assessing
perchlorate health risks, and examined the references of each study for
other studies we had not obtained. We identified 125 studies on
perchlorate and the thyroid, of which we reviewed 90 that were relevant
to our review. A more detailed description of our scope and methodology
is presented in appendix I. We conducted our work from June 2004 to
March 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards, including an assessment of data reliability and internal
controls.
Results in Brief:
Perchlorate has been found by federal and state agencies at almost 400
sites in groundwater, surface water, soil, or public drinking water in
the United States. However, because there is not a standardized
approach for reporting perchlorate data nationwide, a greater number of
sites than we identified may already exist in the United States.
Perchlorate has been found in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and
2 commonwealths of the United States, where the highest concentrations
ranged from 4 parts per billionto more than 3.7 million parts per
billion. (At some sites, federal and state agencies detected
perchlorate concentrations as low as 1 part per billion or less, yet 4
parts per billion is the minimum reporting level of the analysis method
most often used.) More than one-half of all sites were found in
California and Texas, and sites in Arkansas, California, Texas, Nevada,
and Utah had some of the highest concentration levels. However, most
sites did not have high levels of perchlorate. Roughly two-thirds of
sites had concentration levels at or below 18 parts per billion, the
upper limit of EPA's provisional cleanup guidance, and almost 70
percent of sites had perchlorate concentrations less than 24.5 parts
per billion, the drinking water concentration calculated on the basis
of EPA's recently established reference dose. At more than one-quarter
of the sites, propellant manufacturing, rocket motor testing, and
explosives disposal were the most likely sources of perchlorate. Public
drinking water systems accounted for more than one-third of the sites
where perchlorate was found. EPA sampled more than 3,700 public
drinking water systems and found perchlorate in 153 systems across 26
states and 2 commonwealths of the United States. Perchlorate
concentration levels found at public drinking water systems ranged from
4 to 420 parts per billion. However, only 14 of the 153 public drinking
water systems had concentration levels above 24.5 parts per billion.
EPA and state officials told us they had not cleaned up these public
drinking water systems, principally because there was no federal
drinking water standard or specific federal requirement to clean up
perchlorate. Further, EPA currently does not centrally track or monitor
perchlorate detections or the status of cleanup activities. In fact,
several EPA regional officials told us they did not always know whether
states had found perchlorate, at what levels, or what actions were
taken. As a result, it is difficult to determine the extent of
perchlorate in the United States or the status of cleanup actions, if
any.
Although there is no specific federal requirement to clean up
perchlorate or a specific perchlorate cleanup standard, EPA and state
environmental agencies have investigated, sampled, and cleaned up
unregulated contaminants, such as perchlorate, under various federal
environmental laws and regulations. EPA and state agency officials have
used their authorities under these laws and regulations, as well as
under state laws and action levels, to sample and clean up and/or
require the sampling and cleanup of perchlorate by responsible parties.
For example, according to EPA and state officials, at least 9 states
have established nonregulatory action levels or advisories, ranging
from under 1 part per billion to 18 parts per billion, under which
responsible parties have been required to sample and clean up
perchlorate. Further, certain environmental laws and programs require
private companies to sample for contaminants, which can include
unregulated substances such as perchlorate, and report to environmental
agencies. According to EPA and state officials, private industry and
public water suppliers have generally complied with regulations
requiring sampling for contaminants and agency requests to sample or
clean up perchlorate. DOD has sampled and cleaned up when required by
specific environmental laws and regulations but has been reluctant to
sample on or near active installations, EPA and state officials said.
Where there is no specific legal requirement to sample at a particular
installation, DOD's policy on perchlorate requires sampling only where
a perchlorate release due to DOD activities is suspected and a complete
human exposure pathway is likely to exist. Finally, EPA, state
agencies, and/or responsible parties are cleaning up or planning
cleanup at 51 of the almost 400 sites where perchlorate was found. The
remaining sites are not being cleaned up for a variety of reasons. The
reason most often cited by EPA and state officials was that they were
waiting for a federal requirement to do so.
We identified and summarized 90 studies of perchlorate health risks
published since 1998. EPA and DOD sponsored the majority of these
studies, which used experimental, field study, and data analysis
methodologies. For 26 of the 90 studies, the findings indicated that
perchlorate had an adverse effect. Eighteen of these studies found
adverse effects on development resulting from maternal exposure to
perchlorate. Although the studies we reviewed examined whether and how
perchlorate affected the thyroid, most of the studies of adult
populations were unable to determine whether the thyroid was adversely
affected. Adverse effects of perchlorate on the adult thyroid are
difficult to evaluate because they may happen over longer time periods
than can be observed in a research study. However, adverse effects of
perchlorate on development can be studied and measured within study
time frames. We found some studies considered the same perchlorate dose
amount but found different effects. The precise cause of the
differences remains unresolved but may be attributed to an individual
study's design type or physical condition of the subjects, such as
their age. Such unresolved questions are one of the bases for the
differing conclusions among EPA, DOD, and academic studies on
perchlorate dose amounts and effects.
In January 2005, NAS issued its report on the potential health effects
of perchlorate. The NAS report evaluated many of the same health risk
studies included in our review. NAS reported that certain levels of
exposure may not adversely affect healthy adults but recommended that
more studies be conducted on the effects of perchlorate exposure in
children and pregnant women. NAS also recommended a perchlorate
reference dose, which is an estimated daily exposure level from all
sources that is expected not to cause adverse effects in humans,
including the most sensitive populations. The reference dose of 0.0007
milligrams per kilogram of body weight is equivalent to a drinking
water concentration of 24.5 parts per billion, if all exposure comes
from drinking water.
To ensure that EPA has more reliable information on the extent of
perchlorate found, the status of cleanup efforts, and the results of
investigations of perchlorate and the effectiveness of cleanup methods,
we are recommending that EPA work with the states and other federal
agencies to establish a formal structure to track and monitor
perchlorate detections and the status of cleanup efforts in the United
States and its territories.
In commenting on a draft of this report, EPA agreed with our findings
and conclusions on the extent of perchlorate in the United States and
also agreed that defense-related activities have been found to be
associated with perchlorate detections. However, EPA did not agree with
our recommendation that it establish a formal structure to centrally
track and monitor perchlorate detections and the status of cleanup
efforts across the federal government and state agencies. In contrast
to EPA's view of our report's accuracy, DOD, in commenting on a draft
of this report, stated that our report did not provide an accurate
assessment of perchlorate issues and activities. DOD asserted that our
report mischaracterized DOD's response to perchlorate and cited
examples of where DOD has sampled and invested in cleanup technologies,
even though perchlorate is currently unregulated. We disagree with
DOD's position. Our report credits DOD with actions it has taken but
also points out where DOD has not acted. Finally, DOD disagreed with
our recommendation that EPA establish a more formal structure to
centrally track and monitor perchlorate because it believes that it is
not clear that such a system will provide added value. DOD stated that
it will continue to share its information on perchlorate. However, in
its comments on this report, DOD provided information on four locations
where perchlorate has been found, in one case as long as 5 years ago,
but these locations do not appear on EPA's list of perchlorate
detection sites. Whether this omission occurred as a result of a DOD or
an EPA oversight is unknown, but it underscores the need for a more
structured and formalized system.
Background:
Perchlorate is a primary ingredient in solid rocket propellant and has
been used for decades by DOD, NASA, and the defense industry in the
manufacturing, testing, and firing of rockets and missiles. On the
basis of 1998 manufacturer data, EPA estimated that 90 percent of the
perchlorate produced in the United States is manufactured for use by
the military and NASA. Total typical production quantities average
several million pounds per year. Private industry has used perchlorate
to manufacture products such as fireworks, flares, automobile airbags,
and commercial explosives. Perchlorate is a salt, both manufactured and
naturally occurring, and is easily dissolved and transported in water.
It has been found in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, and
soil across the country. There is no national primary drinking water
regulation for perchlorate. In 1992 and again in 1995, EPA established
a provisional reference dose range for perchlorate of 0.0001 to 0.0005
milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. This converts to a
drinking water concentration of between 4 and 18 parts per billion. On
the basis of the drinking water conversion, EPA identified a
corresponding provisional cleanup level for perchlorate of between 4
and 18 parts per billion.[Footnote 1]
History of Perchlorate Investigation and Study:
Perchlorate was initially identified as a contaminant of concern by EPA
in 1985, when it was found in wells at hazardous waste sites in
California. Perchlorate became a chemical of regulatory concern in 1997
after California found perchlorate in the groundwater near Aerojet, a
rocket manufacturer in Rancho Cordova. At the time, perchlorate could
not reliably be detected below 400 parts per billion in water. In April
1997, a new analytical method capable of detecting perchlorate in
drinking water at concentrations of 4 parts per billion became
available. This development prompted several states to test drinking
water, as well as groundwater and surface water, for perchlorate.
Within 2 years, perchlorate had been detected in drinking water in 3
western states and groundwater and surface water in 11 states across
the United States. Perchlorate in drinking water is considered a more
immediate concern.
In light of emerging concerns about perchlorate, EPA published in 1998
its first draft risk assessment on the environmental risks of
perchlorate exposure. In February 1999, an external panel of
independent scientists reviewed EPA's draft risk assessment and
recommended additional studies and analyses to provide more data on
perchlorate and its health effects. DOD and industry researchers
conducted laboratory and field studies of the health effects of
perchlorate and submitted them to EPA. On the basis of an analysis of
these studies, EPA revised its draft perchlorate risk assessment and
released it for peer review and public comment in January 2002. The
revised draft risk assessment included a proposed reference dose
equivalent to a concentration of 1 part per billion in drinking
water,[Footnote 2] if it is assumed all exposure comes only from
drinking water. After a second panel peer review, and some disagreement
about the proposed reference dose, EPA, DOD, NASA, and the Department
of Energy asked NAS, in 2003, to review EPA's perchlorate risk
assessment and key studies of the health effects of perchlorate. These
and other recent health studies have shown that the consumption of
perchlorate affects the human thyroid by decreasing the amount of
iodine absorbed. Iodine deficiency can result in developmental delays
if it occurs during pregnancy and early infancy and can result in
hypothyroidism[Footnote 3] if it occurs during adulthood. The purpose
of the NAS study was, in part, to assess the extent to which studies
have shown negative health effects from perchlorate.
In January 2005, NAS reported that existing studies did not support a
clear link between perchlorate exposure and developmental effects, and
NAS recommended additional research on perchlorate exposure and its
effect on children and pregnant women. NAS also recommended a safe
exposure level, or reference dose, for perchlorate of 0.0007 milligrams
per kilogram of body weight per day. (For comparison, EPA's draft
reference dose for perchlorate in its 2002 draft risk assessment, which
equated to a drinking water concentration of 1 part per billion, was
based on a daily dose of 0.00003 milligrams per kilogram of body weight
per day.) According to NAS, the reference dose is conservative and
includes safeguards to protect the most sensitive population, the fetus
of the nearly iodine-deficient pregnant woman. In February 2005, EPA
established a new reference dose for perchlorate on the basis of the
NAS recommendation. The new reference dose is equivalent to 24.5 parts
per billion in drinking water, assuming that an adult weighing 70
kilograms (or 154 pounds) consumes 2 liters of drinking water per day,
and that all perchlorate ingested comes from drinking water. If EPA
establishes a drinking water standard for perchlorate, however, it may
be less than 24.5 parts per billion because humans may consume
perchlorate from other sources, such as produce and milk.
In addition to studies of perchlorate and health effects, other federal
agencies, research groups, and universities have conducted or are
conducting studies of perchlorate found in food and the environment.
For example, the U.S. Geological Survey collected soil samples from
California and New Mexico to test for the presence of perchlorate in
natural minerals and materials. In 2003, an environmental research
group reported that it sampled lettuce purchased in northern California
and found perchlorate above 30 parts per billion in 4 of 22 samples. In
September 2003, researchers from Texas Tech University sampled 8
bottles of milk and 1 can of evaporated milk and found perchlorate
concentrations up to 6 parts per billion in seven of the milk samples
and more than 1 part per billion in the evaporated milk sample. In
2004, the Food and Drug Administration sampled the following items for
perchlorate: lettuce, bottled water, milk, tomatoes, carrots,
cantaloupe, and spinach. Produce samples were taken from areas where
officials said they believed irrigation water contained perchlorate.
These data are currently being evaluated, but preliminary results show
perchlorate was found in some samples.
Method 314.0 is the EPA-approved method for analyzing perchlorate in
drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Method 314.0 can
detect perchlorate concentrations of 1 part per billion in finished
(treated) drinking water but has a minimum reporting limit of 4 parts
per billion. Both EPA and DOD officials have expressed concerns about
using Method 314.0 to test for perchlorate in media other than drinking
water, such as groundwater, surface water, and soil (where researchers
mix soil with a liquid to extract the sample). According to EPA,
sediment and dissolved ions commonly found in groundwater and surface
water can yield false positive results if the method is not used
properly. Analysis methods other than Method 314.0 are available, and
EPA has approved their use to analyze specific sites for perchlorate.
Further, two new methods have been developed for the analysis of
perchlorate in drinking water, and another is expected to be available
in the spring of 2005. These three methods have minimum reporting
limits ranging from 0.02 to 0.1 parts per billion. However, Method
314.0 has been the principal method used to test and report on the
presence of perchlorate in all media, including soil, sediment,
groundwater, and surface water.
Various treatment technologies to remove perchlorate from groundwater
and surface water are in use or under review. Biological treatment and
ion exchange systems are among the technologies currently in use.
Biological treatment uses microbes to destroy perchlorate by converting
the perchlorate ion to nontoxic ions, oxygen, and chloride. Ion
exchange systems replace the perchlorate ion with chloride, which is an
ion found in table salt.
Environmental Laws, Regulations, and Federal Policy Covering Hazardous
Substances:
Several federal environmental laws provide EPA, and states authorized
by EPA, with broad authorities to respond to actual or threatened
releases of substances that may endanger public health or the
environment. For example, the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended,
authorizes EPA to investigate the release of any hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976 (RCRA) gives EPA authority to order a cleanup of hazardous
waste when there is an imminent and substantial endangerment to public
health or the environment, and one federal court has ruled that
perchlorate is a hazardous waste under RCRA. The Clean Water Act's
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) provisions
authorize EPA, which may, in turn, authorize states, to regulate the
discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. These
pollutants may include contaminants such as perchlorate. The Safe
Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to respond to actual or threatened
releases of contaminants into public water systems or underground
sources of drinking water, regardless of whether the contaminant is
regulated or unregulated, where there is an imminent and substantial
endangerment to health and the appropriate state and local governments
have not taken appropriate actions. Under certain environmental laws
such as RCRA, EPA can authorize states to implement the requirements as
long as the state programs are at least equivalent to the federal
program and provide for adequate enforcement. A detailed summary of
these and other laws and regulations is presented in appendix IV.
In addition, some states have their own environmental and water quality
laws that provide state and local agencies with the authority to
monitor, sample, and require cleanup of various hazardous substances,
both regulated and unregulated, that pose an imminent and substantial
danger to public health. For example, the California Water Code
authorizes Regional Water Control Boards to require sampling of waste
discharges and to direct cleanup and abatement, if necessary, of any
threat to water, which may include the release of a contaminant such as
perchlorate.
DOD's September 2003 interim policy on perchlorate sampling states that
the military services shall sample for perchlorate where service
officials suspect the presence of perchlorate on the basis of prior or
current DOD activities, and where a complete human exposure pathway is
likely to exist. The policy also states that the services shall sample
for perchlorate (1) as required by the Safe Drinking Water Act's
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation[Footnote 4] and the Clean
Water Act's NPDES program and (2) as part of cleanup conducted under
DOD's Environmental Restoration Program. While DOD's policy requires it
to sample where the two conditions of release and exposure are met, it
does not specify whether the services may sample for perchlorate when
requested by state agencies or EPA, apart from requirements under
environmental laws and regulations. Further, except for at a few
sites,[Footnote 5] DOD has not independently directed the services to
clean up perchlorate. We previously reported that DOD has cleaned up
perchlorate when directed to do so by EPA or a state environmental
agency under various environmental laws, or when perchlorate is found
on closed ranges.[Footnote 6]
Perchlorate Has Been Found at Almost 400 Sites across the United
States:
Various federal and state agencies have reported finding perchlorate at
almost 400 sites in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and 2
commonwealths of the United States in drinking water, surface water,
groundwater, and soil. Perchlorate was found at a variety of sites
including public water systems, private wells, military installations,
commercial manufacturers, and residential areas. The concentration
levels reported ranged from 4 parts per billion to more than 3.7
million parts per billion in groundwater at 1 site, yet roughly two-
thirds of sites had concentration levels at or below 18 parts per
billion, the upper limit of EPA's provisional cleanup guidance for
perchlorate. Federal and state agencies are not required to routinely
report perchlorate findings to EPA, and EPA does not currently have a
formal process to centrally track or monitor perchlorate detections or
the status of a cleanup. As a result, a greater number of sites may
exist in the United States than is presented in this report.
The Majority of Perchlorate Was Found in California and Texas:
Through discussions with federal and state environmental agency
officials and a review of perchlorate sampling reports, we identified
395 sites in the United States and its commonwealths where perchlorate
was found in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, sediment, or
soil. A table of reported perchlorate detections in the United States
and its commonwealths as of January 2005 is presented in appendix II.
Most of the sites and the highest levels of perchlorate were found in a
small number of states. More than one-half of all sites, or 224, was
found in Texas and California, where both states have conducted broad
investigations to determine the extent of perchlorate. The highest
perchlorate concentrations were found in 5 states--Arkansas,
California, Nevada, Texas, and Utah--where 11 sites had concentrations
exceeding 500,000 parts per billion. However, the majority of the 395
sites had lower levels of perchlorate. We found 249 sites where the
highest concentration was equal to or less than 18 parts per billion,
the upper limit of EPA's provisional cleanup level, and 271 sites where
the highest concentration was less than 24.5 parts per billion, the
drinking water concentration equivalent calculated on the basis of
EPA's newly established reference dose (see fig. 1).
Figure 1: Maximum Perchlorate Concentrations Reported in any Media and
Number of Sites, January 2005:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
According to EPA and state agency officials, perchlorate found at 110
of the sites was due to activities related to defense and aerospace,
such as propellant manufacturing, rocket motor research and test
firing, or explosives disposal. At 58 sites, officials said the source
of the perchlorate found was manufacturing and handling, agriculture,
and a variety of commercial activities such as fireworks and flare
manufacturing (see fig. 2).
Figure 2: Activities Linked to Perchlorate, by Site:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
At the remaining 227 sites, EPA and state agency officials said the
source of the perchlorate found was either undetermined or naturally
occurring. Further, all 105 sites with naturally occurring perchlorate
are located in the Texas high plains region where perchlorate
concentrations range from 4 to 59 parts per billion.
Perchlorate Was Found in 4 Percent of Sampled Public Drinking Water
Systems:
As of January 2005, and as required for a 12-month period between 2001
and 2003 under the Safe Drinking Water Act's Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Regulation, 3,722 public drinking water systems had sampled
drinking water and reported the results to EPA. Of these public
drinking water systems, 153, or about 4 percent, reported finding
perchlorate. Located across 26 states and 2 commonwealths, these 153
sites accounted for more than one-third of the sites we identified,
where perchlorate concentrations reported ranged from 4 parts per
billion to 420 parts per billion and averaged less than 10 parts per
billion. Only 14 of the 153 public drinking water systems had
concentration levels above 24.5 parts per billion, the drinking water
equivalent calculated on the basis of EPA's revised perchlorate
reference dose. California had the most public water systems with
perchlorate, where 58 systems reported finding perchlorate in drinking
water. The highest drinking water perchlorate concentration of 420
parts per billion was found in Puerto Rico in 2002. Subsequent sampling
in Puerto Rico did not find any perchlorate, and officials said the
source of the initial finding was undetermined.
Because of the proximity of these 153 public water systems to populated
areas, an EPA official estimated that about 10 million people may have
been exposed to perchlorate through their drinking water. EPA officials
told us that they do not know the source of most of the perchlorate
found in public water systems, but that perchlorate found in 32 water
systems in Arizona, California, and Nevada was likely due to previous
perchlorate manufacturing in Nevada. Regional EPA and state officials
told us they did not plan to clean up perchlorate found at public
drinking water sites pending a decision to establish a drinking water
standard for perchlorate. In some cases, officials did not plan to
clean up because subsequent sampling was unable to confirm that
perchlorate was present.
Extent of Perchlorate and Cleanup Efforts Is Difficult to Determine
Because Federal and State Agencies Are Not Generally Required to Share
with EPA Information on Perchlorate Sampling or Cleanup:
EPA officials said the agency does not centrally track or monitor
perchlorate detections, or the status of cleanup activities, other than
under the Safe Drinking Water Act where EPA collected data from public
water systems for 1 year. As a result, it is difficult to determine the
extent of perchlorate in the United States. EPA maintains a listing of
sites known to EPA where cleanup or other response actions are under
way, but the list does not include all sites because some sites have
not been reported to EPA. As a result, EPA officials said they did not
always know whether other federal and state agencies found perchlorate
because, as is generally the case with unregulated contaminants, there
is no requirement for states or other federal agencies to routinely
report perchlorate findings to EPA. For example, except as required
under specific environmental programs, DOD is not required to report to
EPA when perchlorate is found on active installations and facilities.
Consequently, EPA region officials in California said they did not know
that the Department of the Navy found perchlorate at the Naval Air
Weapons Station at China Lake. Further, even where EPA has authorized
states to implement the RCRA program, states are not required to
routinely notify EPA about perchlorate found under the program. For
example, EPA region officials in California said the Nevada state
agency did not tell them perchlorate was found at Rocketdyne, an
aerospace facility in Reno, or that it was being cleaned up. EPA only
learned about the perchlorate finding when the facility's RCRA permit
was renewed.
We also found that communication and data sharing between EPA and state
agency officials varied. Because states are not required to routinely
notify EPA about perchlorate, some EPA region officials told us they
contacted state agencies to ask whether new sites had been found. Some
EPA region and state officials told us they participated in monthly or
quarterly meetings to discuss perchlorate, and most EPA and state
officials told us they had good working relationships and shared
information about perchlorate. Yet a few EPA region officials told us
they did not always know whether states found perchlorate, at what
levels, or what actions were taken. For example, an EPA region official
told us he did not know what actions were taken at three RCRA sites in
Utah where perchlorate was found.
EPA and State Environmental Agencies Use Federal and State
Environmental Laws and Regulations to Respond to Perchlorate:
Although there is no federal standard for perchlorate in drinking water
or a federal cleanup standard, EPA and state environmental agencies
authorized by EPA have investigated suspected sites; collected samples
and analyzed for perchlorate; and, when perchlorate is found, cleaned
up or limited perchlorate releases under broad authorities found in
various federal environmental laws and regulations. Further, both EPA
and authorized states have required responsible parties to sample and
clean up perchlorate under other state laws. Most responsible parties
sampled and cleaned up when required by regulation or directed by EPA
or states. DOD sampled and cleaned up on the basis of its
interpretation of federal and state legal requirements and its own
policy. Of the 395 sites where perchlorate has been found, EPA or state
environmental officials told us cleanup is under way or planned at 51
of them.
Various Environmental Laws, Regulations, and Provisional Standards Are
Used by Federal and Some State Agencies to Sample and Clean Up
Perchlorate:
We found EPA and state environmental agencies have investigated,
sampled, and cleaned up perchlorate, or have required sampling and
cleanup, pursuant to general authorities contained in various federal
and state environmental laws and regulations. According to EPA and
state agency officials, state agencies have also established levels for
sampling and cleanup, and some state environmental laws provide that
other authorities are to respond to contaminant releases, including
perchlorate.
Both EPA and state environmental agencies have used federal
environmental laws, such as CERCLA, RCRA, and the NPDES provisions of
the Clean Water Act, as authority to respond to releases of substances
that may endanger public health or the environment, including
perchlorate. EPA and the states have used such authority to sample and
clean up as well as require the sampling and cleanup of perchlorate.
For example:
* As part of a CERCLA review, EPA sampled groundwater near former
government-owned grain storage facilities in Iowa and found perchlorate
in residential and commercial drinking water wells at three sites.
During subsequent sampling, EPA did not find perchlorate at two of the
sites but confirmed perchlorate at the third site. EPA is providing
bottled drinking water to certain persons until an uncontaminated
drinking water supply becomes available.
* During sampling required as part of a RCRA permit, ATK Thiokol, a
Utah explosives and rocket fuel manufacturer, found perchlorate. Under
authority provided by RCRA, Utah required the manufacturer to install a
monitoring well to determine the extent of perchlorate and take steps
to prevent additional perchlorate releases.
* Under the NPDES program, Texas required the Navy to reduce
perchlorate levels in wastewater discharges at the McGregor Naval
Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant to 4 parts per billion, the lowest
level at which perchlorate could be detected.
According to EPA and state officials, EPA and state environmental
agencies have investigated and sampled groundwater and surface water
areas for perchlorate, or requested that responsible parties or others
do so, pursuant to agency oversight responsibilities to protect water
quality and human health. For example:
* EPA plans to sample five waste disposal sites in Niagara Falls, New
York, to determine whether the groundwater contains perchlorate from
manufacturing that took place in the area between 1908 and 1975.
* EPA asked Patrick Air Force Base and the Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station, Florida, to sample groundwater for perchlorate near rocket
launch sites. Previously, both installations inventoried areas where
perchlorate was suspected and conducted limited sampling. DOD officials
did not find perchlorate at Patrick Air Force Base, and, according to
an EPA official, the Department of the Air Force said it would not
conduct additional sampling at either installation until there is a
federal standard for perchlorate.
* Between 1998 and 2002, Utah sampled public drinking water systems
considered at risk for the presence of perchlorate because of nearby
perchlorate use and found perchlorate concentrations at more than 42
parts per billion in three wells at two sites.
* Texas contracted with Texas Tech University to sample drinking water
wells for perchlorate in 54 counties after perchlorate was found in
five public water systems in the high plains region of the state. The
university study found perchlorate in some drinking water wells and
concluded that the most likely source was natural occurrence.
When perchlorate was found, according to state and EPA officials, state
agencies have taken steps to minimize human exposure or perform
cleanup, or required responsible parties to do so, pursuant to the same
general authorities contained in federal environmental laws and
regulations. For example:
* Nevada is requiring Pepcon, a former perchlorate manufacturing site,
to install a cleanup system to remove perchlorate from groundwater.
* Massachusetts closed a public well and provided bottled drinking
water to students at a nearby school when perchlorate was found in a
city public water system.
* At the request of California, United Technologies, a large rocket
testing facility in Santa Clara County, stopped releasing perchlorate
and cleaned up perchlorate found in the groundwater.
Without a federal standard for perchlorate, according to EPA and state
officials, at least nine states have established nonregulatory action
levels or advisories for perchlorate ranging from under 1 part per
billion to 18 parts per billion. States that have sampled, or required
responsible parties to sample, report, and clean up, have used these
advisories as the levels at which action must be taken. For example:
* Oregon initiates in-depth site studies to determine the cause and
extent of perchlorate when concentrations of 18 parts per billion or
greater are found.
* Nevada required the Kerr-McGee Chemical site in Henderson to treat
groundwater and reduce perchlorate concentration releases to 18 parts
per billion, which is Nevada's action level for perchlorate.
* According to Utah officials, Utah does not have a written action
level for perchlorate, but, if perchlorate concentrations exceed 18
parts per billion, the state may require the responsible party to clean
up.
Finally, in addition to state laws enacted to allow states to assume
responsibility for enforcing federal environmental laws, other state
environmental laws provide authority to respond to contaminant
releases, including perchlorate. For example, EPA and state officials
told us that both California and Nevada state agencies have required
cleanup at some sites under state water quality laws.
Parties Responsible for Perchlorate Findings Generally Have Complied
with Regulations Requiring Sampling and Cleanup:
According to EPA and state officials, private industry and public water
suppliers have generally complied with regulations requiring sampling,
such as those under (1) the RCRA and NPDES permit programs, where
responsible parties have been required to sample and report hazardous
releases to state environmental agencies, or (2) the Safe Drinking
Water Act's Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation, which
required sampling for unregulated contaminants, such as perchlorate,
between 2001 and 2003. Further, according to EPA and state officials,
private industry has generally responded by reducing perchlorate and
cleaning up when required by regulation or directed by EPA or state
agencies.
DOD's Policy Requires Sampling for Perchlorate under Certain
Conditions:
DOD's perchlorate sampling policy requires the military services to
sample where the particular installation must do so, under laws or
regulations such as the Clean Water Act's NPDES permit program, or
where a reasonable basis exists to suspect that a perchlorate release
has occurred as a result of DOD activities and that a complete human
exposure pathway is likely to exist. However, DOD's policy on
perchlorate sampling does not address cleanup. We found DOD has sampled
for perchlorate on closed installations when requested by EPA or a
state agency and cleaned up on active and closed installations when
required by a specific environmental law, regulation, or program, such
as the environmental restoration program at formerly used defense
sites. For example, at EPA's request, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) installed monitoring wells and is sampling for perchlorate at
Camp Bonneville, a closed installation near Vancouver, Washington. Utah
state officials told us DOD is removing soil containing perchlorate at
the former Wendover Air Force Base in Utah, where the Corps found
perchlorate in 2004.
According to EPA and state officials, DOD has been reluctant to (1)
sample on or near active installations because there is no specific
federal regulatory standard for perchlorate or (2) sample where DOD
determined the criteria to sample were not met as outlined in its
policy. Except where there is a legal requirement to sample at a
particular installation, DOD's perchlorate policy does not require
sampling unless the two conditions of release and exposure are met.
Utah state officials told us the agency asked the Department of the
Army to sample for perchlorate at two active installations, Dugway
Proving Grounds and Deseret Chemical Depot. Previously, in 1998, the
Army reported that perchlorate had been used at Dugway for more than 20
years. According to state agency officials, the Army said there was not
a clear potential for human exposure to perchlorate at these sites, and
it would not sample unless a higher Army level approved the sampling.
In February 2005, Utah officials told us Dugway Proving Grounds had not
requested permission from Army headquarters to sample, and they did not
know whether Deseret requested permission to sample.
In fiscal years 2004 and 2005, several provisions to federal law were
enacted that encourage DOD to conduct health studies and evaluate
perchlorate found at military sites. For example, the Ronald W. Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 states that the
Secretary of Defense should develop a plan for cleaning up perchlorate
resulting from DOD activities, when the perchlorate poses a health
hazard, and continue evaluating identified sites.[Footnote 7] In
October 2004, DOD and California agreed to a procedure for prioritizing
perchlorate sampling at DOD facilities in California. The procedure
includes steps to identify and prioritize the investigation of areas on
active installations and military sites (1) where the presence of
perchlorate is likely based on previous and current defense-related
activities and (2) near drinking water sources where perchlorate was
found. Although DOD has been urged by Congress to evaluate sites where
the presence of perchlorate is suspected, DOD's September 2003
perchlorate policy continues to require sampling on active
installations only where there is a suspected release due to DOD
activities and a likely human exposure pathway, or where required under
specific laws, such as the Clean Water Act.
EPA and States Are Cleaning Up, Requiring Cleanup, or Taking Action to
Clean Up 51 Sites Where Perchlorate Was Found:
EPA, state agencies, and responsible parties are cleaning or planning
to clean up at 51 of the 395 sites we identified. At 23 sites, EPA,
states, and responsible parties are cleaning up or working to reduce
perchlorate releases. For example, EPA required several defense,
petroleum, and other companies to clean up perchlorate in Baldwin Park,
California, a CERCLA site. The cleanup involves extracting and treating
up to 26 million gallons of water per day, after which the water is
distributed to several nearby communities. Texas required Longhorn Army
Ammunition Plant, a closed DOD facility, to clean up by limiting
perchlorate releases to a daily average concentration of 4 parts per
billion (and a maximum of 13 parts per billion per day) under the NPDES
program. Kerr-McGee Chemical, a former perchlorate manufacturer in
Nevada, is cleaning up using an ion exchange system. According to
officials, Nevada required the facility to clean up perchlorate under a
state water law after perchlorate concentrations up to 3.7 million
parts per billion were found in the groundwater.
At 28 sites, EPA and state agency officials told us that federal and
state governments and private parties are evaluating the extent of
perchlorate and potential cleanup methodologies. Unidynamics, an
Arizona propellant manufacturer located at a CERCLA site, responded to
EPA's concern about perchlorate at the site and is investigating
perchlorate treatment methods. According to officials, after Kansas
asked Slurry Explosives to clean up perchlorate under a state
environmental law, the manufacturer began investigating a biological
method to clean up.
The remaining 344 sites are not being cleaned up for a variety of
reasons. The reason most often cited by EPA and state officials was
that they were waiting for a federal requirement to do so. In some
instances, officials said they would not clean up sites where
perchlorate was naturally occurring or where subsequent sampling was
unable to find perchlorate.
DOD and EPA Sponsored Numerous Studies of Perchlorate Exposure, but
Findings about Perchlorate's Health Effects Are Inconsistent:
Since 1998, EPA and DOD have sponsored a number of studies of the
health risks of perchlorate using experimental, field study, and data
analysis methods. We reviewed 90 of these studies and found that 44
offered conclusions or observations on whether perchlorate had a health
effect. Of these, 26 studies found that perchlorate had an adverse
effect. However, in some of these studies, it was unknown whether the
observed adverse effects would be reversible over time. In January
2005, NAS issued its report on EPA's draft health assessment and the
potential health effects of perchlorate. The NAS report considered many
of the same health risk studies that we reviewed and concluded that an
exposure level higher than initially recommended by EPA may not
adversely affect a healthy adult, but recommended more study of the
effects of perchlorate on pregnant women and children.
Study Findings Differed on the Health Effects of Perchlorate Exposure:
DOD, industry, and EPA sponsored the majority of the 90 health studies
we reviewed; the remaining studies were conducted by academic
researchers and other federal agencies. Of these 90 studies, 49 used an
experimental design methodology to determine the effects of perchlorate
on humans, mammals, fish, and/or amphibians by exposing these groups to
differing dose amounts of perchlorate over varied periods of time and
comparing the results with other groups that were not exposed. Twelve
were field studies that compared humans, mammals, fish, and/or
amphibians in areas known to be contaminated with the same groups in
areas known to be uncontaminated. Both methodologies have limitations;
that is, the experimental studies were generally short in duration, and
the field studies were generally limited by the researchers' inability
to control whether, how much, or how long the population in the
contaminated areas was exposed. Finally, 29 studies used a data
analysis methodology where researchers reviewed several publicly
available human and animal studies and used data derived from these
studies to determine the process by which perchlorate affects the human
thyroid and the highest exposure levels that did not adversely affect
humans. The 3 remaining studies used another or unknown
methodology.[Footnote 8] Appendix III provides data on these studies,
including who sponsored them; what methodologies were used; and, where
presented, the author's conclusions or findings on the effects of
perchlorate.
Many of the studies we reviewed contained only research findings, not
conclusions or observations, on the health effects of perchlorate. Only
44 studies had conclusions on whether perchlorate had an adverse
effect. Of these, 29 studies evaluated the effect of perchlorate on
development, and 18 found adverse effects resulting from maternal
exposure to perchlorate. Adverse effects of perchlorate on the adult
thyroid are difficult to evaluate because they may happen over longer
time periods than can be observed in a research study. However, the
adverse effects of perchlorate on development can be more easily
studied and measured within study time frames. Moreover, we found
different studies used the same perchlorate dose amount but observed
different effects. The different effects were attributed to variables
such as the study design type or age of the subjects, but the precise
cause of the difference is unresolved. Such unresolved questions are
one of the bases for the differing conclusions in EPA, DOD, and
academic studies on perchlorate dose amounts and effects. According to
EPA officials, the most sensitive population for perchlorate exposure
is the fetus of a pregnant woman who is also nearly iodine-deficient.
However, none of the 90 studies we reviewed considered this population.
Some studies reviewed pregnant rat populations and the effect on the
thyroid, but we did not find any studies that considered perchlorate's
effect on nearly iodine-deficient pregnant populations and the thyroid.
The National Academy of Sciences Reported That Evidence Was
Insufficient to Show Perchlorate Causes Adverse Effects:
In January 2005, NAS issued its report on EPA's draft health assessment
and the potential health effects of perchlorate. NAS reported that
although perchlorate affects thyroid functioning, there was not enough
evidence to show that perchlorate causes adverse effects at the levels
found in most environmental samples. Most of the studies NAS reviewed
were field studies, the report said, which are limited because they
cannot control whether, how much, or how long a population in a
contaminated area is exposed. NAS concluded that the studies did not
support a clear link between perchlorate exposure and changes in the
thyroid function in newborns and hypothyroidism or thyroid cancer in
adults. In its report, NAS noted that only 1 study examined the
relationship between perchlorate exposure and adverse effects on
children, and that no studies investigated the relationship between
perchlorate exposure and adverse effects on vulnerable groups, such as
low-birth-weight infants. NAS concluded that an exposure level higher
than initially recommended by EPA may not adversely affect a healthy
adult. The report did not recommend a drinking water standard; however,
it did recommend that additional research be conducted on perchlorate
exposure and its effect on children and pregnant women.
Conclusions:
Perchlorate has been found in the groundwater, surface water, drinking
water, or soil in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and 2
commonwealths of the United States where concentrations reported ranged
from 4 parts per billion to millions of parts per billion. According to
EPA and state environmental agency officials, a leading known cause of
the perchlorate found was defense-related activities. In addition, EPA
and state officials attributed the cause of the perchlorate found at
more than one-half of sites to natural occurrence or undetermined
sources. State and other federal agencies do not always report
perchlorate detections to EPA, however, because EPA, other federal
agencies, and the states do not have a standardized approach for
reporting perchlorate data nationwide. As a result, a greater number of
sites with perchlorate may already exist. Further, EPA does not track
the status of cleanup at sites where perchlorate has been found.
Without a formal system to track and monitor perchlorate findings and
cleanup activities, EPA and the states do not have the most current and
complete accounting of perchlorate as an emerging contaminant of
concern, including the extent of perchlorate found and the extent or
effectiveness of cleanup projects.
Recommendation for Executive Action:
In order to ensure that EPA has reliable information on perchlorate and
the status of cleanup efforts, and to better coordinate lessons learned
between federal agencies and states on investigating and cleaning up
perchlorate, we recommend that, in coordination with states and other
federal agencies, EPA use existing authorities or seek additional
authority, if necessary, to establish a formal structure to centrally
track and monitor perchlorate detections and the status of cleanup
efforts across the federal government and state agencies.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In its April 26, 2005, letter (see app. V), EPA agreed with our
findings and conclusions on the extent of perchlorate in the United
States and that defense-related activities have been found to be
associated with perchlorate detections. However, EPA did not agree with
our recommendation that it establish a formal structure to centrally
track and monitor perchlorate detections and the status of cleanup
efforts across the federal government and state agencies. In its
letter, EPA stated that it already had significant information and data
on perchlorate concentrations in various environmental media, where
much of the information was provided by other federal and state
agencies as well as private parties. EPA also asserted that the
development and maintenance of a new tracking system would require
additional resources or the redirection of resources from other
activities. To justify a tracking system, EPA would have to analyze its
associated costs and benefits.
As our report explains, however, state and other federal agencies do
not always report perchlorate detections to EPA. Further, without a
formal system to track and monitor perchlorate findings and cleanup
activities, EPA does not have the most current and complete accounting
of perchlorate as an emerging contaminant of concern. To underscore our
point, in commenting on a draft of this report, DOD provided a listing
of four sites where it found perchlorate between 2000 and 2004. These
sites were not in EPA's database. (We added these sites to our listing
in app. II.) With regard to the cost benefit aspect of EPA's comments,
we believe that EPA is misconstruing the extent of work necessary to
implement a more formalized and structured system to track perchlorate.
We are not proposing an elaborate new system but, instead, believe that
EPA needs to work toward a more structured process than what is
currently in place to track and monitor perchlorate routinely.
Currently, EPA's regions are spending time and effort contacting their
counterparts in other federal agencies and states on an ad hoc basis to
obtain more current information about perchlorate. However, this is
being done without any structure or consistency related to how and when
contacts are made, how frequently they are made, or what specific
information is collected. As a result, we found that EPA does not have
complete, current, or accurate information to track the occurrence of
perchlorate--the type of information that would be needed when making a
determination about the need for regulation. We continue to believe
that such information is necessary and that it can be obtained without
an elaborate or costly undertaking.
In contrast to EPA's view of our report's accuracy, DOD said in its
April 26, 2005, letter (see app. VI), that our report did not provide
an accurate assessment of perchlorate issues and activities. DOD
asserted that our report mischaracterized DOD's response to perchlorate
and cited examples of where DOD has sampled and invested in cleanup
technologies, even though perchlorate is currently unregulated. We
disagree with DOD's position. Our report credits DOD with actions it
has taken but also points out where DOD has not acted. For example, our
report acknowledges that DOD is sampling for perchlorate as required
under various environmental laws, or when certain criteria exist as
specified in DOD's sampling policy; that is, where the presence of
perchlorate is suspected based on prior or current DOD activities and a
complete exposure pathway to humans is likely to exist. While DOD
states that it has a policy that establishes an affirmative obligation
to sample and not a limitation, that view is not shared by some
regulators. As we point out in our report, there have been a number of
instances where EPA or state agencies asked the services to sample but
service officials declined because they did not believe the conditions
met with DOD's sampling policy. As such, DOD has used its policy to
limit testing for perchlorate that environmental regulators believed
was necessary.
With regard to DOD's point that perchlorate is unregulated, we are well
aware that many other contaminants, like perchlorate, are not
specifically regulated, yet are being addressed and cleaned up as
hazards under various environmental laws.
DOD also stated that we did not accurately summarize the findings of
the NAS study and other scientific and technical data. We believe our
report accurately summarizes key information from both NAS as well as
90 other studies of the potential health risks of perchlorate, as
specified by the requester of this report.
Finally, DOD disagreed with our recommendation that EPA establish a
more formal structure to centrally track and monitor perchlorate
because it was not clear that such a system will provide added value.
DOD stated that it will continue to share its information on
perchlorate. As previously noted, in commenting on this report, DOD
provided information on four locations where perchlorate has been
found, in one case as long as 5 years ago, and which do not appear on
EPA's list of perchlorate detection sites. Whether this omission
occurred as a result of a DOD or an EPA oversight is unknown, but it
underscores the need for a more structured and formalized system.
Both EPA and DOD provided technical comments as enclosures to their
letters, which we incorporated in our report as appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents
of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days
from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report
to the appropriate congressional committees; the Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency; the Secretary of Defense; and other
interested parties. We will also provide copies to others upon request.
In addition, the report will be available, at no charge, on the GAO Web
site at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any questions, please call me or Edward
Zadjura at (202) 512-3841. Contributors to this report are listed in
appendix VII.
Sincerely yours,
Signed by:
John B. Stephenson:
Director, Natural Resources and Environment:
[End of section]
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
We identified (1) the estimated extent of perchlorate nationwide; (2)
what actions the federal government, state governments, and responsible
parties have taken to clean up or eliminate the source of perchlorate
found; and (3) what studies of the potential health risks from
perchlorate have been conducted and, where presented, the author's
conclusions or findings on the health effects of perchlorate.
To provide an estimate of the extent of perchlorate in the United
States, we compiled and analyzed data on perchlorate detections from
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Defense
(DOD), the U.S. Geological Survey, and state agencies. For each site,
our review shows the highest perchlorate concentration reported for all
media sampled as of January 2005, although officials may have sampled
the site more than once, in varying locations and media, and found
differing levels of perchlorate. We also interviewed officials from EPA
headquarters and regional offices, DOD, and selected state agencies to
determine the accuracy and completeness of our compiled list of
perchlorate detections.
To identify what actions the government and private sector have taken
to address perchlorate and the extent to which responsible parties have
taken action to clean up and eliminate the source of perchlorate, we
reviewed federal and state laws, regulations, and policies on water
quality and environmental cleanup and interviewed EPA and state agency
officials on their roles, responsibilities, and authorities to monitor
and respond to instances of perchlorate found. We interviewed officials
from EPA headquarters and each of its 10 regions. We also interviewed
officials from state environmental agencies in California, Oregon,
Texas, and Utah. We selected these states because they (1) had higher
estimated numbers of sites where perchlorate was found and higher
perchlorate concentration levels and/or (2) had taken steps to
investigate and respond to perchlorate. During interviews with state
agency officials, we discussed whether parties responsible for
perchlorate had taken action to clean up and whether federal or local
governments required that they stop activities causing the release of
perchlorate. Finally, we reviewed and analyzed data from federal and
state agencies to determine the status and extent of cleanup efforts.
To identify studies of the potential health risks from perchlorate, we
conducted a literature search for studies of perchlorate health risks
published since 1998. We also interviewed DOD and EPA officials to
obtain a list of the studies they considered important in assessing
perchlorate health risks. We examined the references for each study so
that we could include any other key studies that we had not obtained
through the literature search and DOD and EPA interviews. We identified
125 studies of perchlorate and the thyroid but did not review 35 of
these studies because they were not directly related to the effects of
perchlorate on the thyroid. Our review of 90 studies included the
title; the author and publication information; the sponsor or
recipient; a description of the study subjects; the type of research
design and controls; and, where presented, the author's conclusions or
findings about the adverse effects of perchlorate on health.
We conducted our work from June 2004 to March 2005 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards, including an
assessment of data reliability and internal controls.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Facilities and Sites Where Perchlorate Was Found and
Concentration Levels, as of January 2005:
1; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Anniston Army Depot, Calhoun County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
2; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Atmore Utility Board, Escambia County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
3; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Daphne Utilities Board, Baldwin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
4; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Fort McClellan, City of Anniston;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 32;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
5; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Mobile County Water and Fire Protection Authority,
Mobile County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
6; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Montgomery Water Works, Montgomery County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
7; State: AL;
Facility/Site name: Redstone Army Arsenal (NASA Marshall Space Flight
Center);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 220,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12,200;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 280;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
8; State: AR;
Facility/Site name: Aerojet (Formerly Atlantic Research Corporation),
City of East Camden;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,708,700;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12,500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
9; State: AR;
Facility/Site name: Hickory Ridge Cross County Rural Water System,
Cross County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
10; State: AR;
Facility/Site name: Hot Springs Waterworks, Garland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
11; State: AR;
Facility/Site name: Schumaker Naval Ammunition Depot, City of Camden;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 850;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
12; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Aerodyne Gila River Indian Reservation, City of
Chandler;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 18;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
13; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Apache Nitrogen Products (formerly known as Apache
Powder Company), City of Benson;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 670;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
14; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Brook Water Company, La Paz County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
15; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Camp Navajo, City of Bellemont;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 39;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
16; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Chaparral City Water Company, Maricopa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
17; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: City of Mesa, Maricopa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
18; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Far West Water Company, City of Yuma;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
19; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Fort Huachuca, Cochise County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 27,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
20; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Glendale Municipal Water Company, Maricopa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
21; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Phoenix Municipal Water System, Maricopa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
22; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Scottsdale Municipal Water, Maricopa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
23; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Tucson Water Dept Municipal, Pima County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
24; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Unidynamics/Phoenix Goodyear Airport, City of
Goodyear;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 80;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 30;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
25; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Universal Propulsion Company, Incorporated, City of
Phoenix;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 130;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
26; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Yuma Marine Corps Air Station, City of Yuma;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 150; 4; 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
27; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Yuma Municipal Water Department, Yuma County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
28; State: AZ;
Facility/Site name: Yuma Proving Ground, City of Yuma;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
29; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Aerojet General, City of Chino Hills;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 877;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
30; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Aerojet General, City of Rancho Cordova;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 640,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 260;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
31; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Air Force Research Laboratory, Edwards Air Force
Base, Kern County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4,550;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
32; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Alpha Explosives, City of Lincoln;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 67,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
33; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Azusa Light and Water, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
34; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Beale Air Force Base, Yuba County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 492;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
35; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California State Polytechnical University-Pomona,
Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
36; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California Water Service Company-Dominguez, Los
Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
37; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California Water Service Company-ELA, Los Angeles
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
38; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California Water Service Company-Salinas, Monterey
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 22;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
39; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California Water Service Company-Stockton, San
Joaquin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
40; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: California Water Service Company-Suburban Los
Altos, Santa Clara County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
41; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Carmichael Water District, Sacramento County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
42; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Casmalia Resources, City of Casmalia;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 58;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
43; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: China Lake Naval Weapons Center, Kern County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 921;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
44; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Anaheim, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
45; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Bakersfield, Kern County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
46; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Brawley, Imperial County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
47; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Chino, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 21;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
48; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Chino Hills, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
49; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Colton, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
50; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Corona, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
51; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Escondido, San Diego County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
52; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Garden Grove, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
53; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Hemet, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
54; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Loma Linda, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
55; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Ontario, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
56; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Patterson, Stanislaus County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
57; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Pomona, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
58; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Rialto, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 21;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
59; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Riverside, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 42;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
60; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
61; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Santa Ana, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
62; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Stockton, San Joaquin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 19;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
63; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Tracy, San Joaquin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 21;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
64; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: City of Tustin, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
65; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Coachella Valley Water District, Cove Community,
Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
66; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Cucamonga Water District, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
67; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Denova Environmental, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 460;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
68; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Desert Water Agency, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
69; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: East Valley Water District, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 16;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
70; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Eastern Municipal Water District, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
71; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: El Centro Naval Air Facility, Imperial County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
72; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,600;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 460;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
73; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: EMBEE, Incorporated, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,900;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
74; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Fort Ord, Monterey County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 35;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
75; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: G.E. Plastics, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,100,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
76; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Great Oaks Water Company, Incorporated, Santa Clara
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
77; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Imperial Valley College, Imperial County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
78; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Irvine Ranch Water District, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
79; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Edwards Air Force Base,
Kern County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,100,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 160,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
80; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Jurupa Community, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
81; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Lawrence National Laboratories, Department of
Energy Experimental Site 300, City of Tracy;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 84;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
82; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Lincoln Avenue Water Company, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
83; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Lockheed Propulsion Company, City of Beaumont;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 141,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
84; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Lockheed Propulsion Company (Former), City of
Redlands;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 87;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
85; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Mather Air Force Base, City of Rancho Cordova;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,900;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 120;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
86; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: McClellan Air Force Base, Sacramento County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 15;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
87; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: McCormick, Selph (same as TDY industries), City of
Hollister;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5,500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
88; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: McDonnell-Douglas and Aerojet Corporation, City of
Rancho Cordova;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 32,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
89; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Metropolitan Water Dist. of Southern California,
Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
90; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Monte Vista Water District, San Bernadino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
91; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Morris Dam Naval Command, Control and Ocean
Surveillance Center, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 65;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
92; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: MP Associates, Incorporated, City of Ione, Amador
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 957,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
93; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, City of Pasadena;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13,300;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
94; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: National Semiconducter Corporation, Santa Clara
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 120;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
95; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: National Technical Systems, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 320;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
96; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: North Rialto Area (multiple responsible parties),
City of Rialto;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 820;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
97; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: OEA Aerospace (formally Universal Propulsion),
Solano County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 350;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
98; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Olin Safety Flare, City of Morgan Hill;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 15;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
99; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Pasadena Water Department, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 35;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
100; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Purity Oil Delta Gunnite, City of Rancho Cordova;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
101; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Pyrite Canyon, City of Glen Avon;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,100;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
102; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Rancho California Water District, Riverside County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
103; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Redlands City Municipal Utility District-Water
Division, San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 67;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
104; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Riverside Highland Water Company, San Bernardino
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
105; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Rubidoux Community Services District, Riverside
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
106; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Fernando City Water Department, Los Angeles
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
107; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Fernando Valley (Area 2), City of Glendale;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
108; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Valley (Area 1), El Monte Operable
Unit, City of El Monte;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 21;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
109; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Valley (Area 2), Baldwin Park Operable
Unit, City of Baldwin Park;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,180;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 159;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
110; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Valley (Area 1), South El Monte
Operable Unit (Includes Nike 14 Launcher Area, City of South El Monte;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
111; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Valley (Area 4), Puente Valley Operable
Unit, City of Industry;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 18;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
112; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Valley Water Company, Fontana, San
Bernadino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 15;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
113; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: San Gabriel Water District, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
114; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Santa Clarita Site Assessment, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 47;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
115; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Santa Clarita Water Company, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
116; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Santa Susanna Field Laboratory, Boeing-Rocketdyne
Division (Department of Energy), Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 750;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
117; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,460;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
118; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Sierra Army Depot, Lassen County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
119; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Sonoma County Site Assessment;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
120; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: South California Water Company, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
121; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: South Pasadena City Water Department, Los Angeles
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
122; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Special Devices Incorporated, City of Newhall, Los
Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 82;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
123; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Stringfellow Superfund Site, City of Glen Avon;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 87,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
124; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Suburban Water Systems-San Jose, Los Angeles
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
125; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Trabuco Canyon Water District, Orange County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
126; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Tulare County Site Assessment;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
127; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: United Defense (FMC Corporation), City of
Hollister;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,600;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
128; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: United Technologies Corporation, Santa Clara
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,282,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
129; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: United States Navy Firing Range, San Nicholas
Island, Ventura County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
130; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Vandenburg Air Force Base;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 517;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
131; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Vernon Water Department, Los Angeles County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
132; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: West San Bernardino County Water District (formerly
West Valley Water District), San Bernardino County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
133; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Whittaker Bermite Ordnance, City of Santa Clarita;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 64,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
134; State: CA;
Facility/Site name: Whittaker Ordnance, City of Hollister;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 510,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
135; State: CO;
Facility/Site name: Colorado Rocky Mountain Arsenal, City of Adams;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
136; State: CO;
Facility/Site name: Pueblo Chemical Depot, City of Pueblo;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 180;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
137; State: CT;
Facility/Site name: Naval Submarine Base New London, New London County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
138; State: DC;
Facility/Site name: Spring Valley Superfund Site, a formerly used
defense site;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 58;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
139; State: DC;
Facility/Site name: Washington Aqueduct;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
140; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Atlantic Beach Water System, Duval County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 200;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
141; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Kissimmee Eastern Regional, North Bermuda, Osceola
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
142; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Manatee County Utilities Operations Department;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 30;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
143; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Royal Palm Beach Utilities, Palm Beach County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
144; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Sebring Water and Sewer System, Highlands County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 70;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
145; State: FL;
Facility/Site name: Three Worlds Camp Resort, Polk County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
146; State: GA;
Facility/Site name: City of Watkinsville, Oconee County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 38;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
147; State: GA;
Facility/Site name: Fayette County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
148; State: GA;
Facility/Site name: Feagin Mill, Houston County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
149; State: IA;
Facility/Site name: City of Ewart;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 29;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
150; State: IA;
Facility/Site name: City of Hills;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 372;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 52;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
151; State: IA;
Facility/Site name: City of Napier;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
152; State: IA;
Facility/Site name: Iowa Army Ammunition Plant, Middletown;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
153; State: IL;
Facility/Site name: Chanute Air Force Base, Rantoul;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
154; State: IL;
Facility/Site name: City of Joliet, Will and Kendall Counties;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
155; State: IL;
Facility/Site name: City of Rock Island, Rock Island County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
156; State: IL;
Facility/Site name: Sangamo Electric Dump/Crab Orchard National
Wildlife Refuge, City of Carterville (Department of the Interior);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,200;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
157; State: IL;
Facility/Site name: Savanna Army Depot Activity, City of Savanna;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
158; State: IN;
Facility/Site name: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division,
Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 470;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 67;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
159; State: IN;
Facility/Site name: United States Army Jefferson Proving Ground, City
of Madison;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 100;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
160; State: KS;
Facility/Site name: City of Hallowell;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 36,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
161; State: KS;
Facility/Site name: Tri-County Airport (Former Herington Army
Airfield), City of Herington;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
162; State: LA;
Facility/Site name: City of Shreveport, Caddo Parrish;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
163; State: LA;
Facility/Site name: St. Charles Water District Number One;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 24;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
164; State: MA;
Facility/Site name: Clinton Water Department, Worchester County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
165; State: MA;
Facility/Site name: Massachusetts Military Reservation, Barnstable
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 134,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
166; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: Aberdeen Proving Grounds, City of Aberdeen;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 15,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 3,500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment.
167; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: ATK Alliant Tech System, City of Elkton;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,020;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
168; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: City of Aberdeen, Harford County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 19;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
169; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: City of Chapel Hill, Harford County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
170; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: City of Hagerstown, Washington County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
171; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: Fort George Meade, City of Odenton;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 70;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
172; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 480,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 276,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 230;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
173; State: MD;
Facility/Site name: White Oak Federal Research Center (Naval Surface
Warfare Center);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,400;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 880;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
174; State: MN;
Facility/Site name: City of New Brighton, Ramsey County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
175; State: MN;
Facility/Site name: City of Northfield, Rice County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
176; State: MO;
Facility/Site name: Expert Management Incorporated (formerly ICI
Explosives USA Incorporated), City of Joplin;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 107,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]:
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
177; State: MO;
Facility/Site name: Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, City of
Independence;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 79;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
178; State: MS;
Facility/Site name: Hilldale Water District, Warren County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
179; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: City of Highpoint, Guilford County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
180; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: City of Kinston, Kinston Lenoir County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
181; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: Cliffdale West, Cumberland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
182; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: Former Camp Butner, Granville and Durham Counties;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
183; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune/Marine Corps Air
Station New River, Onslow County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
184; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: New Hanover County Water System, City of
Wilmington;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
185; State: NC;
Facility/Site name: Vick's Mobil Home Park, Nash County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
186; State: NE;
Facility/Site name: City of Lewiston, Pawnee County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
187; State: NE;
Facility/Site name: City of North Platte, Lincoln County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
188; State: NE;
Facility/Site name: Nebraska Ordnance Plant, City of Mead;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 24;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
189; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Fort Dix, Pemberton Township;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 28;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
190; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Middlesex County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
191; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Montclair Water Bureau , Essex County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
192; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: New Jersey American Water Company, City of
Lakewood;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
193; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Park Ridge Water Department, City of Bergen;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
194; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Picatinny Arsenal, Morris County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 627;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: Soil.
195; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Township of Hammonton Water Dept, Atlantic County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
196; State: NJ;
Facility/Site name: Vineland Water and Sewer Utility, Cumberland
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
197; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Cannon Air Force Base, Clovis;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 46;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 46;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: Soil.
198; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: City of Deming, Luna County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
199; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: City of Des Moines;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
200; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Fort Wingate Depot, Gallup;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 3,180;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,890;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
201; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Holloman Air Force Base, Alamogordo;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 16,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7,600;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7,600;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment.
202; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 50,500;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
203; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Los Alamos National Laboratory, City of Los Alamos
(Department of Energy);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,662;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
204; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Melrose Air Force Bombing Range, City of Clovis;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 480;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 41;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
205; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Mountain View Albuquerque, City of South Valley;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
206; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: New Mexico American Water Company, City of Clovis;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
207; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: Sandia National Labs, City of Albuquerque
(Department of Energy);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,040;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
208; State: NM;
Facility/Site name: White Sands Missile Range;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 32,900;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
209; State: Northern Mariana Islands;
Facility/Site name: Commonwealth Utilities Corporation, Saipan;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
210; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: Boeing-Rocketdyne Test Site, City of Reno;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 400;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
211; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: Henderson Water Company, Clark County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 23;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
212; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: Kerr-McGee Chemical, City of Henderson, Clark
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 3,700,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 120,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 24;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
213; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: Mohave Generating Station, Clark County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
214; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: PEPCON (Former), City of Henderson, Clark County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 600,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
215; State: NV;
Facility/Site name: Southern Nevada Water System, Clark County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
216; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Bethpage Water District, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
217; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: City of Glen Cove, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
218; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: City of Westhampton, Suffolk County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 3,370;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 16;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
219; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: City of Yaphank, Suffolk County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 122;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 26;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
220; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Garden City, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
221; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Greenlawn Water District, Suffolk County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
222; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Hicksville Water District, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
223; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Plainview Water District, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
224; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: South Huntington Water District, Suffolk County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
225; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Suffolk County Water Authority;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
226; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Town of Hempstead Water District;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
227; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Water Authority of Western Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
228; State: NY;
Facility/Site name: Westbury Water District, Nassau County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
229; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: City of Berea, Cuyahoga County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
230; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: City of Fairfield;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 27;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
231; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: City of Loveland;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
232; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: City of Painesville, Lake County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
233; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: City of Ravenna, Portage County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
234; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: Defiance Water Treatment, City of Defiance;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
235; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: Hecla Water Association-Plant Public Water System,
Lawrence County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 32;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
236; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: Ravenna Army Ammunition Plant, City of Ravenna;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 25;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
237; State: OH;
Facility/Site name: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Greene County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
238; State: OK;
Facility/Site name: Bixby Public Works Authority, Tulsa County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
239; State: OK;
Facility/Site name: City of Enid, Garfield County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 30;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
240; State: OK;
Facility/Site name: City of Moore, Cleveland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
241; State: OK;
Facility/Site name: City of Woodward;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
242; State: OK;
Facility/Site name: Edmond Public Works Authority;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
243; State: OR;
Facility/Site name: Arkema Incorporated (formerly Atofina), City of
Portland;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 370,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
244; State: OR;
Facility/Site name: Former Boardman Air Force Range;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
245; State: OR;
Facility/Site name: Adjacent to the Navy Boardman Bombing Range;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 23;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
246; State: OR;
Facility/Site name: Umatilla Ammunition Demolition Area, North Morrow,
City of Hermiston;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 25;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
247; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Ambler Boro Water Department, Montgomery County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
248; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Columbia Water Company, Lancaster County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
249; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Erie City Water Authority;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
250; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Huntingdon Boro Water Department, Huntingdon
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
251; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Meadville Area Water Authority, Crawford County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 33;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
252; State: PA;
Facility/Site name: Muhlenberg Township Municipal Authority, City of
Reading;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
253; State: PR;
Facility/Site name: City of Utuado;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 420;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
254; State: SC;
Facility/Site name: Cassatt Water Company Number One, Kershaw County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
255; State: SC;
Facility/Site name: Darlington County Water and Sewer Authority,
Hartsville and Darlington Counties;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
256; State: SC;
Facility/Site name: Shaw Air Force Base, Poinsett Range, Sumter County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
257; State: SC;
Facility/Site name: Talatha Water District, Aiken County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
258; State: TN;
Facility/Site name: Arnold Air Force Base, City of Tullahoma;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
259; State: TN;
Facility/Site name: Crossville Water Department;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
260; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Ackerly Water Supply Corporation, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
261; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Acuff Steak House, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
262; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Addison private well, Terry County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 23;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
263; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Andrews County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 24;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
264; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Barr private well, Howard County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
265; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Blackwell private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
266; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Blair private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
267; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Bledsoe Water Service Company, Cochran County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
268; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Blue Nile Water Company, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
269; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Camp Bullis, Bexar County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 424;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
270; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Camp Post, Garza County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
271; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Casselman private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
272; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cave private well, Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 19;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
273; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Amherst, Lamb County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
274; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Andrews, Andrews County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
275; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Crane, Crane County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
276; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of El Paso, El Paso County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
277; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Georgetown, Williamson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
278; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Jayton, Kent County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
279; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Kingsville;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
280; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Lamesa, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 26;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
281; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Lefors, Gray County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
282; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Levelland, Hockley County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 123;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
283; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Midland, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 46;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
284; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of O'Donnell, Lynn County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
285; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Quitaque, Briscoe County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
286; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Seagraves, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
287; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Seminole, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 25;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
288; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Slaton, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
289; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Stanton, Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
290; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Sudan, Lamb County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 18;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
291; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Whiteface, Cochran County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
292; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: City of Wickett, Ward County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
293; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cooper Independent School District, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
294; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cosner private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
295; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cotton Gin, Patricia, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
296; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cotton private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
297; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: County Line Gin, Borden and Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
298; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: County Road 404, Winkler County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
299; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cranfill private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
300; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Crucher private well, Terry County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
301; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Cunningham private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
302; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Duke Energy Field Services Fullerton Plant, Andrews
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 16;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
303; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: ExxonMobil Production Company, Andrews County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
304; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Florey Park, Andrews County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
305; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Flowing Wells School District One, Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
306; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Furlow private well, Lynn County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
307; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Gaines County Golf Course, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 27;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
308; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Gaines County Park, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 19;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
309; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Galian private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
310; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Gardendale Country Water, Incorporated, Ector
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
311; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Gill private well, Lynn County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
312; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Girard Post Office, Kent County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
313; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Glosson private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 29;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
314; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Greenwood Independent School District, Midland
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
315; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Greenwood Terrace Mobile Home Subdivision, Midland
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
316; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Greenwood Ventures, Incorporated, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
317; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Greenwood Water Corporation, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
318; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Hancock private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
319; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Henry private well, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 21;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
320; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Huber Gardens Estates, Ector County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
321; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Johns Mobile Home Park, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
322; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Jones private well, Andrews County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
323; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Jones private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
324; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Kadir private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
325; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Kent KWIK Convenience Store 312, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
326; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Klondike High School, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
327; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Loller private well, Yokum County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
328; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant, Texarkana County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 186;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 157;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 23;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
329; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant, Harrison County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 320,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 163,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment.
330; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Loop Water Service Company, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
331; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Lubbock Public Water System, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
332; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Lucas private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
333; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Luckie private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
334; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Maple Water Service Company, Bailey County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
335; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 32;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
336; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: McClain private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
337; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: McGregor Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant,
McLennan County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,800,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 91,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6,600;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 720;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment.
338; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: McMurries private well, Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
339; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Minnix private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
340; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Mobile Home Park, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
341; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Nelms private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
342; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Nobels private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
343; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: North State Highway 115, Winkler County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
344; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: North University Estates, Lubbock County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
345; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: North West Yoakum, Yoakum County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
346; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: O'Brien private well, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 59;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
347; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Offield private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
348; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Pantex Plant, City of Amarillo, Carson County
(Department of Energy);
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 408;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
349; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Pecan Acres Homeowners Association, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
350; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Pecan Acres Water Supply Corporation, Midland
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
351; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Peck private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
352; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Posey private well, Howard County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 26;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
353; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Ray Jr. private well, Howard County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 25;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
354; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Red River Army Depot, Texarkana County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 417;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 226;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
355; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Rivera private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
356; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Roosevelt Independent School District, Lubbock
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 20;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
357; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Sherwood Estates Manufactured Town, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
358; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Sid Richardson Carbon Company, Howard County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
359; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Small private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
360; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Southland Independent School District, Garza
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
361; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Spade Water Supply Corporation, Lamb County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 5;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
362; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Spring Meadow Mobile Home Park, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
363; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Tahoka Public Water System, Lynn County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 12;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
364; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Tate private well, Martin County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
365; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Tellinghuisen private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
366; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Texland Great Plains Water Company, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
367; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Twin Oaks Mobile Home Park, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 10;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
368; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Valley View Mobile Home Park, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
369; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Warren private well, Gaines County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 30;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
370; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Water Runners, Incorporated, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
371; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Weitzel private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
372; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Welch Water Supply Corporation, Dawson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 14;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
373; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Weltie private well, Midland County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
374; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: West Cedar Creek Municipal Utility District,
Henderson County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
375; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: West Texas Animal Clinic, Scurry County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 13;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
376; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Whiteface Independent School District, Cochran
County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
377; State: TX;
Facility/Site name: Yoakum County Park and Golf Course, Yoakum County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
378; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: ATK Thiokol, Bacchus ( former Bacchus Works,
Alliant Tech Systems, Incorporated), City of West Valley;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 19,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
379; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: ATK Thiokol, Promotory (former Thiokol, Promotory
Point), City of Brigham;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 60,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
380; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Dyno Nobel, Site B (Pelican Point), City of Lehi,
Utah County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,300,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
381; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Dyno Nobel, Tooele Test Site, City of Topliff Hill,
Tooele County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 41,900;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil.
382; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Hill Air Force Base, City of Layton, Davis County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 70;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
383; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Kennecott Utah Copper (former Bacchus Works,
Alliant Tech Systems, Incorporated), City of Magna;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 61;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
384; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Magna Water Company, Salt Lake County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
385; State: UT;
Facility/Site name: Wendover Air Force Base, Tooele County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,200;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
386; State: VA;
Facility/Site name: Atlantic Research Corporation;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 17;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Planning.
387; State: VA;
Facility/Site name: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 2,700;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 1,200;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 120;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 7;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water.
388; State: VA;
Facility/Site name: Purdue Farms, Incorporated, Accomack County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 4;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
389; State: VA;
Facility/Site name: Radford Ammunition Plant;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 11;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater.
390; State: WA;
Facility/Site name: Camp Bonneville, City of Vancouver;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 380;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Cleanup status[C]: Under way.
391; State: WA;
Facility/Site name: City of Puyallup, Pierce County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 8;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
392; State: WA;
Facility/Site name: Firgrove Mutual, Incorporated, Pierce County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
393; State: WA;
Facility/Site name: Lacey Water Department, Thurston County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 9;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
394; State: WA;
Facility/Site name: Lakewood Water District, Pierce County;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 6;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Drinking water.
395; State: WV;
Facility/Site name: Allegheny Ballistics Lab, City of Rocket Center;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 35,000;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 34,900;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Groundwater;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 880;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sub-Soil;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 690;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Surface water;
Highest detection reported[A]: Amount (ppb)[B]: 190;
Highest detection reported[A]: Media: Sediment.
Sources: Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, U.S.
Geological Survey, and state environmental agencies.
Note: For the purposes of this report, a site refers to the physical
location where perchlorate was found. Our listing includes both points
of origin as well as locations where perchlorate was found away from
the origin or source. This table lists the highest detection reported
and the media in which it was found, such as groundwater or soil.
[A] In some instances, officials have not confirmed initial sampling
results through subsequent tests. For example, subsequent sampling may
have found lower concentrations or could not find perchlorate.
[B] Parts per billion (ppb).
[C] Data in column reflect the status of cleanup at 51 of the almost
400 sites where perchlorate was found.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: Perchlorate Health Risk Studies Published Since 1998:
1; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: The Effect of Ammonium Perchlorate on Thyroids;
Author: Mann;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: New diagnostic criteria (see original study for
experimental controls);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Not identified/Unknown.
2; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Statistical Analysis of the Tumors Observed in Male F1
Rats at Week 19 in the Argus (1999) Two-Generation Reproduction Study
of Ammonium Perchlorate;
Author: Dunson;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Established incidence probabilities (see original
study for experimental controls);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects indicated.
3; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Report of the Peer Review of Thyroid Histopathology from
Rodents and Rabbits Exposed to Ammonium Perchlorate in the Drinking
Water;
Author: Wolf;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: New diagnostic criteria for reviewing data (see
original study for experimental controls);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects indicated.
4; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Revised Analysis of the Thyroid Hormone Data from the
Mouse Immunotoxicology Study (from Keil et al., 1999);
Author: Crofton;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
5; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Revised Analysis of the Thyroid Hormone Data from the Rat
Developmental "effects" Study-Argus Protocol1416-003;
Author: Crofton;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Adverse effects to development
indicated.
6; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Effects of Ammonium Perchlorate on Immunotoxicologi-cal,
Hematological, and Thyroid Parameters in B6C3F1 Female Mice;
Author: Keil, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, age, sex, and weight; (dose levels
independently verified);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Information on adverse effects
is incomplete.
7; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: Effects of Ammonium Perchlorate on Immunotoxicologi-cal,
Hematological, and Thyroid Parameters in B6C3F1 Female Mice [Final
report];
Author: Keil, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and Environmental Protection
Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, age, sex, strain, and weight; (dose
levels independently verified);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse effects indicated.
8; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: A 90-day Drinking Water Toxicity Study in Rats With
Ammonium Perchlorate [Final Report];
Author: Siglin;
Sponsor/Recipient: ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, sex, and weight;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse and adverse effects indicated.
9; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: A Neurobehavioral Developmental Study of Ammonium
Perchlorate Administered Orally in Drinking Water to Rats;
Author: York;
Sponsor/Recipient: ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects and adverse developmental effects
indicated.
10; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Hormone, Thyroid and Neurohistological Effects of Oral
(drinking water) Exposure to Ammonium Perchlorate in Pregnant and
Lactating Rats and in Fetuses and Nursing Pups Exposed to Ammonium
Perchlorate During Gestation and Via Maternal Milk;
Author: York;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects and adverse developmental effects
indicated.
11; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: A Neurodevelop-mental Study of Ammonium Perchlorate
Exposure on the Motor Activity of Pre-weanling Rat Pups;
Author: Bekkedal, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and age;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No developmental effects indicated.
12; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: An Assessment of Issues Regarding Neurotoxic Effects of
Developmental Exposure to Perchlorate;
Author: Boyes, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
13; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Hormone, Thyroid and Neurohistological Effects of Oral
(drinking water) Exposure to Ammonium Perchlorate in Pregnant and
Lactating Rats and in Fetuses and Nursing Pups Exposed to Ammonium
Perchlorate During Gestation and Via Maternal Milk;
Author: Consultants in Veterinary Pathology;
Sponsor/Recipient: Review: Environmental Protection Agency/Original
study: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and age;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
14; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Statistical Analysis of the Effects of Perchlorate on
Neurobehavioral (motor activity) in SD Rats;
Author: Dunson;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and age;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
15; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Profile Analysis of Brain Morphometry data from
Argus/Primedica "Effects" Protocol 1416-003;
Author: Gellar;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
16; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Revised Brain Morphometry Analysis Incorporating
Consultant in Veterinary Pathology (2003) Review of Morphometry Data
from Argus 1416-003;
Author: Gellar;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
17; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Re: Comments on Original Experimental Design, Study
Performance, and Brain Morphometry Results of Argus Research
Laboratories, Inc., 14 March 2001 Study (Protocol Number 1416-003) and
Supplemental Materials Provided by Dr. Robert Garman, Consultants in
Veterinary Pathology, Inc;
Author: Harry;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
18; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: Oral (Drinking Water) Two Generation (one Litter Per
Generation) Reproduction Study of Ammonium Perchlorate;
Author: York;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and sex;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
19; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Oral (Drinking Water) Developmental Toxicity Study of
Ammonium Perchlorate in Rats [Final report];
Author: York;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse developmental effects indicated.
20; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Ammonium Perchlorate: Effect on Immune Function;
Author: Dourson and Dollarhide;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse and adverse effects indicated.
21; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Addendum to Ammonium Perchlorate: Effect on Immune
Function;
Author: Dourson and Dollarhide;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse and adverse effects indicated.
22; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Ammonium Perchlorate Contamination of Colorado River
Drinking Water is Associated With Abnormal Thyroid Functions in
Newborns in Arizona;
Author: Brechner, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose, comparison/control town, race/ethnicity, and
age;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
23; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Health Effects Assessment for Environmental Perchlorate
Contamination: The Dose Response for Inhibition of Thyroidal
Radioiodine Uptake in Humans;
Author: Greer, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group and National Institute of
Health;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and external data audit;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
24; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: The Effect of Short-Term Low-Dose Perchlorate on Various
Aspects of Thyroid Function;
Author: Lawrence, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group, National Institute of
Health, and the Thyroid Center for Excellence;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Baseline blood and urine tests, and statistical
controls for time and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse effects.
25; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Estimating Human Dose-Response Functions for the Greer et
al. (2000, 2002) and Merrill (2001a) Data on Thyroid Radioactive Iodide
Uptake (RAIU) After Perchlorate Ingestion;
Author: Marcus;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as autocorrelation;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
26; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Analysis of Dose-Response Functions for Effects of
Perchlorate on Serum Hormone from Data of Greer et al. (2000, 2002) and
Merrill (2001a);
Author: Marcus;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as circadian rhythms,
gender, dose, and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
27; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Gestational Exposure to Perchlorate is Associated With
Measures of Decreased Thyroid Function in a Population of California
Neonates;
Author: Schwartz;
Sponsor/Recipient: California Department of Health Services;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Gender, multiple birth, birth weight, blood sample,
age, and ethnicity;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Potential adverse
developmental effects indicated.
28; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Anion Selectivity by the Sodium Iodide Symporter;
Author: Van Sande, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Ministere de la Politique Scientifique, and Fonds;
Subject description: Cells;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Not identified/Unknown;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
29; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Perchlorate and the Thyroid Gland;
Author: Wolff;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Not identified/Unknown;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Not identified/Unknown;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
30; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Differences in the Electrophysiologi-cal Response To I-and
the Inhibitory Anions SCN-and CIO-4 Studied in FRTL-5 Cells;
Author: Yoshida, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Cells;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Not identified/Unknown;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
31; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Intravenous Kinetics of Radio Labeled
Iodide and Perchlorate in Tissues of Pregnant and Lactating Spraque
Dawley Female Rats Dosed With Perchlorate and/or Carrier Free [125] I-;
Author: Yu;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
32; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic
Model for the Kinetics of Perchlorate-Induced Inhibition of Iodide in
the Pregnant Rat and Fetus;
Author: Clewell, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as time, body weight
changes, mammary tissue, blood flow, cardiac output, and body fat;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
33; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic
Model for the Kinetics of Perchlorate-Induced Inhibition of Iodide in
the Lactating and Neonatal Rat;
Author: Clewell, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as time, body weight
changes, mammary tissue, blood flow, cardiac output, and fractional
body fat;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
34; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Audit Report for the Study of
Perchlorate Pharmacokinetics and Inhibition of Radioactive Iodine
Uptake (RAIU) by the Thyroid in Humans;
Author: Merrill;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Audit of documentation from a prior study;
Design controls: Not identified/Unknown;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
35; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: PBPK Model for Perchlorate-Induced
Inhibition of Radioiodide Uptake in Humans;
Author: Merrill;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
36; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Revision To AFRL-HE-WP-CL-2001-0010,
Comparison of Internal Dosimetrics Using PBPK Models for Perchlorate-
Induced Inhibition of Thyroid Iodide Uptake and Sensitivity Analysis
for Male Rat Model;
Author: Merrill;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
37; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Uptake and Elimination of Perchlorate in American Bullfrog
Larvae, Rana Catesbeiana;
Author: Carr, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse developmental
effects indicated.
38; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Response of Native Adult and Larval Anurans in Their
Natural Environment to Ammonium Perchlorate Contamination: Assessment
of Reproductive and Thyroid Endpoints;
Author: Carr, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose, contaminated/noncontami-nated sites, oxygen
level, temperature, conductivity, salinity, pH, and species;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse developmental effects indicated.
39; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: The Effects of Contaminated and Reference Surface Waters
on Metamorphosis in Xenopus Laevis Using a Modified US Environmental
Protection Agency Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory
Committee (EDSTAC, US Environmental Protection Agency, 1998)-Tier 1
Tail Resorption Assay;
Author: Carr, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Experimental design plus field study;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse developmental effects indicated.
40; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Lethal Concentration Determination of Sodium Perchlorate
and Ammonium Chloride on Xenopus Laevis Eggs and Developing Juveniles
During a 5 Day Exposure;
Author: Carr, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse developmental effects indicated.
41; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Perchlorate Toxicity and Risk Assessment;
Author: Klaassen;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human and animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (reference dose developed).
42; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: Thyroid Health Status of Ammonium Perchlorate Workers: A
Cross-Sectional Occupational Health Study;
Author: Lamm, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: American Pacific Corporation, Las Vegas, NV;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose exposure level, and screening for underlying
thyroid and health problems;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No nonadverse or adverse effects indicated.
43; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Genotoxicity Assays for Ammonium Perchlorate;
Author: Sharma, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group, Toxicology Excellence for
Risk Assessment, Cincinnati, OH;
Subject description: Animal, bacteria, and cells;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, repeated study, bacteria strain, and sex;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effects indicated.
44; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Hormone and Perchlorate Data from
Cross-Fostering Study;
Author: Mahle;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and switched exposed/control litters
with exposed/control dams;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
45; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Hormone and Perchlorate Data from
Cross-Fostering Study;
Author: Mahle;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and switched exposed/control litters
with exposed/control dams;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
46; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Human PBPK Model for Perchlorate
Inhibition of Iodide Uptake in the Thyroid;
Author: Merrill;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as body weight, urinary
excretion rate constants, thyroid maximum velocities, and inhibition
affinity constants;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
47; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Hormone Data from Brabant Human
Perchlorate (1.0 and 12.0 mg/kg-day) Kinetics Drinking Water Study;
Author: Mattie;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Not identified/Unknown.
48; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Uptake of Ammonium Perchlorate and Thyroid Status in
Native Fish;
Author: Theodorakis;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Fish;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse and adverse effects indicated.
49; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: In Situ Exposure of Fish and Amphibians for Determination
of Contaminant Effects at the Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant, Jefferson
County, Texas;
Author: Theodorakis;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Fish;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose, contaminated/clean sites, duration, pH, oxygen
levels, conductivity, and temperature of test sites;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Findings not used--design limitations too great.
50; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Fish and Amphibians as Aquatic Sentinels for Perchlorate
Exposures and Effects at the Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant, Jefferson
County, Texas;
Author: Theodorakis;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Fish;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose, contaminated/clean sites, duration, pH, oxygen
levels, conductivity, and temperature of test sites;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effects indicated.
51; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Stability and Concentration Verification of Ammonium
Perchlorate Dosing Solutions;
Author: Tsui, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Ions;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Room temperature, light, humidity, and light/dark
cycle;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
52; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Assessment of Perchlorate in Terrestrial Mammalian
Receptors: Raccoons (Procyon Lotor) and Opossums (Didelphis
Virginiana);
Author: Smith;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose, and contaminated areas compared with uncontami-
nated;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No nonadverse or adverse effects indicated.
53; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Tissue Distribution and Inhibition of
Iodide Uptake in the Thyroid by Perchlorate With Corresponding Hormonal
Changes in Pregnant and Lactating Rats (Drinking Water Study);
Author: Yu;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
54; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Intravenous Kinetics of Radiolabeled
Iodide in Tissues of Adult Male Sprague Dawley Rat Dosed With [125] I-
Plus Carrier;
Author: Yu;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Time after dosing and before death;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
55; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Salmonella Mutagenicity Testing of
Ammonium Perchlorate;
Author: Zeiger;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Health and Human Services, National
Institute of Health;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effects indicated.
56; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Oral (Drinking Water) Developmental Toxicity Study of
Ammonium Perchlorate in Sprague-Dawley Rats;
Author: York, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Adverse effects to development
indicated.
57; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Review of the Thyroid Histopathology
from Xenopus Laevis Exposed to Ammonium Perchlorate in the Water;
Author: Wolf;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects indicated.
58; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Evidence for Competitive Inhibition of Iodide Uptake by
Perchlorate and Translocation of Perchlorate into the Thyroid;
Author: Clewell, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and National Aeronautics and
Space Administration;
Subject description: Human and animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
59; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: A 90-Day Drinking Water Toxicity Study in Rats of the
Environmental Contaminant Ammonium Perchlorate;
Author: Siglin, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Duration, dose, and recovery period;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse and adverse effects indicated.
60; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: A Rat Neurodevelop-mental Evaluation of Offspring,
Including Evaluation of Adult and Neonatal Thyroid, From Mothers
Treated With Ammonium Perchlorate in Drinking Water;
Author: York, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and ManTech Geo-Centers Joint
Venture;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Duration and dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Adverse developmental effects
indicated.
61; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Oral (Drinking Water) Developmental Toxicity Study of
Ammonium Perchlorate in New Zealand White Rabbits;
Author: York, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse developmental
effects indicated.
62; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Oral (Drinking Water) Developmental Toxicity Study of
Ammonium Perchlorate in Sprague-Dawley Rats;
Author: York, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse developmental
effects indicated.
63; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: Does Perchlorate in Drinking Water Affect Thyroid Function
in Newborns or School-Age Children?;
Author: Crump, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Kerr-McGee Chemical, Oklahoma City Oklahoma;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose (cities with high, medium and no levels of
perchlorate in water), age, sex, and urinary iodine concentration,
whether living in the study city since birth or moving there in the
past year;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse developmental effects indicated.
64; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Evaluation of a Population With Occupational Exposure to
Airborne Ammonium Perchlorate For Possible Acute or Chronic Effects On
Thyroid Function;
Author: Gibbs, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose (high, low/control air exposure groups), dose
estimation (shift and lifetime), race, gender, age, hours awake prior
to shift, hours slept, time of day, and shift length;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effects indicated.
65; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Letter To The Editor: Crump Et Al. Study Among School
Children in Chile: Subsequent Urine and Serum Perchlorate Levels Are
Consistent With Perchlorate in Water in Taital;
Author: Gibbs, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Dose (cities with high, medium and no levels of
perchlorate in water), age, sex, and urinary iodine concentration,
whether living in the study city since birth or moving there in the
past year;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
66; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Health Effects Assessment for Environmental Perchlorate
Contamination: The Dose Response Inhibition of Thyroidal Radioiodine
Uptake in Humans;
Author: Greer, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group and National Institute of
Health;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and sex;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No adverse effects indicated.
67; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Letter To The Editor: Low Dose Perchlorate (3mg Daily) and
Thyroid Function;
Author: Lawrence, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Not identified/Unknown;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No effects indicated.
68; Publication year: 2000;
Study title: The Effect of Short-Term Low-Dose Perchlorate on Various
Aspects of Thyroid Function;
Author: Lawrence, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group, Thyroid Center for
Excellence, and National Institute of Health;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Baseline tests performed to ensure subjects had no
prior thyroid problems;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available of
adverse effects.
69; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Perchlorate Clinical Pharmacology and Human Health: A
Review;
Author: Soldin, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Not identified/Unknown.
70; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Predicting Fetal Perchlorate Dose and Inhibition of Iodide
Kinetics During Gestation: A Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic
Analysis of Perchlorate and Iodide Kinetics in the Rat;
Author: Clewell, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design and review/reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and model controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
71; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Predicting Neonatal Perchlorate Dose and Inhibition of
Iodide Uptake in the Rat During Lactation Using Physiologically-Based
Pharmacokinetic Modeling;
Author: Clewell, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design and review/reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and model controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
72; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: PBPK Predictions of Perchlorate Distribution and its
Effect on Thyroid Uptake of Radioiodide in the Male Rat;
Author: Merrill, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and National Aeronautics and
Space Administration;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and model controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
73; Publication year: 2005;
Study title: PBPK Model for Radioactive Iodide and Perchlorate Kinetics
and Perchlorate-Induced Inhibition of Iodide Uptake in Humans;
Author: Merrill, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and National Aeronautics and
Space Administration;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and model controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
74; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: The Pharmacokinetics of Perchlorate and its Effect on the
Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Thyroid Axis in the Male Rat;
Author: Yu, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and National Aeronautics and
Space Administration;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and model controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse effects.
75; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Reference Dose for Perchlorate Based On Thyroid Hormone
Change in Pregnant Women as the Critical Effect;
Author: Strawson, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: Statistical controls, such as Environmental Protection
Agency protocols on Reference Dose risk assessment, and uncertainty
factors;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (reference dose developed).
76; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: In Vitro Mammalian Cell Gene Mutation Test (L5178Y/TK
Mouse Lymphoma Assay);
Author: San and Clarke;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, established criteria for a mutagenesis assay;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effect indicated.
77; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Uptake of the Perchlorate Anion Into Various Plant
Species;
Author: Anderson;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental and Research Development
Program;
Subject description: Plants;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, plant type, and water v. sand;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
78; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Effects of the Perchlorate Anion on Earthworms;
Author: Anderson;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental and Research Development
Program;
Subject description: Earthworms;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose, duration, and dermal v. soil contact;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
79; Publication year: 2001;
Study title: Hormone, Thyroid, and Neurohistological Effects of Oral
(Drinking Water) Exposure to Ammonium Perchlorate in Pregnant and
Lactating Rats and in Fetuses and Nursing Pups Exposed to Ammonium
Perchlorate During Gestation or Via Maternal Milk;
Author: Consultants in Veterinary Pathology;
Sponsor/Recipient: Perchlorate Study Group;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Duration and dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effect on development indicated.
80; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Kinetic Data for Iodide Uptake
Inhibition in the Thyroid by Perchlorate (2-Week Drinking Water Study);
Author: Channel;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of
Defense;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No effects indicated.
81; Publication year: 1999;
Study title: Consultative Letter: Summary of Human Kinetic Data on
Perchlorate;
Author: Channel;
Sponsor/Recipient: Department of Defense and National Aeronautics and
Space Administration;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (model developed).
82; Publication year: 2003;
Study title: Effect of Perchlorate on Amphibian Development;
Author: Tietge and Degitz;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Amphibians;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverese effects indicated. Adverse effects to
development indicated.
83; Publication year: 1998;
Study title: Benchmark Dose Calculations on Thyroid Data from Studies
Submitted for Evaluation of Perchlorate;
Author: Geller;
Sponsor/Recipient: Environmental Protection Agency;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: See original study for experimental controls;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied (bechmark dose developed).
84; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Solid-State Proton Conduction: An Ab Initio Molecular
Dynamics Investigation of Ammonium Perchlorate Doped With Neutral
Ammonia;
Author: Rosso and Tuckerman;
Sponsor/Recipient: National Science Foundation and Research Corporation
Research Innovations;
Subject description: Ammonium Perchlorate Crystal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Temperature levels, and pure crystal v. neutral
ammonia doped crystal;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
85; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Community Cancer Assessment in Response to Long-Time
Exposure to Perchlorate and Trichloroethylene in Drinking Water;
Author: Morgan and Cassady;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human;
Design type: Field study;
Design controls: Incidence rates, age, sex, race/ethnicity, population
size, and demographic features;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: No adverse effects indicated.
86; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Interspecies Differences in Susceptibility to Perturbation
of Thyroid Homeostasis: A Case Study With Perchlorate;
Author: Lewandow-ski, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Not identified/Unknown;
Subject description: Human and animal;
Design type: Review/Reanalysis of studies/data;
Design controls: From original studies;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
87; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: In Utero and Lactational Exposure to Ammonium Perchlorate
in Drinking Water: Effects on Developing Deer Mice at Postnatal Day 21;
Author: Thuett, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental and Research Development
Program;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Adverse effects to development indicated.
88; Publication year: 2002;
Study title: Effects of In Utero and Lactational Ammonium Perchlorate
Exposure On Thyroid Gland Histology and Thyroid Sex Hormones in
Developing Deer Mice (Peromyscus Maniclatus) Through Postnatal Day 21;
Author: Thuett;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental and Research Development
Program;
Subject description: Animal;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and breeding pairs (analysis with paired groups
and individual pups);
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. Adverse effects to development
indicated.
89; Publication year: Since 1998 (precise year unknown);
Study title: Iodide Transport in Xenopus Laevis Gut and Skin;
Author: Harrison, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Howard Huges Medical Institute and Texas Tech
University;
Subject description: Amphibian;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Effects not studied.
90; Publication year: 2004;
Study title: Ammonium Perchlorate Effects on Thyroid Function and
Growth In Bobwhite Quail Chicks;
Author: McNabb, et al;
Sponsor/Recipient: Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program;
Subject description: Birds;
Design type: Experimental design;
Design controls: Dose and duration;
Author's findings/conclusions about the adverse effects of perchlorate
on health: Nonadverse effects indicated. No information available on
adverse developmental effects.
Source: GAO review of publicly available studies on perchlorate health
effects.
Note: For the purposes of this study, we have categorized nonadverse
effects as including, for example, transitional changes in thyroid
hormones from perchlorate exposure. We have categorized adverse effects
as including, for example, adenomas, increased thyroid or organ
weights, follicular cell hypertrophy and hyperplasia, and changes in
brain structure of developing subjects resulting from perchlorate
exposure. (Lists are not inclusive of all criteria.)
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix IV: Summary of Certain Environmental Laws and Regulations:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was enacted as an
amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act to create a framework for the
management of hazardous and nonhazardous solid waste. It authorizes EPA
to control hazardous waste from the point where waste is generated
through its transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal. EPA
regulations define hazardous waste to include waste specifically listed
in the regulation as well as those defined as "characteristic waste."
Characteristic hazardous waste is defined as waste that is ignitable,
corrosive, reactive, or toxic. A federal district court in California
ruled, in part, that perchlorate is a hazardous waste under RCRA
because it is ignitable, under certain conditions.[Footnote 9]
RCRA requires owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, and
dispose of hazardous waste, including federal agencies, to obtain
permits specifying how they will safely manage waste. Under RCRA's
corrective action provisions, facilities seeking or holding RCRA
permits can be required to clean up their hazardous waste
contamination. Under RCRA, EPA has the authority to order a cleanup of
hazardous waste when there is an imminent and substantial endangerment
to public health or the environment. EPA may authorize states to
administer their own programs in lieu of the federal program, as long
as these programs are equivalent to and consistent with the federal
program and provide for adequate enforcement. Under RCRA, state
agencies have required RCRA permit holders to sample for and report on
perchlorate detections and prevent additional releases.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act:
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, governs the cleanup of
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants. CERCLA's definition of a hazardous substance includes
substances regulated under various other environmental laws, including
RCRA, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Toxic Substances
Control Act. Under section 120 of CERCLA, the federal government is
subject to and must comply with CERCLA's requirements to the same
extent as any nongovernmental entity. CERCLA provides broad authority
to EPA to respond to releases or threatened releases of hazardous
substances or pollutants or contaminants that may endanger public
health or the environment. Under these provisions, DOD has responded to
perchlorate found on military installations and facilities. CERCLA
establishes prohibitions and requirements for contaminated sites;
provides for the liability for hazardous substances at these sites; and
provides for the use of the Hazardous Substances Superfund, a trust
fund to provide for cleanup, for example, when a responsible party
cannot be identified. The law authorizes short-term removal--where
actions may be taken to address releases or threatened releases
requiring prompt response--and long-term response--where actions may be
taken to permanently reduce the danger associated with a release. EPA
identifies the most hazardous sites, those requiring long-term action,
by listing them on the National Priorities List.
The Clean Water Act:
The Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to regulate the discharge of
pollutants into waters of the United States. EPA may authorize states
to carry out a state program in lieu of the federal program if the
state program meets the requirements of the Clean Water Act, including
providing for adequate enforcement. The act defines a pollutant to
include virtually all waste material. The act provides for the
establishment of national discharge limitations, water quality
standards, and a permit program and has provisions for addressing oil
and toxic substance spills. Covered private parties as well as federal
facilities must comply with the requirements of the act. According to
EPA, since pollutants are defined broadly in the act to include most
waste material, perchlorate would likely fall within this definition.
Under the Clean Water Act's National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program, facilities discharging pollutants into waters
of the United States from point sources are required to obtain an NPDES
permit from EPA or authorized states. NPDES permits include specific
limits on the quantity of pollutants that may be discharged and require
monitoring of those discharges to ensure compliance. Industrial,
municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits to discharge
specific pollutants if their discharges go directly to waters of the
United States. Sites with NPDES permits are required to routinely
sample and report to state regulatory agencies on the release of
specified pollutants, which may include contaminants such as
perchlorate.
The Federal Facility Compliance Act:
Under section 107 of the Federal Facility Compliance Act of
1992,[Footnote 10] EPA was required, in consultation with DOD and the
states, to issue a rule identifying when military munitions become
hazardous waste under RCRA and to provide for protective storage and
transportation of that waste. Under the rule issued by EPA, used or
fired military munitions become waste subject to RCRA regulation if,
among other things, (1) they are transported off-range for waste
management purposes or (2) they or their constituents are recovered,
collected, and then disposed of by burial on or off a range.[Footnote
11] Unexploded, used, and fired military munitions are known sources of
perchlorate. Under RCRA, as amended by the Federal Facility Compliance
Act, EPA maintains that DOD installations may be required to sample and
monitor off-range for perchlorate as well as other contaminants
associated with military munitions where EPA has evidence that the
contaminants are creating an imminent and substantial endangerment to
health or the environment.
The Safe Drinking Water Act:
The Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to issue national primary
drinking water regulations setting maximum contaminant-level goals and
maximum contaminant levels for drinking water that must be met by
public water systems.[Footnote 12] EPA may authorize states to carry
out primary enforcement authority for implementing the Safe Drinking
Water Act if, among other things, the states adopt drinking water
regulations that are no less stringent than the national primary
drinking water regulations. EPA has set standards for approximately 90
contaminants in drinking water; however, most of the more than 200
chemical contaminants associated with munitions use, including
perchlorate, are currently unregulated under the Safe Drinking Water
Act.[Footnote 13]
The 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act required EPA to (1)
establish criteria for a monitoring program for unregulated
contaminants, where a maximum contamination level has not been
established, and (2) publish a list of contaminants chosen from those
not currently monitored by public water systems. EPA's regulation,
referred to as the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation, was
issued in 1999 and supplemented in 2000 and 2001.[Footnote 14] The
purpose of the regulation was to determine whether a contaminant occurs
at a frequency and in concentrations that warrant further analysis and
research on its potential effects, and to possibly establish future
drinking water regulations. The first step in the most recent program
required public water systems serving more than 10,000 customers--and a
sample of 800 small public water systems serving 10,000 or fewer
customers--to monitor drinking water for perchlorate and 11 other
unregulated contaminants over a consecutive 12-month period during 2001
and 2003 and to report the results to EPA. According to EPA, large
public water systems provide drinking water to about 80 percent of the
U.S. population served by public water systems.
[End of section]
Appendix V: Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY:
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460:
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
APR 26 2005:
Mr. John Stephenson:
Director:
Natural Resources and Environment Office:
Government Accountability Office:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Stephenson:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) draft report entitled "Perchlorate: A
System to Track Sampling and Cleanup Results Is Needed" (GAO-05-462).
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) appreciates GAO's
thoroughness in researching and reporting on the extent of perchlorate
contamination, actions to clean up existing contamination, and studies
on potential health risks of perchlorate.
EPA agrees with the report's conclusion that perchlorate contamination
has been found in the groundwater, surface water, drinking water, or
soil of 37 U.S. states and commonwealths. EPA also agrees with the
report's finding that defense-related activities have been found to be
associated with perchlorate detections. EPA does not agree with the
proposed recommendation, cited on page 25, that EPA "establish a formal
structure to centrally track and monitor perchlorate detections and the
status of cleanup efforts across the federal government and state
agencies."
Enclosed are our comments on specific issues for GAO's consideration
when preparing the final report.
EPA already has significant information and data on perchlorate
concentrations various environmental media. Much of the information is
obtained from our partners in other federal agencies and States and by
private parties, among others. The currently-available information
indicates the extent of contamination nationally. While it's true EPA
does not have all the data a tracking system could provide, as GAO
recommends, benefits are unclear.
Moreover, the development and maintenance of a new tracking system
would require additional resources or the redirection of resources from
other vital ongoing environmental activities. In order to justify a
tracking system, EPA would have to analyze its associated costs and
benefits and weight them against projects in other environmental
programs. If the benefits of a new large and complex system are
unclear, it is unlikely that EPA would fund it, especially when current
information on perchlorate contamination is sufficient.
Thank you for this opportunity to review and comment on the draft
report on perchlorate contamination.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Barry N. Breen:
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator:
Enclosure:
[End of section]
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Defense:
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE:
ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY AND LOGISTICS:
3000 DEFENSE PENTAGON:
WASHINGTON, DC 20301-3000:
APR 26 2005:
Mr. John Stephenson:
Director, Natural Resources and Environment:
U.S. General Accountability Office:
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Stephenson:
This letter is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the GAO
draft report, "PERCHLORATE: A System to Track Sampling and Cleanup
Results is Needed," dated March 31, 2005 (GAO Code 360484/GAO-05-462).
DoD finds this draft report to be factually incorrect and fundamentally
flawed. It fails to provide Congress and the public with an accurate
assessment of perchlorate issues and activities.
The report mischaracterizes DoD's response to perchlorate, a chemical
which is unregulated by the Federal government and for which no state
has promulgated standards. In an environment where no regulatory
requirement exists, DoD has sampled for perchlorate at 800 sites on 101
different facilities over and above the sampling required and conducted
pursuant to the Unregulated Contaminants Monitoring Rule of the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Furthermore, DoD has invested over $40 million
dollars in developing and demonstrating perchlorate remediation
technologies and over $8 million in pollution prevention measures.
The report risks misleading Congress and the public with respect to the
significance and interpretation of key health risk findings and
exposure information because it inaccurately summarizes the findings of
the National Academy of Sciences as well as other scientific and
technical data. In so doing, the report does a serious disservice to
both the complexities and nuances of those findings. DoD is
disappointed that the extensive comments it twice provided (orally and
in writing) to GAO staff on means to improve the accuracy and quality
of text, data analysis and its presentation, were largely unheeded. If
summaries of the NAS and others' studies are retained in the report,
they require significant reformulation to be accurate and informative.
Enclosed are specific comments and corrections to the data and
information in this report.
DoD does not concur with the report's single recommendation that "..
EPA use existing authorities or seek additional authority to establish
a formal structure to centrally track and monitor perchlorate
detections and the status of cleanup efforts across the federal
government and state agencies." DoD does not believe that EPA requires
additional authority to create the proposed perchlorate data base. DoD
will continue to share its information on perchlorate. It is not clear
that new formal structures to track and monitor perchlorate will
provide added value.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this report.
Questions should be directed to DoD's primary action officer, Ms.
Shannon E. Cunniff (703) 604-1529).
Sincerely,
Philip W. Grove:
Principal Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations
and Environment):
Enclosure:
As stated:
[End of section]
Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
John B. Stephenson (202) 512-3841 Edward Zadjura (202) 512-9914:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individuals named above, John Delicath, Christine
Frye, Alan Kasdan, Karen Keegan, Roderick Moore, Edith Ngwa, James
Rose, and Rebecca Shea made key contributions to this report.
(360484):
FOOTNOTES
[1] Although EPA recently adopted a perchlorate reference dose of 24.5
parts per billion, EPA's provisional cleanup level for perchlorate
remains between 4 and 18 parts per billion and has not been revised.
[2] Previously, in 1995, on the basis of a 1952 human pharmaceutical
study, EPA established a provisional reference dose for perchlorate in
drinking water that equated to a drinking water concentration of
between 4 and 18 parts per billion.
[3] Hypothyroidism is a condition in which the thyroid gland fails to
produce enough thyroid hormone, causing a variety of symptoms--such as
mental and physical sluggishness.
[4] Sampling for perchlorate was required under this regulation between
2001 and 2003 (see app. IV).
[5] Edwards Air Force Base, California, is cleaning up perchlorate.
According to DOD, the cleanup is independent from, and not in response
to, a requirement from a regulatory agency or environmental law.
[6] GAO, DOD Operational Ranges: More Reliable Cleanup Cost Estimates
and a Proactive Approach to Identifying Contamination Are Needed, GAO-
04-601 (Washington, D.C.: May 28, 2004).
[7] Pub. L. No. 108-375, § 318, 118 Stat. 1811, 1845 (2004).
[8] The number of study types is greater than the total number of
studies because 3 studies used a combination of experimental design and
data analysis methodologies.
[9] Castaic Lake Water Agency v. Whittaker Corp, 272 F. Supp. 2d 1053
(C.D. Cal. 2003). The conclusion that perchlorate is a hazardous waste
was the first step in the court's analysis of whether perchlorate is a
hazardous substance under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). (The definition of hazardous
substances under CERCLA includes hazardous waste under RCRA.)
[10] Section 107 of the Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992 amended
RCRA by adding a new section 3004(y), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6924(y)
(2004).
[11] 40 C.F.R. 266.202 (2004).
[12] A public water system is subject to the Safe Drinking Water Act if
the system has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at
least 25 individuals.
[13] The Safe Drinking Water Act regulates ammonium nitrate, benzene,
cadmium, chromium, and lead--constituents commonly found in munitions.
[14] 40 C.F.R. 141.40.
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of
Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director,
NelliganJ@gao.gov
(202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office,
441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548:
