DEQ headed in right direction on limit for arsenic in Klamath water 

It sounds terrible, but a little won’t kill you

Herald and News Editorial

November 15, 2011

      The city of Klamath Falls caught a break last month when it found out it may not have to reduce arsenic in water below levels that occur naturally.

   That would have driven up costs well beyond what the city already was steeling itself to meet. Still unresolved is the question of how much it will cost to meet the total maximum daily load — TMDLs for short — that would require water users and others in the Klamath Basin to meet new standards.

   Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality has proposed a TMDL standard that the city of Klamath Falls says isn’t reasonable and is appealing. It will be some time next year before the appeal is decided. Then the decision goes to the federal Environmental Protection Agency for final approval.  

   Million dollar price tag

   The main problem is a proposed standard that would reduce phosphorous by 91 percent. It would cost city ratepayers an estimated $6 million for machinery.

   Yet, the effluent from the city of Klamath Falls that goes into the Klamath River already is lower in phosphorous than the amount that occurs naturally in the river because of the high phosphorous in the Klamath Basin soil.

   As for arsenic, we know it sounds kind of terrible to allow any amount of arsenic in water, but like a lot of substances, its danger is more from the amount than from the fact that it is there at all. It’s been demonized in the public mind where death and arsenic are usually as closely linked as, well, “Crater” and “Lake.”

   But the fact is that arsenic is a natural element that like a lot of naturally occurring substances, can kill in high doses. It’s important that the DEQ may be willing to say relaxing the allowable arsenic levels in the city’s waste water won’t pose a public risk.  

   We don’t know if what seems to be happening on arsenic is a sign that the DEQ will bend a bit on phosphorous content, but it sure isn’t a bad sign either. If so, the agency deserves credit for recognizing natural conditions as important.