Go to Recent Letter to USGS
Go to Recent Letter to NJDEP
Letter to NJDEP
August 19, 1998
Chief Barker Hamill
NJDEP
Water Supply Element
Bureau of Safe Drinking Water
PO Box 426
401 E. State St.
Floor 3
Trenton, NJ 08625-0426
Dear Chief Barker Hamill,
SUBJECT: SAFE WATER IN WINSLOW TWP, CAMDEN CTY
After reading a recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer concerning the Radium levels in South Jersey public water wells, I am concerned about the safety of our drinking water.
The article states that many wells in the area, which draw water from the Kirkwood- Cohansey, aquifer have levels of Radium which exceed the level of 5pc/l federal limit. It also states that land development , fertilizers & lime are some reasons the Radium entered the aquifer.
I live in Winslow Township. One public well listed in the article was reported by the USGS to be at a level of 7pc/l. After speaking to Superintendent Charles Stevens at Winslow Township about the water, I was not exactly relieved. Mr. Stevens told me that the public well listed in the article was no longer in use. He said that the public water in Winslow was below the 5pc/l federal level for Radium. He said it was probably around 4pc/l at some wells, 3pc/l at others. However, he also said that the Township does not test for Radium at regular intervals. He said that other agencies (USGS, I think) test for Radium. The last test was several years ago. The next test will be 2-3 years in the future.
My concerns are these:
1) What is the current Radium level in the water at Winslow Township?
2) Since no level of Radium is safe to ingest (as per the article), what can be done to achieve safe drinking water?
3) What other contaminants are in the public water i.e. mercury, nitrates etc.?
4) Should land development be curtailed on order to prevent additional strain and pollution on the aquifer?
5) Who is responsible for overseeing development and land use to protect and prevent total destruction of the aquifer ?
I would like to believe our water supply is safe and clean as Mr. Stevens of Winslow has assured me. However, I have my doubts.
What can be done to alleviate my fears? Tell me that Radium testing will be done regularly. Tell me all data concerning the public water systems is available to the public. Tell me all municipalities will not develop land unconscionably in the name of the almighty tax dollar.
I anxiously await your reply.
Sincerely,
D.C.-
This is the Reply:
Date:
Wed, 26 Aug 1998 09:54:58 -0500
From:
Nasir Butt NBUTT@dep.state.nj.us
To:
D.C.
Subject:
Safe Water in Winslow Township,Camden County
Hello D.C.:
Here is the itemized response to your inquiry of August 19,1998,
relative
to quality of water serviced by Winslow Twp. Water & Sewer :
1. If Gross Alpha is less than 5 pci/l, there is no need to even
investigate
for Radium. Last time when the Utility had its water tested for
Radionuclides ,the Gross Alpha level was 2.9 pci/l . Therefore, the
Water
Utility has no problem with Radium.
2. There is nothing wrong with the water provided by Winslow Twp.
However, a water softner treatment is cosidered very effective in
removing Radium from water.
3. Winslow twp. has no problem with Mercury & Nitrate. Everything is in
compliance with the Safe Drinkig Water Act.
4.The NJDEP already has restriction imposed in the tri-county area (
Burlington,Camden,and Gloucester ) on the use of certain aquifer.This is
called critical area # 2. You can call Bureau of Allocation at (609)
292-2957 for further info.
5. I would suggest that you call Bureau of Allocation on this subject.
The Bureau of Safe Drinking Water has jurisdiction over all the Public
Community Water System in the State. One of our primary responsibility
is to keep track of the water quality throuhgout the State. Every
utility in
the State has to monitor their water quality on a regular basis under
the
Safe Drinking Water Act.We maintain files on evey water system which
is a public info. We also have a program where we randomly check the
warter quality of all the Public Community Water System in the State. I
hope ,I answered all your questions. If you have any further questions,
please contact me at (609) 292-5540
Sincerely,
Nasir Butt
Back to top of page
Letter to USGS - District Chief
To: District Chief, NJ, West Trenton, NJ
dc_nj@wrdmail.er.usgs.gov
After reading the 8/9/98 article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, I am very
concerned about the radium levels in the public drinking water. In the
article, the authors indicate that public water is mixed with other
sources to achieve a level of 5 picocuries/liter. Does this mean that
the level found by the USGS at Winslow public water well of 10.7
picocuries/liter is not the level that is pumped to the resident's
homes? In addition, the article mentions that 5 picocuries/liter is
really an arbitrary level. No level of radium ingested is safe.
My family will be using bottled water for all drinking and cooking. But
what about about washing dishes and clothes and brushing teeth etc.?
What can be done at the township level do further reduce the level of
radium in the water?
Sincerely,
D. C.
This is the Reply:
Dear D. C.,
Because USGS is interested in identifying, both the source concentrations
and locations of radium occurence, we sample raw water at individual
wells. It is quite common for water-supply companies to blend delivered
water from many wells. Therefore, the delivered water may be
substantially different in radium concentration (and hopefully lower)
that that pumped from one well in the water system.
Regarding drinking-water safety at or below the 5 pc/l limit: The risk
assessment and human-health effect studies associated with establishing
the drinking water standards are beyond the scope of USGS studies. You
would need to address that question to NJDEP or USEPA.
Regarding what can be done by the township: The radium is naturally
occurring and certain land-uses have likely aided in its mobilization.
Because ground-water moves very slowly, any kind of "flushing" would take
a long while to clean out the aquifer and would have to be coordinated
with what would likely be drastic changes in land-use practices (no
fertilizers, liming, or road salt) to minimize the dissolution of radium.
My humble, personal opinion is that it would not be feasible to
accomplish. I suspect that point-of-use treatment with water-softener
equipment to remove radium from drinking water is the more feasible
solution to this issue.
Back to top of page
