It's anyone following the flint water issue?

[ivwshane]

Not only that but when an EPA person leaked information to Flint residents the Mayor of Flint contacted the EPA for details and Susan Hedman actively refused to provide them. She instead thought it would be better to wait 5 more months for the official report to be released

For someone who derides others for being partisan you sure seem hell bent on blaming the EPA. Do you have a source for this claim that the EPA actively denied giving any info to the mayor?

Unless you think the timeline posted is wrong, it shows that the state denied/disputed allegations of bad water when independent tests were done AND when doctors claimed high levels of lead found in patients. Now you want us to believe that if the state only had the same info from the EPA it would have done something more?

I suggest you check yourself for your own partisan hackery.

 

[Sonikku]

It's popular to dig at the EPA though in countries like China where businesses have the kind of lax regulations Republicans can only dream about, things like this wouldn't even be a scandal. Just another day in the life.

Still sucks for the people of Flint and is not at all acceptable.

 

[Exterous]

For someone who derides others for being partisan you sure seem hell bent on blaming the EPA. Do you have a source for this claim that the EPA actively denied giving any info to the mayor?

Please tell me what party the EPA is a member of because I am pretty sure that its neither a republican or democratic entity. If it doesn't have a party affiliation it would be kinda hard to be partisan in regards to it. Their issues are many and span administrations. I also made it clear that the EPA are not the only ones at fault here.

As for a source is it really too hard for you to spend 5 seconds educating yourself on an issue?

In late June, then-Flint Mayor Dayne Walling wrote to Hedman, seeking information about the issue of lead in Flint's drinking water. She essentially shot him down in her response.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/health/flint-water-crisis/

Here you can see the actual emails. The Mayor asks - twice - for the information to be provided to the city and - twice - Susan refuses to release it to him. Instead he is expected to wait 5 more months for the EPA's final report. Not even a 'Well the report isn't finalized but early indications are that there might be an issue. It wouldn't hurt to do some checking in the meantime but again we aren't completely sure yet." Nope - that would have been too much warning for Hedman to give the Mayor.

In comparison to the 6 months it took the EPA to release their report Virginia Tech testers tested the water and released their report in 2 weeks.

http://flintwaterstudy.org/2015/10/new-freedom-of-information-act-foia-request-documents-answer-our-earlier-question-where-is-the-us-epa/

Here's a nice link to some of the EPA's handiwork when it comes to safe drinking water:
http://flintwaterstudy.org/2016/01/...endangerment-in-flint-better-late-than-never/

This is why I am so focused on the EPA. Yes the DEQ and DHHS were more responsible about the Flint issue. But, as terrible as that is, its a local issue with a small reach on a country wide scale. The EPA should be working to stop these issues at a nationwide level but its not. And they very clearly need to be as Flint is not an isolated case. The EPA has repeatedly failed US citizens on what should be a basic and universal resource

Unless you think the timeline posted is wrong, it shows that the state denied/disputed allegations of bad water when independent tests were done AND when doctors claimed high levels of lead found in patients. Now you want us to believe that if the state only had the same info from the EPA it would have done something more?

I suggest you check yourself for your own partisan hackery.

'The State' is not some monolithic entity that consists solely of the Governor. The groups denying the lead issues were the DEQ and DHHS. The timelines show that both Flint and the state (and very specifically Governor Snyder) authorized millions of dollars to treat the water for issues. Given the large outlay of money they were willing to make to deal with reported issues I think its pretty clear that the Governor would have authorized money to deal with the lead issue.

As for partisan hackery - you realize I am defending someone who I didn't see fit to vote for right?

 

[ivwshane]

Please tell me what party the EPA is a member of because I am pretty sure that its neither a republican or democratic entity. If it doesn't have a party affiliation it would be kinda hard to be partisan in regards to it. Their issues are many and span administrations. I also made it clear that the EPA are not the only ones at fault here.

As for a source is it really too hard for you to spend 5 seconds educating yourself on an issue?

You made the claim it's your job to back it up, not mine.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/health/flint-water-crisis/



Here you can see the actual emails. The Mayor asks - twice - for the information to be provided to the city and - twice - Susan refuses to release it to him. Instead he is expected to wait 5 more months for the EPA's final report. Not even a 'Well the report isn't finalized but early indications are that there might be an issue. It wouldn't hurt to do some checking in the meantime but again we aren't completely sure yet." Nope - that would have been too much warning for Hedman to give the Mayor.

So your argument is that they should have done something they normally don't do?

In comparison to the 6 months it took the EPA to release their report Virginia Tech testers tested the water and released their report in 2 weeks.

It was also explained to the DEQ that switching sources would require treatment before the switch even happened. The DEQ was also informed by citizens about water issues including possible lead contamination before the citizen reached out to the EPA and the DEQ did nothing.

http://flintwaterstudy.org/2015/10/new-freedom-of-information-act-foia-request-documents-answer-our-earlier-question-where-is-the-us-epa/

Here's a nice link to some of the EPA's handiwork when it comes to safe drinking water:
http://flintwaterstudy.org/2016/01/...endangerment-in-flint-better-late-than-never/

I'm not sure what that commentary is supposed to indicate unless you want the EPA to take actions without the necessary data? You do realize that the EPA is the rights whipping boy when it comes to complaining about over regulation, right?

This is why I am so focused on the EPA. Yes the DEQ and DHHS were more responsible about the Flint issue. But, as terrible as that is, its a local issue with a small reach on a country wide scale. The EPA should be working to stop these issues at a nationwide level but its not. And they very clearly need to be as Flint is not an isolated case. The EPA has repeatedly failed US citizens on what should be a basic and universal resource

Yeah, so you thought that you'd make a stand in what is a local issue to highlight issues you have with the EPA? That's pretty much the definition of being partisan. Maybe you should create your own anti EPA thread instead of capping in this one to try to make your point.


'The State' is not some monolithic entity that consists solely of the Governor. The groups denying the lead issues were the DEQ and DHHS. The timelines show that both Flint and the state (and very specifically Governor Snyder) authorized millions of dollars to treat the water for issues. Given the large outlay of money they were willing to make to deal with reported issues I think its pretty clear that the Governor would have authorized money to deal with the lead issue.

Pure speculation on your part.

As for partisan hackery - you realize I am defending someone who I didn't see fit to vote for right?

At best you could complain that the EPA didn't work fast enough or want forceful enough but that's hardly a reason to put as much blame on them as you are willing to do.
The facts remain;
Flint was told they would need to treat the water when they do the switch over, they didn't.
Citizens complained to the DEQ and they did nothing.
Multiple sources confirmed the issues and the reaction was either non existent or slow.

 

[Exterous]

So your argument is that they should have done something they normally don't do?

The EPA releases preliminary results and draft results all the time and even did so that same year (See: Fracking). So saying its not something they do is a factual misrepresentation of reality. At best it is a specific policy decision by an administrator that is arbitrary and open to criticism and - since she was removed - appears to have been in incorrect one.

It was also explained to the DEQ that switching sources would require treatment before the switch even happened.

For someone who wants evidence on other peoples claims despite the mountain of provided links you sure do love posting things without proof. The EPA has not weighed in on whether corrosion controls were required

Particularly baffling is the EPA’s failure to say definitively whether Flint was required to have a corrosion-control program in place after switching from the Detroit system to the Flint River.

http://www.aclumich.org/article/revised-epa-memo-raises-troubling-questions-amid-flint-water-crisis

This is the email discussing if Flint was actually required to implement corrosion control or not:

The City of Flint’s second round of monitoring will be completed by June 30,

2015, and we will make a formal decision at that time. If my memory is correct, this is

consistent with the process followed in the early 1990’s for large systems when the Pb/Cu rule

was first implemented. The Department waits until large systems complete both rounds of full

scale, 6 month monitoring before making a decision about optimal corrosion control. If it is

determined that Flint has to install corrosion control treatment, the rule allows up to 2 years to

complete a study and 2 additional years to install the treatment unless we set a shorter time

Edit: The EPA has since revised their requirements and new requirements went into effect November 3rd 2015

I'm not sure what that commentary is supposed to indicate unless you want the EPA to take actions without the necessary data? You do realize that the EPA is the rights whipping boy when it comes to complaining about over regulation, right?

Necessary data? The testing was completed in May so all the data was there. It took them 6 months to release a 28 page report on the three houses they tested.

So yes - I do want the EPA to take less than 6 months to release the testing data showing that people's health is at risk when drinking water from the tap
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/transmittal_of_final_redacted_report_to_mdeq.pdf

Yeah, so you thought that you'd make a stand in what is a local issue to highlight issues you have with the EPA?

I don't think you understand what 'making a stand is' but this situation does show that there are issues at the EPA. Other people think this as well which is why Hedman no longer has a job and policies are being revised.

Maybe you should create your own anti EPA thread instead of capping in this one to try to make your point.

A thread about the Flint water disaster seems like a pretty good place for discussing the EPA's role in the Flint water disaster

 

[werepossum]

Except for the mountains of extremely important facts they left out of course. Like how they mentioned the emergency manager was a democrat, but failed to mention that the law that put the emergency manager in charge was passed twice by Republicans over the ballot veto of the citizens. Or that the article mentions the city council voted 7-1 to go off Detroit water but then doesn't mention that the city council also voted 7-1 to go back on it after problems developed. Those seem like curious omissions for an article providing a 'much better' take on the situation. lol.

That's a good point. Any Republican who does something as foolish as appointing a Democrat to be in charge of, well, anything, or who passes a law that might allow a Democrat to be in charge of, well, anything, should certainly be held accountable.

That WAS your point, right?

Plenty of blame to go around for everybody it seems...I'm just damn glad they finally found a Republican they could pin it all on. /s

I see that the regional administrator overseeing this crisis for the EPA resigned yesterday. Apparently the EPA knew there were issues long before the governor found out.

Yup. Both parties, federal and state and local. Nothing like this happens without a lot of people committing grievous errors in judgement.

At best you could complain that the EPA didn't work fast enough or want forceful enough but that's hardly a reason to put as much blame on them as you are willing to do.
The facts remain;
Flint was told they would need to treat the water when they do the switch over, they didn't.
Citizens complained to the DEQ and they did nothing.
Multiple sources confirmed the issues and the reaction was either non existent or slow.

The issue with the EPA is EXACTLY the issue with the DEQ: This is what they do for a living. Literally this is why those agencies exist. Yet neither did anything effective in any reasonable time frame. I expect local government to do stupid shit from time to time out of ignorance. I expect local government (and emergency managers, and corporations) to do stupid shit from time to time out of ignorance or a desire/need to cut costs. The DEQ and the EPA are both in existence to stop this; we accept a little less freedom for a little more public safety and health. This is not acceptable behavior from either, and focusing on which one fucked up worse (especially on the basis of politics) is just stupid.

 

[ivwshane]

Sorry it wasn't the EPA's recommendation for corrosion treatment, it was a report commissioned by flint that was forwarded to the DEQ itself!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/how-flint-water-got-poisonous_us_569907f5e4b0b4eb759e1426

Back in 2011, Flint had commissioned an evaluation of Flint River water, the results of which indicated it would need to be treated with phosphates to reduce its corrosiveness. Two years later, according to the Detroit Free Press, a Flint official forwarded that information to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, which is responsible for ensuring that Flint follows the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. But the MDEQ didn't do its job.

Oh and there is this little tidbit:

In a recent interview, Hedman told The Huffington Post that the agency couldn't talk publicly about the memo because it contained identifying information about a private citizen, Lee Ann Walters, whose children were exposed to high lead levels. For much of last year, Walters worked to publicize the problem and even petitioned the EPA to take emergency measures.

The corrosion never got controlled.

Hedman told HuffPost that while the EPA didn't publicize its corrosion concerns, the agency was busy behind the scenes pressuring the MDEQ to get its act together. But even though MDEQ agreed to implement corrosion control in July, an MDEQ spokeswoman told HuffPost that no corrosion control occurred before Flint switched back to Detroit's water system in October.

 

[Exterous]

Sorry it wasn't the EPA's recommendation for corrosion treatment, it was a report commissioned by flint that was forwarded to the DEQ itself!

I don't disagree that the DEQ didn't do its job. They also released incorrect information about whether they were using corrosion control. No proof yet of lying but that is likely what happened IMO. There need to be a lot of people fired at the DEQ

Oh and there is this little tidbit:

The part about not releasing the report because of private information is a BS excuse. First - they just needed to redact her information in the report because that is what they did for the final release (and it wasn't that much). That doesn't take 6 months. Looking at the report that could probably be done in under 1 hour

Second the Mayor isn't the public and she could have discussed the issue with him.

As for the 'pressuring' of the MDEQ that seems quite suspect to me as no one has been able to find that pressuring in any of the emails the EPA released:

http://flintwaterstudy.org/2016/01/all-flint-water-crisis-related-documents-concerning-city-of-flint-and-miguel-a-del-toral-obtained-by-the-guardians-ryan-felton-via-freedom-of-information-act-foia-requests-to-the-us-epa/

Instead we have the EPA saying things like this:

I hope this all dies down once they connect to the Karegnondi pipeline

Mayor Walling --
I understand that we received a media inquiry on this topic today -- and we plan to respond to the reporter by making clear that the City of Flint is implementing EPA's recommendations

Since its a slow day I actually downloaded all 117MB and it looks like I looked at all the May-Sept emails and there were maybe 8 that went to the DEQ and certainly none of those were 'pressuring'. Instead they were discussing how many faucets the DEQ needed to retest and trying to determine if the EPA rules required 60 or 100

I did find emails that make it even more suspect that the EPA was 'pressuring' the DEQ given that in September the EPA still didn't know if their interpretation of the LCR regulations were correct so they couldn't yet pressure the DEQ on that front until they knew. In September they were still reviewing the DEQ's samples to determine if they were in compliance with the 90th percentile calculation. No 'pressuring' there as they didn't know if the DEQ was in compliance or not
(EPA-R5-2015-01129900000241.pdf)


Edit: An interesting side note - Apparently the EPA "advises everyone across the country to flush their pipes before drawing drinking water" And they want you to do this if the water hasn't been running for more than 6 hours. That seems....concerning to me

 

[ivwshane]

Here's a better timeline with better citations and explanations than the CNN link I posted earlier.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-went-wrong-in-flint-water-crisis-michigan/

It looks like the DEQ really fucked up on this one.

 

[Linux23]

this whole issue is fucked to high hell. whoever is responsible for this, and it seems like it went all the way to the top, should be jailed and fined for this.

 

[HomerJS]

It's popular to dig at the EPA though in countries like China where businesses have the kind of lax regulations Republicans can only dream about, things like this wouldn't even be a scandal. Just another day in the life.

Still sucks for the people of Flint and is not at all acceptable.

+1

 

[Ackmed]

Some are saying racism is the cause for this; http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/us/flint-michigan-water-crisis-race-poverty/index.html

this whole issue is fucked to high hell. whoever is responsible for this, and it seems like it went all the way to the top, should be jailed and fined for this.

I agree, no problems with that at all. If someone willingly and knowingly did this then they should face consequences.

 

[HomerJS]

When Republicans want to "turn things back to the states" this is what you get.

Illustrates the importance of national standards. Republicans are at best are indifferent to poorer people and people of color. This never would have happened in a well to do or predominantly white neighborhood.

 

[Genx87]

When Republicans want to "turn things back to the states" this is what you get.

Illustrates the importance of national standards. Republicans are at best are indifferent to poorer people and people of color. This never would have happened in a well to do or predominantly white neighborhood.

I have no idea what this situation has to do with states rights. Unless you believe the federal govt runs your local water tap? Anyways this situation isn't making the federal side of the issue look flattering either. The EPA dropped the ball as well.

 

[Ackmed]

I don't know why fingers are being pointed at Republicans. Yeah the Governor of Michigan is. The council members and Mayor of Flint aren't though. And almost all black.

https://www.cityofflint.com/city-council/
https://www.cityofflint.com/mayors-bio/

 

[K1052]

I have no idea what this situation has to do with states rights. Unless you believe the federal govt runs your local water tap? Anyways this situation isn't making the federal side of the issue look flattering either. The EPA dropped the ball as well.

Well the people who want the EPA to go away generally claim that the states should be left to regulate their environment in it's entirety. Given the highly variable quality and integrity of state environmental agencies I think this is an extremely bad idea. Some state agencies are basically owned by industry and even stocked with their former employees.

 

[Indus]

I don't know why fingers are being pointed at Republicans. Yeah the Governor of Michigan is. The council members and Mayor of Flint aren't though. And almost all black.

https://www.cityofflint.com/city-council/
https://www.cityofflint.com/mayors-bio/

Because President Obama sent 80 million dollars to fix the water situation and the Republican Governor instead of providing water to the people of Michigan is using that money to hire PR firms.

Yes you read that right. Source MSNBC The Rachel Maddow Show.

 

[Ackmed]

That may be. Who let it be a problem to begin with?

 

[fskimospy]

I don't know why fingers are being pointed at Republicans. Yeah the Governor of Michigan is. The council members and Mayor of Flint aren't though. And almost all black.

https://www.cityofflint.com/city-council/
https://www.cityofflint.com/mayors-bio/

The governor is a Republican and the state legislature is Republican. The emergency manager law that led to the manager making this decision was passed by Republicans, vetoed by citizens in a ballot measure, and then re-imposed by the Republican governor and legislature. Yes, the emergency manager that the governor appointed was a Democrat, but the entire reason there was an emergency manager at all was due to Republicans and that appointee was still from the Republican governor.

That doesn't mean what happened there is all their fault as the EPA failed, the city council failed initially (before being overruled by the emergency manager when they tried to switch back), etc. Still, when the state government takes control of a locality and then poisons it, the state government is going to feel a lot of heat and rightly so.

 

[Ackmed]

I understand all of that. My point was that the people were failed by many, on many different levels. Dem's and Repub's. Trying to claim that only one or the other is at fault is silly. It is really incredible that this can happen at all, and hopefully gets fixed. And the appropriate people punished.

 

[OverVolt]

You guys can complain all you want. If the money and the infrastructure doesn't exist, stuff like this happens. This was bound to happen for decades.

 

[werepossum]

I have no idea what this situation has to do with states rights. Unless you believe the federal govt runs your local water tap? Anyways this situation isn't making the federal side of the issue look flattering either. The EPA dropped the ball as well.

True, but at least with the EPA you have two shots at the apple. Sure, the EPA fumbled as badly as did the MDEQ, but that isn't necessarily the case every time.

The governor is a Republican and the state legislature is Republican. The emergency manager law that led to the manager making this decision was passed by Republicans, vetoed by citizens in a ballot measure, and then re-imposed by the Republican governor and legislature. Yes, the emergency manager that the governor appointed was a Democrat, but the entire reason there was an emergency manager at all was due to Republicans and that appointee was still from the Republican governor.

That doesn't mean what happened there is all their fault as the EPA failed, the city council failed initially (before being overruled by the emergency manager when they tried to switch back), etc. Still, when the state government takes control of a locality and then poisons it, the state government is going to feel a lot of heat and rightly so.

It's worth pointing out that the entire reason such steps were taken is because the all-Democrat governments of Detroit and Flint failed utterly. No failure = no emergency manager, period.

I do agree that the governor deserves the heat he is getting. Absent unforeseeable intentional mischief, the commander is ultimately responsible for everything the unit does or does not do. Appointing competent people and providing adequate oversight is a big part of any executive's duties. In this particular case, bare competency is making sure that if and when the failed unit switches from a too-expensive water source, then the new source meets all laws and guidelines for safety. Multiple people failed to do this over a period of many months, in spite of overwhelming evidence that the new water supply was not even near adequately safe.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Well the people who want the EPA to go away generally claim that the states should be left to regulate their environment in it's entirety. Given the highly variable quality and integrity of state environmental agencies I think this is an extremely bad idea. Some state agencies are basically owned by industry and even stocked with their former employees.

Not to mention pollution doesn't stop at imaginary lines on a map.

 

[Linux23]

Not to mention pollution doesn't stop at imaginary lines on a map.

It does in Sim City

 

[Exterous]

Because President Obama sent 80 million dollars to fix the water situation and the Republican Governor instead of providing water to the people of Michigan is using that money to hire PR firms.

Yes you read that right. Source MSNBC The Rachel Maddow Show.

I think you need better sources:

Gov. Rick Snyder’s tax-exempt nonprofit fund is footing the bill for public relations specialists

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...16/01/26/snyder-pr-fund-flint-water/79363674/