Dear Editor: Uranium Standards and Whitehall Water

Dear Editor,

The recent Ledger coverage regarding uranium in Whitehall groundwater was timely and well done.

One of the articles (May 29, 2024) contains an apparent statement by someone that none of the 34 water samples taken from the Whitehall area groundwater "came back with low enough uranium." Some interpret this to mean that uranium exceeded drinking water standards in all samples and occurred throughout the Whitehall area.

These samples were part of the work I did for the town from 2015 to 2017. The issue surfaced because the town had recently been required to sample the public water system for radioactive constituents. Uranium was above the drinking water limit, and little was known about it. Some were very concerned. The location and cause of the elevated uranium were required to develop a path forward.

The majority of the 34 samples were below the uranium drinking water limit. Those that exceeded it were relatively localized. This indicates that most of the Whitehall area groundwater meets the standard. Additional sampling would be required to verify this.

Uranium in the Whitehall area groundwater is natural and was not introduced by human activity. Whitehall is not alone. Similar natural exceedances have been identified elsewhere in Montana and the U.S. since the EPA required public water systems to be tested for uranium.

The uranium standard is 30 ug/l (micrograms per liter), which is 30 ppb (parts per billion). A ppb is 1 part of uranium in 1 billion equal parts of water. This is an extremity low concentration. The 30 ppb limit equates to one second in a year. These low limits and the required sampling were recently implemented, so reliable long-term scientific studies of humans have not been completed (let alone repeated). The EPA instead uses limited animal testing, extrapolations, and modeling to determine the standards.

States are required to comply with and enforce the EPA standards. Note that household uranium can typically be treated with relatively inexpensive off-the-shelf under-sink systems (reverse osmosis, ion exchange, etc.).

Homeowners determine whether to test for and treat uranium (should it happen to be elevated). It would be arrogant to assume anyone fully understands the health impacts. However, I doubt it is a serious immediate risk. People have been drinking the naturally occurring uranium here for over 150 years, and Whitehall does not appear to have discernable high cancer rates.

FESS FOSTER

Whitehall, Montana