In the past I have frequently referred to the fact that chlorine is a toxic substance, which reacts with organic substances in drinking water which can result in organic carcinogens.

I also pointed out to those who need to perform emergency water purification that chlorine is less of a risk than many water borne diseases, and that I would use chlorine in an emergency, but would avoid drinking chlorinated water on a regular basis.

I just happened upon this article while searching for information on the water rationing which occurred last week, I THINK in Santa Cruz, Calif.

Am I remembering correctly? It was a city where the water tested out too turbid, and therefore was shut down while repairs of some sort were made, which resulted in lowered water levels in the storage tanks, rationing, hardships for homeowners and businesses, etc.

Al

We appeal to the City of Santa Cruz Water Commission to discontinue application of Chlorine, (CL2 ) in the City of Santa Cruz Water Treatment Process.

This appeal is based on the toxicological data on chlorine. Our request is for the Water Commission to recognize the toxicological data compiled on chlorine and apply a weight-of-evidence approach in coming to a decision of applying CL2; or circumventing the grave health problems that exposure to chlorine poses to our human community and the environment.

Our opposition to chlorine application is supported by a number of critical reports exhorting the dangers of Chlorine Technology. A list of the Reports follows.

1 The USEPA Health Assessment Document for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p- Dioxin (TCDD). 2 The International Joint Commission Seventh Biennial Report on the Great Lakes Water Quality: Recommendations for the Virtual Elimination of Persistent toxic Substances. 3 The Montreal Protocol: Report on Toxic Compounds. 4 The US Water Quality Act amendment: The Chlorine Zero Discharge Act of 1994. 5 The Greenpeace reports Chlorine the Product is the Poison: The Case for a Chlorine Phase-Out. 6 Chlorine Human Health And the Environment: The Breast Cancer Warning. 7 Achieving Zero Dioxin. 8 Body of Evidence: The effects of chlorine on human health. 9 President Clinton proposal: The presidents proposal for Zero Discharge of Chlorine. 10 The Citizens Conference report on Chlorine. 11 The Coastal Alliance Report on Contaminant Sludge. 12 The USEPA Report on chlorine. 13 The Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Toxicology on Chlorine. 14 Chlorine is a registered pesticide: Registered with the EPA.

The evidence compiled in these and other reports and papers clearly show that chlorine is the primary compound contributing to the demise of biological life systems. The International strategy focusing on the elimination of chlorine is founded on the fact that chlorine is one of the most detrimental compounds on the face of the earth. Chlorine metabolites to dioxin; the most toxic compound known to chemical science. Chlorine and Organochlorines by-products such as dioxins, furans, PCBs and hexachlorobenzene are some of the most toxic, and persistent compounds that are affecting (producing a toxic body burden) everyone. The present rate of expansion of chlorine technology is on a crash course that could eventually over-capacitate the Biological Life Support system and poison it to death.

The EPA9s report on dioxin states that the human uptake of dioxins is exceeding levels considered to be safe. More importantly the report states that everyone is accumulating dioxins in their fatty tissue; the fact that this is unacceptable to the EPA is clearly shown by the major effort that the EPA is now putting into gathering and up-grading information on dioxins.

The EPA Report shows that we are living with a background of dioxin toxicity. The report clearly defines chlorine and chlorinated compounds as the genitor of a myriad of toxic effects such as chloracne, estrogen and hormonal disorders, carcinogenicity, Reproductive and developmental, immunotoxicity and Toxic affects. The Clear Message about Chlorine Health Risk It is imperative that chlorine technology be phased out in order to secure Biological Integrity.

The issue of drinking chlorine that has been applied in water treatment processes has been shown to be an un-intelligent option. A significant number of Water departments have already opted to discontinue application of chlorine. There is no question that the elimination of chlorine from water treatment is an intelligent choice.

Cancer has been linked to chlorine in the environment. Reports are showing that one in eight women will get breast cancer. Cancer in males is increasing, decreased sperm count, and incurring prostate cancer demonstrates that both sexes are suffering from the impacts of industrial toxins. The number of people in our community that are complaining of environment illness, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, are on the increase. We view these people as indicator of the silent epidemic that is expanding as synthetic toxic engineering expands; talking its toll, on unsuspecting persons in this toxic chemical era.

People living in the Santa Cruz area are exposed to a myriad of toxic substances that comes from many point sources and non-point sources. See the EPA9s Toxic Release Inventory. While we can not expect you to do everything to safeguard the community from all the toxic substances that we are exposed to, we require you to resolve the issue of toxins in our drinking water. It is a recognized fact that toxins that we ingest have the greatest toxic impact on us. Daily up take of water borne toxins is clearly not acceptable.

The average person after thirty years of consuming chlorinated drinking water begins showing symptoms of biological dysfunction. It is unacceptable to continue the argument 3a small amount of chlorine in our drinking water is harmless2 or to justify a lifetime of exposure to chlorinated water because chlorine kills bacteria.

What community tells us about Chlorine. In talking with community we found that most people sooner or later stop drinking 3tap water2 choosing to buy bottled water. Some people have such an abhorrence for 3Santa Cruz water2 that they refuse to bathe in tap water. Many people filter both the shower water and drinking water. People complain that they have to pay their city water bill and filtered water bills, thus paying for Water twice. The cost of a gallon of bottled water is more than the cost of a gallon of gasoline. We need a Bio-safe water The need for the Water Department to deliver a Bio-safe product is the challenge that community brought to our committee. The question 3can you do something about the chlorine in our drinking water2 is an important question, it is in fact a security issue that we all must work to achieve. The answer to this question is answered some what in the City of Santa Cruz Water Department: Water Treatment Alternative Study. The 3study2 covers a number of alternatives. proving that there are alternatives to chlorine technology. Most of the alternatives sited in the report are Chemical alternatives. There are other non-chemical options that needs to be considered. The American Works Association, and the US Office for Alternative Technology list quite a number of options to chlorine.

We trust that you can and will find a better way of Water Treatment than Chlorine Application.

Factoring the impact of chlorine on communities where chlorine is produced. Communities in the Mississippi River corridor where much of the chlorine that we use is generated, are endangered communities. The people that live in these areas bare the greater burden of our dependency on chlorine technology. They show the human cost of Toxic Technologies. Chlorine is not cheap it cost lives, still births, headaches, neuro-disorders, breast cancer, and premature aging, to name a few. The cost of medical treatment for persons living in chlorine production zones is staggering. The pain and suffering is beyond estimate.

It is conscionable for us to support chlorine production at the risk of communities that are suffering and dying from exposure to the recognized toxic effects of chlorine.

Industry is clearly irresponsible in continuing to produce chlorine when the evidence against it is overwhelming. We must not let the profit motive usurp our integrity. It is important that we say no to chlorine, no to industry. Our security and well being depends on it.

What will it cost to change form a chlorine application water system to a non chlorine water system?

In our conversations with water department personnel the figure of one hundred million came up in discussion for an ozone water treatment system. We have sent out a call for information on cost for other types of systems. We are in communication with a Water Commissioner in Olympia Washington whom is sending us information about their new Ultra Violet Water system. We shall get a copy of this report and its cost modeling to you as soon as we get it. Recognizing that cost is a sensitive issue, we are prepared to work with you in coming to a cost effective and bio-safe water system. The chlorine council stresses that chlorinated water systems are cheap, however the health impact and human cost of this toxic product is very costly, more costly that a bio-safe water system.

In closing we trust that your deliberations will be directed for the well being of our community. we wish you well.

Rev. Dr. Benet Luchion DD. Chemist of CUS ZTTC The Committee for Universal Security, Zero Tolerance Toxic Campaign 1095-A Smith Grade Rd. Santa Cruz Ca. 95060

-- Al K. Lloyd (al@ready.now), August 24, 1999

Answers

Y2K?

Lots of bandwitdht= yes.

General forum = maybe

Bye, bye.....

-- A (regular@tb2000.com), August 24, 1999.

Hmmm, let's see now. Chlorine has been used for decades in water systems throughout the USA while life expectancies in the USA have climbed and climbed. Hmmmm. Perhaps the toxicity of chlorine is very effective at killing microbes that would otherwise adversely affect human health. Hmmmm. Perhaps some folks have learned to use chlorine safely and effectively in water systems in ways that some other folks still haven't figured out.

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), August 24, 1999.

Yes, chlorine is toxic. Yes, trace amounts are in the water you drink. SO? What has to be done here is to decide which is the greater risk - purifying water with chlorine, or drinking possibly contaminated water. For me its - gimme chlorine!

As for OZONE and other methods - well pressure was put on several countries to reduce chlorine use, by our State Dept., as a result of pressure on the administration from the same groups of anti- chlorinators you represent. NET RESULT - well my goodness, I suppose I am so stupid I didn't notice they were the SAME countries people here are obsessing over because they have had outbreaks of several diseases, including CHOLERA! NOT!

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), August 26, 1999.

We trust that you can and will find a better way of Water Treatment than Chlorine Application.

Has it occurred to you that maybe a search for such alternative was made long ago, and it has not been found because it does not exist?

Any such petition that proposes the destruction of something that is largely known and works quite well, even if imperfect, should be put in the nearest bin if it cannot propose an alternative. Only if it does propose an alternative can a rational debate follow from it.

As for safety: I'd rather risk tiny quantities of carcinogens than the ingestion of as much as a single live cholera bacterium, because the latter can be all it takes to kill you! And the quantities of these carcinogens are tiny: there's probably a greater risk from one barbecued burger than a year's intake of tapwater. And if you are really paranoid, a charcoal filter will remove these nasty organics with very high efficiency.

In fact, I'd recommend such filtration to anyone. The real nasties in tap water aren't a product of chlorination. They are various industrial and agrochemical products that have found their way into groundwater and rivers: pesticides, nitrate fertilizer, any number of nasty solvents that were legally tipped down the drains in decades past (including trichloroethylene and even benzene!), used motor oil that continues to be illegally dumped by any number of DIYers and backstreet garages.

In the meantime, at least we don't have cholera and typhoid epidemics.

PS I know nitrates aren't removed by charcoal, but commercial filters normally also contain other agents to mop up nitrate and heavy metals.

-- Nigel Arnot (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), August 26, 1999.