Is the Arsenic Rule Affordable?

摘要

This article compares different methods-viz., the US Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) current expenditure margin affordability method, its proposed incremental burden method, and other methods based on below-median household income thresholds-that are primarily used to assess affordability of the Arsenic Rule. The authors use the original cost estimates from 2000 and actual cost data reported in 2010 to analyze the affordability of the USEPA's revised Arsenic Rule. We find the Arsenic Rule is affordable for all systems only under the current expenditure margin method; according to all other methods, between 24 and 83% of small US community water systems examined had unaffordable arsenic removal. Analyzing the USEPA's 2010 Arsenic Removal Demonstration Project, zero to 22 of the 40 systems (0-55%) have unaffordable arsenic removal treatment. Further, we find that affordability methods based on a 25th percentile income (with criteria to identify economically disadvantaged communities) most closely match the purpose of drinking water affordability.