A Costly Benefit: Economic Analysis Does Not Support Epa's New Arsenic Rule

Abstract

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently finalized a rule that would reduce the maximum allowable level of arsenic in drinking water by 80 percent, from 50 micrograms per liter to 10 micrograms, by 2006. As soon as the rule was announced during the waning hours of the Clinton presidency, it became the topic of considerable debate as some experts argued that it is appropriate and necessary while others charged that its costs would far outweigh its benefits. The authors side with the latter group and argue that the costs may exceed the benefits by as much as $100 million annually.