our most valuable asset is you. with your help, we can create change.

Sign up for our free newsletter for updates on the latest fluoride developments.
Find ways to get involved.

fan newsletter

back to top

Fluoride Action Network

  • New Visitors
  • Take Action
  • Researchers
  • Join Us
  • Donate
    • Issues
      • TSCA Fluoride Lawsuit
      • NTP Fluoride Review
      • Fluoride Neurotoxicity
      • What Is Water Fluoridation?
      • Fluoride In Dental Products
      • Dental Fluorosis
      • Health Effects Of Fluoride
      • Fluoride’s Role In Tooth Decay
      • Sources of Fluoride
      • Infant Fluoride Exposure
      • Fluoride & Environmental Justice
      • Fluoride Pollution
      • Fluoride Politics
    • F.A.Q.
    • About FAN
      • Contact FAN
      • FAN’s Accomplishments
      • FAN In The News
      • FAN Bulletins
      • Our Team
    • Tool Kit
      • Video: Steps to End Fluoridation in Your Community
      • Fluoridation Neurotoxicity One-Pager
      • Fluoridation Efficacy One-Pager
      • 10 Facts About Fluoride Handout
      • 50 Reasons To Oppose Fluoridation
      • Water Fluoridation Infographic
      • 10 Ways To Avoid Fluoride Exposure
      • A Response To Pro-Fluoridation Claims
      • World-Wide Alliance One-Pager
    • FAN.tv
≡ 
Menu
  • New Visitors
  • Take Action
  • Researchers
  • Issues
    • TSCA Fluoride Lawsuit
    • NTP Fluoride Review
    • Fluoride Neurotoxicity
    • What Is Water Fluoridation?
    • Fluoride In Dental Products
    • Dental Fluorosis
    • Health Effects Of Fluoride
    • Fluoride’s Role In Tooth Decay
    • Sources of Fluoride
    • Infant Fluoride Exposure
    • Fluoride & Environmental Justice
    • Fluoride Pollution
    • Fluoride Politics
  • F.A.Q.
  • About FAN
    • Contact FAN
    • FAN’s Accomplishments
    • FAN In The News
    • FAN Bulletins
    • Our Team
  • Tool Kit
    • Video: Steps to End Fluoridation in Your Community
    • Fluoridation Neurotoxicity One-Pager
    • Fluoridation Efficacy One-Pager
    • 10 Facts About Fluoride Handout
    • 50 Reasons To Oppose Fluoridation
    • Water Fluoridation Infographic
    • 10 Ways To Avoid Fluoride Exposure
    • A Response To Pro-Fluoridation Claims
    • World-Wide Alliance One-Pager
  • FAN.tv
  • Donate


fluoridealert.org

home // News // Public Comments Due Oct 11 on Range for Fluoride Concentration in Fluoridation Schemes //

Public Comments Due Oct 11 on Range for Fluoride Concentration in Fluoridation Schemes

Source: Federal Register | October 8th, 2018 | A Notice by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Location: United States, National USA

Action

Notice; request for comment.

Summary

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces in this Federal Register Notice a proposed operational control range around optimal fluoride concentration in community water systems that adjust fluoride, and monthly adherence to that range. The proposal is based on analysis of available data, provided in the Background document. CDC is opening a docket to obtain comment on the existence of evidence-based concerns about the appropriateness of the proposed operational control range and criteria for adherence based on measurement capacity or feasibility of maintaining a target level. The operational control range specifies upper and lower limits of variation around a target concentration of fluoride. Managers of adjusted water systems at state and local levels need this updated operational control range to ensure the maintenance of consistent monthly averages in fluoride concentration that maximize prevention of tooth decay and minimize the possibility of dental fluorosis. The proposed operational control range is 0.6 mg/L to 1.0 mg/L. CDC bases this guidance on the following considerations: (1) Concentration of fluoride in water shown to prevent tooth decay and (2) Ability of water systems to control variation in fluoride concentration.

Dates

Written comments must be received on or before October 11, 2018.

Addresses

You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0064 by any of the following methods:

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
  • Mail: Division of Oral Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS S107-8, Atlanta, Georgia 30341. Attn: Docket Number: CDC-2018-0064.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

For Further Information Contact

Valerie Robison, D.D.S., M.P.H., Ph.D., Dental Officer, Division of Oral Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS S107-8, Atlanta, GA 30341. Email: OPTOL2018@cdc.gov, telephone: (770) 488-6054.

Supplementary Information

In 2015, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) recommended that community water systems maintain a concentration of 0.7 mg/L to achieve a beneficial fluoride level. 1 This recommendation, which updated and replaced the 1962 Drinking Water Standards related to community water fluoridation, did not include an operational control range associated with the recommended level of 0.7 mg/L. 1?2

After the 2015 PHS recommendation was issued, several state water fluoridation and drinking water programs contacted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to request development of revised operational control range guidance around the 0.7 mg/L target level. As part of the range-setting process, these programs requested that CDC consider how consistently water treatment systems can stay within an operational control range on a daily basis. A detailed summary of the information CDC considered in developing a proposed operational control range recommendation is available in the Background document found in the Supplement Material tab of the docket.

Recommended Operational Control Range

Since water systems tend to favor an operating strategy that has a lower feed rate, or the rate at which product is added, CDC recommends an asymmetrical operational control range of 0.6 mg/L to 1.0 mg/L in order for public water systems to consistently meet the recommended concentration of 0.7 mg/L. 3

The lowest concentration of 0.6 mg/L (?0.1 mg/L below the target level of 0.7 mg/L) will allow public water systems to maintain the oral health benefits of water fluoridation. A lowest concentration of 0.6 mg/L in an operational control range has been in effect since 1962 and water systems have demonstrated experience in meeting it in normal operations. 2?3

The highest concentration of 1.0 mg/L (+0.3 mg/L above the target level of 0.7 mg/L) will reduce the possibility of dental fluorosis. 4?5

An operational control range of 0.4 mg/L (?0.1 mg/L to +0.3 mg/L) [actual values (0.6 mg/L to 1.0 mg/l)] will provide operational flexibility. This is based on data demonstrating the ability of water systems to stay successfully within a particular operational control range. 4?6?7 A detailed summary of these findings is available in the Background document.

CDC has received requests for criteria that demonstrate compliance with the operational control range. Published studies have shown that water systems are able to maintain at least 80% of daily measurements during the month within the proposed operational control range. 6?7 Based on these findings, CDC recommends the following operational criteria; the monthly average fluoride level is maintained within the proposed operational control range, and 80% of daily measurements of fluoride are maintained within the proposed operational control range.

In this docket, we are only concerned with the operational control range for water systems that adjust the fluoride level in the water. This request does not apply to water systems that have natural fluoride levels that exceed this recommended level. Further, the issues of whether or not to adjust fluoride in drinking water, as well as the recommended level to which fluoride should be adjusted, have previously been addressed in the Federal Register and are not part of this request. 8

Note: Public water systems must continue to comply with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements for a special notice for exceedance of the secondary standard of 2 mg/L (40 CFR 141.208) (https://www.epa.gov/dwregdev/drinking-water-regulations-and-contaminants).

CDC is seeking public comment on the following:

  1. Are there any evidence-based concerns about the appropriateness of the proposed operational control range and criteria for adherence based on measurement capacity or feasibility of maintaining the target level?

References

  1. U.S. Public Health Service Recommendations for Fluoride Concentration in Drinking Water for the Prevention of Dental Caries. Public Health Reports. 2015 July-Aug;130(4):318-331.
  2. Department of Health, Education and Welfare (US) Public Health Service drinking water standards, revised 1962. Washington: Public Health Service (US); 1962. PHS Publication No. 956.
  3. Barker LK, Duchon KK, Lesaja S, et al. Adjusted Fluoride Concentrations in 34 States: 2006-2010 and 2015. Journal AWWA. 2017;109(8):2-17.
  4. Engineering and Administrative Recommendations for Water Fluoridation, MMWR Sept 29,1995/44(RR-13:1-40. Fluoride Recommendations Work Group. Recommendations for using fluoride to prevent and control dental caries in the United States. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001;50(RR-14):1-42.
  5. Heller KE, Eklund SA, Burt BA. Dental caries and dental fluorosis at varying water fluoride concentrations. J Public Health Dent. 1997;57:136-43.
  6. Brown R, McTigue N, Graf K. Monitoring fluoride: how closely do utilities match target versus actual levels? Opflow, 40;7:10. https://doi.org/10.5991/OPF.2014.40.0042.
  7. Teefy S. Managing fluoridation within a stringent regulatory framework. Proc 2013 AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference, Oakland, Calif.
  8. Public Health Service Recommendation for Fluoride Concentration in Drinking Water for the Prevention of Dental Caries. Fed Regist. 2015;80(84):24936-24947. Available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/05/01/2015-10201/public-health-service-recommendation-for-fluoride-concentration-in-drinking-water-for-prevention-of. Accessed 5/11/2018.

Dated: July 9, 2018.

Sandra Cashman,

Executive Secretary, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2018-14968 Filed 7-12-18; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P

Comment Now!

Due Oct 11 2018, at 11:59 PM ET

ID: CDC-2018-0064-0001

View original printed format:

Document Information

Date Posted: Jul 13, 2018

Federal Register Number: 2018-14968

Show More Details

Comments

25

Comments Received*

The California Dental Association (CDA), representing 27,000 member dentists across the state, respectfully write to express our support for the Centers for…

View Comment

For over 70 years, water fluoridation has provided a safe, effective way of reducing tooth decay and improving the overall dental health of the population. The…

View Comment

On behalf of the Association of State and Territorial Dental Directors (ASTDD), we are writing to express our support for community water fluoridation in the U…

View Comment

Docket Information

This document is contained in

CDC-2018-0064

Related Dockets:

None

Related RINs: None

Related Documents:

None

Related Comments:

View all

* This count refers to the total comment/submissions received on this document, as of 11:59 PM yesterday. Note: Agencies review all submissions, however some agencies may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof) such as those containing private or proprietary information, inappropriate language, or duplicate/near duplicate examples of a mass-mail campaign. This can result in discrepancies between this count and those displayed when conducting searches on the Public Submission document type. For specific information about an agency’s public submission policy, refer to its website or the Federal Register document.

Document text and images courtesy of the
Federal Register

*Online at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2018-0064-0001

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

fan newsletter

Sign up for our free newsletter for updates on the latest fluoride developments.

quick facts

  • 97% of western Europe has rejected water fluoridation

  • Many children now exceed recommended daily fluoride intake from toothpaste alone.

  • Fluoride is not a nutrient.

  • 64 studies have linked fluoride with reduced IQ in children.

    • Related Videos:

    • Crippling Waters

      Crippling Waters

    • Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation

      Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation

    • Don't Swallow Your Toothpaste

      Don't Swallow Your Toothpaste

    • Related Articles:

    • The Absurdities of Water Fluoridation

      [caption id="attachment_10205" align="alignleft" width="190"] Paul Connett, PhD[/caption] Water fluoridation is a peculiarly American phenomenon. It started at a time when Asbestos lined our pipes, lead was added to gasoline, PCBs filled our transformers and DDT was deemed so "safe and effective" that officials felt no qualms spraying kids in school classrooms

    • Why I am now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF-hKlIgCuM April, 2000 To whom it may concern: Since April of 1999, I have publicly decried the addition of fluoride, especially hydrofluosilicic acid, to drinking water for the purpose of preventing tooth decay. The following summarize my reasons. New evidence for lack of effectiveness of fluoridation in modern times. [caption id="attachment_10211" align="alignleft" width="150"] Dr. Hardy

    • 50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation

      Introduction [caption id="attachment_11821" align="alignleft" width="200"] Dr. Paul Connett[/caption] In Europe, only Ireland (73%), Poland (1%), Serbia (3%), Spain (11%), and the U.K. (11%) fluoridate any of their water. Most developed countries, including Japan and 97% of the western European population, do not consume fluoridated water. In the U.S., about 70% of public water supplies are

    • Related Studies:

    • Fluoride & IQ: 76 Studies

      • As of July 18, 2022, a total of 85 human studies have investigated the relationship between fluoride and human intelligence. • Of these investigations, 76 studies have reported that elevated fluoride exposure is associated with reduced IQ in humans. • The studies which reported an association of reduced IQ with exposure

    • Fluoride's Effect on Fetal Brain

      The human placenta does not prevent the passage of fluoride from a pregnant mother's bloodstream to the fetus. As a result, a fetus can be harmed by fluoride ingested pregnancy. Based on research from China, the fetal brain is one of the organs susceptible to fluoride poisoning. As highlighted by the excerpts

    • Fluoride: Developmental Neurotoxicity.

      Developmental Neurotoxicity There has been a tremendous amount of research done on the association of exposure to fluoride with developmental neurotoxicity. There are over 60 studies reporting reduced IQ in children and several on the impaired learning/memory in animals. And there are studies which link fluoride to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Teaching

    • Related Miscellaneous Content:

    • Email Exchange with FDA re: Fluoride Supplements

      Email exchange regarding FDA's reasons for not approving fluoride supplements.

    • Harvard's Statement on Chester Douglass/Scientific Misconduct

      Statement Concerning the Outcome of the Review into Allegations of Research Misconduct Involving Fluoride Research BOSTON-August 15, 2006-The Harvard Medical School and School of Dental Medicine (HSDM) review of Chester Douglass, DMD, PhD, professor of oral health policy and epidemiology at HSDM, has concluded that Douglass did not intentionally omit, misrepresent,

    • The 'Altered Recommendations' of the 1983 Surgeon General's Panel

      "We believe that EPA staff and managers should be called to testify, along with members of the 1983 Surgeon Generals panel and officials of the Department of Human Services, to explain how the original recommendations of the Surgeon Generals panel were altered to allow EPA to set otherwise unjustifiable drinking water standards for fluoride."

  • New Visitors
  • Take Action
  • Researchers
    • Issues
    • FAN.tv
    • News
    • F.A.Q.
    • About FAN
  • Join Us
  • Donate
  • © Fluoride Action Network 2023. All Rights Reserved.