Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
May 21, 2007
4. Water Quality -
Bill would turn up heat on bottled water
Lawmaker wants source identified
By Ed Mendel, STAFF WRITER
Polls show that many Latino immigrants, following old habits, don't trust tap water and are willing to spend more to get bottled water or water dispensed by vending machines.
A freshman legislator, Assemblywoman Mary Salas, D-Chula Vista, has introduced a bill requiring bottled water labels and water vending machines to identify the source of the water.
Salas' theory is that if people on tight budgets see that the water comes from a public water system, as is often the case, they will be more likely to switch to much-cheaper tap water.
“In my own experience in
Salas has stepped into an ongoing battle in the Legislature over increased regulation of bottled water.
Some environmentalists don't like the trend. The National Resources Defense Council found low levels of hazardous impurities, not at the level deemed a health risk, in one-third of 100 brands of bottled water tested a decade ago.
“They demonstrated that the bottled water was not necessarily any better than tap water and that bottled water was perhaps not as pure as it was touted to be,” said Dr. Gina Solomon, a scientist for the environmental group.
Environmentalists also are concerned about the amount of fuel burned to prepare and transport bottled water, and the disposal of the bottles and boxes used to package the beverage, particularly brands from overseas.
“Bottled water is heavy stuff when you are shipping, or worse yet, flying,” Solomon said. “There is a significant contribution to global warming in there that is clearly unnecessary.”
Feeling the pressure, a number of upscale restaurants have begun offering patrons tap water “that has been filtered, chilled and, if desired, carbonated,” The Wall Street Journal reported last month.
A spokesman for the International Bottled Water Association said restaurants might do better by examining their kitchens and overall operations instead of replacing bottled water.
“It may make splashy headlines but would really have a minimal impact, if any, on the environment,” said Stephen Kay of the bottled water association.
Kay said critics should keep in mind that many consumers are choosing bottled water as an alternative to beverages “that may contain calories, caffeine, sugar, artificial colors or alcohol.”
Fear that harmful chemicals might leach out of plastic bottles and contaminate water, well-founded or not, has been aimed mainly at a type of plastic used in some reuseable hiking and baby-formula bottles.
Kay said the “use by” or “sell by” date found on many bottled water brands has nothing to do with safety. He said it started when
The
Because bottled water is regulated as a food, bottlers do not have to make public reports of water-quality tests – unlike the utilities that provide tap water, which are covered by environmental regulations.
“If you want to know what's in bottled water, you are pretty much out of luck,” said Solomon of the National Resource Defense Council.
In addition to identifying the source of the water, Salas' bill, Assembly Bill 1521, would require bottlers to file an annual “consumer confidence report” containing the results of water-quality tests.
Although previous regulatory bills have failed, Salas' proposal is joined by more sweeping legislation, Senate Bill 220 by Sen. Ellen Corbet, D-San Leandro, backed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District.
Corbet's bill would impose new regulations on water vending machines, including monthly cleaning and annual state inspection of at least 4 percent of the machines.
“We think the bill is unnecessary and will impose additional costs on the consumer and the state and not increase safety,” said Kelly Jensen, a lobbyist for the California Bottled Water Association.
Jensen said the annual water-quality reports by utilities are “one of the most useless documents known to man” because the water is tested at treatment plants, not after it flows through pipelines and household plumbing.
He also said that when Maine required bottled water companies to identify the water source, the state rule was overturned by federal regulations, which only require source identification if water from a community system is not purified.
Randy Kanouse, a lobbyist for the East Bay Municipal Utility District, said water-quality reports posted online by many utilities provide important information, particularly for people concerned about trace elements.
Kanouse said backers of the Corbet bill think a state source identification requirement is not prevented by federal rules, provided that states properly consult with federal regulators before imposing it.
Under the bill, the annual cost of a license fee for a water vending machine would be increased from $10.50 to tentatively $40. The amount of the fee increase, which may change, is based on a rough estimate of inspection costs.
An Environmental Working Group study in 2002 found that the largest water vending machine operator, Glacier Water in
Glacier, with 15,000 machines in 41 states, settled a lawsuit filed by the Environmental Law Foundation, agreeing to fix the problem and perform long-term monitoring.
“They fixed the problem,” said Alise Cappel, research director for the foundation based in
Some critics have said water vending machines often are placed at supermarkets in areas with high concentrations of Latinos, who tend to avoid drinking tap water.
A San Diego County Water Authority survey in 2003 found that about 10 percent of Latino homes use tap water as the main source of drinking water. Across the county, 18 percent use tap water as their main source, 48 percent use bottled water, and 31 percent use filtered water.
A statewide Public Policy Institute of California survey in 2002 found that 30 percent of non-Hispanic whites typically drink tap water in their homes, compared with 13 percent of Latinos.
Asked if his firm targets Latino areas when placing water vending machines, Glacier Water President Brian McInerney said, “Clearly not.”
McInerney said the company tries to visit each machine once a week, backed an unsuccessful bill last year calling for state inspections and would like to work out a compromise this year on the Corbet bill.
“What added value does it have if you tell them which municipal water (is being filtered by the machine)?” McInerney asked.
At several Sacramento-area supermarkets, the Glacier machines are clean and modern-looking and give a description of a six-step filtering process.
The water is described as “crisp,” “refreshing” and “great tasting,” with no suggestion that it is safer than tap water. A gallon costs 35 cents; 5 gallons cost $1.75. Buyers must supply containers.
A small light display flashes the price and a “last service” date, which was well beyond a week in several cases.
Three Glacier machines are lined up in a row at a Safeway in a Latino neighborhood in
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070521/news_1n21bottled.html
No comments:
Post a Comment