Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
June 15, 2009
4. Water Quality –
$7.5 million Coca Cola settlement will improve AmCan water system
Tennant water project likely put off for another year
Siskiyou Daily News
Two years after fluoride lawsuit,
Water: What's clean enough?
In new policy statement,
Consumer Reports
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
$7.5 million Coca Cola settlement will improve AmCan water system
By Sarah Rohrs
With millions in the city's coffers from a lawsuit settlement, the City Council on Tuesday will vote on a plan for spending that money.
The city reached the $7.5 million settlement in February with Coca Cola Co. over waste water discharge violations at its local bottling plant.
Tuesday's council meeting starts at 5:30 p.m. with a closed session. The public portion of the meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall,
A bulk of the settlement funds will help pay for major infrastructure projects for the city, particularly to improve the city's ability to store water, Mayor Leon Garcia said. Other money will go into various reserves.
The city hopes to combine the settlement funds with federal stimulus money to build a water storage facility to better meet
"In terms of being responsible to the people of
The city has combined the Coca Cola settlement money with $1.8 million from two internal service funds which were closed out.
The plan for spending this money was discussed by the council's finance committee prior to going to the full council, Garcia and Finance Director Barry Whitley said.
The matter is on the council's "consent calendar" and may not be discussed unless a council member or member of the public requests it.
The finance committee also recommends funds be used to establish a reserve in the vehicle replacement fund, and to increase reserves in the general, water and wastewaster funds, according to the resolution before the council.
In other matters, the council will revisit a policy regarding rental of the Council Chambers. The city's new City Hall opened in February.
Council members want to allow those who rent the chambers a chance to serve food and beverages, which are not allowed, according to a city staff report.
One option is to allow groups to rent a break room that could be used conjunction with the chambers.
The council also wants to address situations in which groups frequently request ongoing use of the chambers, a situation which could make city functions more difficult.
http://www.timesheraldonline.com/news/ci_12592548
Tennant water project likely put off for another year
Siskiyou Daily News-6/12/09
By Dale Andreasen
It looks like the people of Tennant will be boiling their drinking and cooking water for another year.
This was disappointing news for those people, many of whom packed the county administrator’s conference room Wednesday for a special board of supervisors meeting to discuss the construction project for a renovated water system for the Tennant Community Services District.
The project has run into snags and misunderstandings. Money from a Community Development Block Grant was being used to get the project going.
According to supervisor Jim Cook, the state has “drawn a hard line.”
“If the project is not ‘shovel ready’ by this Friday, you won’t be able to start,” he asserted.
He explained that the deadlines keep moving up closer and closer to assure that the project can take advantage of the economic stimulus money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
And there’s still the matter of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) work to be done.
The board looked briefly at the possibility of a “Cat X” (or categorical exemption) for the project, but that was rejected by a vote of 1-4 with supervisor Cook voting in the affirmative.
Categorical exemptions are descriptions of types of projects which the Secretary of the Resources Agency has determined do not usually have a significant effect on the environment. By CEQA’s own words, categorical exemptions are not absolute; there are exceptions to the exemptions depending on the nature or location of the project.
It was mentioned that the project rules had been changed last Thursday at 9:30 p.m. and then again Monday morning at 6 a.m. Mark Teague of Pacific Municipal Consultants said, “This is not the ideal way of doing anything. The project description keeps changing.”
As a result, a vote to consider an addendum to the Pace Engineering contract in the amount of $400,000 was put off until more discussion can take place on July 7.
“This project is not shovel ready,” said supervisor Marcia Armstrong, “We don’t want to be at cross purposes with CEQA. We’ve got to do it the right way. This is way too risky (trying to get an exemption). It’s just gone too far for me.”
“Laws are made to be respected and followed. I think we need to do it right, because we might be exposing the county to legal problems later on,” said supervisor Grace Bennett, “I’m just having a real rough time. I would rather get it down right than try to circumvent.”
Dancer said she has “no basis to advise at all.” She added that she wanted the CAO to participate in these decisions (CAO Brian McDermott was on vacation this week.)
“This was kind of dropped in our laps,” said board chair Michael Kobseff, “We’re just trying to meet the challenge.”
Meanwhile, the people of Tennant have been boiling their water for three years.#
http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x2085760121/Tennant-water-project-likely-put-off-for-another-year
Two years after fluoride lawsuit,
By Kelly O'Connor
Two years after a
But vindication for one side of the debate inches closer.
Late last month, the state Carcinogen Identification Committee, which reviews chemicals to determine toxicity, placed fluoride in the top nine of 38 compounds for complete review, including possible links to cancer.
Fluoridation opponents in
"I already feel vindicated," said Nick Bulaich, who since 2002 has spearheaded the effort to ban fluoridation in his hometown. Bulaich looks forward to the results, and thinks the investigation is evidence of a problem.
Carcinogen Identification Committee chair, Dr. Thomas Mack could not be reached to comment about why fluoride was ranked high, but released a statement saying it was because of "its widespread use," and stressed that the high priority ranking does not indicate that it is cancer-causing.
The investigation may prove fluoride is harmless.
"The California Dental Association wants this investigation to take place as quickly as possible," said Jon Roth, executive director of the California Dental Association. "A review would put questions that opponents have manipulated to rest."
If found to be harmful, fluoridated water will require warning labels, but fluoridation will continue, according to the outlines of Proposition 65.
In 2005, a screening of 64 percent of kindergartners at
"The best defense against tooth decay for low-income kids is to fluoridate the water," Roth said. "It really is sad that a small percentage of people in
Unfortunately, the results are a long way away.
"We don't know when the investigation will begin," said Chris Bowman, a spokesman for the Office of Environment Health Hazard Association, which also will review the chemical. "No one in this agency can say when they will get around to fluoride, as we have many other compounds to review before it."
Currently, fluoride is an approved chemical for ingestion by the California Environmental Protection Agency and state law requires cities with 10,000 or more residents to fluoridate water if the money is available to do so.
Two years of negotiations after the court ruling, the grant terms are finally coming to a close.
"We are down to the technical aspects," Roth said. "We are hoping to have that done within a couple of months."
Watsonville City Manager Carlos Palacios said that there is no time line for fluoridation construction, but the California Dental Association still has not agreed to take on liability for any unforeseen harm due to fluoride exposure, which has been the main sticking point in negotiations.
And the research for potential fluoride harm remains controversial.
Groups such as the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology claim supporters are financially backed by fluoride companies, while the
The Pajaro Valley Community Health Trust and Dientes, a dental clinic serving low-income patients, have supported fluoridation, while Citizens for Safe Drinking Water opposes it.#
Water: What's clean enough?
Continual requirements for costly upgrades don't make sense
Anyone who has done any camping has probably heard the adage about always leaving a campsite cleaner than it was when you found it.
But what if that friendly "rule" turned into a costly legal requirement?
That is precisely what is happening in
A $65 million piece of that is to meet a state requirement concerning trihalomethane, or THM.
THMs are four chemicals created when chlorine mixes with organic matter in the water, such as leaf debris.
Basically, the system designed to kill bacteria in water so people don't get sick from drinking it also produces chemicals that can cause cancer later on. The Environmental Protection Agency has said, though, that water which contains fewer than 80 parts per billion THM is safe to drink.
Yet the Water Quality Control Board's rules call for sewage treatment plants to lower the THM level of water being released to 10 parts per billion.
Where is the sense in this?
And why isn't the cost to the public part of the equation for determining just how low this level should go?
The upgrades in
That will ultimately add more than $20 to the average homeowner's monthly $34 bill.
THMs are only the most recent issue.
It seems as if every time someone develops a test to tell what minute particles are found in water, the state Water Resources Control Board enacts a new standard, telling communities to get those particles out without regard to any benefit-cost analysis.
The state and regional boards that enact these regulations are composed of appointees who are seemingly unaccountable to anyone.
Yes, the Legislature or Congress can step in, but first their attention has to be called to the matter, but that just isn't happening.
As Dawn LaBar of state Sen. Lois Wolk's office told members of the Vacaville Chamber of Commerce Business Issues Committee a week ago, of the hundreds of residents who are concerned enough to call the senator's office each week, no one mentions water regulations.
Yet people are likely to complain to the City Council when their rates go up, even though the city has no choice but to obey the order its under.
That anger and energy need to be focused toward
Unless, of course, the public is willing to keep spending money to meet ever-higher standards, regardless of whether they make sense or not.
No one is against clean water. But it's time to decide how clean is clean enough.#
http://www.thereporter.com/ci_12588065?IADID=Search-www.thereporter.com-www.thereporter.com
In new policy statement,
Consumer Reports-6/12/09
If you get your household water from a private well, you probably know that you should check the well annually for potential impurities like Giardia intestinalis, Shigella spp., E. coli 0157:H7 and coliform bacteria, Campylobacter jejuni, nitrate from sewage or fertilizer, radon, and arsenic.
Groups like the National Ground Water Association, NSF International, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advocate for an annual assessment of water for the 15 to 20 percent of
But if you have infants or young children at home, you should be aware of a new policy statement issued by the
The statement suggests using bottled water for infants when nitrate contamination is detected or when the source of drinking water is unknown.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), which worked with the AAP on its recommendations involving children's safety, goes further in its own warnings. If you think your well has suffered structural damage, you're at risk of drinking tainted water and should have the water tested in case contamination occurred, says the NIEHS.
Private wells aren't subject to federal regulations and are only minimally regulated by states, according to the NIEHS. Because potential water problems differ by region, pay particular attention to alerts from state and local health experts.
Essential information: Call the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791) to see whether your municipality provides free or inexpensive testing or to find a certified testing lab in your area.#
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment