RSS Feed
Print Story
E-mail Story
Bakersfield, other cities suing chemical companies over water contamination
| Tuesday, Mar 18 2008 11:28 AM
Last Updated: Tuesday, Mar 18 2008 5:25 PM
A recent lawsuit filed by the city and California Water Service Company over detection of a suspected carcinogen in drinking water supplies is just the latest in a series of suits statewide.
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:
Loading Stories
Advertisement
The chemical, 1,2,3-Trichloropropane, has been found at extremely low levels in about 60 of the 200 wells owned by the City of Bakersfield and California Water Service Company, according to Cal Water spokeswoman Shannon Dean.
Statewide, the chemical has surfaced in about 85 water systems in 16 counties, according to the California Department of Public Health. It is believed to have come from pesticide applications.
Despite the detection, the water is safe to drink and meets all state and federal guidelines, local water officials said. The lawsuit is an attempt to recoup costs for a filtration system before a statute of limitations expires, water officials said.
“This is for the longterm protection of our customers,” Dean said. “It shouldn’t be there and we don’t think our customers should pay for taking it out.”
The concentration of the chemical found in local wells is low — up to 30 parts per trillion, according to California Water Company’s 2006 annual water quality report for the Bakersfield area.
No safe level of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane in water has been set by state or federal regulators but water suppliers must report detection whenever they are more than 5 parts per trillion. Suppliers must take further steps if the concentration reaches 500 parts per trillion.
California recently proposed a “public health goal” of no more than 0.7 parts per trillion. The state will soon create a legal limit, and it’s expected to be not much higher than the goal.
1,2,3-Trichloropropane, or 123-TBC as it’s known, was manufactured by Shell Oil and Dow Chemical, the companies named in the lawsuit. It occurred in soil fumigant applied to farm land to control pests, but served no agricultural purpose and wasn’t removed from the fumigant until the 1980s, according to Vic Sher, the San Francisco lawyer representing the city and Cal Water in the lawsuit.
In animal tests, TCP causes cancer, liver and kidney damage and blood disorders, according to the suit. The chemical does not stick to soil, but instead seeps slowly down through soil into the groundwater, the suit says.
Sher said about 10 other communities in California have also sued the companies. He also represents Shafter, Delano and Wasco and many of the other communities, but not all.
Similar suits have been filed in Hawaii, but in no other states that he knows of, he said.
But Dow Chemical says the chemical isn’t as dangerous as it’s being made out to be.
“The TCP levels in question are not in violation of any established government health standards,” Jarod D. Davis, a spokesman for Dow, wrote in an e-mail. “The concerns about TCP raised in the lawsuit are based on tests conducted more than a decade ago. In these tests, laboratory animals were dosed at levels that were well in excess of any potential human exposure from the trace levels in water, which are the subject of this litigation.”
Although the suit names “manufacturers, distributors and releasors” of the chemical, Sher said the farmers who applied the chemicals are not a target of the lawsuit.
The different cases are being coordinated in San Bernardino County, Sher said, and one case — the city of Oceanside’s suit — is expected to go to trial within the next year and a half and will serve as the guide for the other cases.