San Bernardino County Sun, Jason Pesick
Published August 29, 2007
The state is in the final stages of setting a standard dictating how much perchlorate can be in your drinking water.
The cap on the amount of the widespread contaminant that can be in the drinking water could be in place within weeks.
But the proposal of 6 parts per billion is not one that will sit well with the environmental community.
It could also lead to hikes in water rates, as water purveyors are forced to begin cleaning perchlorate from the water they serve.
"We're disappointed that in light of all the accumulating evidence that perchlorate is harmful at levels well below this that California decided to stick with 6 ppb," said Bill Walker, vice president for the Environmental Working Group's West Coast office.
Perchlorate has been discovered in drinking water throughout areas of Southern California used for agricultural, industrial and military purposes.
On Aug. 6, the state Department of Public Health submitted a standard of 6 ppb to the state Office of Administrative Law. Once its review is complete, it will send the regulation to the secretary of state to sign off on.
Since the state began developing the standard, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a study showing that even at low levels, perchlorate can affect hormone levels in a large percentage of women.
The proposed standard is also higher than the 2 ppb set by Massachusetts last year.
Perchlorate is used in the production of explosives like fireworks and rocket fuel.
Chilean fertilizer used in agricultural areas around the Southland is also thought to be responsible for perchlorate contamination.
It can affect the functioning of the thyroid, which is important for metabolism and neurological development.
Between August 2002 and August 2007, 251 wells had reported having perchlorate at a level of 4 ppb or higher in California.
Of those, 114 are in San Bernardino and Riverside counties.
The process of setting a standard began in August last year when the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment set a public health goal of 6 ppb.
Its task is to only take public health into consideration when setting that goal. Then the Department of Public Health takes into account how practical the proposed standard would be.
A few months after the public health goal was set, the CDC study came out in October.
"This is going to be important information for those people who are setting acceptable levels (for perchlorate)," one of the study's co-authors James Pirkle, said when the study came out.
Massachusetts officials said they came to a level of 2 out of caution and a difference of a opinion with California officials over how much perchlorate people ingest from other sources besides water, like food.
Massachusetts officials said they thought people take in a fair bit of perchlorate from other sources besides water, so they wanted to set a lower standard for perchlorate in water.
While environmentalists aren't satisfied with California's proposed standard because they see it as too high, some water purveyors have a very different complaint.
It will cost them millions of dollars to clean perchlorate out of water and lead to rate hikes.
The East Valley Water District will have to spend tens of millions of dollars building facilities to treat perchlorate ranging from levels of 6 to 12 ppb in some of its wells, said General Manager Bob Martin.
He said there will be an 11 percent rate increase this year, and that's just the beginning.
"For us it's more of a nuisance," said Ken Manning, CEO of the Chino Basin Watermaster.
A combination of treatment systems, blending contaminated water with clean water, and shutting down some wells has worked for his agency, he said.
If California adopts Massachusetts' standard of 2 ppb, that would have presented more of a challenge, he said.
Agencies around Rialto, where industrial sites on the city's north end have led to perchlorate contamination of up to 10,000 ppb, say they aren't too concerned over the new standard.
This is because with the help of grant money, they've been treating the water to the point where they can't detect perchlorate in it.
"We're pretty well geared up for it," said Anthony "Butch" Araiza, general manager of the West Valley Water District.
Representatives of water purveyors said that if California set a standard of 2 ppb, the costs would have been much higher because of the low levels of perchlorate found throughout the region and the fact that the Colorado River, a major source of water in Southern California, is contaminated with low levels of perchlorate.
The level in the river has been decreasing, but it is still at about 2 ppb, said Mic Stewart, water quality manager for the Metropolitan Water District.
After the CDC study came out, environmentalists asked the state to review the proposed standard early and start the process over again, but the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment declined, citing a lack of information.
The next review of the standard will be in 2009, said Sam Delson, deputy director of the office.
Last year, Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill authored by then-state Sen. Nell Soto that included provisions allowing the state to compare its standard with other states' standards and would have made the process of determining a standard more transparent.
Walker called the new standard a compromise.
"I think frankly it's a political calculation by the Schwarzenegger administration that there are obviously lots of voices out there in industry and much more powerfully in the military establishment who don't want a strong perchlorate standard set because it's going to cost a lot more to clean it up," he said.
Contact writer Jason Pesick at (909) 386-3861 or via e-mail at
jason.pesick@sbsun.com.
