10:15 PM PDT on Friday, August 26, 2011
BY JANET ZIMMERMAN
STAFF WRITER
jzimmerman@pe.com
A state health assessment has found that tap water from two wells contaminated with a rocket fuel ingredient could have caused thyroid problems that affected the physical and mental development of people who grew up in Rialto in the 1980s.
The report, released this week, said that the amount of perchlorate found during some periods in West Valley Water District's well No. 22 and Rialto's well No. 2 could have delayed speech development in some children there. Those with concerns about potential health affects were urged to consult their doctors.
Residents have expressed concerns that the contaminated water caused a variety of other problems, including migraines, attention deficit disorder, kidney cancer, miscarriages, stillbirths and birth defects.
Story continues below
But California Department of Public Health officials reported that their study, based on existing scientific and medical information, found no link between those problems and exposure to perchlorate and trichloroethylene, or TCE, an industrial solvent also found in Rialto drinking water. TCE has been linked to cancer.
The 160-acre Goodrich industrial area north of the Rialto Airport was designated a federal Superfund cleanup site in 2009, prompting the health assessment.
Russell Bartlett, a state health assessor, said the report was prepared to address public concerns and represents the worst-case scenario. Because early records were not available to them, investigators had to assume that water from the contaminated wells was not blended with cleaner sources.
"If it was blended, then it would have reduced contaminant levels. There was nothing on paper or any kind of report we could use to verify that," he said.The water is safe to drink, Bartlett said.
From the 1940s to the 1980s, private companies and government agencies stored, tested and manufactured munitions, rocket motors, fireworks and other explosives on the site, where perchlorate and other toxic chemicals were dumped onto the ground and burned in pits.
The contamination leached into the groundwater supply, causing a plume that has traveled at least three miles to the southeast, affecting various wells and moving toward water supplies owned by the city of Riverside.
Perchlorate can inhibit the absorption of iodine by the thyroid gland and decrease its production of hormones that are critical during pregnancy and childhood for normal physical growth and brain development. Adults are not affected, according to the report.
"It's of no surprise to me that they're finding something. People were drinking water with perchlorate in it for many, many years," said Penny Newman, executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice in Glen Avon.
The findings will be discussed at a future community meeting in Rialto, local water officials said.
Butch Araiza, general manager of West Valley Water District, said he fears the findings will trigger a rash of lawsuits by people who think they may have been harmed by the contamination.
"I think there'll be some people who, if they have an ache and a pain, will think it's because of perchlorate, but I don't think it was. All of us might have drunk some perchlorate at some time in our life, because we didn't know what it was," said Araiza, who has lived in Rialto for 61 years.
The report also erroneously assumed that water from well No. 22 went to consumers directly, when in fact it was blended with other sources that would have reduced contaminant levels, he said.
The well, north of Interstate 210, was used only intermittently for a couple of months in the summer when demand was up; it was lower-quality water because it was sandy and jammed meters, Araiza said.
The well was last pumped in 1988 and permanently shut in 1997 after the perchlorate was found, he said. Other wells in Rialto, Colton and Fontana also were closed.
The agency installed ion exchange treatment systems in 2001 to remove perchlorate, which residents have helped pay for with an average $12 monthly surcharge on their water bills. Treatment takes the perchlorate below the level at which it can be detected, which is 4 parts per billion, Araiza said. The state's health standard for perchlorate is 6 parts per billion.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which is leading the cleanup effort in Rialto, has issued a plan to spend $18 million building pumps and treatment systems to clean water of perchlorate, TCE and other compounds and deliver it to homes and businesses.
Newman of the Center for Community Action said she is concerned the EPA systems wouldn't clean the water enough, because even 6 parts per billion could pose a risk for infants and fetuses and lower levels over long periods of time could cause problems for adults.
"For people who have continued to drink this water for decades, that 2 parts per billion may be enough to put them over the threshold for developing disease," Newman said.
Dave and Diane Mavity and their two children, now 38 and 41, lived in Rialto from 1975 to 1980 and again from 1994 to 1998. In 1997, Diane was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, and many of their neighbors also had thyroid problems, he said.
"Something's not right," Dave Mavity said.
The highest concentration measured at the Rialto site was more than 1,000 times the drinking-water standard, according to the EPA documents. TCE was found in concentrations more than 300 times the drinking-water standard.
Officials with the city of Rialto could not be reached for comment on the report because their offices were closed Friday.
Health report
Water agencies didn't have a test for perchlorate until 1997. That's when high levels were found in two wells that intermittently served Rialto. The contamination radiated from the Goodrich industrial site, now slated for federal Superfund cleanup. A state study concluded:
People who currently work at the Goodrich site are not at risk from chemicals in the soil or groundwater.
Drinking water supplied by Rialto, Colton, West Valley Water District and Terrace Water Co. is safe.
Some drinking water from West Valley's well No. 22 in 1981, 1982, 1985, 1987 and 1988 may have contained TCE but isn't believed to have harmed people's health.
In the same years, perchlorate contamination in well No. 22 could have been high enough to modestly impair iodine absorption by the thyroid gland, potentially affecting physical growth and brain development of fetuses, infants and children.
The same is true of perchlorate in Rialto's well No. 2, from 1979 to 1997.
It is not possible to know whether eating fruits and vegetables from a garden irrigated with perchlorate-tainted water would have been harmful.
Source: California Department of Public Health
Showing posts with label West San Bernardino Water District. Show all posts
Showing posts with label West San Bernardino Water District. Show all posts
Friday, August 26, 2011
Saturday, September 27, 2008
EPA ducks perchlorate standards (Contra Costa Times September 27, 2008) White House Edits Draft!!
BS Ranch Perspective:
Alright everybody that drinks water in the City of Rialto, get ready to suffer from Cancer and the like it is great that the government is standing by everything that we do for them! The Tax Dollars at work I always say. Drink up and get that Stomach Cancer and dwindle away to nothing! I have seen this happen first hand!
That is the scary part, and to have the Government, our Government turn their backs on the tax payers of the Inland Empire is beside me!!
BS Ranch
EPA ducks perchlorate standards
White House edits draft
Article Launched: 09/27/2008 08:23:17 PM PDT
The decision, first reported by The Washington Post, came in a document indicating the EPA had made a "preliminary regulatory determination" not to set a standard.
The Sun has obtained a summary of the report from staff for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
According to the summary, the EPA draft underwent heavy editing from the White House, and the EPA's original suggestion to have a 45-day comment period was reduced to 30 days.
Perchlorate has been found at 400 sites nationwide, including more than 100 in California.
Locally, it has been found in especially high concentrations around Riverside, the San Gabriel Valley, Redlands and Rialto, where the EPA is close to naming a 160-acre area a Superfund site.
Perchlorate can interfere with the thyroid gland, affecting metabolism as well as mental and physical development.
California has set a maximum standard of 6 parts per billion, and Massachusetts has set one at 2 ppb in drinking water.
In 2002, EPA scientists developed a draft protective level of 1 ppb for drinking water, assuming all perchlorate intake comes from water. In reality, perchlorate is also found in milk, breast milk, lettuce and other food sources.
The National Academy of Sciences
was then tasked with coming up with a recommendation and came up with a reference dose of about 20 ppb, assuming a body weight of 150 pounds and that all perchlorate is ingested through water.Environmentalists and some members of Congress blasted the news as an example of the White House and Pentagon - much of the perchlorate contamination is at old Pentagon and defense contractor sites - influencing the EPA.
"The Defense Department's response to perchlorate contamination raises serious questions about the appropriateness of its role in the EPA's internal regulatory process," Rep. Hilda Solis, an El Monte Democrat, and Rep. Gene Green, a Texas Democrat wrote to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson.
The Sept. 23 letter asks for all communications on the issue since last year.
EPA spokeswoman Enesta Jones said the agency plans to issue the preliminary determination in the next couple of weeks and the final one by the end of the year but that "no decision has been made."
"This is an open and transparent process," she said.
Solis and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., have sponsored legislation to require the EPA to set a perchlorate standard.
In March, the Government Accountability Office criticized the EPA's risk assessment process and said it is not transparent enough and allows too much influence from other federal agencies, including the White House.
Boxer mentioned the issue at a May committee hearing.
"We had a full hearing on a GAO report ... and the fact that EPA is trying to shunt the scientists to the back, put the (Department of Defense) contractors to the front - at the table - and they said it's very dangerous," she said at the May hearing.
An EPA decision not to regulate perchlorate in drinking water would not have a major effect on Superfund sites with perchlorate, like the one on its way to Rialto, said Kevin Mayer, the EPA's regional perchlorate manager and a Superfund project manager.
Treatment systems the EPA uses in Rialto should remove all perchlorate from the water, he said, but the agency won't have to clean water contaminated at lower levels than the state standard, 6 ppb.
"In a Superfund program, we're required to meet federal and state standards, and we're required to assess the risks for those contaminants that don't have standards," he said.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Rialto to be REPAID before its Rate payers (Daily Bulletin March 10, 2008)
BS Ranch Perspective
Wow, this is great news for those that were charged through the water Crisis, that the Perchlorate Contamination had put us through!! It is one thing when the mistake was make to fight it the way that it was, Owen was completely wrong, and I don't know why the City Council gave this guy so much of a leash to do these kinds of careless law suits, to benefit his pockets and not the city!!
BS Ranch
Rialto to be repaid before its ratepayers
Article Created: 03/10/2008 10:14:27 PM PDT
The bad news is that, although customers have been paying for the team of lawyers and consultants through a surcharge on their water bills, no quick reimbursement is in sight.
Rialto has spent at least $20 million treating and investigating perchlorate and other chemicals polluting the groundwater, as well as fighting the suspected polluters in court.
But policies enacted by the City Council since 2004 indicate that the city and its water department, which serves about half the city, get repaid after legal settlements and judgements before the customers.
"I think it's a fair discussion to reconsider that," said City Councilwoman Winnie Hanson, a member of the council's perchlorate subcommittee.
The first settlement in the perchlorate matter is being finalized with San Bernardino County and calls for the county to clean up part of the contamination and pay the city $4 million.
The surcharge customers pay starts at $6.85 per bill and increases with consumption.
Longtime resident Mary Moton said the perchlorate charge on her last monthly water bill of $69.44 was $9.27.
"I think we should get all our money back. That's fair," she said.
When the council established the surcharge in 2004, it passed a policy that states the first priority is
repaying the water department, plus an extra $1.5 million for the department's reserves.
That repayment includes $5 million to City Council transferred from the General Fund reserves to the water department in November 2006 to pursue polluters.
After the city receives from polluters an amount equal to half the surcharges collected, ratepayers will be able to be reimbursed.
In recent months, Councilman Ed Scott, the other member of the perchlorate subcommittee, has said the ratepayers should be reimbursed before the water and general funds.
"That's my preference," he said.
Hanson said the council will probably have to examine the issue. She said members meeting in closed session would decide whether they want to vote on the issue in open session.
Hanson said she hasn't come down on one side of the issue yet. Her determination will include a number of factors, including the fiscal health of various city accounts.
Some residents don't seem to be conflicted.
"I think that the citizens should be paid back first. They didn't waste any time in taking the money out," Rialto resident and water customer Toby Polinger said of the city.
"It seems like the city puts these kinds of things together frequently that the Rialto citizens are often considered last," he said.
(909) 386-3861
Friday, February 15, 2008
Water Rates Might Go Up (San Bernardino County Sun Feb. 15, 2008) Depends on amount used!!
BS Ranch Perspective
I guess it would be inevitable for the water rates to go up with the cost of Perchlorate Contamination and all the court costs that the County Water Department is having to pay for, The City of Rialto was forced to discharge the Cities Representation that they have had for over 15 years, because of the poor decision making that he was doing in an attempt to take the responsible party, or the party that he was convinced was responsible for causing the Perchlorate contamination in the first place. I mean who would you believe was responsible, a company that was using a chemical that was approved at the time that they were using it by the government, and it was even disposed of in the manor proscribed by law at that time of the year!
However having written that the City of Rialto's Attorney wanted to apply today's laws to what a company did Yesterday which contaminated the water supply, Now who knows what they did wasn't the normal way to dispose of this chemical, because there is an awful a lot of contamination in the south land. Why not just Rialto & Colton, but San Bernardino, parts of Pasadena, Santa Ana, Orange County has some Perchlorate Contamination as well. I bet that there is some Perchlorate Contamination in Inyo County and Kern County as well as Los Angeles County too.
Now I know that it wasn't just two Companies such as Black & Decker, and Goodyear that spread the Perchlorate all over the Counties of Southern California!!
BS Ranch
Water rates might go up
Depends on amount used
Article Launched: 02/15/2008 09:57:49 PM PST
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, a regional water supplier based in Los Angeles, adopted a plan Tuesday that would penalize client water agencies exceeding their allocation, a cost that could be passed on to ratepayers.
One of the MWD's 26 clients is the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, which relies on Metropolitan for roughly one-third of its water supply.
The Inland Empire agency serves 800,000 customers in seven cities - Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga and Upland.
"The first thing to understand is they're going to apply very significant rate increases and penalties if we use water above what we're allocated," said Wyatt Troxel, inland water board president.
Troxel estimated water rates could increase from 3percent to 5percent in the short term and predicted that cities experiencing rapid population growth could be hit hardest. Programs to provide recycled water to municipalities should decrease the demand for imported water in the long term, he said.
Montclair, Upland and Rancho Cucamonga have the greatest risk because Montclair and Upland are still in the process of implementing a recycled
water program and Rancho Cucamonga is continuing to develop, he said.
Fontana Water Co., which will begin processing inland agency water this summer, doesn't expect its rates to be affected by the recently adopted plan, said Assistant General Manager Robert Young.
Fontana Water Co. is a unit of San Gabriel Valley Water Co.
Penalties could be imposed as early as July, although it is unlikely that allocations will be exceeded so quickly following this winter's rains, said Jeff Kightlinger, MWD general manager.
In addition, the MWD will consider adopting a general rate increase in March, Kightlinger said.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Rialto Eyes Toxin Money? (San Bernardino County Sun Sept. 11, 2007) City Pursuing $23Million from State!
| Rialto eyes toxin money |
| City pursuing $23M from state |
| Jason Pesick, Staff Writer San Bernardino County Sun |
| Article Launched:09/11/2007 11:26:20 PM PDT |
Download: Letter to Cindy Tuck RIALTO - City officials are seeking $23 million in emergency funds from the state because of perchlorate contamination in the drinking water. The contamination is not new nor has an emergency been officially declared, but Rialto has been battling the perchlorate for years. It found its way into the groundwater from the past manufacturing at industrial facilities of military rockets, fireworks and other explosives. On Aug. 29, members of the City Council met in Sacramento with a number of state officials, including Dan Dunmoyer, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's deputy chief of staff. Dunmoyer suggested that Rialto look into declaring a state of emergency. "It's the only way we can get emergency funds from the governor. We have to do it," said City Councilman Ed Scott, concerning the possible declaration of a state of emergency. Scott is a member of the council's perchlorate subcommittee. The council will likely vote at its next meeting on whether to declare the emergency, he said. Perchlorate, which could cause a number of health effects by interfering with the thyroid, has been flowing through Rialto from industrial sites on the city's north end. It could cost hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up. The contamination has generated more attention in Sacramento since last month, when a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge halted state hearings to determine if three companies - Pyro Spectaculars, Goodrich and Black & Decker - should have to clean some of the contamination. The city laid out its funding request in a letter to Cindy Tuck, undersecretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency. The city would use the money to stop the perchlorate from continuing to move through the Rialto Basin and contaminating more clean water. Much of the money Rialto requested would also help the city better understand the extent of the contamination. Rialto has developed plans that spell out what needs to be done in order to better understand the total cleanup cost and the extent of the contamination. The city wants to use the state money to gather that information, Scott said. Then Rialto could take out an insurance policy, and parties such as the suspected polluters, would pay into the policy, to guarantee that the cleanup would be paid for. "We are seeking an emergency cleanup while we urge the state to toughen its enforcement effort against the (potentially responsible parties)," reads the letter, signed by Scott and Councilwoman Winnie Hanson, the other member of the perchlorate subcommittee. In another move that could provide Rialto with millions of dollars in cleanup money, the state Assembly last week amended legislation, which had already passed in the Senate, to provide about $50 million in remaining Proposition 84 money for drinking water cleanup. The money set aside by the Assembly amendment should go to the poorest, most populated and most contaminated areas, said Alicia Trost, a spokeswoman for Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland. Perata wrote the original bill. "So Rialto of course is included in that group," Trost said. Scott said he hopes Rialto can get $15 million to $20 million of that money. Both Assembly chambers were expected to vote on the legislation during an all-night session on Tuesday. __________________________________________________ BS Ranch Perspective: When is The Rialto City Administrator going to Wake up, and go to the City Council and ask for the City's Council's Resignation. After all Owen's handling of the Perchlorate Contamination in the water was Very Flawed from the Beginning. He Started off with a massive Law Suit, Opening huge billable hours for him and his Law Firm, from which he knows that the city cannot afford. The Gamble was that the money that was generated by the Law Suit would be paid not by the City but by the private business that was named in the law suit, however the Businesses have been winning their portion of the law suits and it has made it hard for the city now to make a simple request to the Federal Government, (namely the Environment Protection Agency), to come in and assist in the clean up of the Perchlorate. Now that there is an Active Law Suit the EPA will not just step in and clean up the mess, they must wait to allow the law suit to go the full suit, now that the City of Rialto has spent over $23Million on the clean up and they have not gotten anything done to clean up the perchlorate, other then shutting down the wells that had tested beyond the measurable amount that is considered to be toxic, well the wells that are getting small amounts of Perchlorate contamination could be getting more toxic, however they might only do spot checking, but that is not information that is given to the public. Now the city's counselor has to go to the state to bail himself out of the trouble that he has dug himself into! The Rialto City Administrator Garcia still sits in his office while all this goes on, $23 Million of the city's money has been spent and is gone, if this was the Police Department and this kind of money was mishandled, I can say with 100% honesty that the City's Administrator would fire the Police Chief and accuse him of being a thief! Then the Police Department would be torn to bits in the news and the whole Police Department would be called Corrupt!! Wait, we have been down this road, only with a real Corrupt Police Chief, Just like the Cities Attorney seems to be more and more corrupt, with billing more and more money to the city when he gets the second largest check, if not the largest check second only to the City Administrator. Wait, that City Administrator is the one that sits on his hands when it seems to be the time to look into getting a new City Counsel. But who am I? I am just a Concerned Citizen that they are supposed to represent! A Citizen that they are supposed to represent without profit to self!! BS Ranch |
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Rialto Water Case in Stall (San Bernardino Sun 08132007) Legal Wrangling Holds City Back!!!.....
Rialto water case in stall
Legal wrangling holds city back
Article Launched: 08/13/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT
The long and winding road leading to cleanup of the drinking water around Rialto is getting more tortuous.
On July 31, Goodrich Corp. sued Rialto and other parties in San Bernardino Superior Court to try to force the city to require a local businessman to clean up perchlorate contamination.
Next week, Emhart Industries - a defunct company associated with Black & Decker - Goodrich and Rialto-based Pyro Spectaculars are expected to ask a Los Angeles Superior Court to stay state hearings on the perchlorate contamination.
The legal efforts are the latest action the three companies have taken to thwart the state regulatory bodies trying to get the perchlorate cleaned up.
Perchlorate, a substance used to produce rocket fuel, fireworks and other explosives, has been flowing from Rialto's north end through the city, and possibly into Colton and toward Fontana. Perchlorate can interfere with the thyroid gland, which is important in the development of unborn babies.
"What this is really about is Goodrich's attempt to deflect attention from its own responsibility for contaminating the groundwater," Cris Carrigan, one of Rialto's lawyers, said about the suit against the city.
_______________________________
BS Ranch Perspective
When there is a huge price tag that is being assessed to this whole conflict there is bound to be a stall some time in the case just so that one side of the case can take the time to see what the heck that the other side is trying to or attempting to pull.
Down the road we discover that there is a possible price of $23,000,000.00 so now that the price tag is possibly that high they thought that they had better take a long recess and have a look at this whole mess!! I just hope that it is recessed for a great long time, because there is something crooked here and it isn't straight, so We had better have a look and see what they are doing. So I hope that they get a chance to have a good long look.
BS Ranch
The StateWater Resources Control Board is scheduled to hold hearings on the contamination - which was discovered in 1997 - later this month. The hearings have been delayed numerous times because of procedural objections raised by the three parties.
In the lawsuit against Rialto, Goodrich claims Rialto is obligated to order Ken Thompson, who owns land where perchlorate has been discovered, to clean up the contamination. It also says Rialto needs to enforce its own 1987 declaration requiring Thompson to clean up the area known as the McLaughlin Pit.
Goodrich has also claimed that the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, whose staff will be arguing against the three companies at the hearings, has not lived up to its responsibility to close the pit properly.
Patrick Palmer, a Goodrich spokesman, said the parties responsible for the contamination should clean it up and that if the proper procedures had been followed in 1987, the perchlorate would have been discovered years earlier. By not pursuing Thompson at the state hearings, Rialto and the Santa Ana board staff are failing to go after one of the responsible parties, Goodrich claims.
"We're very disappointed in this matter, where only select responsible parties and very key facts are being ignored," Palmer said.
Carrigan and Kurt Berchtold, assistant executive officer of the Santa Ana water board, both said their agencies have done nothing wrong and that Thompson might still be pursued in the future.
Thompson hasn't been a focus of the cleanup investigations thus far because he did not discharge perchlorate into the ground; he merely bought property from a party that did, said Scott Sommer, Rialto's lead attorney in the perchlorate matters. So far, the state regulatory agencies have focused on pursuing the parties suspected of actually discharging perchlorate. Any perchlorate he did spread by operating on the site was spread unknowingly because the perchlorate hadn't even been discovered there yet, Sommer said.
Carrigan said it's not even clear what Goodrich wants the city to do and that the suit is just another attempt to outspend state agencies and Rialto by using clever legal tactics.
At last count, Rialto has spent about $15 million on its efforts to investigate the perchlorate and take legal action. As that number has risen, dissatisfaction with the city's legal strategy has mounted.
The three parties being pursued in the state hearings have been criticized for using a number of aggressive legal strategies. One of the environmental groups involved in the hearings, the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, dropped out after being overwhelmed by how difficult the process had become.
In a letter to one of Goodrich's lawyers, Jeffrey Dintzer, the executive officer of the Santa Ana board, Gerard Thibeault, said the parties' legal efforts cost the state $954,000 and 9,430 hours in staff and attorney time in the 2006-07 fiscal year, and the costs are still growing.
At a Rialto City Council meeting on Wednesday, a woman - who identified herself as Donna Worley and claimed to be a concerned citizen - caused quite a stir when she went before the council to complain about the same matters contained in the Goodrich lawsuit. Earlier, she had provided The Sun with information about Thompson, in a letter calling the situation "just another case of the city helping the rich." At the meeting, she mentioned a potential recall of members of the council, prompting a vigorous response from the dais, especially from Councilman Ed Scott, who noted she lives in Burbank and accused her of working for Goodrich.
In the other matter regarding potential court action in Los Angeles, on Tuesday, James Meeder, an attorney for Emhart, wrote a letter on behalf of all three companies saying that if the hearing officer of the state proceedings did not disqualify the state board and the regional board from the process, he would go to court to ask for a stay in the hearings.
The companies claim the Santa Ana board's staff and the state board have taken part in improper communications or are biased against them because the state board handed out grants to local agencies to treat perchlorate. They have also claimed bias on the grounds that the Santa Ana board's staff erred in its handling of the closing of the McLaughlin Pit and is itself therefore partially responsible. Palmer also said the state board has no right to try the matter at this point.
Hearing officer Tam Doduc ruled Saturday against the companies.
"I think their disqualification argument lacks merit, and it would be sad if the proceedings are stayed," Carrigan said.
Berchtold said allegations of bias or that the Santa Ana board tried to cover up its own actions are "just not the case."
If all else fails, a federal trial on the contamination is tentatively scheduled for October 2008.
_______________________________________________________________________________
BS Ranch Perspective
After reading this it seems that The City of Rialto, and The City Council is being Treated as I was treated when it came to my workers compensation case, It took me 10 years to settle my case, and it was only settled because my lawyer made an offer to settle out of court, well Rialto accepted that offer and that was the only reason that my case was well handled. I even Died On Duty, in a Motorcycle Accident. But that didn't matter.This case will not be settled and all of the J&K Utility Tax money is going to the lawyer, Owen's so that he can take this case to Court. I don't think that this will go very far in October 88 either...
BS Ranch
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
IT's Time For Rialto to Call in the E.P.A.!!! A.S.A.P.!!
It's time for Rialto to call in the EPA
Article Launched:07/16/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT
When is enough enough? When should Rialto throw in the towel and call in the big dogs?
The city has been fighting for a decade to get suspected polluters, including major corporations and the Pentagon, to pay the costs of cleaning up perchlorate that has contaminated Rialto's wells. But the lawsuits and extended legal battle have cost more than $18 million so far and could go much higher.
And while Rialto's city attorney seems content to play David to the suspected polluters' Goliath - albeit, with the help of a cadre of top-level lawyers - it's chiefly customers of the city's water utility that have had to bear the burden, and the brunt of the costs, with no quick end in sight. So far, the city has spent the equivalent of its Police Department's budget on the fight.
The city's water agency serves about half of Rialto, with Fontana Water Co. and West Valley Water serving the rest. And so, it is about half of Rialto residents who are footing the bill for the city's legal juggernaut. The surcharge on water bills starts at $6.85 a month and rises from there.
If Rialto eventually wins its case in court, resident ratepayers will be reimbursed. But that could be a long time in coming. And the total for actual cleanup of the contaminant could be $300 million.
Besides ratepayers' hefty chunk, the City Council also contributed $5 million from general fund reserves to escalate the fight last year. But even the council has become leery, without seeing much in the way of results.
Why won't Rialto call in the cavalry and ask the feds for help? We're sure city ratepayers would like to know.
Why is it that the city has insisted on going it alone, without bringing the resources of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to bear?
Commenting on Rialto's reluctance to do the logical thing, Penny Newman, executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, said, "I think going with EPA and the Superfund program is probably the strongest mechanism a city or community has. I'm always amazed that people - communities - shy away from that."
Indeed, Rialto has become almost territorial in pursuing the fight on its own. It's almost as if time and money were no object. Let the ratepayers pay it - that seems to be the city's attitude.
But with the pricetag reaching into the millions, it's time to regroup. The city needs to take a more regional approach and spread out the costs.
Rialto initially considered going with EPA. But after looking at a variety of Superfund projects, and finding that each took 17 to 27 years to start cleanup, the city felt it would take too long, said City Attorney Bob Owen.
So, this is any better? How long does the city expect ratepayers to keep fronting litigation costs?
The state Water Resources Control Board, which has taken over from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, plans hearings in August. At that time, it could order three suspected polluters - Goodrich, Pyro Spectaculars and Emhart Industries, parent company of Black and Decker - to remove the contamination.
Then again, those companies all have been fighting long and hard to delay any consequences.
The San Gabriel Valley Water Co., which owns Fontana Water Co., and the West Valley Water District have urged Rialto go with a regional coalition that works with the EPA.
Rialto has been fighting for cleanup of the Rialto-Colton Basin, without regard for pollution of West Valley and Fontana wells.
And while a fault separates the West Valley and Fontana wells from the Rialto-Colton Basin, such that the regional agency has said it can't prove the suspected Rialto-area polluters caused contamination of the other wells, it's all the more reason for a regional approach that takes all of the pollution into account.
Yet Rialto persists in its one-sided struggle.
Better to lean on the EPA - and save residents the aggravation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BS Ranch Perspective
I am wondering why, the County of San Bernardino is not mentioned in this fight for the water rights and the fight for the water, and the monies to pay for the filtration to clean out the Perchlorate from the filters. I did a vast Search across the State and found that there was over 200 Wells in California that was effected by Perchlorate, many wells had to be shut down and some had to be filtered with the Revers Osmosis Filtration system, Each filter, I am talking about one filter, costs $4 Million Dollars, and they are very expensive. Rialto needed to have many of these Expensive Filteration systems on their system to clean the water and make it safe from Perchlorate!
But The question that Remains is What or who paid for the cleaning of those other 190 wells in the State of California tha that I could not find any news on? Who paid for the Filtration systems, and why didn't I find any other City's or Counties taking the Privious Owners of the Businesses to court that was responsible for placing the Perchlorate in the Water Table in the first place? I guess I can tell you that one thing is for sure.
Back when they started and found out that they had Perchlorate in contamination in the water table in Rialto, Rialto's Council Immediatly said that he must start a law Suit against the Businesses that were found to be responcible for the contamnation of the Perchlorate in the Water Table. I have Written all along that this was a bad Move since the Companies all have said that they were going to pay for the filters and clean up what they could of the Perchlorate from the Water Table, but Owen said that even with the Company spoksman saying that they were going to pay for their clean up.
I beleive that Owens, with all the extra pay that he received from the city should be held responcible for paying for the clean up of the water table, and the Perchlorate! They cannot beleive that Owen's did this law suit for the City of Rialto's Benefit, because Clearly it was not for the City of Rialto's Benefit, since it didn't benefit the City of Rialto!
Rialto Lost in this whole thing, Clearly since Owen's Continued his Pursuit of the Law Suit against the Businesses that admitted to being responsible for the Perchlorate Contamination of the Water Table, Dating back to World War One, and Clearly they were not the owners of those businesses then, they were the purchaser's of the businesses, so they got the businesses, and with that they inherited the responciblity of the Wrong Doings of those companies form a long time ago. When Owen's Representing the City of Rialto Took the Responcible Businesses to Court they decided to pay for only the stuff that they were told topay for, that left a huge amount that was left unpaid and The City of Rialto's Water Department was left with these Bills for the Remaining Clean up.
You Clearly Cannot Blame the Businesses, but the Lawyer's that Represented the Law Suit that started it!!
THE LAW SUIT IS TO BLAIM FOR THE LIMITED CLEAN UP OF IT!! NOT THE BUSINESSES HERE! THE LAWYERS ARE TO BLAME!
When I say lawyer I mean the one that started the whole Law Suit, OWEN!
The City of Rialto, and The Rialto City Council should fire their council, Owen, simply has to go, he has been there long enough and has made his milliions off the city, and if left in the City Representation Positon, he will make himself a millionare over and over and over again. With Law Suits, JUST LIKE THE ONE THAT THEY JUST LOST!! 10 FOLD W/PERCHLORATE!!
BS Ranch
Article Launched:07/16/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT
When is enough enough? When should Rialto throw in the towel and call in the big dogs?
The city has been fighting for a decade to get suspected polluters, including major corporations and the Pentagon, to pay the costs of cleaning up perchlorate that has contaminated Rialto's wells. But the lawsuits and extended legal battle have cost more than $18 million so far and could go much higher.
And while Rialto's city attorney seems content to play David to the suspected polluters' Goliath - albeit, with the help of a cadre of top-level lawyers - it's chiefly customers of the city's water utility that have had to bear the burden, and the brunt of the costs, with no quick end in sight. So far, the city has spent the equivalent of its Police Department's budget on the fight.
The city's water agency serves about half of Rialto, with Fontana Water Co. and West Valley Water serving the rest. And so, it is about half of Rialto residents who are footing the bill for the city's legal juggernaut. The surcharge on water bills starts at $6.85 a month and rises from there.
If Rialto eventually wins its case in court, resident ratepayers will be reimbursed. But that could be a long time in coming. And the total for actual cleanup of the contaminant could be $300 million.
Besides ratepayers' hefty chunk, the City Council also contributed $5 million from general fund reserves to escalate the fight last year. But even the council has become leery, without seeing much in the way of results.
Why won't Rialto call in the cavalry and ask the feds for help? We're sure city ratepayers would like to know.
Why is it that the city has insisted on going it alone, without bringing the resources of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to bear?
Commenting on Rialto's reluctance to do the logical thing, Penny Newman, executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, said, "I think going with EPA and the Superfund program is probably the strongest mechanism a city or community has. I'm always amazed that people - communities - shy away from that."
Indeed, Rialto has become almost territorial in pursuing the fight on its own. It's almost as if time and money were no object. Let the ratepayers pay it - that seems to be the city's attitude.
But with the pricetag reaching into the millions, it's time to regroup. The city needs to take a more regional approach and spread out the costs.
Rialto initially considered going with EPA. But after looking at a variety of Superfund projects, and finding that each took 17 to 27 years to start cleanup, the city felt it would take too long, said City Attorney Bob Owen.
So, this is any better? How long does the city expect ratepayers to keep fronting litigation costs?
The state Water Resources Control Board, which has taken over from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, plans hearings in August. At that time, it could order three suspected polluters - Goodrich, Pyro Spectaculars and Emhart Industries, parent company of Black and Decker - to remove the contamination.
Then again, those companies all have been fighting long and hard to delay any consequences.
The San Gabriel Valley Water Co., which owns Fontana Water Co., and the West Valley Water District have urged Rialto go with a regional coalition that works with the EPA.
Rialto has been fighting for cleanup of the Rialto-Colton Basin, without regard for pollution of West Valley and Fontana wells.
And while a fault separates the West Valley and Fontana wells from the Rialto-Colton Basin, such that the regional agency has said it can't prove the suspected Rialto-area polluters caused contamination of the other wells, it's all the more reason for a regional approach that takes all of the pollution into account.
Yet Rialto persists in its one-sided struggle.
Better to lean on the EPA - and save residents the aggravation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BS Ranch Perspective
I am wondering why, the County of San Bernardino is not mentioned in this fight for the water rights and the fight for the water, and the monies to pay for the filtration to clean out the Perchlorate from the filters. I did a vast Search across the State and found that there was over 200 Wells in California that was effected by Perchlorate, many wells had to be shut down and some had to be filtered with the Revers Osmosis Filtration system, Each filter, I am talking about one filter, costs $4 Million Dollars, and they are very expensive. Rialto needed to have many of these Expensive Filteration systems on their system to clean the water and make it safe from Perchlorate!
But The question that Remains is What or who paid for the cleaning of those other 190 wells in the State of California tha that I could not find any news on? Who paid for the Filtration systems, and why didn't I find any other City's or Counties taking the Privious Owners of the Businesses to court that was responsible for placing the Perchlorate in the Water Table in the first place? I guess I can tell you that one thing is for sure.
Back when they started and found out that they had Perchlorate in contamination in the water table in Rialto, Rialto's Council Immediatly said that he must start a law Suit against the Businesses that were found to be responcible for the contamnation of the Perchlorate in the Water Table. I have Written all along that this was a bad Move since the Companies all have said that they were going to pay for the filters and clean up what they could of the Perchlorate from the Water Table, but Owen said that even with the Company spoksman saying that they were going to pay for their clean up.
I beleive that Owens, with all the extra pay that he received from the city should be held responcible for paying for the clean up of the water table, and the Perchlorate! They cannot beleive that Owen's did this law suit for the City of Rialto's Benefit, because Clearly it was not for the City of Rialto's Benefit, since it didn't benefit the City of Rialto!
Rialto Lost in this whole thing, Clearly since Owen's Continued his Pursuit of the Law Suit against the Businesses that admitted to being responsible for the Perchlorate Contamination of the Water Table, Dating back to World War One, and Clearly they were not the owners of those businesses then, they were the purchaser's of the businesses, so they got the businesses, and with that they inherited the responciblity of the Wrong Doings of those companies form a long time ago. When Owen's Representing the City of Rialto Took the Responcible Businesses to Court they decided to pay for only the stuff that they were told topay for, that left a huge amount that was left unpaid and The City of Rialto's Water Department was left with these Bills for the Remaining Clean up.
You Clearly Cannot Blame the Businesses, but the Lawyer's that Represented the Law Suit that started it!!
THE LAW SUIT IS TO BLAIM FOR THE LIMITED CLEAN UP OF IT!! NOT THE BUSINESSES HERE! THE LAWYERS ARE TO BLAME!
When I say lawyer I mean the one that started the whole Law Suit, OWEN!
The City of Rialto, and The Rialto City Council should fire their council, Owen, simply has to go, he has been there long enough and has made his milliions off the city, and if left in the City Representation Positon, he will make himself a millionare over and over and over again. With Law Suits, JUST LIKE THE ONE THAT THEY JUST LOST!! 10 FOLD W/PERCHLORATE!!
BS Ranch
Monday, July 30, 2007
Rialto Takes Perchlorate Stand (San Bernardino Sun July 28, 2007).
BS Ranch Perspective
I figure that the Law Suite route that they took forced the hand that they have to pay some of the cost, so in order to get away from that now they must go after the Government to get the money needed in order to get the water filters that are needed to clean that perchlorate out of the water and away from the Water Drinking Public!!
I guess, they will be having to shake the hands of the Government to get this done now, since Owen's Idea of a Law Suit has Failed!!
BS Ranch
I figure that the Law Suite route that they took forced the hand that they have to pay some of the cost, so in order to get away from that now they must go after the Government to get the money needed in order to get the water filters that are needed to clean that perchlorate out of the water and away from the Water Drinking Public!!
I guess, they will be having to shake the hands of the Government to get this done now, since Owen's Idea of a Law Suit has Failed!!
BS Ranch
| Rialto takes perchlorate stand |
| Article Launched:07/28/2007 09:59:16 PM PDT |
| According to the most recent Study by the Center for Disease Control, perchlorate in drinking water, even at low doses, is a threat to the thyroid function of many of U.S. women, and to brain and nervous system development in children. By 2002, it had become apparent that a 6-mile-long plume of perchlorate, a key ingredient of rocket fuel, and trichloroethylene (TCE), a hazardous solvent phased out of industrial use by the 1980s, contaminates the otherwise pure groundwater aquifer that supplies drinking water for the city of Rialto and the Rialto Utility Authority. The source is a World War II ordinance depot later used for manufacturing by large defense contractors and fireworks manufacturers. The contamination comes from land now used by San Bernardino County for its Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, to the west, and a 160-acre site to the east occupied by Goodrich Corporation, Emhart (Black & Decker), Pyro Spectaculars and other manufacturers. In response, the Rialto City Council adopted a policy of shutting down contaminated wells to avoid serving perchlorate in any amount to its citizens. Initially, perchlorate concentrations were detected in the dozens to several hundred parts per billion (ppb). Additional investigation and testing found perchlorate as high as 5,000-10,000 ppb, the highest level in the nation in a domestic water supply. The state of California action level is 6 ppb. Protecting citizens' health is paramount, but the potential effects on business, development and the city's finances are also dire. Installing wellhead treatment costs millions, and operational costs add millions more. With the new 210 Freeway, parts of the city are poised for increased development and employment. But if the city cannot assure a 20-year supply of water, state law prohibits local development. Projected costs for the cleanup run as high as $200 million to $300 million. Initially, Rialto turned to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) for assistance. EPA undertook some studies and issued investigation orders to some of the dischargers. At the time, the Bush administration, under pressure from major defense contractors that had used perchlorate nationally and the Pentagon, resisted adoption of a federal cleanup standard or rigid enforcement by the EPA. EPA took no further action, and deferred to the state of California. The first prosecution effort by the RWQCB ended in a dismissal for lack of evidence. In 2003, Rialto turned to San Bernardino County and asked it to take steps to control the perchlorate from its Mid-Valley Landfill. Through then-supervisor Jerry Eaves, the county declined to offer Rialto any help and denied the extent of the contamination later confirmed by more testing. Faced with ineffective action from EPA and the regional board, a rejection of liability from the county, and some expiring statutes of limitation, Rialto brought suit in federal court in 2004 to make the large corporate polluters and insurance companies - rather than its own citizens - pay for the cleanup. Through investigation of activities as far back as the 1940s, and under federal discovery authority, a mass of evidence was collected and delivered to the RWQCB and EPA. Using some of this evidence, Rialto was successful in November 2005 in obtaining a Clean-up and Abatement Order from the RWQCB that requires the county to clean up the perchlorate emanating from the landfill. By late 2006, the RWQCB began a further prosecution of Goodrich, Emhart/Black & Decker and Pyro Spectaculars, supported in substantial part by the evidence from the federal litigation. Rialto's strategy is straightforward: use the federal litigation to supply evidence to EPA and the regional board with the objective of obtaining orders for cleanup of the basin. California law requires such a lawsuit to invoke the decades of insurance coverage of many of the dischargers, some of whom otherwise lack funding. Rialto's objective has always been to play a supporting role to federal and state agencies to obtain the orders for prompt cleanup. That strategy has worked as to the county and its landfill. The current State Water Board prosecution, which goes to hearing in Rialto Aug. 21-30, will hopefully result in a cleanup order on the eastern part of the plume as well. Rialto will participate and assist the RWQCB in presenting important evidence. If that hearing, which has been delayed four times by the large, well-funded law firms representing the dischargers, is not successful, Rialto has as a backup its federal lawsuit, which should go to trial in late 2008. Either way, Rialto is committed to making the large corporate polluters and insurance companies pay for the cleanup. The same federal litigation has been filed by the city of Colton, West Valley Water District and the private supplier Fontana Water Company. Right now, Rialto and Colton are doing the work in the litigation. The same water purveyors, and the county - both singly and jointly - have applied for federal and state cleanup money for years with only limited success. Rialto is following a dual approach of assisting the administrative agencies and using the federal litigation as a backup. We request this newspaper and all affected citizens to support the current State Water Board prosecution in Rialto Aug. 21-30. The state Legislature should be encouraged to supply funding for prosecution of the dischargers and to assist with the cleanup. EPA should likewise be more actively involved, and take further action on the evidence that has been supplied to it. The health and welfare of Rialto's citizens, and its women and children in particular, deserve nothing less. - Winnie Hanson, Rialto's mayor pro tem, and Ed Scott, council member, comprise the Rialto Perchlorate Subcommittee. |
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Toxin-Free water Demanded in Rialto (Dainly Bulletin June 28, 2007)
| BS Ranch Perspective Don't get me wrong, but isn't Toxin-free water what any Home owner wants when they own their home and they pay their taxes, and then they have all that water bill paid, and suddenly they have toxic water, that is terrible for human consumption, You spend your hard earned money, that you had worked really hard for, yet you find that the place that you purchased that you figured was safe for your family is actually poisonous Water that gives everyone Cancer if they drank the water!! All you want is to keep your family SAFE!! It is no wonder that everyone is up in arms about the Contamination in the Water Supply at Rialto!! They need to Concentrate on keeping the Water Clean, rather than Suing the Company Responsible for the problem. Rialto needs to concentrate on the clean up and not on the problems surrounding the clean up. Perchlorate is nothing to play with it is a dangerous substance when left in the water supply!! BS Ranch Toxin-free water demanded in Rialto |
| By Jason Pesick, Staff Writer Inland Valley Daily Bulletin |
| Article Launched:06/28/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT |
| RIALTO - Hundreds of residents and representatives of organizations around the state came to a rowdy forum Wednesday night to demand that an ingredient used to produce rocket fuel, perchlorate, be cleaned out of the local drinking water supply. The event, held by the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, featured marching, Aztec dancers, a hearing before a panel of guest activists and calls for action. "This particular pollutant is really worrisome," said UC San Francisco medical professor Gina Solomon during a presentation on the health effects of perchlorate. Well-known activist Dolores Huerta was expected to lead a panel of guests to demand change, but she was unable to make it to the event. Perchlorate is used to produce different types of explosives, and although its health effects are not well understood, it can interfere with the thyroid gland. A number of residents took the opportunity to tell the panel - which later voted to have the State Water Resources Control Board order cleanup - about the problem. The center's executive director, Penny Newman, highlighted how much longer it has taken to clean up the perchlorate in Rialto than it took to clean up perchlorate discovered in Redlands the same year. Rialto has accused dozens of parties of being responsible for the pollution, while only one party caused the contamination in Redlands. But Newman said Redlands is a wealthier and predominately white community with more political influence than Rialto. "I don't know too many people who say race does not play a role in our society today," she said before the event. The contamination has been spreading from Rialto's north end through the city and into Colton. Local water companies have spent millions of dollars to clean it out of the water they serve their customers. The entire mess could cost $300 million to clean up. Rialto and Colton have tried a number of strategies to get the dozens of suspected polluters, which include Goodrich, Black and Decker and Pyro Spectaculars, to clean it up. A federal lawsuit is still in the early stages, and the state regulatory bodies charged with monitoring water quality have struggled to move the case forward. State hearings have been delayed numerous times, most recently from July to late August, delays Newman called "unacceptable." Contact writer Jason Pesick at (909) 386-3861 or via e-mail at jason.pesick@sbsun.com. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)