septic tank finding(Sac Bee Paper)
California's first water-quality surveillance of single-family wells has found contaminants in a high proportion of those tested in rural El Dorado
and Yuba counties, The Bee has learned.
More than half of the 513 foothill wells sampled in the state's pioneering study contained bacteria or chemicals such as pesticides and fuel
ingredients that do not occur naturally in groundwater - the mark of contamination - according to unpublished test results shared with the newspaper.
"These are things you don't find a lot in public well systems," said Carl Lischeske, a state health official who oversees the safety of drinking water
from Northern California wells, rivers and reservoirs that serve the public at large.
The potential contamination sources of greatest concern are household septic tank systems that separate out liquid sewage and disperse it underground,
said Lischeske, who reviewed the data collected by the state Water Resources Control Board.
The study's most disturbing find was the confirmation of fecal matter in 16 of the wells. That's a high rate, considering that in any given year,
disease-causing bacteria show up in fewer than five of the hundreds of public wells that Lischeske oversees, from Sacramento to the Oregon border.
"We require a public water system to take immediate action to correct it," he said. "It's a big deal."
State water board officials told the affected well owners to stop drinking the water immediately and resume only after disinfecting the well and
retesting the water.
Most of the 16,000 public wells in California are chlorinated to protect against microbes in feces that can cause diarrhea, cramps and more serious
illness.
And while federal safe-water rules implemented in the past decade have prompted public utilities to install further treatments, virtually none of the
unregulated 600,000 individually owned wells in California get any treatment whatsoever, said James Giannopoulos, the water board's chief of
groundwater quality.
"What the data show is that a good percentage of these wells appear to be vulnerable to contamination," Giannopoulos said.
Except for fecal bacteria and a few other substances, the mere presence of contaminants does not necessarily render water unsafe to drink, health
officials said; risk depends on several factors, including the type of contaminant and its concentration.
But the detection of contaminants in 62 percent of the wells checked definitely points up the need for monitoring the quality of drinking water tapped
from individually owned boreholes, a safeguard long required of water utilities large and small, water board officials said.
"The data add to the argument that these wells ought to be tested," Giannopoulos said.
The well-sampling results emerge as the water board prepares to release a set of proposed groundwater-protection rules that for the first time would
require homeowners hooked to their own wells to test the water, at least every five years. The water board also is calling for stricter standards in
the design, installation and performance of septic systems.
Local environmental health officials, especially those in predominantly rural counties, say the state's proposal amounts to regulatory overkill. They
and real estate interests say the rules should apply only to areas where septic systems are known to pollute water supplies.
"There are some areas in our county where the soil is so good and the groundwater is so good that there is no point," said Jon Morgan, El Dorado
County's director of environmental management.
Giannopoulos, in turn, asks, "How do you know whether septic tanks are a problem? There's no groundwater testing, no data."
The private-well testing is part of a statewide surveillance of groundwater quality that the Legislature authorized in 2001.
More than 10 million Californians - 30 percent of the state's population - draw some or all of their drinking water from public wells, the state
Department of Health Services said. An additional 2 million drink from their own wells. Most live on large lots in rural or semirural areas.
The water quality of these individually owned wells is largely unknown because, unlike public supply wells, there is no government requirement to
monitor them.
Tests of the private wells in the foothills turned up 23 with chemical compounds at levels exceeding those limits, a high proportion by public water
standards, state health officials said. The state provided well owners with a list of public health resources to learn how to boost water quality.
The water board mailed hundreds of solicitations for free testing to well owners, working off names and addresses on well construction permits filed
at Yuba and El Dorado county offices.
Huestis, a real estate agent, said she knew her water tested fine in 2000 when she and her husband bought their one-acre ranchette in Lotus, near the
site of the James Marshall discovery that launched the Gold Rush.
"We wanted to find out if our well is still good," Huestis said. The state checked for more than 100 contaminants, from naturally occurring arsenic to
industrial solvents.
"We were pleased to see we had good quality water," she said.
Most of the 513 participants, however, said they had never tested their drinking water, said Carol Anacker-Hubbard, who collected many of the samples
in the $750,000 study.
"Many folks thought that because their well is permitted by the county, their water is fine," Anacker-Hubbard said. Water-quality testing is not
required for a well-drilling permit.
The predominant contaminants found were nitrogen compounds that form as sewage permeates the soil or originate from fertilizers and animal waste.
The compounds, nitrate and nitrite, turned up in 296, or 58 percent, of the wells tested.
"If you are in an area that doesn't have big fertilizer application or dairy farms, your other likely source is your septic tank or somebody else's
septic tank," the health department's Lischeske said.
With few exceptions, the wells sampled were not near commercial agricultural operations, water board officials said, though some were in pastures with
small numbers of horses or farm animals.
The next most prevalent contaminants detected were coliform bacteria that occur in soil and in human and animal feces. Tests found coliform in 139, or
27 percent, of the wells. Subsequent analysis confirmed the presence of fecal matter in 16 of these wells.
Coliform turned up in the Meyer family well in Latrobe.
"At first it made my heart catch in my throat," said Jennifer Meyer, a freelance writer and equestrian who has a 20-acre spread south of Placerville.
She and her husband, Hank, installed their well when they bought property 25 years ago but had never checked the water quality.
State officials informed the couple that the presence of coliform indicates but does not confirm the presence of the harmful fecal bacteria E. coli.
Subsequent testing for these microbes turned up negative, but the Meyers switched to bottled water and disinfected their well just to be sure.
A summary and analysis of the foothills study are expected to be posted next month on the state water board's Web site, www.swrcb.ca.gov.
The next round of private-well testing is scheduled for Tehama County in March. A food additive commonly found in sewage will be added to the list of
chemical checks to better establish the link between septic systems and tainted wells, Giannopoulos said.
Meanwhile, water board officials plan public hearings on proposed regulation of private wells and septic systems.
Giannopoulos acknowledges that the state would not have the resources to enforce the water-monitoring requirement on individual homeowners. But he
believes regulation will spur water testing when properties are sold.
Thomas and Mary Lou Huntington said they had more than good flow to recommend their well last spring when they put up for sale their 8-acre lot in the
foothills community of Browns Valley, east of Marysville. The couple had in hand results from the state testing program that showed their water to be
safe.
"It pretty much cinched the sale," Mary Lou Huntington recalled. "It was like putting a gold seal on the well, a stamp of approval."
Related graphics
Coliform bacteria detections in sampled domestic supply wells [720k PDF]
Nitrate detections in sampled domestic supply wells [721k PDF]
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
