The Orange County Water District (OCWD) and several other cities and agencies in the county have filed a federal lawsuit against multiple manufacturers of long-lasting chemicals, using newly adopted federal standards that the district says shows the chemicals threaten the region’s drinking water, but which manufacturers say are based on questionable science.
OCWD filed the lawsuit on April 12 in the Central District of California, alleging that AGC Chemicals Americas Inc. and seven other manufacturers produced substances and products containing synthetic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and related chemicals. The complaint seeks to remedy the chemical contamination of surface water and groundwater in Orange County that has created human health hazards.
Federal courts transferred the case to South Carolina federal court on May 3, where it was consolidated with a host of other similar PFAS-related class actions against the same manufacturers.
“PFAS are persistent, toxic and bioaccumulative compounds when released into the environment,” the lawsuit states. “PFAS have impacted surface water and groundwater and now contaminate the water pumped from the (local) producers’ water supply wells.”
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a rule on maximum contaminant levels for PFAS in public drinking water supplies two days before the Orange County officials filed their federal lawsuit. The federal limit for PFAS and related chemicals is now 4 parts per trillion, according to the complaint.
The chemical industry, however, says that although it shares the goal of having safe and reliable drinking water for all Americans, the EPA’s scientific evaluations of the PFAS threat are questionable.
“Unfortunately, there are serious concerns with the underlying science used to develop these maximum contaminant levels (MCLs),” the American Chemical Council said in a statement last month. “These concerns have been validated by peer-reviewed research that also calls into question the basis for EPA’s overly conservative approach to assessing one of the health endpoints. Even EPA’s own Science Advisory Board severely criticized much of the underlying science behind the proposed standards.”
John Kennedy, OCWD’s general manager, said the district has been monitoring the EPA’s regulatory moves in dealing with PFAS contamination of drinking water.
“The district has been following the federal EPA process and was expecting a relatively low maximum contaminant level (MCL) to be established this spring,” Kennedy said in an email to the Southern California Record. “Additionally, the district expects the state of California to also establish a relatively low and similar MCL sometime in 2024.”
He also stressed that the PFAS contamination problem in the county is widespread.
“There are approximately 220 major groundwater extraction wells in the OCWD service area,” Kennedy said. “Currently, 102 groundwater extraction wells will need treatment systems to comply with the new PFAS MCLs. The total capital cost of these treatment systems is currently estimated at approximately $550 million, and the total PFAS cleanup costs will likely exceed $1.8 billion over the next 30 years.”
Fluorochemical products made with PFAS include waterproofing products, firefighting foam, stain-proofing substances, waxes and other coatings, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs are seeking a jury trial and compensatory and punitive damages awards against the defendants, as well as attorney fees and an order mandating that the defendants take actions to put a stop to what the lawsuit terms a “public nuisance.”
The damages award needs to be sufficient to cover the plaintiffs’ costs for investigating and remediating the contamination of drinking water sources in the county, according to the complaint.
OCWD and its co-plaintiffs are represented in the action by attorneys Kenneth A. Sansone, of SL Environmental Law Group, of San Francisco; Daniel S. Robinson, of Robinson Calcagnie, of Newport Beach; and Andrew W. Homer, of Kelley Drye & Warren, of La Jolla.