Panel approves review of Upcountry water study

The Maui News
Friday, October 20, 2006
By HARRY EAGAR, Staff Writer

WAILUKU - The County Council Water Resources Committee voted Wednesday to spend up to $40,000 on two reviews of Upcountry water, including a $500,000 report that found there is nothing wrong with it.

The Boyle Engineering study, presented in May as part of an Environmental Protection A-gency grant, found no serious problems with the output of three surface water treatment plants.

The Upcountry Water Oversight Committee has refused to accept that report. This committee is a self-selected citizens group that EPA guidelines required to provide a community voice in the various studies funded by the grant.

Two of its members, Rosemary Robbins and Ginny Parsons, testified in support of the proposal by Water Resources Committee Chairwoman Mic-helle Anderson for the two reviews:

- A comprehensive performance evaluation of the Upcountry water systems to be performed by Region IX of the EPA. EPA would pick up some of the costs. Anderson said the county would pay for transportation and lodging for a small team of EPA inspectors for seven to 10 days.

- A review workshop on the Boyle report on contamination of Upcountry water.

Committee Member Jo Anne Johnson worried that inviting the EPA fox into the county henhouse could have unwanted consequences.

Johnson said she was concerned about the legal or moral responsibility of the inspectors to report any violations they might find in the operation of the county's water systems, possibly leading to fines. Council Member Charmaine Tavares asked whether such an invitation could lead to the county facing some kind of enforcement action if the EPA were to find violations of Safe Drinking Water standards.

"Let's be careful what we ask for," Johnson said.

Anderson assured both that EPA does performance evaluations around the country, and that "they're not going to come over here and visit and then turn around and fine us."

She said an EPA toxicologist overseeing the $500,000 grant had assured her about that, and the Office of Corporation Counsel had concurred.

"I hope you get that in writing," said Deputy Corporation Counsel Ed Kushi, who advises the committee.

"Any public representative, if they do find a violation, I think they are obligated to follow up, especially the EPA, whose obligation is to regulate water," he said.

"I don't think we should be afraid that we're going to be found in violation," Anderson said.

The committee voted unanimously to advance a resolution requesting the review. Money would come from the Office of Council Services budget.

The workshop review of Boyle was suggested by Bruce Macler, the toxicologist who is minding the EPA's end of the $500,000 grant pushed through Congress by Sen. Daniel Inouye when some Upcountry residents complained about a rash - "Upcountry Itch" - which they suspected came from water.

The grant also paid for a study of how lead gets into water from household taps in some Upcountry homes. Tests never find lead in the water coming out of the three county treatment plants, although it is possible that some lead (or copper) is leached from plumbing fixtures, particularly in older homes.

However, blood tests taken from residents in the region have not found elevated levels of lead.

A majority of the oversight committee, however, is advocating a theory, offered by Professor Mark Edwards of Virginia Polytechnic University, that anti-lead measures have caused microbial blooms in the Upcountry water system that are the reason for skin irritation and other ailments reported by water users.

Anderson wants Edwards on a panel that would analyze the Boyle study, which offered little support for the Edwards theory.

Other EPA and university experts also would spend two days on the study, and on the third day, Boyle would be invited to defend the report, Anderson said.

Expenses for this study are estimated to run around $10,000, although $20,000 was requested in the resolution for unexpected costs.

Unlike the EPA performance review, whose sponsor would be the EPA, the workshop review would require another sponsor. Anderson said she was concerned that the Water Resources Committee might not be able to maintain a quorum for three consecutive days, so she has invited the oversight committee to be the host. The committee has accepted.

Robbins was asked who is on the committee. She said at the initial meeting, only two people attended. She was one. She said there are now 10 or 12 members, although she was uncertain of the status of at least one of them.

This resolution also was passed unanimously by the committee for consideration by the full council.


(Read the original article here)