The nightmare in northeast Morgan Hill happened almost 10 years
ago: a road flare plant contaminated the groundwater basin
threatening the rural community’s way of life, property values and
health.
The nightmare in northeast Morgan Hill happened almost 10 years ago: a road flare plant contaminated the groundwater basin threatening the rural community’s way of life, property values and health.
Since the total disruption in 2002, Olin Corporation – the flare manufacturer that closed its plant in 1997 after 40 years on Tennant Avenue – has been forced by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board to clean the groundwater contamination.
Some San Martin residents not affected by the pollutant are crying foul.
In July 2007, the water district sued Olin Corporation asking for reimbursements for what it paid to clean the ground basin and provide bottled water for owners of about 1,000 wells during the height of the contamination. The case was terminated June 8, 2010 and both parties agreed to pay their own legal fees.
“It’s totally and completely wrong,” said Sylvia Hamilton, a San Martin resident and member of the Perchlorate Community Awareness Group. “The community is the one that’s paid the biggest price, not necessarily in money – though we are paying a monthly fee – but just in the quality of life. People in the community did not contaminate the water, Olin did.”
The water district says it shouldn’t be defined as an “Olin debt” but rather the “costs associated with the benefits provided by the district.”
Hamilton did say she is appreciative for the water district and its board of directors who worked with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, a regulatory agency that stepped in during the perchlorate crisis and keeps tabs on water quality in California, to get PCAG started.
She said she’s received a good education on San Martin’s unfortunate relationship with perchlorate and the groundwater basin, and it’s helped her edify the San Martin community.
The city of Morgan Hill and the Santa Clara Valley Water District have included “perchlorate response” fees in water bills that residents pay each month. In Morgan Hill, it’s a 3 percent surcharge for residents who are living off the city-owned wells.
For a SCVWD bill – which goes to South County’s estimated 4,000 private well owners – the charge is $4.5 million spread over two years, or 14.8 percent of the total cost of groundwater costs.
The median water bill for city residents is about $22; so about $4 goes to the perchlorate response funds for the city and the water district.
The water district is a wholesale retailer that sells water for distribution, though it also sells water directly to residents who own and operate their own wells.
Water district spokesman Marty Grimes said the perchlorate response includes legal fees, water bottle distribution and cleanup costs, which has been inserted into residents’ groundwater fees for the next two years after it was approved by the water district board of directors last spring.
In 2003, Olin was spending $60,000 per month to supply the bottled water to about 1,000 residents south of Tennant Avenue and accepted responsibility for the 9.5-mile perchlorate plume that stretched south through San Martin and east of Gilroy.
Perchlorate is a chemical that affects the normal function of the thyroid gland if consumed by humans. Water that contains more than six parts per billion perchlorate is considered unsafe to drink and to cook with. Some of the wells in South County initially found to be contaminated in 2001 contained up to 50 parts per billion.
Today, nine private wells are still considered hot spots in San Martin and Morgan Hill – that are stable with fewer than six ppb perchlorate – and are frequently monitored.
The corporation must report its strategic progress to the Regional Water Quality Control Board periodically, which is to remove and treat the highest perchlorate concentrations south of Morgan Hill. City Manager Ed Tewes said the city remains concerned that the regional board has not required Olin to “fully characterize” the plume in the northeast area, where the city draws its water supply.
Olin also is performing “monitored attenuation” or “wait to see if the perchlorate goes away,” Tewes said. “The regional board … believes that if a pump and treat system is installed there by Olin that it will keep perchlorate from flowing northeasterly into the area of the well field that serves 40,000 people,” Tewes said.
Since about 2003, Morgan Hill has treated the water from its contaminated wells before distributing it to customers. In 2003, the city was billing customers a 10 percent surcharge on their monthly water bills.
The water district has done it’s own cleanup procedure with the expectation that it would be reimbursed by Olin. Since the contamination and response, the water district has provided free water sampling, funded distribution of bottled water, held public meetings, formed awareness groups with staff support and assisted the city of Morgan Hill with well treatment. The city has said the Tennant Avenue well was not part of the treatment.
The total cost to the district was about $6.9 million.
Recovery of the costs for the water district’s response was sought through litigation with Olin, and the district did recover $2.7 million and obtained a grant for $450,000, though about $4.5 million was not recovered.
That’s where the rate-payers enter.
During the next two fiscal years – through 2011 – the $4.5 million has been inserted into the groundwater production fees, something that was approved by the water district board of directors in spring 2010. The new board will look at the issue again when they approve the groundwater fees in early in 2011.
Groundwater rates have remained at $275 per acre foot for the past three years. The last increase was 2007, though staff projects that it will rise to $365 by 2020 in South County and $1,070 in North County. Revenue from the current rate is about $61 million this year.
The city of Morgan Hill owns and operates 12 wells serving about 11,500 people. The city pays the rate of $275 per acre foot for about 8,400 acre feet of water a year or about $2.3 million. One acre-foot is enough water to provide water for a family five for one year.
