CCMIN090898 - Laserfiche WebLink

being drained into the Delta water are far more dangerous than the RO water. He said 35 percent of bottled water being sold today is RO water. He hoped the review process would look at all the documents, the pros and cons, and ignore the scare tactics. M. M. Fulk, 5116 Diane Lane, Livermore, talked about the science and numbers. He believed in freedom of beliefs but not when it is harmful to the public's health and welfare. He said it is very difficult to determine the presence of Tridium. He explained that it takes six hours to two days to prepare a sample and do an analysis. He said natural background radiation causes about five percent of the cancer deaths. He said Prop 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, talks about the level of exposure in which there is no birth defects or reproductive harm. He said Tridium on a water molecule could do damage to the unborn fetus, etc. He said according to Prop 65 no water in this area is safe. He questioned the people quoting numbers and scientific data. Paulette Salisbury, 6170 Cone Trancas, said the Tri-Valley Sierra Club and the San Francisco Bay Chapter opposes the direct injection of RO treated sewage into the groundwater aquifer or the chain of lakes, which is the water basin that serves the Tri-Valley area. The Sierra Club is not opposed to recycling water, but is concerned about injecting contaminants into the groundwater aquifer. This is a precedent setting project. She said RO is a process that the water is put through, not a definable quantity. She said another misconception is that DSRSD had presented this project to the voters of the Valley. She said the citizens of Pleasanton do not vote on DSRSD Boardmembers or their projects. She understood the need for expanded sewer capacity according to buildout of the General Plan. She felt the monitoring of sites could not be adequately done. If garbage is put in, you will get garbage coming out. She urged the Council to consider this project carefully. She said it is not needed presently and asked Council to stop the RO injection process. She said there is a petition circulating that says, "we the undersigned do not want to drink recycled sewage treated by reverse osmosis and do not want RO water injected into the groundwater storage basin or chain of lakes." She will make copies for Council. John Bell, 4605 Herrin Way, supported the RO project. He believed the project would improve the water quality and would not put any additional expense onto the paying customer. He said it needs careful consideration but felt it was a good project. Debra Barker, 5018 Blackbird Way, said it is the Council's responsibility to protect the water. She said historically the scientific community has tried to convince the people that they can do better than Mother Nature. But they were wrong; formula is not better than mothers' milk. The things that the scientists do not know to test for are the things that will harm the people. She understood there is a sewage capacity problem. She felt there were other uses for the RO water instead of drinking water. She read from the professional magazine of the American Society of Civil Engineers: "It is critical to determine if the process is feasible for a specific water source." She said as the membranes filter out the contaminants from the water the membranes become clogged and less effective. She said presently there is no accurate Pleasanton City Council 10 09/08/98 Minutes