Last month the Division of Drinking Water and the Division of Water Quality announced the State Water Resources Control Board’s phased investigation approach to PFAS. It is the intention of the Board to begin the investigation by collecting PFAS detection data at 31 airports and 252 municipal solid waste landfills. These facilities have the potential to impact over 1,320 surrounding drinking water wells and drinking water sources.
Lead testing was in the mainstream news yet again this month after a report gave California a “C+” for its policies to protect children from lead in drinking water at school. In fairness to California, it was one of the only states to receive a “passing” grade, as 22 of the 32 states analyzed received an “F” letter grade. If you’re a parent like me, however, you probably feel like a C+ report card is hardly worth celebrating.
But what exactly did the report base its assessment on?
Promised federal regulatory actions from the EPA, the addition of PFOA and PFOS to Proposition 65, and phased implementation of the Water Board’s new Action Plan all point to one thing: PFAS liability for California.
Last week, drinking water fixtures at Grant Union High School in Sacramento were shut off after elevated levels of lead and copper were found in the water.
Grant Union High School is not the first school to experience risky lead levels in its drinking water; it is merely the most recent. The water quality issues the Sacramento school is experiencing should serve as a wake-up call to all California schools, the vast majority of which have yet to take advantage of the State Water Resource Control Board’s lead testing program for schools.