12. Miscellaneous

12.1. Dioxane Contamination

As part of this rate application, Park asks the Commission to specify one of three methods for dealing with a low level of contaminant found in four wells serving the Bellflower/Norwalk area. The contaminant, 1,4-dioxane, was found to have exceeded the state action level of three per billion (ppb) in three of the wells. By letter dated January 23, 2003, the DHS advised Park that the low levels of the contaminant (averaging 4.9, 3.7 and 3.4 ppb in three of the wells) did not represent a significant health risk to customers and that closing the wells would not be required unless the level of 1,4-dioxane exceeded 300 ppb. Based on this advice, Park has resumed pumping from the wells.

Noting that the Commission shares regulatory responsibility with DHS in water quality matters, Park presented three methods of dealing with the problem and asks the Commission to select the one it should follow: (1) Turn off the wells and increase purchased water at an additional cost of $16,500; (2) Install treatment to the wells at an additional cost of $432,000, or (3) Continue to pump groundwater without treatment. Park's witness stated that the reason for seeking Commission approval of one of these three scenarios is to help shield the company from liability in case a lawsuit is filed by a consumer of the water.

ORA argues that the request for Commission advice in this matter is inappropriate in an application for a general rate increase. ORA's witness stated that if Park seeks a Commission investigation and order on this subject, it should submit a separate application. The witness said that he had asked for detailed information, including expert analyses, about the contamination, but that all Park submitted was the letter from DHS and a general description of the problem.

We agree with ORA that Park's request is inappropriate in this rate case and that, in any event, the information supplied by Park is inadequate for the Commission to make any reasoned evaluation of the effects of low levels of 1,4-dioxane. With that said, however, we note that this Commission has found that DHS requirements governing drinking water quality adequately protect the public health and safety. (See In re Standards of Drinking Water Quality (2000) D.00-11-014, Conclusion of Law 4.) As ORA notes, the Commission generally defers to DHS on matters of contaminant levels in drinking water.