Please do not drink the water!

If you live west of Interstate 19 between Twin Buttes Road to Duval Mine Road, the water is not fit to drink-especially for elderly, babies and animals.

Unfortunately, the Department of Environmental Quality and our Community Water Co. have not taken the responsibility to inform you of the condition of the water--so I am doing so.

I have been working behind the scenes for over a year trying to get the situation remedied. But the truth is, even though the Phelps Dodge mine officials gave a promise of two new wells to replace the two wells they were contaminating, nothing has been done to date.

I've talked to the mine official and got some promises, which I found to be inaccurate. I have spoken with every water quality official in Pima County and the state. At this time, I am told it will be two to three more months before the situation is remedied.

So until then, please, don't drink the water, or give it to your pets!

Here are the facts on which I base my conclusion. You consider them and decide for yourselves.

EPA recommended values (all measurements in mg/ltr):

TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) 500

Sulfate 250

Hardness--no recommendation--12 to 15 grains per gallon or 216 to 270 mg/ltr

First the data from Tucson water:

TDS 322

Hardness 115

Sulfate 44

Although we knew it had poor water quality, we were all shocked recently when the Colorado River, our CAP water resource, made the top of the list of America's Most Endangered Rivers of 2004.

The numbers for CAP water are:

TDS 603

Hardness 280

Sulfate 248

Yet compare them with the numbers from Community Water Co.'s Wells 7 and 8.

Well 7

TDS900

Hardness 507

Sulfate 505

Well 8

TDS 956

Hardness 565

Sulfate 956

These numbers were taken from the 2003 Water Quality Report which was issued in May 2004.

This means that these numbers are already at least 8 months old. Since the TDS is rising at 100 mg/ltr per year, the Sulfate and Hardness at 50, we can see that the numbers are going off the grid while we are sitting and waiting for well replacements.

The argument is that the TDS or Total Dissolved Solids (comprised of inorganic salts, principally calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, bicarbonates, chlorides and sulfates), Sulfates and Hardness are not toxic minerals, therefore, they are not regulated, but only aesthetic values are recommended.

Even though in our area, these numbers are double the primary drinking water standards, there is no cause for any action.

For example, in an area in Missouri, the water actually comes out orange because it has so much mineral content. Yet, the water is considered safe by the EPA, because they are not "toxic" metals.

Let's take for example, Hardness, which is the amount of calcium and magnesium dissolved in the water. Sure, these are not toxic minerals.

In fact, the body needs them for healthy bones and teeth. But how much? We have a Hardness of 560 mg/ltr, which is like consuming chalk. Chalk is not particularly toxic, yet if you consume a chunk every day, eventually, the kidneys are going to be overtaxed.

Health issue

Although the authorities will not say so, I personally think that there is a health issue, particularly since we are dealing with an elderly population here in Green Valley.

Some testing has been done, but not over a prolonged period of time, and were not specifically in an elderly community.

There have been tests of the effects of sulfate on humans and they can withstand levels to 1,100 without any visible side effects. However, these tests were on normal healthy people. And a high TDS level and Hardness level was not added into the test.

Everyone will agree that people who have had treatments like chemo or radiation will be more sensitive to high sulfate levels.

Do a couple of tests: Put just two cups of tap water in a sauce pan. Let it boil away until you see the residue--pretty amazing for two cups of water.

Pops and cracks

But what is more amazing is the way it pops and cracks like little geysers when it gets close to the bottom. This is not a normal quality of water.

Next, empty your hot water heater. (It just takes a hose attached to the bottom drain valve, but turn off the power to the water heater!). Empty the water out on a pavement so that you can see the residue that remains.

You will be shocked--this is what you are putting in your body. You decide.

The truth is our water company has let us down.

One good indicator is that after the recent annual meeting, a board member approached me and thanked me for bringing up the situation in the meeting.

Another board member phoned me to personally thank me for my "good work" and intelligent letter to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality officials.

Although it is supposedly "member-owned," Community Water Co. has let us down in not giving us the proper information so that we can make our own decisions.

Their water reports hide the high numbers in certain areas by giving a range, for example, "Hardness levels range between 111.0 to 565 mg/l and 6.5 to 33.0 grains per gallon" making it appear as if there is a fluctuation. There is no fluctuation. Some of us are getting the 33 grains all the time, and others are getting 6.5.

Same deception with arsenic. It is listed ranging between 5 and 14 parts per billion. That's a big difference for arsenic. Those in the 14 zone (no longer considered a safe value for arsenic, but regulations won't be enforced until January, 2006, should be informed.

Last year, Community Water put a new well into operation that had been carefully calculated to be outside of the polluting tailings plume of Phelps Dodge mine.

For reasons totally beyond logic, the water from that well was not given to those of us who have the worse water quality readings.

In their recent annual report, following words were used: "We are committed to providing you with the best water service and the highest quality water drinking water at the lowest possible cost."

"Idle commitments"

We need good clean water, not some fancy words and idle commitments.

Also the report stated: "The water delivered to our homes meets or surpasses every health and safety measure required by EPA, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Pima County."

This is misleading-if they had been honest they would have put every "primary" health and safety measure, letting us know that there were some secondary ones that they were ignoring-for those numbers are twice the recommended value (as you saw above).

Community Water "new" information on bottled vs. tap water states:

"We suggest that you take an empty water bottle or your favorite sports bottle, rinse it thoroughly and fill it with tap water. If you object to the chlorine taste, just keep the bottle in the refrigerator for at least 8 hours. The chlorine taste will dissipate." This is misleading because it does not compare the known contaminants in our water with the bottled drinking water whereas, the former manager, all board members and engineer have reverse osmosis systems in their homes for drinking water.

The Press Section of their Web site does not contain any of the articles concerning Community Water Co. water quality that have appeared in the local Green Valley News.

Michael Weber, former manager, wrote a rebuttal to an editorial in the Green Valley News in April 2001.

Of course, the original letter which sensibly stated that the groundwater needed to be tested, was not even posted. Instead, Michael gave some inane soft-soap, and never addressed the problem that he knew existed.

I believe this is a serious situation. If you have friends and neighbors in this area who do not read the newspaper, please inform them.

If there are elderly who can not easily get bottled water, we will have to get together to help them out, perhaps through the coordination with one of the volunteer groups.

If you are not sure about your water, call the Community Water Co. and ask them if you are in the area serviced by Wells 7 or 8.

I know that the mine officials make claims that the mine was here first. Surely, Fairfield, et al, got this land so cheap they were laughing all the way to the bank. (It would be interesting to know what the mine paid for their acreage.)

But the Aquifer was here first. It is a wonderful resource in this hot dry area. I believe that no one has the right to ruin our quality of life by polluting our community drinking water and air and eventually lower our property values.

What can we do? Together we can make demands.

A Department of Environmental Quality official told me that is the only way to get any results. If you are interested in helping with a coalition to protect the Santa Cruz Aquifer from further pollution, please contact me at nanfree24@hotmail.com

Green Valley resident Nancy Freeman is a technical writer and editor who has worked for NASA in Clear Lake City, Texas and for the Stanford Research Institute in Menlo Park, Calif. She has also published and edited an alternative health newspaper, among many other projects. The opinions expressed above are the writer's own and do not necessarily reflect those of this newspaper.