A Santa Clarita Valley legislator questioned state officials on the safety of the deep well injection plan Monday, in response to residents’ concerns about property value and seismic activity.

“These are questions that are floating out in the community, and they ought to be addressed,” said Assemblyman Scott Wilk, R-Santa Clarita. “And we need to be fully armed with the facts, whether it’s on the wells or a different alternative.”

Dozens of Westsiders have been protesting a chloride solution approved by Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District officials about 18 months ago — a series of well sites for excess brine to be pumped into after it’s removed from water sent downstream — after the plan was moved to their backyard more than a month ago.

After Sanitation District staff incorrectly identified a well site in an environmental report as a viable site, officials moved the site to near the 16th hole of the Valencia TPC golf course in Westridge, sparking the outcry.

The result was for the Sanitation District board — led by Santa Clarita Mayor Marsha McLean, Councilwoman Laurene Weste and Supervisor Michael Antonovich — to direct staff to “start over” on the search for a well site.

“The board clearly directed us to go identify a different site,” said Ray Tremblay, Sanitation District spokesman, “so we absolutely are not using the Stevenson Ranch or Westridge sites at all. They’ve directed us to go find a new place to go and implement the project.”

“We have to start over and find a different site, so it puts us back to square one on that part of the project,” Tremblay said. “We’re still making great progress on implementing the treatment part of the plan.”

Sanitation District staff now has “to start over and re-evaluate (the plans) with a clean slate,” Tremblay said, adding staff also is seeking to determine if another well site is even feasible.

However, Wilk’s letter to the California Earthquake Authority asks officials to address some questions regarding implications the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District’s decision to use the deep well injection method, he said, pertaining to real estate values, earthquake insurance and any correlation to seismic activity.

The letter calls into question several concerns Westside residents have expressed about the plan, namely would the existence of wells indemnify insurance agencies from paying out for earthquake damage, as some have claimed to officials.

Wilk wouldn’t comment on whether the well plan is feasible, but he said there are concerns from his constituents that need to be addressed before any plan progresses.

Below is the letter in its entirety:

“Dear Mr. Pomeroy,

The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (SCVSD) is being compelled by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Board to reduce the level of chloride it discharges into the Santa Clara River.

The Sanitation District has chosen a process of extracting the excess chloride and then “storing” that brine through deep well injection (DWI).

My constituents have questions about the implications DWI might have on real estate values, earthquake insurance, and the incidence of seismic activity generally.

On the CEA website, the sample homeowners policy under the “Definitions” section (Item 18), states, “Tectonic processes – means natural adjustments of the earth’s crust that are wholly in response to regional stress conditions caused by natural dynamic forces within the earth’s interior, and not initiated, in whole or in any part, by any human activity.”

Accordingly, I would appreciate answers to the following questions:

1. Considering the “tectonic processes only” definition regarding coverage of damages, what constitutes “human activity” and how do insurers determine “whole or in any part”?
2. Is the presence of deep well injection activities in a seismic event’s area currently considered to constitute an exclusion from coverage based on the definition of “Tectonic processes”. If so, at what distance from any seismic event is DWI no longer considered to have initiated “in any part”?
3. If the CEA is aware of a deep well injection site near a homeowner who is applying for earthquake insurance, does that fact either defeat issuance of the policy or change the premium charged?
4. Does the CEA have specific experience that they can cite relative to the questions above with other California communities where DWI is taking place?

I thank you in advance for your efforts to answer these questions. You can reach me directly at (916) 319-2038 if you have any additional questions for me.

Sincerely,

Assemblyman Scott Wilk

38th Assembly District”

The 38th Assembly District encompasses Simi Valley, the northwestern section of the San Fernando Valley and most of the Santa Clarita Valley.