Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Chloramine topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident testimony urges medical study of chloramine; commission to compile national and international science

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission · September 12, 2006
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During public comment a resident described alleged skin and infant health problems after San Francisco's switch to chloramine and urged the commission to prioritize empirical studies and medical protocols; commissioners reiterated staff will compile national and international research before considering action.

At the start of the meeting the commission took public comment on non-agenda items. A resident who was identified in the record as "Mister Gubbertson" described personal and family health issues he associated with San Francisco's conversion from chlorine to chloramine, including skin rashes, a newborn's cardiology tests and references to studies he named ("SH Swan, the Betts lay review, and the Wall Report"). He asked the commission to prioritize citizens' health over infrastructure and urged development of medical protocols for providers treating people exposed to chloramine.

Commissioners responded that they had already requested staff and the general manager to compile all available national and international scientific information on chloramine use and report back. The commission's chair said the agency would not act on anecdotal evidence alone but expressed sympathy for people reporting health effects and reiterated staff would return with the compiled material in a timely manner.

A commissioner also asked that correspondence received from the "Citizens Concern for Chloramine" continue to receive timely status responses. Staff said some letters had already been answered and that staff would respond further when the compiled analysis is ready.

No policy action was taken during the meeting; commissioners confined the response to requesting a staff review of the scientific literature and to keeping the item on the commission's radar for future consideration.