It seems that E. coli bacteria, associated with gastro-intestinal symptoms, were responsible for numerous residents falling ill in the neighbourhood of St Michaels in Brackenfell three weeks ago.
The City recently disclosed that E. coli bacteria were indeed found in Brackenfell drinking water, but denied that sewage was the source. The City also shrugged liability saying the supply of water does not constitute an undertaking to maintain a specific standard of water quality.
“The sample taken from the domestic tap of the original complainant’s household contained high counts of total coliforms and Escherichia coli (E. coli),” the City’s Mayco member for health, Siyabulela Mamkeli, confirmed.
“The pipe bursts in the St Michaels area necessitated flow reversals in the system and, as a result of these reversals, poor quality water from stagnant sections of the pipeline was drawn into the supply lines,” she said.
“E. coli bacteria are removed during the treatment process, however under certain conditions, such as in an isolated section of pipeline, or due to flow reversals stirring up sediment inside the pipes, bacterial regrowth can occur.”
Since this bacteria are mostly found in the intestines of people and animals, Mamkeli conceded that the presence of E. coli could point towards sewage contamination, but for the presence of sewage to be confirmed, ammonia should also be present in the samples at levels above 10mg/l.
“In this case, ammonia levels were negligible, thus ruling out sewage contamination,” she stated.
According to her the presence of E. coli could be attributed to other sources associated with microbial water quality in piped distribution systems other than the municipal water supply, such as contamination introduced into domestic plumbing and exposure of polypropylene pipes to sunlight.
“Polypropylene pipes are not recommended for domestic use, as they tend to facilitate bacterial and algal regrowth, especially when exposed to sunlight,” she said.
She added that most E. coli are harmless and are actually an important part of a healthy human intestinal tract.
“However, some E. coli are pathogenic, meaning they can cause illness. As such, the presence of E. coli does not necessarily guarantee that illness will follow.”
After the initial pipe bursts during the last week of November, the City flushed the system and introduced additional chlorine.
“A subsequent test of the complainant’s domestic water and at the field testing points showed significant reduction of total coliforms, which do not pose a risk, and no E. coli.”
Dozens of people in St Michaels fell ill with diarrhoea-type symptoms directly after the pipe bursts, many of whom demanded from the City disclosure of the results found from the health department.
“We want to know the results found from the health department. We need exact bacteria names or whatever it may be as well as the health risks associated with it,” one resident told TygerBurger after the City avoided her questions. Along with several other residents, they posed these questions to the City a few weeks ago but at the time of writing haven’t received any answer.
“It’s like we have been poisoned but unable to inform our doctor what poison was consumed.”
Another issue many other readers brought up was that of reparation.
According to them they had to foot big medical bills of which the City should be held liable for.
To this Mamkela stated the following:
“While the City has a constitutional obligation to provide potable water and does so to the best of its ability, in terms of section 24 of the City’s Water Bylaw, the supply of water does not constitute an undertaking to maintain a specific standard of water quality.”
She added that should any members of the public wish to make claims against the City relating to water quality, the City will respond to these on individual merits.
However, the Consumer Protection Act does hold bigger municipalities liable for goods and services provided.
Advocate Neville Mellville, Ombudsman for Consumer Goods and Services, says although small municipalities have been exempted from this act, big metros like Cape Town can potentially be held liable.
“In terms of section 61 of this act a service provider, in this case the City of Cape Town, can be held liable on a no-fault basis if a service or product they provide, in this case water, causes harm or illness,” Mellville told TygerBurger today (19 December).
“The difficulty would lie therein to prove that it was the drinking water that caused the illness,” he said.
He advised residents to approach the office of the City Ombudsman on the matter.
The ombudsman investigates and facilitates the resolution of public complaints against the administration.
In a case last year, the Gauteng High Court held that parastatal Eskom was “100% liable” to the plaintiff in terms of section 61 of the Consumer Protection Act. The plaintiff had been riding a bicycle and inadvertently came into contact with a low hanging live power line spanning a footpath, resulting in serious burns.
This section states that “… the producer or importer, distributor or retailer of any goods is liable for any harm … caused wholly or partly as a consequence of supplying any unsafe goods …”.
