The PEX EIR found that methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) and tert-Butyl alcohol can leach from PEX in amounts that exceed taste, odor and health guidelines set by the State of California for drinking water. The PEX EIR found that PEX pipes can initially leach as much as 290 ppb of MTBE.
The PEX EIR also found that PEX can leach ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), a chemical in the same family as MTBE, in amounts exceeding 100 ppb. An expert toxicologist report commissioned as part of the PEX EIR found that the leaching of ETBE from PEX pipe could contribute to taste and odor impacts, and could potentially lead to adverse health effects.
The PEX EIR found that PEX pipe is susceptible to permeation by outside contaminants such as pesticides, oil, gasoline, benzene and termiticides.
Numerous studies and articles submitted to the State of California comparing potable water pipe materials, including variants of PEX, polybutylene, polypropylene, CPVC, copper and steel, have found that PEX displayed the strongest biofilm formation and the strongest initial promotion of the growth of Legionella bacteria.
According to Lubrizol Advanced Materials, Inc., polybutylene pipe passed ASTM F2023 and still failed miserably in U.S. water conditions.
In 2002, the Plastic Pipe and Fittings Association (PPFA) filed an unsuccessful lawsuit arguing that review of PEX pipe under CEQA was unlawful. The Court of Appeal denied the PPFA claim and held that substantial evidence of potential drinking water contamination through chemical leaching and permeation, as well as evidence of mechanical performance problems and failures, required that PEX pipe undergo CEQA review prior to state approval.
Shell was sued across the nation, as well as in San Diego, where class-action lawsuits were filed on behalf of 60,000 homeowners with failing PB pipe. Shell withdrew the product from the marketplace and stopped all manufacture of the pipe. It is estimated that more than one million American homes may eventually suffer problems with PB failures.
Shell ultimately agreed to a one billion dollar settlement of the claims. Furthermore, Leonardini won a five million dollar judgment against Shell for malicious prosecution of the trade libel claim. According to the Court of Appeal decision, “Shell's policy was that if the state did not discover any health problems with the system on its own and did not specifically ask for that information, Shell would not volunteer it.” (Leonardini v. Shell Oil Co. (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 547.)