A new class-action lawsuit has been filed against the town of Denmark, SC. It alleges that the town has been adding a chemical called HaloSan to its water supply without any approval. The suit seeks an undisclosed amount of damages for its residents. However, the amount of damage isn’t as high as some critics claim. The company itself has denied any wrongdoing.
- 1 A lawsuit has been filed on behalf of Denmark, South Carolina, a town of only 3,000 residents.
A lawsuit has been filed on behalf of Denmark, South Carolina, a town of only 3,000 residents.
The city injected the chemical, HaloSan, into the municipal well for more than 10 years. Although the chemical wasn’t approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency to disinfect drinking water, town officials continued to use it. In other words, they weren’t informed of the dangers and used it for more than 10 years even though the state had not approved it for use.
The state of South Carolina has approved the use of HaloSan as a water disinfectant, but the United States Environmental Protection Agency hasn’t approved it as a water sanitizer. This chemical is commonly used in swimming pools and spas and is widely used in these establishments. The plaintiffs, who claim the town knew of a 2007 EPA study that found that the chemical was causing skin irritations and allergic reactions, sued. The EPA is currently conducting further tests to approve HaloSan as a safe and effective water sanitizer.
A class-action lawsuit filed by attorneys in the city of Denmark, South Carolina, on behalf of its residents, claims that the town should not have allowed the use of HaloSan in the drinking water. The chemical is commonly used in spas and swimming pools and is not approved for use as a disinfectant in drinking water. Despite the EPA’s approval, there are still many questions that remain. There is also a need for more research on this chemical before it is deemed safe for use in residential areas.
The lawsuit against the city of Denmark, South Carolina, was filed by former state representative Bakari Sellers, a resident of the town of about 3,000 people. During the past decade, the town has used HaloSan in its municipal well to prevent the growth of iron slime in the city’s water. According to the EPA, however, the chemical is not approved for use in drinking-water supplies.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a former state representative.
The plaintiff’s lawsuit was filed against the city of Denmark, South Carolina, which uses the chemical HaloSan to disinfect its water supply. Nevertheless, the lawsuit says that the state’s health department was unaware of the study, which showed that HaloSan was not approved for use in drinking water. A federal investigation is necessary to determine whether the chemical has been inadvertently injected into the water system.
The lawsuit was filed against the city of Denmark, South Carolina, which uses HaloSan as a disinfectant for its water. The state’s health department has stopped this chemical from being injected into the water supply. The EPA’s approval of HaloSan is required for it to be used as a safe water sanitizer. But the state has not yet done so. Consequently, the lawsuit filed against the town of Denmark alleges that the state has not been following the law.
The plaintiffs say that the chemical was injected without the proper approval from the EPA and state, and the state must pay damages to the residents. If the town was aware of the study, it would have stopped using the chemical in the water supply.
The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control has approved the use of HaloSan as a water sanitizer but has not approved it as a safe sanitizer. The chemical is used in swimming pools and spas and is marketed to reduce the risk of skin irritation and other problems. In Denmark, the chemical is injected into the water to kill the iron bacteria in the water. The state’s water company has denied the allegations.