Exxon Mobil spokeswoman Prem Nair said the company would not settle any of the MTBE cases.
"These cases are without merit, and the plaintiffs have not suffered any physical damage, and we will defend this vigorously," she said, adding Sher's charges were "totally inaccurate."
Oil company representatives argued that the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act forced them to use MTBE because there were insufficient supplies of alternatives.
But Sher alleges the companies used the chemical because it was cheaper and that they could have taken more measures to keep MTBE from leaking or seeping out of gas station tanks and pipes.
It was not immediately clear how much of the settlement money would go to water providers to help cover costs of installing costly filters to scrub out MTBE, and how much will be paid to attorneys.
Several other California counties and communities have won large settlements from the fuel additives' producers, including a $69-million award in South Lake Tahoe, and a $120-million settlement in Santa Monica.
After those settlements, oil industry representatives sought blanket protection from Congress against MTBE lawsuits by having a measure tucked into a massive energy bill proposed by the House of Representatives.
It ultimately was removed from the law.
--
janet.wilson@latimes.com
