The URL can be used to link to this page

SR 09-13-2016 9A Ci ty Council Report City Council Meeting : September 13, 2016 Agenda Item: 9.A 1 of 4 To: Mayor and City Council From: Susan Cline, Director , Public Works, Water Resources Subject: Hold a Public Hearing on Report on Water Quality and Public Health Goals Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council h old a public hearing ; rece ive public comments on the City of Santa Monica Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals ; and accept the report. Executive Summary Provisions of the California Health and Safety Cod e section 116470 require public water systems serving more than 10,000 customers to prepare a report every three years that includes information on the detection of any elements the water at levels above Public Health Goals (PHG ’s) or the equivalent Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG ’s). PHGs are adopted by th e State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and MCLGs are set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A public hearing is required to accept and receive public comments on the report. Staff has prepared the attached repor t (Attachment A) to provide information on the quality of its drinking water supply relative to adopted Public Health Goals and Maximum Contaminant Level Goals. Background The re is strong public interest and concern about the safety of drinking water nat ionally and here in California. Sophisticated testing can now trace infinitesimal traces of potentially hazardous elements in water sources. The California legislature has established the concept of a Public Health Goal (PHG). PHGs are established by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). A PHG is a health risk assessment, not a proposed drinking water standard. It is the level of a contaminant in drinking water, which is conside red not to pose a significant risk to health if consumed for a lifetime. This determination is made without regard to cost or treatability. The State Water Resource 2 of 4 Control Board (SWRCB)/Division of Drinking Water (DDW), formerly the California Departmen t of Public Health, uses PHGs in the evaluation of health -related drinking water standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). The Division of Drinking Water uses Public Health Goals to identify Maximum Contaminant Levels that are to be reviewed for possible revision or when setting new Maximum Contaminant Levels for unregulated chemicals. California State Water Code section 116470 require s that large water utilities (more than 10,000 service connections) prepare a special report every three years if their water quality measurements have exceeded any PHGs in the three previous calendar years. The current report covers years 2013, 2014, and 2015. The law also requires that where OEHHA has not adopted a PHG for a contaminant, the water suppliers ar e to use the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs, but are not identical. Only contaminants w hich have a California primary drinking water sta ndard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed in this report. Discussion In June 2016 , the City of Santa Monica sent out its Annual Water Quality Report, which is available online at http://www.smgov.net/departments/publicworks/water.aspx . Along with information regarding important current water issues, the annual report includes information required by the Federal and State Governments to illustrate how t he quality of the water at the consumer’s tap compares against established water quality standards. These water quality standards are established by Federal and state regulations as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL ’s) and Notification Levels (NL ’s). MCLs are the highest level of a contaminant allowed in drinking water, and NLs are the concentrations of a contaminant which, if exceeded, trigger treatment or other requirements that public water systems must follow. Consistently, Santa Monica’s water is show n to be in full compliance (below all regulated MCLs and NLs) with all Federal and State regulatory water quality standards. Furthermore, recent reports prepared by the City of Santa Monica address the City’s ongoing efforts to maintain a safe and reliable water supply, including the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan 3 of 4 (http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Public_Works/Water/2015_UWMP_ Final_June_2016.pdf ), and the February 201 6 information item addressing Santa Monica’s control of lead in drinking water (http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/Public_Works/Water/Lead_in_Drinki ng_Water_20160222.pdf ). The attached report (Attachment A) has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the State Health and Safety Code. For the period from 2013 to 2015 in Santa Monica, Public H ealth G oals were exceeded for seven unique elements : Lead, Copper, Arsenic, Uranium, Radionuclides, Bromate, and Chromium VI . Further details about each of these element’s characteristics, health risks, and treatment technologies are presented in the full Public Health Goals Report . Although these elements exceed Public Health Goals, Santa Monica’s drinking water meets all State and Federal drinking water standards. S ubstances in the City’s water supply are below the applicable MCLs required by these regulatory agencies and no additional actions are recommended for the treatment of the City’s potable water supply a t this time . As both treatment technology and health risk assessments evolve, standards for these elements may be altered in the future, but Santa Monica continues to meet or exceed the state of the art levels of water purity. Copies of the report are a vailable for public review at the City Clerk’s office, Water Resources Division office s , the Main Library, and online at http://www.smgov.net/departments/publicworks/water.aspx . A public notice advising of the availability of the report was published in t he Santa Monica Daily Press on August 30, 2016 and September 6, 2016 . Environmental Analysis The City of Santa Monica Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals is categorically exempt from the California Water Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 8 exemption (Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines), actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment. 4 of 4 Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended a ctions. Meeting all the new Public Health Goals for all elements is beyond the current limits of financial feasibility for Santa Monica water customers. Prepared By: Gil Borboa, Water Resources Manager Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. PHG Report 2016 Draft 6 -30 -16 with Exhibits A -F Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 1 CITY OF SANTA MONICA REPORT ON WATER QUALITY RELATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS June 2016 BACKGROUND The California legislature has established the concept of a Public Health Goal (PHG). PHGs are established by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). A PHG is a health risk assessment, not a proposed drinking water standard. It is the level of a contaminant in drinking water, which is considered not to po se a significant risk to health if consumed for a lifetime. This determination is made without regard to cost or treatability. The State Water Resource Control Board (SW RCB)/Division of Drinking Water (DDW), formerly the California Department of Public Health, uses PHGs in the evaluation of health-related drinking water standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). DDW uses PHGs to identify MCLs t hat are to be reviewed for possible revision or when setting new MCLs for unregulated chemicals. Provisions of the California Health and Sa fety Code Section 116470(b) (Exhibit A) require that large water utilities (>10,000 se rvice connections) prepare a special report by July 1, 2016 if their water quality meas urements have exceeded any PHGs in the three previous calendar y ears. The law also require s that where OEHHA has not adopted a PHG for a contaminant, the wate r suppliers are to use the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). MC LGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs, but are not identical. Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been se t are to be addressed in this report. Exhibit B is a list of all regulated cons tituents with MCLs and PHGs or MCLGs. There are a few constituents that are rout inely detected in water systems at levels usually well below the drinking water standar ds for which no PHG nor MCLG have yet been adopted by OEHHA or USEPA. These include total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) among others. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 2 This report provides the following informati on as specified in the Health and Safety Code (Exhibit A) for each consti tuent detected in the City of Santa Monica’s (City) water supply in 2013, 2014, and 2015 at a level e xceeding an applicable PHG or MCLG: • Numerical public health risk associated with the MCL and the PHG or MCLG (Exhibit C). • Category or type of risk to health t hat could be associated with each constituent. • Best Available Treatment Technolog y that could be used to reduce the constituent level. • Estimate of the cost to install that treatment if it is appropriate and feasible. WHAT ARE PHGs? • PHGs are set by the Califo rnia Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) which is part of Cal/EPA. • PHGs are based solely on public health risk considerations. None of the risk- management factors that are considered by DDW in setting drinking water standards are considered in setting the PHGs. T hese factors include analytical detection capabilities, treatment technology available, benef its and costs. • PHGs are not enforceable and are not requ ired to be met by any public water system. MCLGs are federal equivalent to PHGs and are set by the USEPA. WATER QUALITY DATA CONSIDERED All of the water quality data collected for Santa Monica’s water system between 2013 and 2015 for purposes of determining compli ance with drinking water standards were considered. This information was summariz ed in tables included in the Annual Water Quality Reports made available to all Santa Monica customers, residents, and businesses in June 2014, June 2015 and June 2016 (Exhibit D). Most of the constituents tested in the wate r were reported as Not Detected (ND) and are not generally listed in the Annua l Water Quality Reports. W hen a constituent is reported as ND, it generally means that the laboratory did not detect the compound, but it could also mean that it was detect ed at a level less than California’s Detection Level for purposes of Reporting (DLR). GUIDELINES FOLLOWED The Association of California Water A gencies (ACWA) formed a workgroup, which prepared guidelines for water utilities to us e in preparing the PHG reports. These guidelines were used in the preparation of this report. No general guidelines are Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 3 available from the state regulatory agencies. ACWA’s workgroup also prepared guidelines for water utilities to use in estima ting the costs to reduce a constituent to the MCL. Exhibit E provides cost estimates for the best treatment technologies that are available today. BEST AVAILABLE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY AND COST ESTIMATES Both the USEPA and DDW have adopted what are known as Best Available Technologies (BATs), which are the best known methods of reducing contaminant levels. Capital construction and operati on and maintenance (O&M) costs can be estimated for such technologies. Howe ver, since many PHGs and MCLGs are set much lower than the MCL, it is not always possible or feasible to determine what treatment is needed to further reduce a constit uent down to or near the PHG or MCLG. For example, USEPA sets the MCLG for potential cancer-c ausing chemicals at zero. Estimating the costs to reduce a constituent to zero is difficult, if not impossible, because it is not possible to verify by analyt ical means that the level has been lowered to zero. In some ca ses, installing treatment to try and further reduce very low levels of one constituent may have adverse effect s on other aspects of water quality. CONSTITUENTS DETECTED THAT EXCEED A PHG OR A MCLG The following is a discussion of constituents t hat were detected in one or more of the City’s drinking water sources at levels ex ceeding the PHG, or if no PHG exists, above the MCLG. For some constituents su ch as Total Coliform Bacteria and Trichloroethylene, no detections above the MCLG or PHG occurred during the period covered by this report, but have appeared in previous PHG reports and are discussed again for comparison purposes. Santa Monica consistently delivers safe water at the lowest possible cost to its customers usi ng multiple treatment methods approved by DDW. Constituents that were detected in one or more drinking water sources at levels above the MCLs are reduced to acceptable le vels. The health risk information for regulated constituents with MCLs, PHGs or MCLGs is provided in Exhibit C.  Total Coliform Bacteria Total coliform bacteria are measured at approx imately 100 sites around the City. No more than 5% of all samples collected in a month can be positive for total coliforms. This defines the MCL. Alt hough there is no PHG for total co liform bacteria, the MCLG is zero positive samples. The reason for the total coliform drinking water standard is to minimize the possibility of the water cont aining pathogens, which are organisms that cause waterborne disease. Because total co liform analysis is only a surrogate indicator of the potential presence of pathogens, it is not possible to state a specific numerical health risk. While USEPA normally sets MCLGs “at a level where no known or Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 4 anticipated adverse effects on per sons would occur”, EPA indicates that it cannot do so with total coliforms. Nevertheless, without th e ability to determine a specific numerical risk, the MCLG has been set at ze ro for total coliform bacteria. Coliform bacteria are a group of indicator or ganisms that are ubiquitous in nature and are not generally considered harmful. They are used because of the ease in monitoring and analysis. If a positive sample is found, it indicates a potential problem that needs to be investigated with follow-up sampling. It is not at all unusual for a system to have an occasional positive sample. In Santa Moni ca, about 80 of the sites where samples are taken for total coliform bacteri a are taps, typically hose bibbs, on private residences or businesses. Many of these taps are exposed to the environment and while they provide a satisfactory sample point most of the ti me, occasionally the tap itself may become exposed to bacteria from the environment, e.g. overgrown plants, pets and humans. When samples are drawn from these exposed taps , they test positive on rare occasion. During the period covered by this repor t, the City collected between 119 and 142 samples each month for total coliform analysi s. No samples were found to be positive for total coliform bacteria fo r calendar years 2013 - 2015. In an effort to reduce the potential for posit ive results due to taps exposed to the open environment, the Water Resources Division (Div ision) has a program to prioritize the sites and install more dedicated sampling stations. The dedicated samplers are enclosed in a lockable box an d are protected from the en vironment. Two new boxes were installed during the period covered by th is report with plans to complete more in the future in conjunction with the Divis ion’s main line replacement program. The Division already maintains an effe ctive cross connection control program, a disinfectant residual throughout the system, an effective monitoring and surveillance program, and positive pressure in all parts of the distribution system. The Division has already taken all of the steps described by the DDW as Best Available Technology (BAT) for Coliform Bacteria in Section 6447, Ti tle 22, CCR. Since it is unlikely that any change to the treatment proce ss at the Arcadia Water Treat ment Plant would prevent the occasional positive test result at the distribution sampling site s, staff recommends no change to the existing treatment.  Trichloroethylene (TCE) The PHG for trichloroethylene (TCE) is 0.0017 milligrams per liter (mg /l). The MCL for TCE is 0.005 mg/l. The level of TCE in the City’s groundwat er and supplemental supplies was below the MCL and PHG at all ti mes during the period of this report. Trichloroethylene is a volatile organic compo und (VOC). It is a manmade solvent used since the 40's and 50's as a degreaser, parts cleaner , and in other industries. In the last several decades, TCE has shown up increasingl y in groundwater s upplies in Southern California and elsewhere. TCE was discover ed at low levels in several of the City’s Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 5 wells located along or near Olympic Boulevar d in 1980. Initially the TCE from the Olympic Wells was diluted in the mixture wit h other, uncontaminated wells. As the TCE levels increased over time, several wells had to be turned off until treatment to remove the TCE could be installed. In 1992, the Division completed an expansion and upgrade to the Arcadia Treatment Plant that included mechanical aerat ion to remove TCE in the combined well flow to a level below the MC L of 0.005 mg/l. The contaminated Olympic Wells were placed back in service and we re blended and treated in this way until December 2010 when the City’s new Revers e Osmosis (RO) softening plant was commissioned. The new plant includes a decarbonator unit that now provides additional removal of TCE. The level of TCE in the water produced by the Arcadia Treatment Plant ranged from ND to 0.0007 mg/l for the period covered in th is report. The annual average TCE produced at the treatment plant was 0.0005 mg/l in 2015 and ND for 2013 and 2014. The category of health risk associated with TCE, and the reason that a drinking water standard was adopted for it, is that people w ho drink water containing TCE above the MCL for many years could experience an increased risk of getting cancer. DDW says that “Drinking water which meets this st andard (the MCL) is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe with respect to TCE.” This language is taken from the California Code of Regulati ons (CCR), Title 22, Section 64468.2. The numerical health risk of ingesting drin king water with TCE above the PHG is 1X10 -6 , or one additional theoretical cancer case in one million people drinking two liters of water a day for 70 years. The health risk of i ngesting water with TCE above the MCL is six additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people. The Best Available Technology (BAT) for TC E to lower the concentration below the MCL is either adsorption using liquid phase Granular Activat ed Carbon (GAC) or Packed Tower Aeration (PTA). However, bec ause the new RO softening plant includes a decarbonator system that is very similar to PTA, the level of TCE is now consistently and reliably below the PHG for TCE. Theref ore, no recommendation for further action is advised.  Lead and Copper There are no MCLs for lead or copper. Lead and copper are not present in our water sources, but can leach into drinking wate r through the resident’s plumbing systems and faucets. Instead of MCLs, ev ery three years a set of special samples is collected and the results evaluated to determine whether the City’s water system has achieved “optimized corrosion control”. The samples collect ed are first-draw at t he tap of thirty or more homes identified as high-risk (new plum bing installed with lead solder before it was banned). To meet drinking water st andards, the 90th percentile reading (meaning 90% of the samples were lower) of all sa mples collected by the City from these household taps cannot exceed an Action Level (AL) of 0.015 mg/l for lead and 1.3 mg/l for copper. The PHG for lead is 0.0002 mg/l and the PHG for copper is 0.3 mg/l. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 6 The last round of testing for lead and copper was conducted by the Water Resources Division in 2013 (next round is summer 2016). The 90 th percentile reading for lead in the last round was 0.0028 mg/l and was 0.13 mg /l for copper. These are below the Action Levels, which means t he City continued to meet wate r quality standards for lead and copper and was again considered to have “optimized corrosion control”. The value for copper was lower than the PHG, but t he level for lead was higher than its corresponding PHG. There are two categories of health risk associated with lead - chronic toxicity (neurobehavioral effects in child ren, hypertension in adults) and cancer. The numerical health risk of ingesting drinking water with lead above the PHG is 2X10 -6 , or two additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people drinking tw o liters of water a day for 70 years. As stated previously, the City’s water supply is considered to have “optimized corrosion control”. In general, optimizing corrosion c ontrol is considered to be BAT to address corrosion issues and any lead and copper fi ndings. The Division will continue to monitor water quality parameter s that relate to corrosivi ty such as pH, hardness, alkalinity and total dissolved solids and will ta ke action, if necessary to maintain our system in an “optimized corrosion control” condition. Since the City’s water supply continues to meet the “optimized corrosion control” requirements, it is not prudent to initiate additional corrosion contro l treatment until such time as changing conditions might warrant further action. Therefore, no estimate of cost has been included in this report and no recomm endations for further action are advised.  Arsenic The PHG for arsenic is 0.000004 mg/l. The MC L for arsenic is 0.01 mg/l. Arsenic is a naturally occurring metallic element found in water generally at low levels throughout California and elsewhere due to the erosion of mineral deposits. It can also enter water supplies from runoff from agricultural and indu strial sites. The MCL was lowered in 2006 due to increasing evidence of potential detrimental heal th effects even at low levels. The concern is that long-term exposur e to arsenic in drinking water may cause skin damage or problems with circulat ory systems, and may cause cancer. Arsenic was below the MCL in all of the Cit y’s water sources at all times during the period covered in this report, however se veral sources exceeded the PHG during 2014 and 2015. Arsenic readings for all sources for the period covered by this report ranged from ND (Reporting Limit was 0.002 mg/l) to a high of 0.0033 mg/l in the water purchased from the Metropolit an Water District’s (MWD) Jensen Treatment Plant. The annual average for the Jensen s upply ranged from ND to 0.0033 mg/l for the period covered by this report and ND to 0.0021 mg/l for the Weymouth supply. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 7 Local groundwater supplies had annual averages for this period that ranged from ND (Reporting Limit was 0.0005 mg/l) to 0.001 mg/l for Santa Monica Well #1. No detection of arsenic was found in water coming from the Arcadia Treatment Plant and the annual average for arsenic in water produced by the treatment plant was ND for calendar years 2013 - 2015. The category of health risk associated wit h arsenic is that people who drink water containing arsenic above the MCL for m any years could exper ience an increased cancer risk. The numerical health risk of i ngesting drinking water with arsenic above the PHG is 1X10 -6 , or one additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people drinking two liters of water a day for 70 years. There are two BATs designated for arsenic removal, Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis (RO). As previously stated, t he City’s RO softening plant was commissioned in December 2010 and as expected, is achievi ng reduction of arsenic to below the level it can be measured. Please note that BAT s are designed for treatment to achieve compliance with the corresponding MCL only, and not PHGs. It is unlikely that arsenic will be removed to a level lower than the very low PHG for arsenic. In any case, that level is lower than laboratory tests can det ect, so it would be impossible to confirm whether water coming from t he Arcadia Treatment Plant, or any given water supply, actually has arsenic lower than the PHG le vel because it cannot be measured at that level. It is not practical or feasible to estimate costs for the reduction of arsenic from the supplemental water the City purchases from MWD or Santa Monica Well #1, so no such determination will be attempted here and no recommendations for further action are advised.  Uranium The PHG for uranium is 0.43 picoCuries per liter (pCi/l) and the MCL is 20 pCi/l. Uranium is a naturally occurring metallic el ement which is weakly radioactive and is ubiquitous in the earth’s crust. Uranium is found in ground and surface waters due to its natural occurrence in geological formations . The average uranium concentrations in surface and ground water are 1 and 2 pCi/l respec tively. The uranium intake from water is about equal to the total fr om other dietary components. Uranium was below the MCL for all water sour ces at all times during the period covered in this report, however all sources exceeded the PHG at least once during this period. Uranium readings for the period covered by this report ranged from 1.5 pCi/l to a high of 2.7 pCi/l in the water coming from the Arc adia Treatment Plant. Annual averages for the water coming from the plant ranged from 1.7 to 1.9 pCi/l for calendar years 2013 - 2015. Annual averages for the water coming from MWD’s Weymouth and Jensen supplies ranged from ND (Reporting Limit was 1 p Ci/l) to 3 pCi/l for the period covered by this report. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 8 The category for health risk associated with uranium is that people who drink water containing uranium above t he MCL for many years coul d experience an increased cancer risk. OEHHA has determined that th e numerical cancer risk for uranium above the PHG level is 1x10 -6 , or one additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people drinking two liters of water a day for 70 years. There are several BATs designated to lower uranium to below the MCL including RO. As previously stated, the City’s RO softening plant was commissioned in December 2010 and as expected, is achieving some reduction of uranium from the City’s groundwater supply. However, BATs are designed for treatm ent to achieve compliance with the corresponding MCL only, and not PHGs, so this addition of a BAT for uranium did not achieve reduction of uranium to bel ow the PHG. Further treatment to reduce uranium at the Arcadia Tr eatment Plant is neither practical, nor feasible. The City’s single well not treat ed by the Arcadia Treatment Plant is Santa Monica Well #1. The water for this well had a uranium leve l that ranged from ND (Reporting Limit is 0.7 pCi/l) to 0.8 pCi/l for the period cover ed by this report and so must be evaluated for treatment for removal of uranium to bel ow the PHG. Of the designated BATs for uranium, the most effective and economical approach would be to us e RO treatment at the well site. Based on 2015 flow rates and esti mated costs, this would be in the range of $332,000 per year not including the cost for waste (bri ne) disposal. However, this well is located in the center median of S an Vicente Blvd in a residential neighborhood where it would not be feasible to construct ev en a small treatment plant at the well site. Again, it is also unclear whether treatment to below t he PHG for uranium could be achieved using RO, as BATs are designed to achieve compliance only to the corresponding MCL. It should also be noted that this cost estimate may be imprecise as treatment costs can vary widely dependin g on the particulars of the situation. It is not practical or feasible to estimate costs for the reduction of uranium from the supplemental water the City purchases from MWD, so no such determination will be attempted here and no recommendations for further action are advised.  Other Radionuclides There are several radionuclides for which OEHHA has not set PHGs, but for which an MCLG has been designated by USEPA. The st andards are for radionuclides including: alpha emitters, beta/photon emitters, comb ined radium as well as the standard for uranium described above. In addition to these standards, USEPA has designated an MCLG of zero for each. The groundwater and supplemental water supplies for Santa Monica are below the MCLs for these consti tuents at all times during the period covered by this report, but the MCLGs of zero for some of these radi onuclides were exceeded at some sources at various times during this period. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 9 Radionuclides are radioactive elements that are found in nature or are man-made. They are unstable and emit particles or wave s of high energy from the nucleus or other parts of the atom. Th ere are three basic kinds of high-ener gy radiation: alpha, beta, and gamma (included in a broader group called photons ). Many radionuclides emit more than one kind of radiation, but are classified by their most important kind. The MCL for alpha emitters limits the level of “gross alpha” radiation other than what is contributed by uranium and radon. The MCL fo r beta/photon emitters limits t he level of radiation from a group of 179 man-made radioactive materials. The MCL for combined radium limits the radiation on two kinds (or “isotopes”) of radium: radium-226 and radium-228. These MCLs were adopted to address concern with the health effects from radiation inside the body after consuming the radionuclides as evidence suggests that long-term exposure to radionuclides in drinking water may cause cancer. The level of alpha emitters in the City’s groundwater and supplemental supplies was below the MCL of 15 pCi/l at all times durin g the period covered by this report, but exceeded the MCLG of zero in some moni toring data. Gross alpha readings for the period covered by this report ranged from ND (Reporting Limit was 2 pCi/l) for all supplies at various times to a high of 5 pCi/l in the water coming from MWD’s Jensen Plant in 2014. Annual averages ranged from ND for some of the suppl ies to 3 pCi/l for water coming from Jensen. The standard for beta/photon emitters does not apply to the City’s groundwater and as such, is not covered by this report. Howeve r, the supplemental wa ter the City receives from MWD met the MCL of 50 pCi/l for beta/photon emitters at all times, but exceeded the MCLG of zero in some monitoring data. Readings for beta/photon emitters for both MWD supplies for the period covered by th is report ranged from ND (Reporting Limit was 4 pCi/l) to a high of 6 pCi/l in the water coming from MWD’s Weymouth Treatment Plant reported for 2014. The annual averages ranged from ND to 5 pCi/l for the Jensen and Weymouth supplies respectively, for the period covered by this report. The level of combined radium in the Cit y’s groundwater and supplemental supplies was below the MCL of 5 pCi/l at all times duri ng the period covered by this report. No detections of combined radium were reporte d for the City’s supp lies or MWD imported water from Weymouth and Jensen plant. The BATs for these radionuclides are the same as for uranium. As previously stated, the City’s RO softening plant was commissi oned in December 2010 and as expected, is achieving some reduction of these other radionuclides from the City’s groundwater supply. As explained previously, BAT s are designed for treatment to achieve compliance with the corresponding MCL only, and not PHGs, so this addition of RO softening considered a BAT for these other r adionuclides did not achieve reduction to below the MCLGs in all cases. Further tr eatment to reduce othe r radionuclides at the Arcadia Treatment Plant is neither practica l, nor feasible. Likewise, the analysis for treatment of Santa Monica Well #1 and the MWD supplies is the same as for uranium and no recommendations for further action are advised. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 10  Bromate The PHG for bromate is 0.0001 mg/l. The MCL for bromate is 0.010 mg /l. Bromate is a disinfection byproduct (DBP) fo rmed when water containing naturally occurring bromide ion is ozonated. The MCL for bromate does not apply to single readings but is instead compared to a Running Annual Average (RAA). The MCL was adopted in 2002 to address conc ern with potential health effects as evidence suggests that long-term exposure to bromate in drinking water may cause cancer. The standard applies only to wate r treatment plants t hat apply ozone for disinfection or other purposes, and so does not apply to the City’s groundwater. However, the supplemental water the City receives from MWD’s Jensen Treatment Plant is ozonated and met the RAA MCL for br omate of 0.010 mg/l at all times, but exceeded the PHG for the period covered by this report. The Jensen Treatment Plant was retrofitt ed with ozone in 2005 as part of MWD’s plan to implement ozonation at all six of their treatment plants. T he purpose of the retrofit is to insure compliance with new requirements for disinfection of surface waters and new DBP regulations, as well as an improvement in the plants’ ability to handle taste and odor episodes resulting from periodic algal blooms in MWD’s source reservoirs. As expected, the switch to ozone at the Jensen Treatment Plant result ed in reductions of total trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids, wh ich are classes of DBPs that are also regulated. However, bromat e itself is a DBP and the formation of which is a consequence of the switch in disinfectant. Bromate readings for the Jensen Treatment Plant for the period covered by this r eport ranged from ND (Repor ting Level is 0.001 mg/l) to 0.013 mg/l. The highest RAA was 0.008 mg/l for 2015 and demonstrated compliance with the MCL as did all other RAAs for 2013 and 2014. The category for health risk associated wit h bromate is that people who drink water containing bromate above the MCL for many years could experience an increased risk of getting cancer. OEHHA has determined that the numerical cancer risk for bromate above the PHG level is 1x10 -6 , or one additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people drinking two liters of water a day for 70 years. The BAT to reduce bromate is control of the ozone treatment process to reduce production of this DBP. As such, this is a process that is under the control and jurisdiction of MWD, is already being conduc ted and will not be addressed further in this report.  Hexavalent Chromium (Chromium VI) A PHG for chromium VI was set at 0.00002 mg/L in July 2011. The MCL for chromium VI was set at 0.01 mg/l in July 2014. The total chromium MCL of 0.05mg/l was established in 1977 to address the non-cancer toxic effect of chromium VI. Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 11 Chromium is an odorless and tasteless metallic element. It is found naturally in rocks, plants and can also be produced by industrial processes. The most common types of chromium found in natural waters in the env ironment are chromium III and chromium VI. Total chromium is the sum of chromium III and chromium VI. Chromium III and chromium VI are covered t ogether under the total chromi um MCL because these forms of chromium can convert back and fo rth in water depending on environmental conditions. Chromium III is an essential human dietary element and naturally occurs in many vegetables, fruits, grains and yeast. Chromi um VI also occurs naturally in the environment from the erosion of natural chromium deposits from rocks and can also be released in the environment fr om industrial processes via storage leaks, discharges and improper disposal practices. Total chromium and chromium VI were below the MCL in all of the City’s groundwater sources at all times, but ex ceeded the PHG for chromium VI at least once during the period covered in this report. Suppl emental water from the Jensen and Weymouth Treatment Plants had no detection of chromium or chro mium VI during this reporting period. Water coming from the Arcadia Water Treatm ent Plant had chromium VI levels that ranged from ND (Reporting Limit is 0.00002 mg /l) to 0.0002 mg/l for the Arcadia Treatment Plant. The City’s single well not treat ed by the Arcadia Treatment Plant is Santa Monica Well #1, which had levels for this peri od ranging from 0.0015 to 0.0016mg/l. Chromium VI is known to be a potent carc inogen when inhaled. It was found to also cause cancer in laboratory mice and ra ts when exposed through drinking water. OEHHA has determined that the numerical cancer risk for chromium VI above the PHG level is 1x10 -6 , or one additional theoretical cancer cases in one million people drinking two liters of water a day for 70 years. The recommended technologies for Chromium VI removal are weak base anion exchange resin or reduction-co agulation-filtration technology. Weak base anion exchange is considered the more cost-effectiv e of these two technologies. However, neither is capable of reducing chromium VI to below 0.001 mg/l. The City’s new RO softening plant is already achieving a great er reduction of chromium VI than these alternate technologies. It is unlikely that any tec hnology will be developed that c an reduce chromium VI to below the very low PHG. In any case, that level is lower than laboratory tests can detect, so it would be impossible to confi rm whether water coming from the Arcadia Treatment Plant, or any given water supply, actually has chromium VI lower than the PHG level because it cannot be measured at t hat level. Further treatment for the Water Resources Division June 2016 Page 12 removal of chromium VI is neither practical, nor feasib le, so no recommendations for further action are advised. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION The drinking water quality of the City of Santa Monica meets all SWRCB/Division of Drinking Water and USEPA drinking water st andards set to protect public health. The City’s RO softening plant commissioned in December 2010 is achieving further reduction of many of the constituents identifi ed in this report from the City’s groundwater supply. To further reduce the le vels of these constituents t hat are already significantly below the established health-based Maxi mum Contaminant Levels (MCL) would typically require that additional costly treatment processes be constructed. The effectiveness of the treatment processes to provide any significant reductions in constituent levels at these already low va lues is uncertain. The health protection benefits of these further hy pothetical reductions are not clear and may not be quantifiable. Therefore, no acti on is proposed at this time. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1,4-Dioxane No MCL, MCLG, or PHG exists for 1,4-Diox ane, and as such, is not a requirement for this report. However, DDW has a Notifica tion Level (NL) for 1,4-Dioxane, which was lowered to 0.001 mg/l in 2010. As reported to City Council in 20 02, the City’s Olympic Wells (Santa Monica Wells 3&4) were found to have 1,4-Dioxane above the NL. The City was advised by DDW in 2002 that it wa s acceptable to continue the use of these wells as long as the level remained less than 100 times the NL. However, plans for the construction of a new treatment plant tar geting 1,4-Dioxane and ot her contaminants in the Olympic Wells are underway with an ant icipated completion date by 2020. EXHIBITS: A California Health and Sa fety Code Section 116470(b) B List of Regulated Constituent s with MCLs, PHGs or MCLGs C Numerical Health Risk Information D Tables excerpted from Annual Wa ter Quality Reports for 2013 - 2015 E Cost Estimates for Treatment Technologies F Acronyms EXHIBIT A Health & Safety Code Section 116470 (b) On or before July 1, 1998, and every thr ee years thereafter, public water systems serving more than 10,000 service c onnections that detect one or more contaminants in drinking water that exceed the applicable public health goal, shall prepare a brief written report in plain language that does all of the following: (1) Identifies each contami nant detected in drinking water that exceeds the applicable public health goal. (2) Discloses the numerical public heal th risk, determined by the office, associated with the maximum contaminant level for each contaminant identified in paragraph (1) and the numerical public health risk determined by the office associated with the public healt h goal for that contaminant. (3) Identifies the category of risk to pub lic health, including, but not limited to, carcinogenic, mutagenic, te ratogenic, and acute toxicity, associated with exposure to the contaminant in drinking water, and incl udes a brief plainly worded description of these terms. (4) Describes the best available tec hnology, if any is then available on a commercial basis, to remove the contamin ant or reduce the concentration of the contaminant. The public water system may, solely at its own discretion, briefly describe actions that have been taken on its own, or by other ent ities, to prevent the introduction of the contaminant into drinking water supplies. (5) Estimates the aggregate cost and the cost per customer of utilizing the technology described in paragraph (4), if any , to reduce the concentration of that contaminant in drinking water to a le vel at or below the public health goal. (6) Briefly describes what action, if any, the local water purveyor intends to take to reduce the concentration of the contam inant in public drinking water supplies and the basis for that decision. (c) Public water systems required to prepar e a report pursuant to subdivision (b) shall hold a public hearing for the purpose of accepting and responding to public comment on the report. Public water syst ems may hold the public hearing as part of any regularly scheduled meeting. (d) The department shall not require a public water system to ta ke any action to reduce or eliminate any exceed ance of a public health goal. (e) Enforcement of this section does not require the department to amend a public water system's operating permit. (f) Pending adoption of a public health goal by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment pursuant to subdivisi on (c) of Section 116365, and in lieu thereof, public water systems shall use the national maximum contaminant level goal adopted by the United States Envi ronmental Protecti on Agency for the corresponding contaminant for purposes of complying with the notice and hearing requirements of this section. (g ) This section is intended to provide an alternative form for the federally requi red consumer confidence report as authorized by 42 U.S.C. Section 300g-3(c). 1 of 4 This table includes: ● DD W's maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) ● DD W's detection limits for purposes of reporting (DLRs) Constituent MCL DLR PHG or (MCLG)Date of PHG Aluminum 1 0.05 0.6 2001 Antimony 0.006 0.006 0.02 1997 Antimony ----0.0007 2009 draft Arsenic 0.010 0.002 0.000004 2004 Asbestos (MFL = million fibers per liter; for fibers >10 microns long)7 MFL 0.2 MFL 7 MFL 2003 Barium 1 0.1 2 2003 Beryllium 0.004 0.001 0.001 2003 Cadmium 0.005 0.001 0.00004 2006 Chromium, Total - OEHHA withdrew the 1999 0.0025 mg/L PHG in Nov 2001 0.05 0.01 (0.100) Chromium, Hexavalent (Chromium-6) 0.01 0.001 0.00002 2011 Cyanide 0.15 0.1 0.15 1997 Fluoride 2 0.1 1 1997 Mercury (inorganic) 0.002 0.001 0.0012 1999 (rev2005)* Nickel 0.1 0.01 0.012 2001 Nitrate (as N) 10 as N 0.4 45 as NO3 (=10 as N)1997 Nitrite (as N) 1 as N 0.4 1 as N 1997 Nitrate + Nitrite (as N)10 as N 0.4 10 as N 1997 Perchlorate 0.006 0.004 0.001 2015 Selenium 0.05 0.005 0.03 2010 Thallium 0.002 0.001 0.0001 1999 (rev2004) Copper 1.3 0.05 0.3 2008 Lead 0.015 0.005 0.0002 2009 ● PHGs for NDMA and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (both are unregulated) are at the bottom of this table ● The federal MCLG for chemicals without a PHG, microbial contaminants, and the DLR for 1,2,3-TCP Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64431 —Inorganic Chemicals Copper and Lead, 22 CCR §64672.3 Values referred to as MCLs for lead and copper are not actually MCLs; instead, they are called "Action Levels" under the lead and copper rule 2016 PHG Triennial Report: Calendar Years 2013-2014-2015 MCLs, DLRs, and PHGs for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants (Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L), unless otherwise noted.) Last Update: December 29, 2015 (Reference last update 9/23/2015: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/MCLsandPHGs.shtml) ● Public health goals (PHGs) from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Exhibit B 2 of 4 Constituent MCL DLR PHG or (MCLG)Date of PHG Gross alpha particle activity - OEHHA concluded in 2003 that a PHG was not practical 15 3 (zero)n/a Gross beta particle activity - OEHHA concluded in 2003 that a PHG was not practical 4 mrem/yr 4 (zero)n/a Radium-226 --1 0.05 2006 Radium-228 --1 0.019 2006 Radium-226 + Radium-228 5 --(zero)-- Strontium-90 8 2 0.35 2006 Tritium 20,000 1,000 400 2006 Uranium 20 1 0.43 2001 Benzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 2001 Carbon tetrachloride 0.0005 0.0005 0.0001 2000 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.0005 0.6 1997 (rev2009) 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (p-DCB) 0.005 0.0005 0.006 1997 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA)0.005 0.0005 0.003 2003 1,2-Dichloroethane (1,2-DCA)0.0005 0.0005 0.0004 1999 (rev2005) 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE)0.006 0.0005 0.01 1999 cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.006 0.0005 0.1 2006 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.01 0.0005 0.06 2006 Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)0.005 0.0005 0.004 2000 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 0.0005 0.0005 1999 1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0005 0.0005 0.0002 1999 (rev2006) Ethylbenzene 0.3 0.0005 0.3 1997 Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) 0.013 0.003 0.013 1999 Monochlorobenzene 0.07 0.0005 0.07 2014 Styrene 0.1 0.0005 0.0005 2010 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.001 0.0005 0.0001 2003 Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 0.005 0.0005 0.00006 2001 Toluene 0.15 0.0005 0.15 1999 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.005 0.0005 0.005 1999 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA)0.2 0.0005 1 2006 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (1,1,2-TCA)0.005 0.0005 0.0003 2006 Trichloroethylene (TCE) 0.005 0.0005 0.0017 2009 Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)0.15 0.005 1.3 2014 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-Trifluoroethane (Freon 113)1.2 0.01 4 1997 (rev2011) Vinyl chloride 0.0005 0.0005 0.00005 2000 Xylenes 1.75 0.0005 1.8 1997 [units are picocuries per liter (pCi/L), unless otherwise stated; n/a = not applicable] Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64444 —Organic Chemicals (a) Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs) Radionuclides with MCLs in 22 CCR §64441 and §64443 —Radioactivity Exhibit B 3 of 4 Constituent MCL DLR PHG or (MCLG)Date of PHG Alachlor 0.002 0.001 0.004 1997 Atrazine 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 1999 Bentazon 0.018 0.002 0.2 1999 (rev2009) Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0002 0.0001 0.000007 2010 Carbofuran 0.018 0.005 0.0017 2000 Carbofuran ----0.0007 2015 draft Chlordane 0.0001 0.0001 0.00003 1997 (rev2006) Dalapon 0.2 0.01 0.79 1997 (rev2009) 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP)0.0002 0.00001 0.0000017 1999 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)0.07 0.01 0.02 2009 Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate 0.4 0.005 0.2 2003 Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) 0.004 0.003 0.012 1997 Dinoseb 0.007 0.002 0.014 1997 (rev2010) Diquat 0.02 0.004 0.015 2000 Diquat ----0.006 2015 draft Endrin 0.002 0.0001 0.0018 1999 (rev2008) Endrin ----0.0003 2015 draft Endothal 0.1 0.045 0.094 2014 Ethylene dibromide (EDB)0.00005 0.00002 0.00001 2003 Glyphosate 0.7 0.025 0.9 2007 Heptachlor 0.00001 0.00001 0.000008 1999 Heptachlor epoxide 0.00001 0.00001 0.000006 1999 Hexachlorobenzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00003 2003 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 0.05 0.001 0.002 2014 Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 0.000032 1999 (rev2005) Methoxychlor 0.03 0.01 0.00009 2010 Molinate 0.02 0.002 0.001 2008 Oxamyl 0.05 0.02 0.026 2009 Pentachlorophenol 0.001 0.0002 0.0003 2009 Picloram 0.5 0.001 0.5 1997 Picloram ----0.166 2015 draft Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)0.0005 0.0005 0.00009 2007 Simazine 0.004 0.001 0.004 2001 2,4,5-TP (Silvex)0.05 0.001 0.003 2014 2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin) 3x10 -8 5x10 -9 5x10 -11 2010 Thiobencarb 0.07 0.001 0.07 2000 Thiobencarb ----0.042 2015 draft Toxaphene 0.003 0.001 0.00003 2003 (b) Non-Volatile Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs) Exhibit B 4 of 4 Constituent MCL DLR PHG or (MCLG)Date of PHG Total Trihalomethanes 0.080 -- Total Trihalomethanes ----0.0008 2010 draft Bromodichloromethane --0.0010 (zero)-- Bromoform --0.0010 (zero)-- Chloroform --0.0010 (0.07)-- Dibromochloromethane --0.0010 (0.06)-- Haloacetic Acids (five) (HAA5)0.060 ------ Monochloroacetic Acid --0.0020 (0.07)-- Dichloroacetic Adic --0.0010 (zero)-- Trichloroacetic Acid --0.0010 (0.02)-- Monobromoacetic Acid --0.0010 ---- Dibromoacetic Acid --0.0010 ---- Bromate 0.010 0.0050 or 0.0010 a 0.0001 2009 Chlorite 1.0 0.020 0.05 2009 Coliform % positive samples %5 (zero) Cryptosporidium**TT (zero) Giardia lamblia**TT (zero) Legionella**TT (zero) Viruses**TT (zero) N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)----0.000003 2006 1,2,3-Trichloropropane --0.000005 0.0000007 2009 Notes: ** Surface water treatment = TT Chemicals with PHGs established in response to DDW requests. These are not currently regulated drinking water contaminants. a DDW will maintain a 0.0050 mg/L DLR for bromate to accommodate laboratories that are using EPA Method 300.1. However, laboratories using EPA Methods 317.0 Revision 2.0, 321.8, or 326.0 must meet a 0.0010 mg/L MRL for bromate and should report results with a DLR of 0.0010 mg/L per Federal requirements. *OEHHA's review of this chemical during the year indicated (rev20XX) resulted in no change in the PHG Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64533 —Disinfection Byproducts Microbiological Contaminants (TT = Treatment Technique) Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 1 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Health Risk Information for Public Health Goal Exceedance Reports Prepared by Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment California Environmental Protection Agency February 20 1 6 Under the Calderon -Sher Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996 (the Act), w ater utilities are required to prepare a report every three years for contaminants that exceed public health goals (PHGs) (Health and Safety Code Section 116470 (b)(2)). The numerical health risk for a contaminant is to be presented with the category of h ealth risk, along with a plainly worded description of these terms. The cancer health risk is to be calculated at the PHG and at the California maximum contaminant level (MCL). This report is prepared by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessme nt (OEHHA ) to assist the water utilities in meeting their requirements. PHGs are concentrations of contaminants in drinking water that pose no significant health risk if consumed for a lifetime . PHGs are developed and p ublished by OEHHA (Health and Safety Code Section 116365) using current risk assessment principles, pra ctices and methods . Numerical health risks . Table 1 present s health risk categorie s and cancer risk values for chemical contaminants in drinking water that have PHGs . The Act requires that OEHHA publish PHGs based on health risk assessments using the most current scientific methods. As defined in statute, PHGs for non -carcinogenic chemicals in drinking water are set at a concentration “at which no known or anticipated adverse health ef fects will occur, with an adequate margin of safety.” For carcinogens , PHGs are set at a concentration that “does not pose any significant risk to health.” PHGs provide one basis for revising MCLs, along with cost and technological feasibility. OEHHA ha s been publishing PHGs since 1997 and the entire list published to date is shown in Table 1. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 2 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 2 presents health risk information for contaminants that do not have PHGs but have state or federal regulatory standards. The Act requires that , for chemica l contaminants with California MCLs that do not yet have PHGs, water utilities use the federal maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for the purpose of complying with the requirement of public notification. MCLGs, like PHGs, are strictly health based and include a margin of safety. One difference, however, is that the MCLGs for carcinogens are set at zero because the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) assumes there is no absolutely safe level of exposure to such chemicals . PHGs, on the other han d, are set at a level considered to pose no significant risk of cancer; this is usually a no more than one -in -one -million excess cancer risk (1 10 -6 ) level for a lifetime of exposure. I n Table 2 , t he cancer risks shown are based on the US EPA’s evaluation s. For more information on health risks: The adverse health effects for each chemical with a PHG are summarized in a PHG technical support document. These documents are available on the OEHHA Web site (http://www.o ehha.ca.gov ). Also, technical fact sheets on most of the chemicals having federal MCLs can be found at http://www.epa.gov/your -drinking -water/table -regulate d -drinking -water -contaminants . Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 3 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Alachlor c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.004 NA 5 0.002 NA Aluminum neurotoxic ity and immunotoxicity (harms the nervous and immune system s ) 0.6 NA 1 NA Antimony digestive system toxicity (cause s vomiting ) 0.02 NA 0.006 NA Arsenic c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.000004 (4 × 10 -6 ) 1 10 -6 (one per million) 0.0 1 2.5 10 -3 (2.5 per thousan d) Asbestos c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 7 MFL 6 (fibers >10 microns in length) 1 10 -6 7 MFL (fibers >10 microns in length) 1 10 -6 (one per million) Atrazine c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00015 1 10 -6 0.001 7 10 -6 (seven per million) 1 B ased on the OEHHA PHG technical support document unless otherwise specified. The categories are the hazard traits defined by OEHHA for California’s Toxics Information Clearinghouse (online at: ht tp://oehha.ca.gov/multimedia/green/pdf/GC_Regtext011912.pdf ). 2 mg/L = milligrams per liter of water or parts per million (ppm) 3 Cancer Risk = Upper estimate of excess cancer risk from lifetime exposure . Actual cancer risk may be lower or zero. 1 10 -6 means one excess cancer case per million people exposed . 4 MCL = maximum contaminant level. 5 NA = not applicable. R isk cannot be calculated. The PHG is set at a level that is believed to be without any significant public health risk to individuals expo sed to th e chemical over a lifetime. 6 MFL = million fibers per liter of water . Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 4 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Barium cardiovascular toxicity (causes high blood pressure ) 2 NA 1 NA Bentazon hepatotoxicity and digestive system toxicity (h arms the liver , intestine , and causes body weight effects 7 ) 0.2 NA 0.018 NA Benzene carcinogenicity (causes leukemia) 0.00015 1 10 -6 0.001 7 10 -6 (seven pe r million) Benzo[a]pyrene c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00000 7 (7 10 -6 ) 1 10 -6 0.0002 3 10 -5 (three per hundred thousand) Beryllium digestive system toxicity (harms the stomach or intestine ) 0.001 NA 0.004 NA Bromate c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0001 1 10 -6 0.01 1 10 -4 (one per ten thousand ) Cadmium nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney ) 0.0000 4 NA 0.005 NA Carbofuran reproductive toxicity (harms the testis) 0.0017 NA 0.018 NA 7 Body weight effects are an indicator of general toxicity in animal studies. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 5 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Carbon tetrachloride c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0001 1 10 -6 0.0005 5 10 -6 (five per million) Chlordane c arcinogenicity (caus es cancer) 0.00003 1 10 -6 0.0001 3 10 -6 (three per million) Chlorite hematotoxicity (causes anemia ) neurotoxicity (causes neurobehavioral effec ts ) 0.05 NA 1 NA Chromium, hexavalent c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00002 1 10 -6 0.01 5×10 -4 (five per ten thousand) Copper digestive system toxicity (cause s nausea, vomiting , diarrhea ) 0.3 NA 1.3 (AL 8 ) NA Cyanide neuro toxicity (damages nerve s) endocrine toxicity (affects the thyroid) 0.15 NA 0.15 NA Dalapon nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney ) 0.79 NA 0.2 NA 8 AL = action level. The action level s for copper and lead refer to a co ncentration measured at th e tap. M uch of the copper and lead in drinking water is derived from household plumbing (The Lead and Copper Rule, Title 22, California Code of Regulations [CCR] section 64672.3). Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 6 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL 1,2 -Dibromo -3 - chloropropane (DBCP) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0000017 (1.7x10 -6 ) 1 10 -6 0.0002 1 10 -4 (one per ten thousand ) 1,2 -Dichloro - benzene (o - DCB) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.6 NA 0.6 NA 1,4 -Dichloro - benzene (p - DCB) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.006 1 10 -6 0.005 8 10 -7 (eight per ten million) 1,1 -Dichloro - ethane (1,1 - DC A) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.003 1 10 -6 0.005 2 10 -6 (two per million) 1,2 -Dichloro - ethane (1,2 - DCA) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0004 1 10 -6 0.0005 1 10 -6 (one per million ) 1,1 -Dichloro - ethylene (1,1 -DCE) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.01 NA 0.006 NA 1,2 -Dichloro - ethylene, cis n ephrotoxicity (harms the kidney ) 0.1 NA 0.006 NA 1,2 -Dichloro - ethylene, trans hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.06 NA 0.01 NA Dichloromethane (methylene chloride) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.004 1 10 -6 0.005 1 10 -6 (one per million) 2,4 -Dichloro - phenoxyacetic acid (2,4 -D) hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity (harms the liver and kidney) 0.0 2 NA 0.07 NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 7 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL 1,2 -Dichloro - propane (propylene dichloride) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0005 1 10 -6 0.005 1 10 -5 (one per hundred thousand ) 1,3 -Dichloro - propene (Telone II ) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0002 1 10 -6 0.0005 2 10 -6 (two per million) D i(2 -ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA) developmental toxicity (disrupt s development) 0.2 NA 0.4 NA Diethylhexyl - phthalate (DEHP) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.012 1 10 -6 0.004 3 10 -7 (three pe r ten million) Dinoseb reproductive toxicity (harms the uterus and testis) 0.014 NA 0.007 NA Dioxin (2,3,7,8 - TCDD) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 5 10 -11 1 10 -6 3 10 -8 6 10 -4 (s ix per ten thousand) Diquat ocular toxicity (harms the eye) developmental toxicity (causes malformation) 0.015 NA 0.02 NA Endothall digestive system toxicity (harms the stomach or intestine ) 0.094 NA 0.1 NA Endrin hepatotoxicity (ha rms the liver ) neurotoxicity (causes convulsions) 0.0018 NA 0.002 NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 8 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Ethylbenzene (phenylethane) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.3 NA 0.3 NA Ethylene dibromide c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00001 1 10 -6 0.00005 5 10 -6 (five per million) Fluoride musculoskeletal toxicity (causes tooth mottling) 1 N A 2 NA Glyphosate nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney ) 0.9 NA 0.7 NA Heptachlor c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.000 008 (8×10 -6 ) 1 10 -6 0.00001 1 10 -6 (one per million) Heptachlor epoxide c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.000006 (6×10 -6 ) 1 10 -6 0.00001 2 10 -6 (two per million) Hexachloroben - zene c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00003 1 10 -6 0.001 3 10 -5 (three per hundred thousand) Hexachloro - cyclo pentad iene (H CCPD ) digestive system toxicity (causes stomach lesions) 0.002 NA 0.05 NA Lead developmental neuro toxicity (causes neurobehavioral effects in children ) cardiovascular t oxicity (cause s high blood pressure ) carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00 0 2 <1 10 -6 (PHG is not based on this effect) 0.015 (AL 8 ) 2 10 -6 (two per million) Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 9 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Lindane (-BHC) c arcinogenici ty (causes cancer) 0.000032 1 10 -6 0.0002 6 10 -6 (six per million) Mercury (inorganic) nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney ) 0.0012 NA 0.002 NA Methoxychlor endocrine toxicity (causes hormone effects) 0.00009 NA 0.03 NA Methyl tertiary - butyl ether (MTBE) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.013 1 10 -6 0.013 1 10 -6 (one per million) Molinate c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.001 1 10 -6 0.02 2 10 -5 (two per hundred thousand) Monochloro - ben zene (chlorobenzene) nephrotoxicity (harms the kidney) 0.07 NA 0.07 NA Nickel developmental toxicity (causes increased neonatal deaths) 0.012 NA 0.1 NA Nitrate h ematotoxicity (causes methemoglobinemia) 45 as nitrate NA 10 as nitrogen (=45 as nitrate) NA Nitrite hematotoxicity (c auses methemoglobinemia) 1 as nitrogen N A 1 as nitrogen NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 10 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Nitrate and Nitrite hematotoxicity (causes methemoglobinemia) 10 as nitrogen NA 10 as nitrogen NA N -nitroso - dimethyl -amine (NDMA) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.000003 (3 10 -6 ) 1 × 10 -6 none NA Oxamyl general toxicity (causes body w eight effects ) 0.0 26 N A 0.05 NA Pentachloro - phenol (PCP) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.000 3 1 10 -6 0.001 3 10 -6 (three per million) Perchlorate endocrine toxicity (affects the thyroid ) developmental toxicity (causes neurodevelop - mental deficits ) 0.001 NA 0.006 NA Picloram hepatotoxic ity (harms the liver ) 0.5 NA 0.5 NA Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00009 1 10 -6 0.0005 6 10 -6 (six per million) Radium -226 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.05 pCi/L 1 10 -6 5 pCi/L (combined Ra 226+228 ) 1 10 -4 (one per ten thousand) Radium -228 carcinogeni city (causes cancer) 0.019 pCi/L 1 10 -6 5 pCi/L (combined Ra 226+228 ) 3 10 -4 (three per ten thousand) Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 11 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Selenium integumentary toxicity (causes hair loss and nail damage ) 0.03 N A 0.05 NA Silvex (2,4,5 -TP) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.003 NA 0.05 NA Simazine general toxicity (causes body weight effects ) 0.004 NA 0.004 NA Strontium -90 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.35 pCi/L 1 × 10 -6 8 pCi/L 2 10 -5 (two per hundred thousand) Styrene (vinylbenzene) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0005 1 × 10 -6 0.1 2 10 -4 (two per ten thousand) 1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloro - ethane c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0001 1 10 -6 0.001 1 10 -5 (one per hundred thousand) Tetrachloro - ethylene (perchloro - ethylene, or PCE) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00006 1 10 -6 0.005 8 10 -5 (eight per hundred thousand) Thallium integumentary toxicity (causes hair loss) 0.0001 NA 0.002 NA Thiobencarb general toxicity (causes body weight effects ) hematotoxicity (affects red blood cells ) 0.07 NA 0.07 NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 12 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL Toluene (methylbenzene) hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) endocrine toxicity (harms th e thymus) 0.15 NA 0.15 NA Toxaphene c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00003 1 10 -6 0.003 1 10 -4 (one per ten thousand) 1,2,4 -Trichloro - benzene endocrine toxicity (harms adrenal glands) 0.005 NA 0.005 NA 1,1,1 -Trichloro - ethane n euro toxicity (harms the nervous system ), reproductive toxicity (causes fewer offspring) hepato toxicity (harms the liver ) hematotoxicity (causes blood effects) 1 NA 0.2 NA 1,1,2 -Trichloro - ethane c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.0003 1x10 -6 0.005 2 10 -5 (two per hundred thousand) Trichloro - ethylene (TCE) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00 17 1 10 -6 0.005 3 10 -6 (three per million) Trichlorofluoro - methane (Freon 11) accelerated mortality (increase in early death ) 1.3 NA 0.15 NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 13 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs) Chemical Health Risk Category 1 California PHG (mg/L)2 Cancer Risk 3 at the PHG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Canc er Risk at the California MCL 1,2,3 -Trichloro - propane (1,2,3 -TCP) c arcinog enicity (causes cancer) 0.0000007 (7×10 -7 ) 1x10 -6 none NA 1,1,2 -Trichloro - 1,2,2 -trifluoro - ethane (Freon 113) hepato toxicity (harms the liver ) 4 NA 1.2 NA Tritium carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 400 pCi/L 1x10 -6 20,000 pCi/L 5x10 -5 (five per hundred thousand) Uranium carcinogenicity (c auses cancer) 0.43 pCi/L 1 10 -6 20 pCi/L 5 10 -5 (five per hundred thousand) Vinyl chloride c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0.00005 1 10 -6 0.0005 1 10 -5 (one per hundred thousand) Xylene neurotoxicity (a ffects the senses, mood , and motor control) 1.8 (single isomer or sum of isomers) NA 1.75 (single isomer or sum of isomers) NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 14 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals Chemical Health Risk Category 1 U.S. EPA MCLG 2 (mg/L) Cancer Risk 3 @ MCLG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Cancer Risk @ California MCL Disinfection byproducts (DBPS) C hloramines acute toxicity (causes irritation) digestive system toxicity (harms the stomach) hematotoxicity (causes anemia) 4 5 ,6 NA 7 none NA C hlorine acute toxicity (causes irritation) digestive system toxicity (harms the stomach) 4 5 ,6 NA none NA C hlorine dioxide hemato toxicity (causes anemia) neurotoxicity (harms the nervous system ) 0.8 5 ,6 NA none NA Disinfection byproducts: haloacetic acids (HAA5) C hloroacetic acid general toxicity (causes body and organ weight changes 8 ) 0.07 NA none NA 1 Health risk category based on the U.S. EPA MCLG document or California MC L document unless otherwise specified. 2 MCLG = maximum contaminant level goal established by U.S. EPA. 3 Cancer Risk = Upper estimate of excess cancer risk from lifetime exposure . Actual cancer risk may be lower or zero. 1 10 -6 means one excess cancer c ase per million people exposed . 4 California MCL = maximum contaminant level established by California. 5 Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal, or MRDLG . 6 The federal Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL), or highest level of disinfectant allowed in drinking water, is the same value for this chemical. 7 NA = not available. 8 Body weight effects are an indicator of general toxicity in animal studies. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 15 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals Chemical Health Risk Category 1 U.S. EPA MCLG 2 (mg/L) Cancer Risk 3 @ MCLG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Cancer Risk @ California MCL D ichloroacetic acid c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 0 none NA T richloroacetic acid hepatotoxicity (harms the liver ) 0.02 0 none NA B romoacetic acid NA none NA none NA D ibromoacetic acid NA none NA none NA T otal haloacetic acids c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) none NA 0.06 NA Disinf ection byproducts: trihalomethanes (THM s ) B romodichloro - methane (BDCM) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 0 none NA B romoform c arcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 0 none NA C hloroform hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity (harms the liver and kidney) 0.07 NA none NA D ibromo - chloromethane (DBCM) h epatotoxicity , nephrotoxicity , and neurotoxicity (harms the liver, kidn ey, and nervous system) 0.06 NA none NA T otal trihalomethanes (sum of BDCM, bromoform, chloroform and DBCM) c arcinogenicity (causes cancer), hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and neurotoxicity (harms the liver, kidney, and nervous system) none NA 0.08 NA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Page 16 Water Toxicology Section February 2016 Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals Chemical Health Risk Category 1 U .S. EPA MCLG 2 (mg/L) Cancer Risk 3 @ MCLG California MCL 4 (mg/L) Cancer Risk @ California MCL Radionuclides G ross alpha particles 9 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 (210 Po included) 0 15 pCi/L 10 (includes 226 Ra but not radon and uranium) up to 1x10 -3 (for 210 Po, the most potent alpha emitter B eta particles and photon emitters 9 carcinogenicity (causes cancer) 0 (210 Pb included) 0 50 pCi/L (judged equiv. to 4 mrem/yr) up to 2x10 -3 (for 210 Pb, the most potent beta - emitter) 9 MCLs for gross alpha and beta particles are screening standards for a group of radionuclides. Co rresponding PHGs were not developed for gross alpha and beta particles. S ee the OEHHA memoranda discussing the cancer risks at these MCLs at http://oehha.studio -weeren.com/media/downloads/water/chemicals/phg/grossalphahealth.pdf . 10 pCi/L = picocuries per liter of water. KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS CITY OF SANTA MONICA PUBLIC WORKS/WATER RESOURCES DIVISION Summary of Results for Primary Drinking Water Standards for 2013 Primary Drinking Water Standards = MCLs, MRDLs and treatment techniques for contaminants that affect health along with their monitoring and reporting requirements, and water treatment requirements. PHG = Public Health Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. PHGs are set by the California Environmental Protection Agency. MCLG = Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level, or the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHGs (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. MRDLG = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal, or the level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. They do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbials. MRDL = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level, or the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants. LRAA = Locational Running Annual Average. The running annual average is based on monitoring location. AL = Action Level, or the concentration of a contaminant which, when exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements which a water system must follow. NS = No Standard ND = Monitored for but Not Detected NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units - used to measure cloudiness of drinking water. ppb = parts per billion, or micrograms per liter (µg/l) ppm = parts per million, or milligrams per liter (mg/l) pCi/l =picocuries per liter * = secondary standard (a) = SM W ell#1 is pumped into a transmission line, is blended with Imported Surface Water and enters the system at 19th St. & Idaho Ave. (b) = W e are not required to test for every parameter each year. If indicated, data is from a previous year. (c) = T wo consecutive Total Coliform-positive samples, one of which contains Fecal Coliform/E. Coli constitutes an acute MCL violation. No violations occurred for 2013. (d) = The MCL has been replaced with a treatment technique requiring agencies to optimize corrosion control. Results given are from first draw, at-the-tap monitoring performed every three years. (e) = T oluene is monitored weekly at the Arcadia Plant. In 2013, very low levels of toluene were detected two times after the completion of reservoir roof repairs in June 2013. The detections were traced to a glue used in the repair process. FOR ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY QUESTIONS, CONTACT M. CARDENAS, ASSISTANT MANAGER FOR WATER PRODUCTION AND TREATMENT AT 310-826-6712 LOCAL IMPORTED IMPORTED Dates Meets MAJOR SOURCES PHG/ State WELL W ATER SM WELL #1(a) SURF ACE WATER SURF ACE WATER Sampled Std IN DRINKING W ATER Parameter [MCLG]/ MCL/ Arcadia Plant W eymouth Plant Jensen Plant if other {MRDLG} {MRDL} A verage Range A verage Range A verage Range A verage Range than 2013(b) PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (MANDATORY HEALTH-RELATED STANDARDS) Clarity Maximum Turbidity (NTU) NS 95% <0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.05 100% <0.3 0.1 100% <0.3 Y Soil runoff Microbiological Total Coliform Bacteria [0] 5% City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Naturally present in the environment (% positive samples/month) Fecal Coliform/E. Coli [0] (c) City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Human and animal fecal waste Organic Chemical Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) (ppb) 13 13(5*) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Leaking underground storage tanks Trichloroethylene (ppb) 1.7 5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Discharge from metal degreasing sites Toluene (ppb) (e) 150 150 ND ND - 1.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Discharge from petroleum based products Disinfection Byproducts & Residuals Total Trihalomethanes (ppb) NS 80 City-wide LRAA: 16 Range: 1 - 52 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Haloacetic Acids (ppb) NS 60 City-wide LRAA: 5 Range: ND - 18 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Total Chlorine/Chloramines (ppm) {4} {4} City-wide A verage: 1.4 Range: 0.2 - 2.4 Y Drinking water disinfectant added for treatment Bromate (ppb) 0.1 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.6 3.9 - 13 Y By-product of drinking water ozonation Inorganic Chemicals Aluminum (ppm) 0.6 1 (0.2*) ND ND ND ND 0.14 0.1 - 0.22 0.10 0.07 - 0.11 Y Erosion of natural deposits; used in water treatment process Arsenic (ppb) 0.004 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Erosion of natural deposits Barium (ppm) 2 1 0 .02 0.02 0 .09 0 .09 N D N D N D N D Y Discharge from oil and metal industries; Erosion of natural deposits Copper (d) (ppm) 0.3 A L=1.3 (1.0*) City-wide 90th percentile: 0.13 0 sites out of 33 exceeded the AL Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Fluoride After Treatment (ppm) 1 2 Control Range 0.7 - 1.3 City-wide Range 0.6 - 1.0 Y W ater additive for dental health Lead (d) (ppb) 0.2 AL=15 City-wide 90th percentile: 2.8 0 site out of 34 exceeded the AL Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Nitrate (as N) (ppm) 10 10 0.8 0.5 - 1.1 3.7 3.6 - 3.8 0.5 0.5 .05 0.5 Y Runoff from fertilizer use; Leaching from sewage; Erosion of natural deposits Perchlorate (ppb) 6 6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Industrial waste discharge Radionuclides Alpha emitters (pCi/l) [0] 15 ND ND ND ND ND ND - 3 ND ND 2011 Y Erosion of natural deposits Beta/photon emitters (pCi/l) [0] 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 ND - 6 ND ND 2011 Y Decay of natural and man-made deposits Combined Radium (pCi/l) [0] 5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2011 Y Erosion of natural deposits Uranium (pCi/l) 0.43 20 1.8 1.5 - 2.0 ND ND 2 1 - 2 1 ND - 2 2011 Y Erosion of natural deposits KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS CITY OF SANTA MONICA PUBLIC WORKS/WATER RESOURCES DIVISION Summary of Results for Primary Drinking Water Standards for 2014 Primary Drinking Water Standards = MCLs, MRDLs and treatment techniques for contaminants that affect health along with their monitoring and reporting requirements, and water treatment requirements. PHG = Public Health Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. PHGs are set by the California Environmental Protection Agency. MCLG = Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level, or the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHGs (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. MRDLG = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal, or the level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. They do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbials. MRDL = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level, or the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants. LRAA = Locational Running Annual Average. The running annual average is based on monitoring location. AL = Action Level, or the concentration of a contaminant which, when exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements which a water system must follow. N/A = Not Applicable NS = No Standard ND = Monitored for but Not Detected NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units - used to measure cloudiness of drinking water. ppb = parts per billion, or micrograms per liter (µg/l) ppm = parts per million, or milligrams per liter (mg/l) pCi/l =picocuries per liter * = secondary standard (a) = SM W ell#1 is pumped into a transmission line, is blended with Imported Surface Water and enters the system at 19th St. & Idaho Ave. (b) = The City is not required to test for every parameter each year . If indicated, data is from a previous year. (c) = T wo consecutive Total Coliform-positive samples, one of which contains Fecal Coliform/E. Coli constitutes an acute MCL violation. No violations occurred for 2014. (d) = The MCL has been replaced with a treatment technique requiring agencies to optimize corrosion control. Results given are from first draw, at-the-tap monitoring performed every three years. FOR ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY QUESTIONS, CONTACT M. CARDENAS, ASSISTANT MANAGER FOR WATER PRODUCTION AND TREATMENT AT 310-434-2672 LOCAL IMPORTED IMPORTED Dates Meets MAJOR SOURCES PHG/ State WELL W ATER SM WELL #1(a) SURF ACE WATER SURF ACE WATER Sampled Std IN DRINKING W ATER Parameter [MCLG]/ MCL/ Arcadia Plant W eymouth Plant Jensen Plant if other {MRDLG} {MRDL} A verage Range A verage Range A verage Range A verage Range than 2014(b) PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (MANDATORY HEALTH-RELATED STANDARDS) Clarity Maximum Turbidity (NTU) NS 95% < 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.03 100% ≤ 0.3 0.06 100% ≤ 0.3 Y Soil runoff Microbiological Total Coliform Bacteria [0] 5% City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Naturally present in the environment (% positive samples/month) Fecal Coliform/E. Coli [0] (c) City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Human and animal fecal waste Organic Chemical Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) (ppb) 13 13(5*) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Leaking underground storage tanks Trichloroethylene (ppb) 1.7 5 ND ND - 0.6 ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Discharge from metal degreasing sites Disinfection Byproducts & Residuals Total Trihalomethanes (ppb) NS 80 City-wide LRA A: 16 Range: 4 - 55 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Haloacetic Acids (ppb) NS 60 City-wide LRAA: 2 Range: ND - 9 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Total Chlorine/Chloramines (ppm) {4} {4} City-wide A verage: 1.2 Range: 0.2 - 2.4 Y Drinking water disinfectant added for treatment Bromate (ppb) 0.1 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.8 4.4 - 13 Y By-product of drinking water ozonation Inorganic Chemicals Aluminum (ppm) 0.6 1 (0.2*) ND ND ND ND 0.14 0.07 - 0.23 0.08 ND - 0.11 Y Erosion of natural deposits; used in water treatment process Arsenic (ppb) 0.004 10 ND ND 1.0 1.0 ND ND 2.2 2.2 Y Erosion of natural deposits Barium (ppm) 2 1 0 .02 0.02 0 .05 0 .05 0 .11 0 .11 N D N D Y Discharge from oil and metal industries; Erosion of natural deposits Chromium 6 (ppb) 0.02 10 ND ND 1.6 1.6 ND ND ND ND Y Naturally occuring; industrial waste discharge Copper (d) (ppm) 0.3 A L=1.3 (1.0*) City-wide, 90th percentile: 0.13 0 sites out of 34 exceeded the AL 2013 Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Fluoride After Treatment (ppm) 1 2 Control Range: 0.77.3 City-wide Range: 0.6 - 1.0 Y W ater additive for dental health Lead (d) (ppb) 0.2 AL=15 City-wide 90th percentile: 2.8 0 site out of 34 exceeded the AL 2013 Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Nitrate (as N) (ppm) 10 10 0.8 0.7 - 1.2 3.3 3.2 - 3.4 ND ND ND ND Y Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from sewage; Perchlorate (ppb) 6 6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Industrial waste discharge Radionuclides Alpha emitters (pCi/l) [0] 15 2 ND - 3 ND ND ND ND - 4 3 ND - 5 Y Erosion of natural deposits Beta/photon emitters (pCi/l) [0] 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 4 - 6 ND ND - 5 Y Decay of natural and man-made deposits Combined Radium (pCi/l) [0] 5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Erosion of natural deposits Uranium (pCi/l) 0.43 20 1.7 1.7 0.8 0.8 3 2 - 3 2 2 - 3 Y Erosion of natural deposits City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples City-wide LRAA: 16 Range: 4 - 55 City-wide LRAA: 2 Range: ND - 9 City-wide Average: 1.2 Range: 0.2 - 2.4 City-wide, 90th percentile: 0.13 0 sites out of 34 exceeded the AL Control Range: 0.7 - 1.3 Citywide Range: 0.6 - 1.0 City-wide, 90th percentile: 2.8 0 sites out of 34 exceeded the AL KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS CITY OF SANTA MONICA PUBLIC WORKS/WATER RESOURCES DIVISION Summary of Results for Primary Drinking Water Standards for 2015 Primary Drinking Water Standards = MCLs, MRDLs and treatment techniques for contaminants that affect health along with their monitoring and reporting requirements, and water treatment requirements. PHG = Public Health Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. PHGs are set by the California Environmental Protection Agency. MCLG = Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, or the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level, or the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHGs (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. MRDLG = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal, or the level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. They do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbials. MRDL = Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level, or the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants. LRAA = Locational Running Annual Average. The running annual average is based on monitoring location. AL = Action Level, or the concentration of a contaminant which, when exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements which a water system must follow. N/A = Not Applicable NS = No Standard ND = Monitored for but Not Detected NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units - used to measure cloudiness of drinking water. ppb = parts per billion, or micrograms per liter (µg/l) ppm = parts per million, or milligrams per liter (mg/l) pCi/l =picocuries per liter * = secondary standard (a) = SM Well#1 is pumped into a transmission line, is blended with Imported Surface Water and enters the system at 19th St. & Idaho Ave. (b) = The City is not required to test for every parameter each year. If indicated, data is from a previous year. (c) = Two consecutive Total Coliform-positive samples, one of which contains Fecal Coliform/E. Coli constitutes an acute MCL violation. No violations occurred for 2015. (d) = The MCL has been replaced with a treatment technique requiring agencies to optimize corrosion control. Results given are from first draw, at-the-tap monitoring performed every three years. FOR ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY QUESTIONS, CONTACT M. CARDENAS, ASSISTANT MANAGER FOR WATER PRODUCTION AND TREATMENT AT 310-434-2672 LOCAL IMPORTED IMPORTED Dates Meets MAJOR SOURCES PHG/ State WELL WATER SM WELL #1(a) SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER Sampled Std IN DRINKING WATER Parameter [MCLG]/ MCL/ Arcadia Plant Weymouth Plant Jensen Plant if other {MRDLG} {MRDL} Average Range Average Range Average Range Average Range than 2015(b) PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (MANDATORY HEALTH-RELATED STANDARDS) Clarity Maximum Turbidity (NTU) NS 95% < 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.05 100% ≤ 0.3 0.09 100% ≤ 0.3 Y Soil runoff Microbiological Total Coliform Bacteria [0] 5% City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Naturally present in the environment (% positive samples/month) Fecal Coliform/E. Coli [0] (c) City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples Y Human and animal fecal waste Organic Chemical Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) (ppb) 13 13(5*) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Leaking underground storage tanks Trichloroethylene (ppb) 1.7 5 0.5 ND - 0.7 ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Discharge from metal degreasing sites Disinfection Byproducts & Residuals Total Trihalomethanes (ppb) NS 80 City-wide LR41A: 16 Range: 4 - 55 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Haloacetic Acids (ppb) NS 60 City-wide LRAA: 2 Range: ND - 9 Y By-product of drinking water chlorination Total Chlorine/Chloramines (ppm) {4} {4} City-wide Average: 1.2 Range: 0.2 - 2.4 Y Drinking water disinfectant added for treatment Bromate (ppb) 0.1 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.0 1.1 - 13 Y By-product of drinking water ozonation Inorganic Chemicals Aluminum (ppm) 0.6 1 (0.2*) ND ND ND ND 0.16 0.09 - 0.20 ND ND - 0.08 Y Erosion of natural deposits; used in water treatment process Arsenic (ppb) 0.004 10 ND ND 1.0 1.0 2.1 2.1 3.3 3.3 Y Erosion of natural deposits Barium (ppm) 2 1 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.12 ND ND Y Discharge from oil and metal industries; Erosion of natural deposits Chromium (ppb) [100] 50 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 1.7 1.6 - 1.7 ND ND ND ND Y Discharge from steel and pulp mills; natural deposits erosion Chromium 6 (ppb) 0.02 10 0.2 0.2 1.6 1.6 ND ND ND ND Y Naturally occuring; industrial waste discharge Copper (d) (ppm) 0.3 AL=1.3 (1.0*) 2013 Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Fluoride After Treatment (ppm) 1 2 Y Water additive for dental health Lead (d) (ppb) 0.2 AL=15 City-wide 90th percentile: 2.8 0 site out of 34 exceeded the AL 2013 Y Corrosion of household plumbing systems Nitrate (as N) (ppm) 10 10 1.0 0.7 - 1.2 3.5 3.4 - 3.8 ND ND 0.8 0.6 - 0.9 Y Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from sewage; Perchlorate (ppb) 1 6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Y Industrial waste discharge Radionuclides Alpha emitters (pCi/l) [0] 15 ND ND ND ND ND ND - 4 3 ND - 5 2014 Y Erosion of natural deposits Beta/photon emitters (pCi/l) [0] 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 4 - 6 ND ND - 5 2014 Y Decay of natural and man-made deposits Combined Radium (pCi/l) [0] 5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2014 Y Erosion of natural deposits Uranium (pCi/l) 0.43 20 1.9 1.5 -2.7 0.8 0.8 3 2 - 3 2 2 - 3 2014 Y Erosion of natural deposits City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples City-wide Maximum: 0 Positive Samples City-wide LRAA: 41 Range: 11 - 54 City-wide LRAA: 12 Range: ND - 2-16 City-wide Average: 1.2 Range: ND - 2.6 City-wide, 90th percentile: 0.13 0 sites out of 34 exceeded the AL Control Range: 0.7 - 1.3 Citywide Range: 0.3 - 0.9 City-wide, 90th percentile: 2.8 0 sites out of 34 exceeded the AL Page 1 of 2 ([KLELW( Table 1 Ref erence: 2012 ACWA PHG Survey COST ESTIMATES FOR TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (INCLUDES ANNUALIZED CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS) No.Treatment Technology Source of Information Estimated Unit Cost 2012 ACWA Survey Indexed to 2015* ($/1,000 gallons treated) 1 Ion Exchange Coachella Valley WD, for GW, to reduce Arsenic concentrations. 2011 costs.1.99 2 Ion Exchange City of Riverside Public Utilities, for GW, for Perchlorate treatment. 0.96 3 Ion Exchange Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating GW source for Nitrates. Design souce water concentration: 88 mg/L NO 3. Design finished water concentration: 45 mg/L NO 3 . Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost. 0.72 4 Granular Activated Carbon City of Riverside Public Utilities, GW sources, for TCE, DBCP (VOC, SOC) treatment. 0.48 5 Granular Activated Carbon Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating SW source for TTHMs. Design souce water concentration: 0.135 mg/L. Design finished water concentration: 0.07 mg/L. Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost. 0.34 6 Granular Activated Carbon, Liquid Phase LADWP, Liquid Phase GAC treatment at Tujunga Well field. Costs for treating 2 wells. Treament for 1,1 DCE (VOC). 2011-2012 costs.1.47 7 Reverse Osmosis Carollo Engineers, anonymous utility, 2012 costs for treating GW source for Nitrates. Design souce water concentration: 88 mg/L NO 3. Design finished water concentration: 45 mg/L NO 3 . Does not include concentrate disposal or land cost. 0.78 8 Packed Tower Aeration City of Monrovia, treatment to reduce TCE, PCE concentrations. 2011-12 costs.0.42 9 Ozonation+ Chemical addition SCVWD, STWTP treatment plant includes chemical addition + ozone generation costs to reduce THM/HAAs concentrations. 2009-2012 costs. 0.09