HomeMy WebLinkAbout75C - PH - WATER QUALITY RPTREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
JULY 16, 2019
TITLE:
APPROVED
PUBLIC HEARING — REPORT ON
❑ As Recommended
WATER QUALITY RELATIVE TO
❑ Or Amended
❑ Ordinance on 9s' Reading
PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS
❑ Ordinance on 2^a Reading
(STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 5, 6)
❑ Implementing Resolution
❑ Set Public Hearing For
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
CITY M AGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file the report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals.
DISCUSSION
The California Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment establishes Public Health Goals (PHGs) for drinking water contaminants. The PHGs
are guidelines and are not requirements for any public water system. PHGs are frequently much
lower than the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) established by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Under provisions of the California Health and Safety
Code, the City is required to prepare a special report every three years identifying water quality
measurements that have exceeded PHGs (Exhibit 1).
For the years of 2016, 2017, and 2018, the report depicts that Santa Ana's drinking water continues
to meet all State of California Department of Health Services, and USEPA, drinking water standards
set to protect public health (Exhibit 2). While the City's drinking water content of naturally occurring
uranium, arsenic, perchlorate, and hexavalent chromium levels exceeded the recommended PHG
levels (Exhibit 3), the report finds that for these naturally occurring elements, additional treatment
would be very expensive, marginally effective, and would not result in significant reduction of the
contaminants; therefore, no action is proposed.
State law specifies that a public hearing be held for the purpose of accepting and responding to
public comments on the report. This public hearing meets the legal requirement.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #5 - Community Health, Livability,
Engagement & Sustainability, Objective #6 (focus projects and programs on improving the health
and wellness of all residents).
75C-1
Public Hearing — Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
July 16, 2019
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
There is no environmental impact associated with this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
is no fiscal impact associated with this action
a
Fuad
Execute Director
Public qorks Agency
FS/NS/RR
Exhibits: 1. City of Santa Ana Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
2. California Health and Safety Code § 116470
3. Listing of all Regulated Constituents with MCLs and PHGs or MCI -Gs
75C-2
EXHIBIT 1
JUNE 2019
861 Village Oaks Drive, Suite 100 -Covina, California 91724
Phone: (626) 967-6202 • Fax: (626)331.7065 • Website:www.stetsonengineers.com
Northern California Southern California < Arizona • Colorado * Oregon
75C-3
2019 Public Health Goals (PHGs) Report
City of Santa Ana
1.0 Introduction
Under the Calderon -Sher Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996 public water systems in
California serving greater than 10,000 service connections must prepare a report
containing information on 1) detection of any contaminant in drinking water at a level
exceeding a Public Health Goal (PHG), 2) estimate of costs to remove detected
contaminants to below the PHG using Best Available Technology (BAT), and 3) health
risks for each contaminant exceeding a PHG. This report must be made available to
the public every three years. The initial report was due on July 1, 1998, and
subsequent reports are due every three years thereafter.
This report has been prepared to address the requirements set forth in Section 116470
of the California Health and Safety Code. It is based on water quality analyses during
calendar years 2016, 2017, and 2018 or, if certain analyses were not performed during
those years, the most recent data available. The report has been designed to be as
informative as possible, without unnecessary duplication of information contained in the
Consumer Confidence Reports, which are mailed to customers by July 1st of each year.
There are no regulations explaining requirements for the preparation of PHGs reports.
A workgroup of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Water Quality
Committee has prepared suggested guidelines for water utilities to use in preparing
PHGs reports. The ACWA guidelines were used in the preparation of this 2019 report.
These guidelines include tables of cost estimates for BAT. The State of California
(State) provides ACWA with numerical health risks and category of health risk
information for contaminants with PHGs. This health risk information is appended to the
ACWA guidelines.
City of Santa Ana 1 2019 PHGs Report
75C-4
2.0 California Drinking Water Regulatory Process
California Health and Safety Code Section 116365 requires the State to develop a PHG
for every contaminant with a primary drinking water standard or for any contaminant the
State is proposing to regulate with a primary drinking water standard. A PHG is the
level of a contaminant in drinking water that poses no significant health risk if consumed
for a lifetime. The process of establishing a PHG is a risk assessment based strictly on
human health considerations. PHGs are recommended targets and are not required to
be met by any public water system.
The State office designated to develop PHGs is the California Environmental Protection
Agency's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The PHG is
then forwarded to the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water
(DDW) for use in revising or developing a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) in
drinking water. The MCL is the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking
water. California MCLs cannot be less stringent than federal MCLs and must be as
close as is technically and economically feasible to the PHGs. DDW is required to take
treatment technologies and cost of compliance into account when setting an MCL.
Each MCL is reviewed at least once every five years.
Total chromium and two radiological contaminants (gross alpha particle and gross beta
particle) have MCLs but do not yet have designated PHGs. For these contaminants,
the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG), the federal U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) equivalent of PHGs, is used in the 2019 PHGs Report.
N-nitrosodimethylamine
(NDMA) has a
PHG of 3 nanograms per liter,
but is not
regulated in drinking
water with
a primary drinking water
standard.
Bromodichloromethane,
bromoform, and
dichloroacetic acid are three
disinfection
byproducts that have federal MCI -Gs of 0 but are not individually regulated with primary
drinking water standards. According to the ACWA guidance and instructions from
City of Santa Ana 2 2019 PHGs Report
75C-5
DDW, these four chemicals do not have to be included in the 2019 PHGs Report
because they do not have an existing MCL.
3.0 Identification of Contaminants
Section 116470(b)(1) of the Health and Safety Code requires public water systems
serving more than 10,000 service connections to identify each contaminant detected in
drinking water that exceeded the applicable PHG. Section 116470(f) requires the
MCLG to be used for comparison if there is no applicable PHG.
The City of Santa Ana (City) water system has approximately 44,838 service
connections. The following constituents were detected at one or more locations within
the drinking water system at levels that exceeded the applicable PHGs or MCLGs:
• Arsenic — naturally -occurring in local groundwater
• Bromate — formed when naturally -occurring bromide reacts with ozone during the
disinfection process.
• Coliform Bacteria, Total — naturally -occurring in the environment but can also be
an indicator of the presence of other pathogenic organisms originating from
sewage, livestock or other wildlife.
• Perchlorate — industrial contamination in groundwater
• Gross alpha particle activity (gross alpha) — naturally -occurring in local
groundwater and surface water purchased from MWDSC
• Gross beta particle activity (gross beta) — naturally -occurring in surface water
purchased from MWDSC
• Uranium — naturally -occurring in local groundwater and in surface water
purchased from MWDSC.
The accompanying chart shows the applicable PHG or MCLG and MCL for each
contaminant identified above. The chart includes the maximum, minimum, and average
City of Santa Ana 3 2019 PHGs Report
75C-6
concentrations of each contaminant in drinking water supplied by the City in calendar
years 2016 through 2018.
4.0 Numerical Public Health Risks
Section 116470(b)(2) of the Health and Safety Code requires disclosure of the
numerical public health risk, determined by OEHHA, associated with the MCLs, Action
Levels, PHGs and MCLGs. Available numerical health risks developed by OEHHA for
the contaminants identified above are shown on the accompany chart. Only numerical
risks associated with cancer -causing chemicals have been quantified by OEHHA.
Arsenic — OEHHA has determined the health risk associated with the PHG is 1 excess
case of cancer in a million people. USEPA has determined the risk associated with the
MCL is 2.5 excess cases of cancer in 1,000 people exposed over a 70-year lifetime.
Bromate — OEHHA has determined the theoretical health risk associated with the PHG
is 1 excess case of cancer in a million people. USEPA has determined the risk
associated with the MCL is 1 excess cases of cancer in 10,000 people exposed over a
70-year lifetime.
Coliform Bacteria, Total — OEHHA has not established a PHG. USEPA has
established an MCLG of 0.
Gross Alpha — OEHHA has not established a PHG. USEPA has established an MCLG
of 0 and the risk associated with the MCL is 1 excess case of cancer in 1,000 people
over a lifetime exposure.
Gross Beta — OEHHA has not established a PHG. USEPA has established an MCLG
of 0 and the risk associated with the MCL is 2 excess cases of cancer in 1,000 people
over a lifetime exposure.
City of Santa Ana 4 2019 PHGs Report
75C-7
Perchlorate — OEHHA has not established a numerical health risk for perchlorate
because PHGs for non -carcinogenic chemicals in drinking water are set at a
concentration at which no known or anticipated adverse health risks will occur, with an
adequate margin of safety.
Uranium — OEHHA has determined the theoretical health risk associated with the PHG
is 1 excess case of cancer in a million people. USEPA has determined the risk
associated with the MCL is 5 excess cases of cancer in 100,000 people exposed over a
70-year lifetime.
5.0 Identification of Risk Categories
Section 116470(b)(3) of the Health and Safety Code requires identification of the
category of risk to public health associated with exposure to the contaminant in drinking
water, including a brief, plainly worded description of those terms. The risk categories
and definitions for the contaminants identified above are shown on the accompanying
chart.
6.0 Description of Best Available Technology
Section 116470(b)(4) of the Health and Safety Code requires a description of the best
available technology , if any is available on a commercial basis, to remove or reduce the
concentrations of the contaminants identified above. The BATS are shown on the
accompanying chart.
7.0 Costs of Using Best Available Technologies and Intended Actions
Section 116470(b)(5) of the Health and Safety Code requires an estimate of the
aggregate cost and cost per customer of utilizing the BATs identified to reduce the
concentration of a contaminant to a level at or below the PHG or MCLG. In addition,
Section 116470(b)(6) requires a brief description of any actions the water purveyor
City of Santa Ana 5 2019 PHGs Report
75C-8
intends to take to reduce the concentration of the contaminant and the basis for that
decision.
Arsenic — The BATs for removal of arsenic in water for large water systems are:
activated alumina, coagulation/filtration, electrodialysis, ion exchange, lime softening,
oxidation/filtration, and reverse osmosis. Arsenic was detected above the PHG in the
local groundwater (Wells 37 and 38). The City is in compliance with the MCL for
arsenic. The estimated cost to reduce arsenic levels in local groundwater to below the
PHG of 0.004 microgram per liter (tag/1) using ion exchange was calculated. Because
the DDW detection limit for purposes of reporting (DLR) for arsenic is 2 tag/I, treating
arsenic to below the PHG level means treating arsenic to below the DLR of 2 tag/l.
There are numerous factors that may influence the actual cost of reducing arsenic
levels to the PHG. Achieving the water quality goal for arsenic could be approximately
$1,500,000 per year, or $32 per household per year.
Bromate — The BATs for removal of bromate in water for large water systems are:
coagulation/filtration optimization, granular activated carbon, and reverse osmosis.
Bromate was detected above the PHG in surface water supplied by MWDSC. The City
is in compliance with the MCL for bromate. The estimated cost to reduce bromate
levels in MWDSC surface water to below the PHG of 0.1 pg/l using reverse osmosis
was calculated. Because the DDW detection limit for purposes of reporting (DLR) for
bromate is 1 tag/l, treating bromate to below the PHG level means treating bromate to
below the DLR of 1 tag/l. There are numerous factors that may influence the actual cost
of reducing bromate levels to the PHG. Achieving the water quality goal for bromate
could range from approximately $2,610,000 to $22,230,000 per year, or between $58
and $496 per household per year.
Coliform Bacteria, Total — The BAT for removal of coliform bacteria in drinking water
has been determined by USEPA to be disinfection. The City already disinfects all water
served to the public. Chlorine or chloramines is used to disinfect the water because it is
City of Santa Ana 6 2019 PHGs Report
75C-9
an effective disinfectant and residual concentrations can be maintained to guard against
biological contamination in the water distribution system.
Coliform bacteria are indicator organisms that are ubiquitous in nature. They are a
useful tool because of the ease in monitoring and analysis. The City collects weekly
samples for total coliforms at various locations in the distribution system and monthly at
each well. If coliform bacteria are detected in the drinking water sample, it indicates a
potential problem that needs to be investigated and followed up with additional
sampling. It is not unusual for a system to have an occasional positive sample.
Although USEPA set the MCLG for total coliforms at 0 percent positive, there is no
commercially available technology that will guarantee 0 percent positive every single
month; therefore, the cost of achieving the PHG cannot be estimated.
The City will continue several programs that are in place to prevent contamination of the
water supply with microorganisms. These include:
Disinfection using chlorine or chloramines and maintenance of a chlorine residual
at every point in the distribution system
Monitoring throughout the distribution system to verify the absence of total
coliform and the presence of a protective chlorine residual
• Flushing program in which water pipelines known to have little use are flushed to
remove stagnant water and bring in fresh water with residual disinfectant
• Cross -connection control program that prevents the accidental entry of non -
disinfected water into the drinking water system.
Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Uranium — The only BAT for the removal of gross
alpha in water for large water systems is reverse osmosis, which can also remove gross
beta, and uranium, if detected. Gross alpha was detected above the MCLG in the local
groundwater and in the surface water supplied by MWDSC. Gross beta was detected
above the MCLG in the surface water supplied by MWDSC. Uranium was detected
above the PHG in the local groundwater (Wells 16, 18, 20, 21, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33,
City of Santa Ana 7 2019 PHGs Report
75C-10
34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 41) and in the surface water supplied by MWDSC. The cost
of providing treatment using reverse osmosis to reduce gross alpha levels in local
groundwater and in MWDSC surface water to the MCLG of 0 picoCurie per liter (pCi/1)
(and consequently gross beta in MWDSC surface water below the MCLG; and uranium
in local groundwater and in MWDSC surface water below the PHG) was calculated.
Because the DLR for gross alpha is 3 pCi/l, treating gross alpha to 0 pCi/I means
treating it to below the DLR of 3 pCi/I. Achieving the water quality goal for gross alpha
could range from $8,690,000 to $74,100,000 per year, or between $194 and $1,651 per
household per year.
Perchlorate — The BATS for removal of perchlorate in water are: ion exchange and
biological fluidized bed reactor. Perchlorate was detected above the PHG in the local
groundwater (Well 24). The City is in compliance with the MCL for perchlorate. The
estimated cost to reduce perchlorate levels in local groundwater to below the PHG of 1
pg/I using ion exchange was calculated. Because the DLR for perchlorate is 4 pg/I,
treating perchlorate to below the PHG level means treating perchlorate to below the
DLR of 4 lag/l. There are numerous factors that may influence the actual cost of
reducing perchlorate levels to the PHG. Achieving the water quality goal for perchlorate
could range from $105,000 to $226,000 per year, or between $2.33 and $5.04 per
household per year.
All Contaminants — In addition, a cost estimate to treat all water produced or
purchased by the City using ion exchange and reverse osmosis to remove all the
contaminants detected above the PHGs or MCLGs was calculated. All the
contaminants listed in the accompanying chart may be removed to non -detectable
levels by ion exchange and reverse osmosis, except total coliform bacteria. As shown
on the accompanying chart, achieving the water quality goals for all contaminants,
except total coliform bacteria, using ion exchange and reverse osmosis could range
from $8,800,000 to $74,300,000 per year, or between $196 and $1,657 per household
per year.
City of Santa Ana 8 2019 PHGs Report
75C-11
For additional information, please contact Mr. Robert Hernandez, Water Services
Quality Supervisor, at (714) 647-3341, or write to the City of Santa Ana, 220 South
Daisy Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92703.
City of Santa Ana
2019 PHGs Report
75C-12
wo
9 S
Uia
V
wN
�'
V
C
v
,Ua
o g
a
«�
rc
0
LL
O
W 3°
°
y°
K m K
W
w
w
aU
LU
Li
W
V
b
b b
N
a
a
.o-
a C'h
N
u
a
ry
r N
N
p y
y
W 6
f Z
x y
p o x
I
140
U
K
Ufa
Z
U U w
U U U
I
F
MO
U U
N
a
j
z z
o c N
z
3
zo
U
a
OWE
Z N Z
Z N m
ONE
w ul
z
m
Z Z
Z
v Z
v Z m
U>
0
Z
N e
m a
UKJ
a0f
e
p
I
p
w
w
Elm
e
=
E
Qy
W
�n
E
e
K
J c
U
U'
a
FF
U
W
J C
z2_
°
2
a
€
° 4
U
a
n m
a
8
v'
Ko
u m o
0¢ m E
U
o e
° o o m
u
o
Er
z¢`ma
U`ci5
w
m �
0
o v°
z � a
U=
ro
° Eyy`�
6'ctlb
iE E2 mcE
Oam'F°v c'rvc� v
3' ooc SEU m
F �jp U;m�OW OxK Bi
�II II F WASH
III 4D
< II II 11 OK
3
8
9
2
E Y
'5 �v
5 Eo
5
� yv
�i YyL'
E 8W
- E _
� � m
d E vat
8 � _
$ I
3 E� E
° NW
j �D v f 9 wmcEa
�F 0 K E „la.
"C Nja a G E 11gaa
s s� e� EaEeEm
v. g E
ES aao mEE6.p�na.E€ �nH9P o'er
o .,F i E.6 iwi .=Eccy L°°c 883 5
tai .6 v° yMANUiEao0 jjQQ��EEE E
U yU_W F'U'JJ^II I ",Hq 11MMWwa
� sa�9zzzImy
JV— IQ
75C-14
"n
I IAfE OF CALI FORK IA
- ;'-
AUTHENTICATED
t..�
ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL ".
State of California
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
Section 116470
EXHIBIT 2
116470. (a) Asa condition of its operating permit, every public water system shall
annually prepare a consumer confidence report and mail or deliver a copy of that
report to each customer, other than an occupant, as defined in Section 799.28 of the
Civil Code, of a recreational vehicle park. A public water system in a recreational
vehicle park with occupants as defined in Section 799.28 of the Civil Code shall
prominently display on a bulletin board at the entrance to or in the office of the park,
and make available upon request, a copy of the report. The report shall include all of
the following information:
(1) The source of the water purveyed by the public water system.
(2) A brief and plainly worded definition of the terms "maximum contaminant
level," "primary drinking water standard," and "public health goal:'
(3) If any regulated contaminant is detected in public drinking water supplied by
the system during the past year, the report shall include all of the following
information:
(A) The level of the contaminant found in the drinking water, and the corresponding
public health goal and primary drinking water standard for that contaminant.
(13) Any violations of the primary drinking water standard that have occurred as
a result of the presence of the contaminant in the drinking water and a brief and plainly
worded statement of health concerns that resulted in the regulation of that contaminant.
(C) The public water system's address and phone number to enable customers to
obtain further information concerning contaminants and potential health effects.
(4) Information on the levels of unregulated contaminants, if any, for which
monitoring is required pursuant to state or federal law or regulation.
(5) Disclosure of any variances or exemptions from primary drinking water
standards granted to the system and the basis therefor.
(b) On or before July 1, 1998, and every three years thereafter, public water
systems serving more than 10,000 service connections 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 contaminant detected in drinking water that exceeds the
applicable public health goal.
(2) Discloses the munerieal public health 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 health goal for that contaminant.
75C-15
(3) Identifies the category of risk to public health, including, but not limited to,
carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, and acute toxicity, associated with exposure to
the contaminant in drinking water, and includes a brief plainly worded description of
these terms.
(4) Describes the best available technology, if any is then available on a commercial
basis, to remove the contaminant 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 entities, 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 level 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 contaminant in public drinking water supplies and
the basis for that decision.
(c) Public water systems required to prepare 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 systems may hold the public hearing as part of
any regularly scheduled meeting.
(d) The department shall not require a public water system to take any action to
reduce or eliminate any exceedance of a public health goal.
(c) 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 subdivision (c) of Section 116365, and in lieu thereof,
public water systems shall use the national maximum contaminant level goal adopted
by the United States Environmental Protection 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 required
consumer confidence report as authorized by 42 U.S.C. Section 300g-3(c).
(Repealed and added by Stats. 1996, Ch. 755, Sec. 12. Effective January 1, 1997.)
75C-16
EXHIBIT 3
(Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L), unless otherwise noted.)
Last Update: March 13, 2019
This table includes: For comparison:
California's maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
Detection limits for purposes of reporting (DLRs) Federal MCLs and
Public health goals (PHGs) from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Maximum
Contaminant Level
OEHHA Goals (MCLGs) (US
Also, the PHG for NDMA (which is not yet regulated) is included at the bottom of this table. Ems_
Regulated Contaminant MCL I DLR PHG Date f MCL MCLG
PHG
Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64431—Inorganic Chemicals
Aluminum I 1 I n n5 I n R 9nn1
= micron nbers per rater; for I 7 MFL 10.2 MFL I 7 MFL 1 2003 7 MFL 1 7 MFL
Total - OEHHA withdrew the 0.05 0.01 I Novh. 2001 I 1999 I 0.1 0.1
L PHG
Hexavalent - 0.01-mg/L MCL & __ __ 0.00002 2011
:rcury (inorganic)
0,002
0.001
1 0.0012
0.002
0.002
rev2005199g
:kel
0.1
0.01
0.012
2001
:rate (as nitrogen, N)
10 as N
0.4
45 as NO3
2018
10
10
=10 as N
:rite as N
1 as N
0.4
1 as N
2018
1
1
:rate + Nitrite as N
10 as N
--
10 as N
2018
rchlorate
0.006
0.004
0.001
2015
denium
0.05
0.005
0.03
2010
0.05
0.05
allium
0.002
0.001
0.0001
1999
0.002
0.0005
ev2004
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
U.U1b I U.UUb I U.000L I 2UU9 U.U1b I zero
Radionuclides with MCLs in 22 CCR §64441 and §64443—Radioactivity
[units are picocuries per liter (pCi/L), unless otherwise stated; n/a = not applicable]
; alpha particle activity- OEHHA
ided in 2003 that a PHG was not 15 1 3 1 none n/a 15 zero
in 2003 that a PHG was not
I4 mrem/yr
I 4
I none
I n/a
I
4 mrem/yr
zero
'.6
-
1
0.05
12006
R
1
1 n n14
9nnF
Page 1 of 3 6/17/2019
75C-17
Regulated Contaminant
MCL
DLR
PHG
Date of
PHG
Radium-226 + Radium-228
5
Strontium-90
8
2
0.35
2006
Tritium
20,000
1 1,000
1 400
2006
Uranium
20
1 1
1 0.43
2001
Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64444-Organic Chemicals
(a) Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs)
Benzene
0.001
0.0005
0.00016
2001
Carbon tetrachloride
0.0005
0.0005
0.0001
2000
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
0.6
0.0005
0.6
1997
ev2009
1,4-Dichlorobenzene -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-Dichloroeth lene 1,1-DCE
0.006
0.0005
1 0.01
1999
cis-1,2-Dichloroeth lene
0.006
0.0005
0.013
2018
trans-1,2-Dichloroeth lene
0.01
0.0005
0.05
2018
Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride)
0.005
0.0005
0.004
2000
1,2-Dichloro ro ane
0.005
0.0005
0.0005
1999
1,3-Dichloropropene
0,0005
0.0005
0.0002
1999
rev2006
Eth (benzene
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
1 0.0001
2003
Tetrachloroeth lene PCE
0.005
0.0005
1 0.00006
2001
Toluene
0.15
0.0005
0.15
1999
1,2,4-Trichoorobenzene
0.005
0.0005
0.005
1999
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,1,1-TCA
0.200
0.0005
1
2006
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1,1,2-TCA
0.005
0.0005
0.0003
2006
Trichloroeth lene TCE
0.005
0.0005
0.0017
2009
Trichlorofluoromethane Freon 11
0.15
0.005
1.3 1
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
X lenes
1.750
0.0005 1
1.8
1997
(b) Non -Volatile Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs)
Alachlor
0.002
0.001
0.004
1997
Atrazine
0.001
0.0005
0.00015
1999
Bentazon
0.018
0.002
0.2
1999
ev2009
Benzo a rene
0.0002
0.0001
0.000007
2010
Carbofuran
0.018
0.005
0.0007
2016
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 1
0.0000017
1999
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)
0.07
0.01
0.02
2009
Di 2-eth (hex I adi ate
0.4
0.005
0.2
2003
Di 2-eth (hex I hthalate DEHP
0.004
0.003
1 012
1997
Dinoseb
0.007
0.002
0.014
1997
rev2010
Page 2 of 3
MCL MCLG
5
zero
30 µ /L
zero
0.005
zero
0.005
zero
0.6
0.6
0.075
0.075
0.005
zero
0.007
0.007
0.07
0.07
0.1
0.1
0.005
zero
0.005
zero
0.7
0.7
01
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.005
zero
1
1
0.07
0.07
0.2
0.2
0.005
0.003
0.005
zero
0.002
zero
10
10
0.002
zero
0.003
0.003
0.0002
zero
0.04
0.04
0.002
zero
0.2
0.2
0.0002
zero
0.07
0.07
0.4
0.4
0.006
zero
0.007
0.007
6/17/2019
75C-18
Regulated Contaminant I MCL I DLR I PHG I Date of I I MCL MCLG
u.uui I u.000b u.uuuu3 1 2uu3 1 1 u.uu1 I zero
0.05 1 0.05 1 0.05
0.0002 1 0.0002 0.000032 1999 0.0002 0.0002
Toxa heney
0.003
0.001
0.0000312018draft
0.003
zero
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
0.000005
0.000005
0.0000007
2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin)
3x10'e
5x10-9
5x10-1'
3x10"e
zero
2,4,5-TP Silvex
0.05
0.001
0.003
0.05
0.05
Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64533-Disinfection Byproducts
Total Trihalomethanes 0.080
-
0.080
Bromodichloromethane
--
0.0010
0.00006
zero
Bromoform
0.0010
0.0005
zero
Chloroform
0.0010
0.0004
2018 draft
-
0.07
Dibromochloromethane
-
0.0010
0.0001
2018 draft
0.06
Haloacetic Acids (five) (HAA5)
0.060
--
0.060
MonochloroaceticAcid
-
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**
0.0001
2009
0.01
zero
Chlorite
1.0
0.020
0.05
2009
1
0.8
Chemicals with PHGs established in response to DDW requests. These are not
currently regulated drinking water contaminants.
N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) I - I -- 1 0.000003--
*OEHHA's review of this chemical during the year indicated (rev20XX) resulted in no change
in the PHG.
**The DLR for Bromate is 0.0010 mg/L for analysis performed using EPA Method 317.0
Revision 2.0, 321.8, or 326.0.
Page 3 of 3 6/17/2019
75C-19
75C-20