August 16, 2022, Item #10
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CONTACT:
SUBJECT:
Summary:
AGENDA REPORT CityofPoway
August 1 6, 2022
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Co
1 ~ncil
Eric Heidemann, Director of Public Works '1 \-t'
CITY COUNCIL
Troy De Priest, Assistant Director of Public Works for Utilities TD p [email protected]. (858) 668-4750
Resolution Adopting the Report on City's Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals for 2019-2021
The City of Poway's (City) public water system is strictly regulated by the State of California and the United States federal government. The California State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establish Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for drinking water at very conservative levels to provide protection to consumers. The City currently meets all DDW and EPA drinking water standards and MCLs to protect public health. To continue compliance with DDW, the City is required to prepare a triennial report on the City's Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals (PHG) for calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021 (Attachment A) and to conduct a public hearing adopting the report through a resolution (Attachment B).
Recommended Action:
It is recommended the City Council open the public hearing, take public input, close the public hearing, and adopt the Resolution.
Discussion:
Public water systems serving more than 10,000 service connections must prepare a brief triennial report if their water quality measurements have exceeded PHGs. PHGs are non-enforceable goals established by the California Environmental Protection Agency's Health Hazard Assessment. The report must also list the detection of any contaminants above a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) set by the EPA Only contaminants with a California primary drinking water standard and for which either a PHG or MCLG has been set are addressed in this report. This report is intended to provide additional information to the public and is supplemental to the Water Quality Report provided to water customers annually.
1 of 10
August 16, 2022, Item #10
The
difference
between
MCLs,
PHGs,
and
MCLGs
is
outlined
in
the
attached
Report
on
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
2019-2021.
MCLs
are
enforceable
standards
and
the
threshold
of
contaminant
levels
for
all
public
water
systems.
PHGs
and
MCLGs
are
defined
as
goals
and
not
enforceable
drinking
water
standards.
Agencies
are
not
mandated
to
take
action
to
achieve
these
goals.
It
is
important
to
note
for
many
contaminants
the
health
goal
is
zero.
None
of
the
practical
risk-management
factors
considered
by
the
EPA
or
DDW
in
setting
drinking
water
MCLs
are
considered
in
setting
PHGs.
These
factors
include
analytical
detection
capability,
available
treatment
technology,
benefits,
and
costs.
Furthermore,
many
contaminants
are
naturally
present
in
source
water
and
cannot
be
eliminated
through
treatment.
Water
quality
data
collected
from
the
City's
public
water
system
in
2019,
2020,
and
2021
was
used
for
this
report.
Six
constituent
classifications
were
detected
above
the
PHG
or
MCLG
limits
and
are
addressed
in
the
report.
The
levels
of
these
contaminants
fall
below
the
MCLs
for
drinking
water
standards.
No
action
is
proposed
in
the
report
as
the
City's
drinking
water
meets
regulatory
standards
and
MCLs
set
by
the
DDW
and
the
EPA.
Environmental
Review:
This
action
is
not
subject
to
review
under
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(CEQA).
Fiscal
Impact:
There
is
no
fiscal
impact
associated
with
this
action.
Public
Notification:
The
State
of
California
requires
that
the
City
Council
conduct
a public
hearing
to
consider
the
adoption
of
the
Report
on
City's
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
2019-2021.
In
compliance
with
this
requirement
, a
Public
Notice
was
published
in
the
Poway
News
Chieftain
on
August
4,
2022,
and
August
11,
2022.
Attachments:
A.
Report
B.
Resolution
Reviewed/Approved
By:
Assistant
City
Manager
2 of
10 Reviewed
By
:
Alan
Fenstermacher
City
Attorney
Approved
By:
Ch
~
City
Manager
August 16, 2022, Item #10
ATTACHMENT A
3 of
10 Report
on
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
2019-2021
August 16, 2022, Item #10
Back~round
CITY
OF
POWAY
WATER
QUALITY
RELATIVE
TO
PUBLIC
HEALTH
GOALS
Published
June
2022,
covering
years
2019
-2021
California
Health
and
Safety
Code
Section
116470(b)
California
Health
and
Safety
Code
Section
116470(b)
specifies
that
public
water
systems
with
over
10,000
service
connections
prepare
a
brief
triennial
report
if
their
water
quality
measurements
have
exceeded
Public
Health
Goals
(PHGs).
PHGs
are
non-enforceable
goals
established
by
the
California
Office
of
Environmental
Health
Hazard
Assessment
(OEHHA).
The
report
must
also
list
the
detection
of
any
contaminant
above
the
Maximum
Contaminant
Level
Goals
(MCLGs)
set
by
the
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(EPA).
Only
constituents
that
have
a
California
primary
drinking
water
standard
and
for
which
a
PHG
or
MCLG
has
been
set
are
addressed
in
this
report.
This
report
covers the
years
2019, 2020,
and
2021
and
follows
the
Association
of
California
Water
Agencies
(ACWA)
guidelines. The
City
of
Poway's
drinking
water
quality
meets
all
State
and
Federal
drinking
water
standards.
Public
water
systems
conduct
frequent
and
extensive
tests
to
ensure
the
quality
of
their
water.
A
few
constituents
are
routinely
detected
at
levels
well
below
drinking
water
standards
for
which
no
PHG
or
MCLG
has
been
adopted.
If
a
constituent
was
detected
in
the
City
of
Poway's
(City)
water
supply
between
2019
and
2021
at
a
level
exceeding
an
applicable
PHG
or
MCLG,
this
report
provides
information
regarding
the
constituent
as
required
by
law,
which
includes:
•
the
numerical
public
health
risk
associated
with
the
MCL,
PHG
or
MCLG;
•
the
category
or
type
of
risk
to
health
that
could
be
associated
with
each
constituent;
•
the
best
treatment
technology
available
that
could
be
used
to
reduce
the
constituent
level;
and
•
an
estimate
of
the
cost
to
install
that
treatment
if
it
is
appropriate
and
feasible.
WHAT
ARE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
GOALS?
Public
Health
Goals
are
set
by
the
OEHHA,
which
is
part
of
the
California
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(EPA).
The
PHGs
are
non-enforceable
and
are
not
required
to
be
met
by
any
public
water
system.
MCLGs
are
the
federal
equivalent
to
PH
Gs
.
There
is
a
difference
in
how
each
organization
categorizes
carcinogens.
The
MCLGs
for
carcinogens
are
set
at
zero
because
the
EPA
assumes
there
is
no
safe
level
of
exposure
to
them.
Conversely,
PHGs
4 of10
City
of
Poway-
Public
Health
Goals
June
2022
Page
2 August 16, 2022, Item #10
are
set
at
a level
considered
to
pose
no
significant
risk
of
cancer.
This
is
usually
denoted
as
a "one-in
a-million"
cancer
risk
for
a lifetime
of
exposure.
At
that
level,
not
more
than
one
person
in
a population
of
one
million
people
drinking
the
water
daily
for
70 years
would
be
expected
to
develop
cancer from
exposure
to
that
chemical.
Determinations
of
health
risk
at
these
levels
are
frequently
theoretical
and
have
not
been
quantified
or
proven
through
scientific
experimentation
.
WATER
QUALITY
DATA
All
water
quality
data
collected
from
the
City's
public
water
system
in
2019,
2020,
and
2021
for
purposes
of
determining
compliance
with
drinking
water
standards
was
considered
in
this
report.
The
water
quality
data
was
summarized
in
each
of
the
2019
through
2021
City
Water
Quality
Reports
made
available
to
all
residents
and
customers.
Water
quality
data
from
2019-2021
considered
for
this
report
contained
no
constituents
that
exceeded
state
or
federal
compliance
standards.
This
report
discusses
six
constituent
classifications
that
were
detected
above
the
PHG
or
MCLG
limits.
CONSTITUENTS
DETECTED
THAT
EXCEED
A
PHG
OR
MCLG.
Gross
Alpha
-
Radionuclides
such
as
gross
alpha
particle
in
water
supplies
are
from
erosion
of
naturally
occurring
deposits.
Gross
alpha
particle
activity
is
a
measure
of
the
total
amount
of
radioactivity
in
a water
sample
attributable
to
the
radioactive
decay
of
alpha-emitting
elements.
The
EPAs
Maximum
Contaminant
Level
Goal
(MCLG)
for
gross
alpha
particle
activity
is
zero
(0)
and
the
California
MCL
is
15 picocuries
per
liter
of
water
(pCi/L)
.
From
2019-2021
samples
collected
and
analyzed
ranged
from
non-detect
(ND)
to
5.21 pCi/L,
with
an
average
of
3.24 pCi/L.
Although
there
is
no
PHG
for
Gross
Alpha,
the
MCLG
is
zero.
The
health
risk
category
for
gross
alpha
particles
is
carcinogenicity,
which
means
capable
of
producing
cancer.
The
numerical
health
risk
for
gross
alpha,
based
on
the
MCL,
is
one
cancer
case
in
a population
of
one-thousand
people
exposed
over
a lifetime
for
the
isotope
polonium
210,
the
most
potent
alpha
emitter.
Gross
Beta
-
Gross
Beta
particle
activity
is
a
measure
of
the
total
amount
of
radioactivity
in
a water
sample
attributable
to
the
radioactive
decay
of
natural
and
man-made
deposits.
The
MCLG
for
gross
beta
particle
is
zero
and
the
State
of
California
is
50 pCi/L.
From
2019-2021
gross
beta
particle
was
detected
and
ranged
from
ND
to
4.32 pCi/1.
Although
there
is
no
PHG
for
Gross
Beta,
the
MCLG
is
zero.
The
health
risk
category
is
carcinogenicity.
The
numerical
health
risk
for
Gross
Beta,
based
on
the
MCL,
is
two
cancer
cases
in
a
population
of
ten-thousand
people
exposed
over
a
lifetime
for
the
isotope
lead
210,
the
most
potent
beta
emitter.
Uranium
-
Uranium
is
a
natural-occurring
radioactive
element
that
is
ubiquitous
in
geological
formations
and
the
earth's
crust.
Uranium
is
found
in
ground
and
surface
waters
due
to
erosion
of
natural
deposits.
The
MCL
for
uranium
is
20 pCi/L
and
PHG
is
0.43 pCi/L.
Samples
collected
from
2019-2021
contained
values
that
ranged
from
non-detect
(ND
to
2.6 pCi/L),
with
all
samples
below
the
MCL.
The
health
risk
category
for
uranium
is
carcinogenicity
. The
numerical
health
risk
for
uranium,
based
on
the
PHG,
is
one
cancer
case
in
a
population
of
one-million
people
exposed
over
a
lifetime.
The
actual
cancer
risk
may
be
lower
or
zero.
These
detections
do
not
constitute
a violation
of
drinking
water
regulations
or
indicate
the
water
was
unsafe
to
drink.
Arsenic
-Arsenic
is
a
naturally
occurring
element
in
the
earth's
crust
and
is
very
widely
distributed
in
the
environment.
All
humans
are
exposed
to
microgram
quantities
of
arsenic
(inorganic
and
organic)
1 y o7'oway-
Public
Health
Goals
June
2022
Page
3 August 16, 2022, Item #10
largely
from
food
(25
to
50 µg/day)
and
to
a
lesser
degree
from
drinking
water
and
air.
In
certain
geographical
areas,
natural
mineral
deposits
may
contain
large
quantities
of
arsenic
and
this
may
result
in
higher
levels
of
arsenic
in
water.
Waste
chemical
disposal
sites
may
also
be
a source
of
arsenic
contamination
of
water
supplies.
The
main
commercial
use
of
arsenic
in
the
U.S.
is
in
pesticides,
herbicides
and
wood
preservatives.
Misapplication
or
accidental
spills
of
these
materials
could
result
in
contamination
of
nearby
water
supplies.
Arsenic
does
not
have
a
tendency
to
accumulate
in
the
body
at
low
environmental
exposure
levels.
The
levels
of
arsenic
that
most
people
ingest
in
food
and
water
(ca.
50 µg/day)
have
not
been
considered
to
be
of
health
concern
. The
MCL
for
arsenic
is
1 0
ppb
and
the
PHG
is
0.004
ppb.
From
2019-2021
samples
collected
and
analyzed
from
untreated
surface
water
have
detected
arsenic
above
the
PHG
and
below
the
MCL
of
10 ppb.
The
category
of
health
risk
associated
with
arsenic
is
carcinogenicity
(causes
cancer).
The
Office
of
Environmental
Health
Assessment
has
set
the
PHG
at
0.004
ppb.
The
PHG
is
based
on
a
level
that
will
result
in
not
more
than
one
excess
cancer
case
in
1 million
people
who
drink
2 liters
daily
of
this
water
for
70 years.
The
actual
cancer
risk
may
be
lower
or
zero.
The
numerical
health
risk
associated
with
the
MCL
is
2.5 cases
per
thousand
people
exposed.
Total
Trihalomethanes
(TTHM)
- A
predominant
group
of
chlorinated
drinking
water
byproducts,
trihalomethanes
can
occur
as
a result
of
the
reaction
between
natural
organic
matter
in
drinking
water
and
chlorine
added
as
a
disinfectant.
TTHMs
describe
four
disinfection
by-products:
bromoform,
chloroform,
bromodichloromethane,
and
dibromochloromethane.
There
are
no
MCLs
for
individual
trihalomethanes.
However,
there
are
PHGs
of
0.4 ppb
for
chloroform,
0.5 ppb
for
bromoform,
0.06 ppb
for
bromodichloromethane
and
0.1 ppb
for
dibromochloromethane.
The
MCL
for
TTHMs
combined
is
80 ppb.
The
TTHM
combined
average
from
2019-2021,
57.4 ppb
is
below
the
state
MCL
and
the
range
was
between
26.7 ppb-64.9
ppb.
The
PHG
for
bromoform
is
0.0005mg/l,
chloroform
0.0004
mg/I,
bromodichloromethane
0.00006
mg/I,
and
dibromochloromethane
0.0001
mg/I.
Bromoform
was
detected
and
ranged
from
non-detected
(ND)
to
0.00646
mg/I
from
2019-2021,
exceeding
the
PHG
of
0.0005
mg/I.
Chloroform
was
detected
and
ranged
from
non-detected
to
0.020
mg/I
from
2019-2021,
exceeding
the
PHG
of
0.0004mg/l.
Bromodichloromethane
was
detected
and
ranged
from
ND
to
0.020
mg/I
from
2019-2021,
exceeding
the
PHG
of
0.0006
mg/I.
Dibromochloro
methane
was
detected
and
ranged
from
ND
to
0.020
mg/I
from
2019-2021,
exceeding
the
PHG
of
0.0001
mg/I
The
health
risk
for
trihalomethanes
is
carcinogenicity.
The
basis
for
this
health
risk
measurement
is
the
state
MCL
for
combined
trihalomethanes
of
0.080
mg/I
(80
ppb)
. The
risk
measurement
will
vary
with
different
combinations
and
ratios
of
trihalomethanes
in
a
particular
sample.
The
health
risk
at
the
PHG
is
one
cancer
case
per
million
people
exposed
over
a lifetime.
The
actual cancer
risk
may
be
lower
or
zero.
Lead
and
Copper
-There
is
no
MCL
for
lead
or
copper.
However,
it
is
required
that
90%
of
samples
taken
from
household
taps
in
the
distribution
system
cannot
exceed
an
Action
Level
(AL)
of
0.Q15
mg/I
for
lead
and
1.30 mg/I
for
copper.
One
sample
taken
in
July
2019,
with
a
recorded
reading
of
0.078
mg/I,
exceeded
the
lead
AL
of
0.015
mg/I
and
the
PHG
of
0.0002
mg/I.
The
copper
AL
of
1.3 mg/I
was
not
exceeded.
The
PHG
of
copper
of
0.30 mg/I
was
exceeded
with
recorded
readings
in
July
2019
of
0.319
mg/I
and
0.315
mg/I.
City
of
Poway-
Public
Health
Goals
June
2022
Page
4 August 16, 2022, Item #10
The
lead
and
copper
sample
data
for
this
report
was
taken
from
the
2019
Lead
and
Copper
Report
submitted
to
the
State
Water
Resources
Control
Board
Division
of
Drinking
Water
(DDW).
Thirty-two
locations
were
sampled
from
single
family
household
taps.
Samples
were
collected
on
July
8,
15,
22,
2019
. 90
th
percentile
lead
level
at
those
locations
was
0.001
O
mg/I
and
90 th
percentile
copper
level
was
0.1330
mg/I.
The
lead
level
of
samples
taken
collectively
falls
below
the
90 th
percentile.
The
copper
level
is
below
the
action
level
as
well
represented
as
the
90 th
percentile
level
collectively.
Special
re
samples
were
taken
at
one
location
that
provided
this
anomaly
in
August
2019.
The
lead
results
of
the
samples
ranged
from
non-detected
(ND)
to
0.00186
mg/I
and
the
copper
results
were
recorded
as
0.00767
mg/I
-0.034
mg/I.
All
the
special
re
-sample
results
were
below
the
action
levels
of
lead
at
0.015
mg/I
and
copper
at
1.3 mg/I.
The
public
health
goals
of
copper
0.3 mg/I
and
lead
.0002
mg/I
were
not
exceeded.
The
action
levels
for
copper
and
lead
refer
to
a concentration
measured
at
the
tap
. Much
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).
The
category
of
health
risk
for
lead
is
developmental
neurotoxicity
(causes
neurobehavioral
effects
in
children),
cardiovascular
toxicity
(causes
high
blood
pressure)
and
carcinogenicity
(causes
cancer).
The
category
of
health
risk
for
copper
is
digestive
system
toxicity
(causes
nausea,
vomiting,
diarrhea).
The
numerical
health
risk
for
lead
at
the
MCLG
is
one
person
in
a million
per
a lifetime
of
exposure.
At
the
California
MCL
the health
risk
is
one
cancer
case
per
million
people
exposed.
At
the
California
MCL
the
actual
cancer
risk
may
be
lower
or
zero.
The
numerical
health
risk
for
copper
at
the
California
MCL
is
two
cancer
cases
per
million
people
per
a
lifetime
of
exposure.
Our
public
water
system
complies
with
the
federal
and
state
Lead
and
Copper
Rule
Regulations.
Based
on
our
sampling
it
was
determined,
according
to
state
regulatory
requirements,
that
the
City
meets
the
Action
Levels
for
lead
and
copper.
Therefore
, we
are
deemed
by
DDW
to
have
"optimized
corrosion
control"
for
our
distribution
system.
In
general,
optimizing
corrosion
control
is
the
best
available
technology
to
deal
with
corrosion
issues
and
with
any
lead
or
copper
findings.
We
continue
to
monitor
our
water
quality
parameters
that
relate
to
corrosivity,
such
as
pH,
hardness,
alkalinity,
total
dissolved
solids
and,
if
necessary,
will
take
additional
action
to
continue
to
maintain
our
system
in
an
"optimized
corrosion
control"
condition.
Since
we
are
meeting
the
"optimized
corrosion
control"
requirements,
it
is
not
prudent
to
initiate
additional
corrosion
control
treatment,
as
it
involves
the
addition
of
chemicals
that
could
raise
additional
water
quality
issues.
Therefore,
no
estimate
of
cost
has
been
included.
BEST
AVAILABLE
TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGY
AND
COST
ESTIMATES
Both
the
EPA
and
DDW
adopt
best
available
technologies
which
are
the
best
methods
of
reducing
contaminant
levels
to
the
MCL.
It
is
not
always
possible
or
feasible
to
determine
what
treatment
is
needed
to
further
reduce
a
constituent
downward
towards
the
PHG
or
MCLG,
many
of
which
are
set
at
zero.
Estimating
the
costs
to
reduce
a
constituent
to
zero
is
difficult,
if
not
impossible,
because
it
is
not
possible
to
verify
by
analytical
means
that
a
level
has
been
lowered
to
zero
. In
some
cases,
installing
treatment
to
try
and
further
reduce
very
low
levels
of
one
constituent
may
have
adverse
effects
on
other
aspects
of
water
quality
.
Reverse
osmosis
(RO)
is
the
best
available
technology to
lower
the
level
of
the
detected
constituents
listed
in
this
report
below
the
associated
PH
Gs
since
the
levels
are
already
below
the
MCL.
Please
note
City
of
Poway-
Public
Health
Goals
June
2022
Page
5 August 16, 2022, Item #10
that
accurate
cost
estimates
are
difficult,
if
not
impossible,
and
are
highly
speculative
and
theoretical.
Cost
estimating
guides
from
ACWA
guidance
report
were
used
in
determin
ing
the
estimated
cost
to
implement
the
best
available
technologies
. According
to
the
ACWA
Cost
Estimates
for
Treatment
Technologies
Survey,
to
install
and
operate
an
RO
system
could
cost
between
approximately
$2.20-
$4.80
per
1,000
gallons
of
water
treated.
The
Lester
J.
Berglund
Water
Treatment
Plant
(WTP)
production
capacity
is
24 million
gallons
per
day.
The
estimated
annualized
cost
to
install
and
operate
a
RO
system
at
the
water
treatment
plant
could
cost
between
$19,000,000
and
$42,000,000.
The
cost
per
customer
service
connection,
assuming
14,000
service
connections
and
the
full
capacity
utilized
at
the
WTP
would
range
from
$1,357-
$3,000
per
service
connection
annually.
There
would
be
additional
costs
for
water
conditioning
to
ensure
water
treated
by
RO
is
optimized
for
distribution
system
corrosion
control.
Costs
including
annualized
capital,
construction,
engineering,
planning,
environmental,
contingency,
and
O&M
are
included,
but
only
very general
assumptions
can
be
made
without
extensive
research
and
assessment
by
a
qualified
professional
engineering
firm.
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR
FURTHER
ACTION
All
constituents
discussed
in
this
report
were
detected
below
the
health
based
MCLs
established
for
"safe
drinking
water."
To
reduce
those
levels
even
further
would
require
a substantial
undertaking
of
engineering
analysis
and
cost
estimating.
The
review
would
take
into
consideration
multiple
variables,
including
alternative
advanced
treatment
methods
such
as
RO
and
ultrafiltration.
The
effectiveness
of
additional
or
alternative
treatment
processes
to
provide
any
significant
reductions
in
constituent
levels
is
uncertain.
The
health
protection
benefits
offurther
hypothetical
reductions
are
not
clear
and
may
not
be
quantifiable.
The
City
spends
approximately
$3,500,000
annually
on
conventional
water
treatment,
including
operation
and
maintenance
of
the
WTP
and
chemicals
for
disinfection
and
conventional
treatment.
Therefore,
since
the
City's
drinking
water
meets
all
state
and
federal
standards
set
to
protect
public
health,
no
additional
action
is
proposed. (Remainder
of
page
intentionally
left
blank.)
8 of
City
of
Poway-
Public
Health
Goals
June
2022
Page
6 August 16, 2022, Item #10
RESOLUTION
NO
. 22-
A
RESOLUTION
OF
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
OF
THE
CITY
OF
POWAY,
CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING
THE
REPORT
ON
THE
CITY'S
WATER
QUALITY
RELATIVE
TO
PUBLIC
HEAL
TH
GOALS
FOR
2019
-2021
WHEREAS,
the
City
of
Poway's
drinking
water
meets
State
of
California
and
federal
government
standards
to
protect public
health
;
WHEREAS,
the
California
Health
and
Safety
Code
section
116470
("Section
116470")
requires
that
water
utilities
with
more
than
10 ,000
service
connections
prepare
a
triennial
report
if
any
of
their
water
quality
measurements
exceeded
any
Public
Health
Goals
;
WHEREAS,
the
City
of
Poway
has
more
than
14,000
service
connections
and
had
water
quality
measurements
exceeding
Public
Health
Goals
for
six
constituent
classifications
between
2019
and
2021
;
WHEREAS,
in
compliance
with
subdivision
(b)
of
Section
116470
, a
Report
on
City's
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
years
2019, 2020,
and
2021
has
been
prepared;
WHEREAS,
in
compliance
with
subdivision
(c)
of
Section
116470
, the
City
of
Poway
must
conduct
a
Public
Hearing
for
the
purpose
of
accepting
and
responding
to
public
comment
prior
to
the
adoption
of
the
Public
Health
Goals
Report;
and
WHEREAS,
on
August
16 , 2022
at
a
regular
meeting
of
the
Poway
City
Council,
which
was
duly
noticed,
and
at
which
quorum
was
present,
the
City
Council
did
conduct
a
public
hearing
for
the
purpose
of
accepting
and
responding
to
public
comment
related
to
the
Public
Health
Goal
Report
. NOW,
THEREFORE,
BE
IT
RESOLVED
by
the
City
Council
of
the
City
of
Poway
as
follows:
·
SECTION
1:
The
foregoing
recitals
are
true
and
correct.
SECTION
2: The
City
of
Poway's
Report
on
City
's
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
years
2019-2021
is
attached
hereto
as
"Exhibit
A"
SECTION
3:
The
City
of
Poway's
Report
on
City
's
Water
Quality
Relative
to
Public
Health
Goals
for
years
2019-2021,
prepared
pursuant
to and
in
compliance
with
Health
and
Safety
Code
Section
116470,
is
hereby
approved
and
adopted
.
9 of
10 ATTACHMENT
B
August 16, 2022, Item #10
Resolution No. 22-
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Poway, California on the 16th day of August 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DISQUALIFIED:
Steve Vaus, Mayor
ATTEST:
Carrie Gallagher, CMC, City Clerk
10 of 10