Staff Report - 2022 Drinking Water Quality, Public Health Goals Report — Sacramento City Council, November 15, 2022

City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2022-01857 11/15/2022 Public Hearing Item 32.
2022 Drinking Water Quality, Public Health Goals Report (Noticed 11/04/2022) File ID: 2022-01857
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, pass a Motion accepting the 2022 Report on the City’s Drinking Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals.

Contact: Pravani Vandeyar, Water Division Manager, (916) 808-3765, [email protected]; Mark Severeid, Water Quality Superintendent, (916) 808-8667, [email protected]; William Busath, Director of Utilities, (916) 808-1434, [email protected], Department of Utilities
Presenter: Mark Severeid, Water Quality Superintendent, (916) 808-8667, [email protected], Department of Utilities Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-2022 Public Health Goals Report
Additional Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: The California Health and Safety Code requires that a Public Health Goals Report be prepared every three years to provide the public with additional water quality information beyond the scope of the annually distributed Consumer Confidence Report. This report compares the City of Sacramento’s drinking water quality to public health goals established by the State of California.

Comments received at today’s public hearing may be addressed at this meeting or will be responded to in an Addendum to the 2022 Public Health Goals Report, which will be made available to the public.

Policy Considerations: Consistent with the 2035 General Plan, drinking water provided by the City of Sacramento’s Department of Utilities meets or surpasses all state and federal minimum drinking water standards set to protect public health. This public hearing on the City’s 2022 Public Health Goals Report provides compliance with Section 116470(c) of the California Health and Safety Code,

Page 1 of 3 ends

File ID: 2022-01857 11/15/2022 Public Hearing Item 32.
which requires a public hearing for the purpose of accepting and responding to public comment on the report.

Economic Impacts: None.

Environmental Considerations:

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This public hearing is required under State law and constitutes a non-discretionary action to which the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply, under Section 21080 of the California Public Resources Code.

The activity is not subject to CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(1).

Sustainability: The City’s drinking water program is consistent with the 2035 General Plan and the goals and targets of the City’s Sustainability Master Plan, by advancing the goal of conserving the use and protection of sources of water.

Commission/Committee Action: Not applicable.

Rationale for Recommendation: This public hearing provides compliance with Section 116470(c) of the California Health and Safety Code, which requires a public hearing for the purpose of accepting and responding to public comment on the public health goal report.

Financial Considerations: Not applicable.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.

Background Effective July 1, 1998, the California Health and Safety Code mandates that a report be prepared every three years to compare drinking water quality with public health goals (PHGs) set by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and with maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) adopted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). • PHGs are developed by OEHHA solely based on evaluation of public health risk, and do not consider the practical risk management factors, such as available analytical technology, available treatment technology, costs, and benefits, incorporated by the California State Water Resources Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW) or EPA in setting state and federal drinking water standards.

MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs. PHGs and MCLGs are not enforceable standards, and no action to meet them is required.
• The City’s drinking water complies with all of the health-based drinking water standards, known as maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), required by DDW and EPA. • The California Health and Safety Code also requires that a public hearing be held for the

Page 2 of 3 ends

File ID: 2022-01857 11/15/2022 Public Hearing Item 32.
purpose of accepting and responding to public comments or questions on the Public Health Goals Report.

Page 3 of 3 ends

2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT
PREPARED FOR:

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED BY:

WATER QUALITY & TREATMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
www.WQTS.com
JUNE 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 WHAT ARE PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS? ............................................................................................................................................... 1 WHAT IS BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY (BAT)? ...................................................................................................................... 2 WHAT ARE DETECTION LIMITS FOR PURPOSES OF REPORTING (DLRS)? ............................................................................. 2 WHAT WATER QUALITY DATA WAS REVIEWED TO PREPARE THIS REPORT? ....................................................................... 2 WHAT GUIDELINES WERE FOLLOWED IN PREPARING THIS REPORT? ..................................................................................... 2 WHAT CONSTITUENTS WERE DETECTED ABOVE A PHG (OR MCLG)? ................................................................................. 3 INORGANIC CHEMICALS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 RADIONUCLIDES ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 ORGANIC CHEMICALS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7 SUMMARY OF TOTAL COSTS AND POTENTIAL IMPACT ON CUSTOMER BILLS ....................................................................... 8

ATTACHMENTS

NO. 1: EXCERPT FROM CALIFORNIA HEALTH & SAFETY CODE: SECTION 116470 (B)

NO. 2: TABLE OF CALIFORNIA REGULATED CONSTITUENTS WITH MCLS AND PHGS

NO. 3: HEALTH RISK INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL EXCEEDANCE REPORTS. PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT. FEBRUARY 2022

NO. 4: DESCRIPTION OF COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY FOR THIS PHG REPORT

NO.5: CITY OF SACRAMENTO – DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2019, 2020 AND 2021 CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORTS.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 1

BACKGROUND

The California Health and Safety Code (Section 116470(b)) requires that public water systems with 10,000 or more service connections prepare a special report every three years if water quality measurements exceed a Public Health Goal (PHG). Attachment 1 includes Section 116470(b)).

The report must be completed by July 1 of the year in which it is due and new reports are required every three years. The City of Sacramento Department of Utilities has prepared PHG reports since 1998, and the current report was completed by July 1, 2022, as required.

The PHG report must present information on (1) contaminants that have been detected above a PHG, (2) health risk information for the detected contaminants , (3) an estimate of the cost to install Best Available Technology to reduce the level of a given contaminant, and (4) what action, if any, the local water purveyor intends to take to reduce the concentration of the contaminant(s) and the basis for that decision.

The State Water Resources Control Board Divisi on of Drinking Water (DDW) sets Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as close as feasible to the PHG taking treatment costs and available analytical and treatment technology into consideration. MCLs are enforceable limits that water purveyors must meet to protect public health. Attachment 2 includes a list of current MCLs and PHGs in California.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is required to determine and publish the “numerical public health risk” associated with PHGs and MCLs. This PHG report uses the most recent health risk information published by OEHHA. Attachment 3 presents the OEHHA health risk information used for this report (OEHHA, “Health Risk Information for PHG Exceedance Reports,” February 2022).

This report identifies each contaminant that exceeded its PHG during the 2019 through 2021 period, describes the public health risk at both the PHG and the MCL, identifies the Best Available Technology (BAT) for treatment, and presents the estimated costs to install B AT to reduce leve ls of the contaminant.

In accordance with the California Health and Safety Code , only constituents that are regulated in drinking water, either with an MCL or Treatment Technique requirement, and for which either a PHG or Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) has been set are to be included in the report. There are some regulated constituents that are routinely monitored and detected by water systems at levels below the drinking water standard for which no PHG or MCLG have yet been adopted. One example is disinfection byproducts, including trihalomethanes and haloacetic acid s. These constituents will be addressed in a future report if PHGs are adopted by OEHHA.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 2

WHAT ARE PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS?

PHGs are non -enforceable goals established by OEHHA. PHGs are developed using available toxicological data in scientific literature. A PHG is the level below which OEHHA has determined that a drinking water contaminant does not pose a significant health risk. None of the practical risk-management factors that are considere d by the US Environmental Protection Agency ( USEPA) or DDW in setting enforceable drinking water standards are considered in setting the PHGs. Such factors include analytical detection capability, treatment technology availability, and benefits and costs. If a constituent does not have a PHG public water systems are to use Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs), developed by the USEPA, for the preparation of this report. Like PHGs, MCLGs are the level of contaminant in drinking water at which the USEPA believes there are no known or expected risks to health, with a margin of safety. USEPA sets the MCL as close as feasible to the MCLG, taking costs and technology into consideration.

WHAT IS BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY (BAT)?

State law requires that at the same time DDW adopts a primary drinking water standard (i.e., health based) they identify BAT for the specific constituent being regulated. BATs are the best-known treatment methods to reduce contaminant levels to the MCL. To be considered BAT, the treatment must be proven effective under full-scale field applications.

WHAT ARE DETECTION LIMITS FOR PURPOSES OF REPORTING (DLRS)?

In addition, w hen DDW establishes a drinking water regulation, the Agency evaluates available analytical methods and sets a DLR for the constituent . DLRs are the lowest concentration of the constituent reliably measurable for reporting to determine compliance. A constituent is considered by DDW to be “detected” when measured concentrations are above the DLR.

WHAT WATER QUALITY DATA WAS REVIEWED TO PREPARE THIS REPORT?

The 2022 PHG report was prepared based upon a review of water qualit y data for the years 2019 through 20 21. Water quality data was collected and reviewed for both surface water treatment plants (Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant) and the City’s wells.

WHAT GUIDELINES WERE FOLLOWED IN PREPARING THIS REPORT?

The Association of California Water Ag encies (ACWA) prepares guidelines for water utilities to use in producing their PHG reports. The most recent ACWA guidelines (ACWA, “2022 PHG Guidance”) was used to prepare this r eport. No guidance materials are available from DDW regarding preparation of PHG reports. OEHHA publishes a document with health risk information for regulated constituents.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 3

WHAT CONSTITUENTS WERE DETECTED ABOVE A PHG (OR MCLG)?

Table 1 presents the constituents that were detected by the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities above a PHG or an MCLG during 2019 through 2021.

Table 1: Constituents Detected Above PHG or MCLG
(2019-2021)
Constituent
PHG
(MCLG) MCL
Arsenic 0.004 μg/L 10 μg/L
Gross alpha (0) 15 pCi/L
Radium-226 0.05 pCi/L 5 pCi/L* Radium-228 0.019 pCi/L
Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 0.06 μg/L 5 μg/L
μg/L = micrograms per liter (equivalent to parts per billion, ppb) pCi/L = picoCuries per liter
*5 pCi/L is the MCL for combined radium-226/radium-228

INORGANIC CHEMICALS

The following section of the PHG report presents a discussion of inorganic chemicals detected above their PHG.

Arsenic. The PHG for arsenic is 0.004 μg/L. The federal and state MCL for arsenic is 10 μg/L (the federal MCLG is 0 μg/L). The DLR for arsenic is 2 µg/L and at the present time there are no laboratory methods available that can reliably measure arsenic as low as the PHG. The health risk category associated with arsenic is carcinogenicity. At the PHG, the theoretical cancer risk is 1 × 10-6. This means the 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water at the PHG is 1 excess case of cancer per million people exposed. At the federal MCL of 10 μg/L, the theoretical cancer risk is 2.5 × 10-3. This means the 70 -year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water at the MCL is 2.5 excess cases per 1,000 people exposed.

The California DDW has identified the following treatment technologies as Best Available Technology for reducing arsenic levels in drinking water to levels closer to the PHG of 0.004 µg/L.

• Activated alumina
• Coagulation/filtration
• Ion Exchange
• Lime softening
• Reverse Osmosis
• Electrodialysis
• Oxidation/filtration

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 4

From the above list of Best Available Technology, the cost evaluation was conducted using ion exchange, given that ion exchange is a lso best avail able technology for radium-226/228 (also included in this PHG report). It is noted that while ion exchange is Best Available Technology for arsenic and radium, the type of resin typically used for arsenic treatment is strong base anion (SBA) resin and that for radium is strong acid cation (SAC) resin. Like ion exchange, reverse osmosis and lime softening have also been identified as Best Available Technology for both constituents (arsenic and radium 226/228). While many factors ( both technical and financial) go into the use of a given technology, ion exchange would be a more cost -effective approach than either reverse osmosis or lime softening. Specifically, reverse osmosis was not selected for this analysis, due to higher capital and operating costs, the amount of water that would be lost as a concentrated brine solution as well as the elevated energy consumption. Lime softening was not selected for this an alysis as it can require large amounts of land and would likely need additional labor to operate and maintain.

All samples that exceeded the arsenic PHG during 2019 through 2021 were in groundwater wells.

Table 2 presents the 22 wells where detections exceeded the arsenic PHG during 2019 through 2021.

The water quality data presented in Table 2 indicates arsenic levels at an average of 3.2 μg/L (with a range of 2.2 μg/L to 4.6 μg/L). All results were below the MCL of 10 μg/L.

The total estimated capital cost to provide SBA ion-exchange treatment for all of the wells presented in Table 2, excluding Well 123 which has been permanently removed from service, at their respective maximum well water production during 2019 through 2021, is $59,219,885 (the total annual O&M costs are estimated to be $6,266,204/year)1. Ion-exchange treatment produces a concentrated waste brine that the City of Sacramento would need to dispose. The estimated costs assume that the waste brine is discharged to the sewer . Capital and O&M costs were estimated with the goal of achieving the arsenic 0.004 µg/L PHG. There is no information available, however, to indicate that ion exchange treatment could in fact reduce arsenic concentrations to such a low level. In addition , the DLR as determined by DDW is 2 µg/L and, as stated previously, there is no analytical method available that can reliably measure arsenic in drinking water down to 0.004 µg/L.

1Attachment 4 presents a description of the models and methodology used to estimate capital and O&M costs presented in this PHG Report.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 5

Table 2: Wells Where Arsenic Was Detected Above the PHG (2019-2021)
Well
Number
Arsenic Concentration (µg/L) SBA Ion-Exchange
Treatment Cost
2019 2020 2021
Maximum
Water
Production
(gpm) Capital
Annual
O&M
91 4.1 4.1 450 $2,445,774 $284,295
93 4.2 3.7 3.7 478 $2,284,785 $277,356
94 2.6 2.9 796 $3,072,761 $300,818
107 3.4 3.9 3.9 942 $3,082,821 $307,521
112 2.3 556 $2,376,517 $281,920
120 2.4 2.4 950 $3,295,343 $316,976
122 2.5 2.5 650 $2,577,540 $295,031
123* 4.2 541 -- --
124 2.9 550 $2,544,702 $290,025
126 3 2.7 2.7 731 $3,880,057 $328,461
129 2.4 2.7 2.7 698 $2,408,957 $289,509
131 2.4 2.4 2.4 514 $2,407,804 $287,736
133 3.7 4.6 4.6 1,200 $3,075,571 $305,137
134 2.6 716 $1,638,715 $263,708
137 2.5 3 3 677 $3,180,348 $312,015
138 2.2 2.8 2.8 891 $3,071,460 $298,817
139 3.3 3.6 3.6 675 $3,078,680 $301,156
143 2.7 2.7 730 $2,580,074 $298,777
153A 3.5 4.4 4.4 1,017 $2,405,852 $284,735
155 2.3 2.6 2.6 752 $3,216,556 $319,196
156 3.7 4.4 802 $3,296,803 $309,998
158 2.7 3.5 3.5 864 $3,298,767 $313,016
gpm = gallons per minute, O&M = operation and maintenance costs, *Well 123 has been permanently taken out of service and will not be included in cost estimates.

RADIONUCLIDES

During 2019 to 2021, two naturally occurring radionuclides were detected in groundwater wells:
radium-226/228 and gross alpha . The following sections present an evaluation of the health risks and treatment costs for reducing the levels of these two constituents.

Radium-226/228. Radium-226/228 is a naturally occurring radionuclide. Radium can be present as several isotopes that have different radioactive properties . T he most common isotopes in groundwater are radium-226 and radium-228. The PHG for radium-226 is 0.05 pCi/L (picoCuries CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 6

per liter)2 and the DLR is 1 pCi/L . The PHG for radium-228 is 0.019 pC i/L and the DLR is 1 pCi/L.

The MCL for combined radium-226/228 is 5 pCi/L. The health risk category associated with radium- 226 is carcinogenicity. At the PHG, the theoretical cancer ris k is 1 × 10-6. This means the 70 -year lifetime theoretical cancer risk for drinking water at the PHG is 1 excess case of cancer per million people exposed. At the MCL of 5 pCi/L, the numerical cancer risk for radium-226, assuming all radium is present as radium-226, is 1 × 10-4, whereas that for radium-228 is 3 × 10-4. This means the 70-year lifetime theoretical cancer risk for drinking water at the MCL is between 1 and 3 excess cases per 10,000 people exposed.

The State Water Resources Control Board DDW has identified the following treatment technologies as Best Available Technology for reducing radium-226/228 levels in drinking water.

• Ion exchange
• Reverse Osmosis
• Lime softening

From the above list of best available treatment technology, the cost evaluation was conducted using ion exchange, given that ion exchange is also Best Available Technology for arsenic (also included in this PHG report). However, as previously described, while ion-exchange is Best Available Technology for arsenic and radium, the type of ion-exchange resin typically used for arsenic treatment is SBA resin and that for radium is SAC resin.

During 2019 through 2021, radium-226/228 was detected above the PHG, but below the MCL of 5 pCi/L in Wells 107 and 155 . Table 3 presents the detected radium-226/228 values of 1.1 pCi/L in Well 155 and 1.91 and 2.26 pCi/L in Well 107. The total estimated capital cost to provide SAC ion- exchange treatment at the two wells presented in Table 3 is estimated at $3,346,300 (and the total annual O&M costs are estimated to be $ 522,990/year). Ion-exchange treatment produces a concentrated waste brine that the City of Sacramento would need to dispose. The estimated costs assume that the waste brine is discharged to the sewer.

Table 3: Wells Where Radium-226/228 Was Detected Above the PHG (2019-2021)
Well
Number
Radium-226/228
Concentration (pCi/L)
Maximum
Water
Production
(gpm)
SAC Ion-Exchange
Treatment Cost
2019 2020 2021 Capital Annual O&M
107 1.91/2.26 942 $2,384,989 $292,710
155 1.1 752 $961,314 $230,280
gpm = gallons per minute; O&M = operation and maintenance costs

Gross Alpha. OEHHA has not established a PHG for gross alpha activity because the results are used as a screening tool for naturally occurring radionuclides (i.e., gross alpha does not represent a specific constituent). The federal MCLG for gross alpha is 0 pCi/L due to the classification of gross alpha

2 A pCi/L is the unit typically used to describe the concentration of radioactivity in drinking water.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 7

radioactivity as carcinogenic. The cancer health risk at 0 pCi/L is zero. The MCL for gross alpha activity is 15 pCi/L and the DLR is 3 pCi/L. Gross alpha measurements can indicate the presence of a number of al pha emitting radionuclides, such as radium. OEHHA indicates that depending upon which isotopes are present, the numerical cancer health risk at the MCL of 15 pCi/L could be 1 × 10-

3. That means for a 70 -year lifetime exposure at the MCL, t here could be a theoretical risk of one excess case of cancer per 1,000 people exposed.

During 2019 through 2021, three wells had a gross alpha detection above the MCLG. Table 4 presents the gross alpha range of 4.4 to 8 pCi/L (below the MCL of 15 pCi/L) for Wells 94, 114, and 123. DDW has identified reverse osmosis as the Best Available Technology for reducing gross alpha levels in drinking water. The cost evaluation was conducted using reverse osmosis given that no other technology has been identified as Best Available Technology. The total estimated capital cost for reverse osmosis treatment at Wells 94 and 114 would be $12,278,380 (the total annual O&M costs would be $ 1,248,670/year). Well 123 has been permanently removed from service and is not included in the cost estimates. A brief description of the estimated cost procedure for Wells 94 and 114 is presented in Attachment 4 of this document. Reverse osmosis treatment produces a concentrated waste that the City of Sacramento would need to dispose. The estimated costs assume that the reverse osmosis concentrate is discharged to the sewer and do not include the costs to replace the lost water.

Table 4: Wells Where Gross Alpha Was Detected Above the PHG (2019-2021)
Well
Number
Gross Alpha Concentration
(pCi/L)
Maximum
Water
Production
(gpm)
Reverse Osmosis
Treatment Cost
2019 2020 2021 Capital Annual O&M
94 5.8 679 $7,093,962 $735,000
114 4.4 460 $5,184,417 $513,675
123* 8 541 -- --
gpm = gallons per minute; O&M = operation and maintenance costs *Well 123 has been permanently removed from service and will not be included in cost estimates.

ORGANIC CHEMICAL

The following section of the PHG report presents a discussion of an organic chemical detected above its PHG.

Tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene, or PCE). The PHG for PCE is 0.06 μg/L. The federal and state MCL for PCE is 5 μg/L (the federal MCLG is 0 μg/L). The DLR for PCE is 0.5 µg/L and at the present time there are no laboratory methods available that can reliably measure PCE as low as the PHG. The health risk category associated with PCE is carcinogenicity. At the PH G, the theo retical cancer risk is 1 × 10-6. This means the 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water at the PHG is 1 excess case of cancer per million people exposed. At the federal MCL of 5 μg/L, the theoretical cancer CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 8

risk is 8 × 10-5. This means the 70-year lifetime cancer risk for drinking water at the federal MCL is 8 excess cases per 100,000 people exposed.

The State Water Resources Control Board DDW has identified the following treatment technologies as Best Available Technology for reducing PCE levels in drinking water to levels closer to the PHG of

0.06 µg/L.

• Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)
• Packed Tower Aeration

From the above list of Best Available Technology, the cost evaluation was conducted using GAC.

During 2019 through 2021, PCE was detected above the PHG at 1.1 μg/L and 2.4 μg/L in Well 112 (Table 5). The total estimated capital cost to provide GAC treatment at Well 112 is $946,120 (the total annual O&M costs are estimated to be $42,760/year). A brief description of the estimated cost procedure for Well 112 is presented in Attachment 4 of this document.

Table 5: Well Where Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) Was Detected Above the PHG (2019-2021)
Well
Number
Tetrachloroethylene
Concentration (μg/L)
Maximum
Water
Production
(gpm)
GAC
Treatment Cost
2019 20203 2021 Capital Annual O&M
112 1.1/2.4 556 $946,120 $42,760
gpm = gallons per minute; O&M = operation and maintenance costs

SUMMARY OF TOTAL COSTS AND POTENTIAL IMPACT ON CUSTOMER BILLS

As required, treatment costs were estimated for regulated constituents that were detected above the PHG but below the MCL. For arsenic and radium-226/228, ion exchange costs were evaluated for both constituents, give n that ion-exchange is one of the Best Available T echnologies for both constituents. The type of ion-exchange resin typically used for arsenic treatment is SBA resin and that for radium is SAC resin . Thus, for those wells containing water with arsenic and radium (Wells 107 and 155), a two-stage ion exchange treatment train was selected. The cost for the two-stage ion- exchange treatment was estimated by adding the individual costs of the SBA (for arsenic treatment) and SAC (for radium) ion-exchange treatment technologies. For gross alpha, costs were estimated using reverse osmosis. For PCE, costs were estimated using GAC. Table 6 presents the capital costs and annual O&M costs for each well evaluated in this P HG Report. In addition, Table 6 presents the annualized total cost for each well (this is the sum of the annualized capital cost plus the annual O&M costs). Based on the 2019 through 20 21 data set , the total capital costs to install ion-exchange, reverse osmosis, and GAC Best Available Technology are estimated to be $72,717,925 and the annual O&M cost is estimated to be $7,779,812. The total annualized capital cost plus the annual O&M costs

3 All results prior to 2020 did not detect tetrachloroethylene, and the well did not serve the system during 2021.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 9

would be approximately $13,614,886. The estimated increase in each City of Sacramento customer’s water bill would be approximately $95 per year or $7.90 per month.

Table 6: Summary of Capital and O&M Costs
(2019 – 2021)
Well
Number
Constituents
Detected
Constituent
Driving the Cost (&
Treatment)
Cost of Treatment (2021 Dollars)
Capital Cost Annual O&M
Annualized Total
Cost*
91 Arsenic Arsenic (IX-SBA) $2,445,774 $284,295 $480,551 93 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $2,284,785 $277,356 $460,693 94 Arsenic,
Gross Alpha Gross Alpha (RO) $7,093,963 $735,000 $1,304,237 107 Arsenic,
Radium
Arsenic (IX - SBA) &
Radium (IX - SAC) $5,467,810 $600,231 $1,038,982
112 Arsenic,
PCE
Arsenic (IX - SBA) &
PCE (GAC) $3,322,636 $324,681 $591,298
114 Gross Alpha Gross Alpha (RO) $5,184,417 $513,675 $929,686 120 Arsenic Arsenic (IX – SBA) $3,295,343 $316,976 $581,403 122 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $2,577,540 $295,031 $501,860 124 Arsenic Arsenic (IX – SBA) $2,544,702 $290,025 $494,219 126 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,880,057 $328,461 $639,806 129 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $2,408,957 $289,509 $482,810 131 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $2,407,804 $287,736 $480,944 133 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,075,571 $305,137 $551,929 134 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $1,638,715 $263,708 $395,202 137 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,180,348 $312,015 $567,214 138 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,071,460 $298,817 $545,279 139 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,078,680 $301,156 $548,197 143 Arsenic Arsenic (IX – SBA) $2,580,074 $298,777 $505,809 153A Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $2,405,852 $284,735 $477,787 155 Arsenic,
Radium
Arsenic (IX - SBA) &
Radium (IX - SAC) $4,177,869 $549,476 $884,719
156 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,296,803 $309,998 $574,542 158 Arsenic Arsenic (IX - SBA) $3,298,767 $313,016 $577,718 Total $72,717,925 $7,779,812 $13,614,886
*Annualized total cost is the sum of the annual O&M cost and the amortized capital annual cost. The amortized capital annual cost was calculated assuming a 20-year amortization period and an interest rate of 5%.

IX = ion -exchange, SBA = strong base anion, SAC = strong acid cation, RO = reverse osmosis , GAC = granular activated carbon

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

WQTS, Inc. Page | 10

RECOMMENDATIONS

The drinking water quality of the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities meets all State of California and USEPA drinking water standards set to protect public health. To further reduce the levels of the constituents identified in this report that are already below the health based MCLs established to pr ovide “safe drinking water ,” would require additional costly treatment processes and would increase the annual customer water bills. The health protection benefits of these potential reductions are unclear and may not be quantifiable. Therefore, no action is proposed CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENTS

No. 1 Excerpt from California Health & Safety Code: Section 116470 (b)

No. 2 Table of California Regulated Constituents with MCLs and PHGs

No. 3 Health Risk Information for Public Health Goal Exceedance Reports. Prepared by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. February 2022

No. 4 Description of Cost Estimating Methodology for this PHG Report

No.5 City of Sacramento – Department of Utilities 2019, 2020 and 2021 Consumer Confidence Reports.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENT 1

EXCERPT FROM CALIFRONIA HEALTH & SAFETY CODE
SECTION 116470 (b)

116470. (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 numerical public health risk, determined by the office, associated with the maximum contaminant level for each contaminant identified in paragraph (1) and the numerical pu blic health risk determined by the office associated with the public health goal for that contaminant. (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 wh at 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.
(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 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 c orresponding contaminant for purposes of complying with the notice and hearing requirements of this section.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENT 2

TABLE OF CALIFORNIA REGULATED CONSTITUENTS WITH MCLs AND PHGs

MCLs, DLRs, PHGs, for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants (Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L), unless otherwise noted.) Last Update: September 14, 2021
The following tables includes California’s maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), detection limits for purposes of reporting (DLRs), public health goals (PHGs) from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). For comparison, Federal MCLs and Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) (USEPA) are also displayed.

Inorganic Chemicals Table, Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64431 State Regulated
Inorganic Chemical
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Aluminum 1 0.05 0.6 2001 -- --
Antimony 0.006 0.006 0.001 2016 0.006 0.006
Arsenic 0.010 0.002 0.000004 2004 0.010 zero
Asbestos (MFL =
million fibers per liter;
for fibers >10
microns long)
7 MFL 0.2 MFL 7 MFL 2003 7 MFL 7 MFL
Barium 1 0.1 2 2003 2 2
Beryllium 0.004 0.001 0.001 2003 0.004 0.004
Cadmium 0.005 0.001 0.00004 2006 0.005 0.005
Chromium, Total -
OEHHA withdrew the

0.0025-mg/L PHG

0.05 0.01 withdrawn
Nov. 2001
1999 0.1 0.1
State Regulated
Inorganic Chemical
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Chromium,
Hexavalent - 0.01-
mg/L MCL & 0.001-
mg/L DLR repealed
September 2017
-- -- 0.00002 2011 -- --
Cyanide 0.15 0.1 0.15 1997 0.2 0.2
Fluoride 2 0.1 1 1997 4.0 4.0
Mercury (inorganic) 0.002 0.001 0.0012 1999
(rev2005)*

0.002 0.002
Nickel 0.1 0.01 0.012 2001 -- --
Nitrate (as nitrogen,
N)
10 as N 0.4 45 as NO3
(=10 as N)
2018 10 10
Nitrite (as N) 1 as N 0.4 1 as N 2018 1 1
Nitrate + Nitrite (as
N)
10 as N -- 10 as N 2018 -- --
Perchlorate 0.006 0.002 0.001 2015 -- --
Selenium 0.05 0.005 0.03 2010 0.05 0.05
Thallium 0.002 0.001 0.0001 1999
(rev2004)

0.002 0.0005
Copper and Lead Table, 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.

State Regulated
Copper and Lead
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Copper 1.3 0.05 0.3 2008 1.3 1.3
Lead 0.015 0.005 0.0002 2009 0.015 zero
Radiological Table, Radionuclides with MCLs in 22 CCR §64441 and §64443 [units are picocuries per liter (pCi/L), unless otherwise state; n/a = not applicable] State Regulated
Radionuclides
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Gross alpha particle
activity - OEHHA
concluded in 2003 that
a PHG was not
practical
15 3 none n/a 15 zero
Gross beta particle
activity - OEHHA
concluded in 2003 that
a PHG was not
practical
4 mrem/yr
4 none n/a 4
mrem/yr
zero
Radium-226 -- 1 0.05 2006
Radium-228 -- 1 0.019 2006
Radium-226 + Radium- 5 -- -- -- 5 zero
State Regulated
Radionuclides
Contaminant
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
228
Strontium-90 8 2 0.35 2006 -- --
Tritium "20,000" "1,000" 400 2006 -- --
Uranium 20 1 0.43 2001 30 µg/L zero
Organic Chemicals Table, Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64444 Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs)
State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Benzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 2001 0.005 zero
Carbon tetrachloride 0.0005 0.0005 0.0001 2000 0.005 zero 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.0005 0.6 1997
(rev2009)

0.6 0.6
1,4-Dichlorobenzene (p-
DCB)

0.005 0.0005 0.006 1997 0.075 0.075
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)

0.005 zero
State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
1,1-Dichloroethylene
(1,1-DCE)

0.006 0.0005 0.01 1999 0.007 0.007
cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.006 0.0005 0.013 2018 0.07 0.07 trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene

0.01 0.0005 0.05 2018 0.1 0.1
Dichloromethane
(Methylene chloride)

0.005 0.0005 0.004 2000 0.005 zero
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 0.0005 0.0005 1999 0.005 zero 1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0005 0.0005 0.0002 1999
(rev2006)
-- --
Ethylbenzene 0.3 0.0005 0.3 1997 0.7 0.7
Methyl tertiary butyl
ether (MTBE)

0.013 0.003 0.013 1999 -- --
Monochlorobenzene 0.07 0.0005 0.07 2014 0.1 0.1
Styrene 0.1 0.0005 0.0005 2010 0.1 0.1
1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane

0.001 0.0005 0.0001 2003 0.1 0.1
Tetrachloroethylene
(PCE)

0.005 0.0005 0.00006 2001 0.005 zero
State Regulated
Volatile Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Toluene 0.15 0.0005 0.15 1999 1 1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.005 0.0005 0.005 1999 0.07 0.07 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
(1,1,1-TCA)

0.200 0.0005 1 2006 0.2 0.2
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
(1,1,2-TCA)

0.005 0.0005 0.0003 2006 0.005 0.003
Trichloroethylene (TCE) 0.005 0.0005 0.0017 2009 0.005 zero 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 0.002 zero
Xylenes 1.750 0.0005 1.8 1997 10 10
Non-Volatile Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs)
State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Alachlor 0.002 0.001 0.004 1997 0.002 zero
State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Atrazine 0.001 0.0005 0.00015 1999 0.003 0.003
Bentazon 0.018 0.002 0.2 1999
(rev2009)
-- --
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0002 0.0001 0.000007 2010 0.0002 zero
Carbofuran 0.018 0.005 0.0007 2016 0.04 0.04
Chlordane 0.0001 0.0001 0.00003 1997
(rev2006)

0.002 zero
Dalapon 0.2 0.01 0.79 1997
(rev2009)

0.2 0.2
1,2-Dibromo-3-
chloropropane
(DBCP)

0.0002 0.00001 0.000003 2020 0.0002 zero
2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyaceti
c acid (2,4-D)

0.07 0.01 0.02 2009 0.07 0.07
Di(2-
ethylhexyl)adipate

0.4 0.005 0.2 2003 0.4 0.4
Di(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate
(DEHP)

0.004 0.003 0.012 1997 0.006 zero
Dinoseb 0.007 0.002 0.014 1997 0.007 0.007
State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
(rev2010)
Diquat 0.02 0.004 0.006 2016 0.02 0.02
Endothal 0.1 0.045 0.094 2014 0.1 0.1
Endrin 0.002 0.0001 0.0003 2016 0.002 0.002
Ethylene dibromide
(EDB)

0.00005 0.00002 0.00001 2003 0.0000
5 zero
Glyphosate 0.7 0.025 0.9 2007 0.7 0.7
Heptachlor 0.00001 0.00001 0.000008 1999 0.0004 zero
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00001 0.00001 0.000006 1999 0.0002 zero Hexachlorobenzene 0.001 0.0005 0.00003 2003 0.001 zero
Hexachlorocyclopent
adiene

0.05 0.001 0.002 2014 0.05 0.05
Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 0.000032 1999
(rev2005)

0.0002 0.0002
Methoxychlor 0.03 0.01 0.00009 2010 0.04 0.04
Molinate 0.02 0.002 0.001 2008 -- --
Oxamyl 0.05 0.02 0.026 2009 0.2 0.2
State Regulated
Non-Volatile
Synthetic Organic
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Pentachlorophenol 0.001 0.0002 0.0003 2009 0.001 zero
Picloram 0.5 0.001 0.166 2016 0.5 0.5
Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs)

0.0005 0.0005 0.00009 2007 0.0005 zero
Simazine 0.004 0.001 0.004 2001 0.004 0.004
Thiobencarb 0.07 0.001 0.042 2016 -- --
Toxaphene 0.003 0.001 0.00003 2003 0.003 zero
1,2,3-
Trichloropropane

0.00000
5 0.00000
5 0.0000007 2009 -- --
2,3,7,8-TCDD
(dioxin)
3x10-8 5x10-9 5x10-11 2010 3x10-8 zero
2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 0.05 0.001 0.003 2014 0.05 0.05
Disinfection Byproducts Table, Chemicals with MCLs in 22 CCR §64533 State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Total Trihalomethanes 0.080 -- -- -- 0.080 --
State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State
PHG
State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
Bromodichloromethane -- 0.0010 0.00006 2020 -- zero
Bromoform -- 0.0010 0.0005 2020 -- zero
Chloroform -- 0.0010 0.0004 2020 -- 0.07
Dibromochloromethane -- 0.0010 0.0001 2020 -- 0.06
Haloacetic Acids (five)
(HAA5)

0.060 -- -- -- 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** 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.

State Regulated
Disinfection
Byproducts
Contaminants
State
MCL
State
DLR
State PHG State
Date of
PHG
Federal
MCL
Federal
MCLG
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
(NDMA)
-- -- 0.000003 2006 -- --
*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.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENT 3

HEALTH RISK INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH GOAL

EXCEEDANCE REPORTS

PREPARED BY OEHHA
FEBRUARY 2022

DRAFT – FOR REVIEW ONLY

OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT
Public Health Goals

Health Risk Information
for Public Health Goal
Exceedance Reports

February 2022
Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Branch
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
California Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 1
Health Risk Information for
Public Health Goal Exceedance Reports
P
repared by
Office of Envi ronmental H ealth Hazard Assessment
C
alifornia Environmental Protection Agency
February 2022
NEW for the 2022 Report: New in this document are an updated Public Health Goal (P
HG) for 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) and newly established PHGs for the t
rihalomethanes bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chl oroform, a nd dibromochloromethane.

Background: Under the C alderon- S her S afe Drinking Water Act of 1996 (the Act), publ
ic water systems with more than 10,000 service connections are required to pr
epare a report ever y t hr ee years f or cont aminants t hat exceed their resp ective PHGs .1 This document contains health risk information on regulated drinking water co
ntaminants to assi st public w ater system s in preparing these reports. A PHG is t he concentration of a contaminant in drinking water that poses no significant health risk if consumed for a lifetime. PHGs are dev eloped and published by t he Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (O EHHA) using current ri sk asse s sment pr
inciples, practices and methods.2
The w
ater system’s report is requ ired to identify t he health risk category (e. g., carcinogenicity or neurot oxicity) asso ciated with exposure to each regulated contaminant in drinking water and to include a brief, plainly wor ded desc r iption of t hese risks. The report is also required to disclose the numerical public health risk, if availabl e, associated with the California Maximum Contaminant Leve l ( MCL) and with the PHG for each
contaminant. This health risk information document is prepared by OEHHA every t
hree years to assist th e water system s in providing the required information in their re
ports.
1 Health and Safety Code Section 116470(b)
2 Health and Safety Code Section 116365

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 2
Numerical health risks: Table 1 presents health risk categories 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 effects 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 has been publishing PHGs since 1997 and the entire list published to date is shown in Table 1.

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 chemical 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 hand, are set at a level considered to pose no significant risk of cancer; this is usually no more than a one-in-one-million excess cancer risk (1×10 -6) level for a lifetime of
exposure. In Table 2, the cancer risks shown are based on the US EPA’s evaluations.

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 website (https://oehha.ca.gov/water/public-health-goals- phgs).

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 3
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Alachlor carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.004 NA5,6 0.002 NA
Aluminum neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity
(harms the nervous and
immune systems)

0.6 NA 1 NA
Antimony hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.001 NA 0.006 NA
Arsenic carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000004
(4×10-6)
1×10-6
(one per
million)

0.01 2.5×10-3
(2.5 per
thousand)
Asbestos carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)
7 MFL7
(fibers >10
microns in
length)
1×10-6 7 MFL
(fibers >10
microns in
length)
1×10-6
(one per
million)
Atrazine carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00015 1×10-6 0.001 7×10-6
(seven per
million)

1 Based 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:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/risk-assessment//gcregtext011912.pdf). 2 mg/L = milligrams per liter of water or parts per million (ppm) 3 Cancer Risk = Upper bound 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. Cancer risk cannot be calculated. 6 The PHG for alachlor is based on a threshold model of carcinogenesis and is set at a level that is believed to be without any significant cancer risk to individuals exposed to the chemical over a lifetime. 7 MFL = million fibers per liter of water.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 4
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Barium cardiovascular toxicity
(causes high blood
pressure)
2 NA 1 NA
Bentazon hepatotoxicity and
digestive system toxicity
(harms the liver,
intestine, and causes
body weight effects8)

0.2 NA 0.018 NA
Benzene carcinogenicity
(causes leukemia)

0.00015 1×10-6 0.001 7×10-6
(seven per
million)
Benzo[a]pyrene carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000007
(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 carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0001 1×10-6 0.01 1×10-4
(one per
ten
thousand)
Cadmium nephrotoxicity
(harms the kidney)

0.00004 NA 0.005 NA
Carbofuran reproductive toxicity
(harms the testis)

0.0007 NA 0.018 NA

8 Body weight effects are an indicator of general toxicity in animal studies.

Of
fice of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 5
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Carbon
tetrachloride
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0001 1×10-6 0.0005 5×10-6
(five per
million)
Chlordane carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00003 1×10-6 0.0001 3×10-6
(three per
million)
Chlorite hematotoxicity
(causes anemia)
neurotoxicity
(causes neurobehavioral
effects)

0.05 NA 1 NA
Chromium,
hexavalent
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00002 1×10-6 none NA
Copper digestive system toxicity
(causes nausea,
vomiting, diarrhea)

0.3 NA 1.3 (AL9) NA
Cyanide neurotoxicity
(damages nerves)
endocrine toxicity
(affects the thyroid)

0.15 NA 0.15 NA
Dalapon nephrotoxicity
(harms the kidney)

0.79 NA 0.2 NA
Di(2-ethylhexyl)
adipate (DEHA)
developmental toxicity
(disrupts development)

0.2 NA 0.4 NA
9 AL = action level. 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).

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 6
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Di(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
(DEHP)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.012 1×10-6 0.004 3×10-7
(three per
ten million)
1,2-Dibromo-3-
chloropropane
(DBCP)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000003
(3x10-6)
1×10-6 0.0002 7×10-5
(seven per
hundred
thousand)
1,2-Dichloro-
benzene
(o-DCB)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.6 NA 0.6 NA
1,4-Dichloro-
benzene
(p-DCB)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.006 1×10-6 0.005 8×10-7
(eight per
ten million)
1,1-Dichloro-
ethane
(1,1-DCA)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.003 1×10-6 0.005 2×10-6
(two per
million)
1,2-Dichloro-
ethane
(1,2-DCA)
carcinogenicity
(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
nephrotoxicity
(harms the kidney)

0.013 NA 0.006 NA
1,2-Dichloro-
ethylene, trans
immunotoxicity
(harms the immune
system)

0.05 NA 0.01 NA

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 7
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Dichloromethane
(methylene
chloride)
carcinogenicity
(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)

0.02 NA 0.07 NA
1,2-Dichloro-
propane
(propylene
dichloride)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0005 1×10-6 0.005 1×10-5
(one per
hundred
thousand)
1,3-Dichloro-
propene
(Telone II)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0002 1×10-6 0.0005 2×10-6
(two per
million)
Dinoseb reproductive toxicity
(harms the uterus and
testis)

0.014 NA 0.007 NA
Diquat ocular toxicity
(harms the eye)
developmental toxicity
(causes malformation)

0.006 NA 0.02 NA
Endothall digestive system toxicity
(harms the stomach or
intestine)

0.094 NA 0.1 NA
Endrin neurotoxicity
(causes convulsions)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.0003 NA 0.002 NA
Ethylbenzene
(phenylethane)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.3 NA 0.3 NA
Of
fice of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 8
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Ethylene
dibromide (1,2-
Dibromoethane)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00001 1×10-6 0.00005 5×10-6
(five per
million)
Fluoride musculoskeletal toxicity
(causes tooth mottling)
1 NA 2 NA
Glyphosate nephrotoxicity
(harms the kidney)

0.9 NA 0.7 NA
Heptachlor carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000008
(8×10-6)
1×10-6 0.00001 1×10-6
(one per
million)
Heptachlor
epoxide
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000006
(6×10-6)
1×10-6 0.00001 2×10-6
(two per
million)
Hexachloroben-
zene
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00003 1×10-6 0.001 3×10-5
(three per
hundred
thousand)
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene
(HCCPD)
digestive system toxicity
(causes stomach
lesions)

0.002 NA 0.05 NA
Lead developmental
neurotoxicity
(causes neurobehavioral
effects in children)
cardiovascular toxicity
(causes high blood
pressure)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0002 <1×10-6
(PHG is
not based
on this
effect)

0.015
(AL9)
2×10-6
(two per
million)

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 9
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Lindane
(γ-BHC)
carcinogenicity
(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)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.013 1×10-6 0.013 1×10-6
(one per
million)
Molinate carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.001 1×10-6 0.02 2×10-5
(two per
hundred
thousand)
Monochloro-
benzene
(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 hematotoxicity
(causes
methemoglobinemia)
45 as
nitrate
NA 10 as
nitrogen
(=45 as
nitrate)
NA
Nitrite hematotoxicity
(causes
methemoglobinemia)
3 as
nitrite
NA 1 as
nitrogen
(=3 as
nitrite)
NA
Of
fice of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 10
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Nitrate and
Nitrite
hematotoxicity
(causes
methemoglobinemia)
10 as
nitrogen10
NA 10 as
nitrogen
NA
N-nitroso-
dimethyl-amine
(NDMA)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.000003
(3×10-6)
1×10-6 none NA
Oxamyl general toxicity
(causes body weight
effects)

0.026 NA 0.05 NA
Pentachloro-
phenol (PCP)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0003 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 hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.166 NA 0.5 NA
Polychlorinated
biphenyls
(PCBs)
carcinogenicity
(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
Ra226+228)
1×10-4
(one per
ten
thousand)
10 The joint nitrate/nitrite PHG of 10 mg/L (10 ppm, expressed as nitrogen) does not replace the individual values, and the maximum contribution from nitrite should not exceed 1 mg/L nitrite-nitrogen.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 11
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Radium-228 carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.019 pCi/L 1×10-6 5 pCi/L
(combined
Ra226+228)
3×10-4
(three per
ten
thousand)
Selenium integumentary toxicity
(causes hair loss and
nail damage)

0.03 NA 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)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0005 1×10-6 0.1 2×10-4
(two per
ten
thousand)
1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloro-
ethane
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0001 1×10-6 0.001 1×10-5
(one per
hundred
thousand)
2,3,7,8-Tetra-
chlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin (TCDD, or
dioxin)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

5×10-11 1×10-6 3×10-8 6×10-4
(six per ten
thousand)

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 12
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Tetrachloro-
ethylene
(perchloro-
ethylene, or
PCE)
carcinogenicity
(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)

0.042 NA 0.07 NA
Toluene
(methylbenzene)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)
endocrine toxicity
(harms the thymus)

0.15 NA 0.15 NA
Toxaphene carcinogenicity
(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
neurotoxicity
(harms the nervous
system),
reproductive toxicity
(causes fewer offspring)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)
hematotoxicity
(causes blood effects)
1 NA 0.2 NA

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 13
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
1,1,2-Trichloro-
ethane
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0003 1x10-6 0.005 2×10-5
(two per
hundred
thousand)
Trichloro-
ethylene (TCE)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0017 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
1,2,3-Trichloro-
propane
(1,2,3-TCP)
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0000007
(7×10-7)
1x10-6 0.000005
(5×10-6)
7×10-6
(seven per
million)
1,1,2-Trichloro-
1,2,2-trifluoro-
ethane
(Freon 113)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)
4 NA 1.2 NA
Trihalomethanes:

Bromodichloro-
methane
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00006 1x10-6 0.080* 1.3×10-3
(1.3 per
thousand)11
Trihalomethanes:

Bromoform
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0005 1x10-6 0.080* 2×10-4
(two per ten
thousand)12

* For total trihalomethanes (the sum of bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, and dibromochloromethane). There are no MCLs for individual trihalomethanes. 11 Based on 0.080 mg/L bromodichloromethane; the risk will vary with different combinations and ratios of the other trihalomethanes in a particular sample.
12 Based on 0.080 mg/L bromoform; the risk will vary with different combinations and ratios of the other trihalomethanes in a particular sample.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 14
Table 1: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals with California Public Health Goals (PHGs)
Chemical Health Risk Category1
California
PHG
(mg/L)2
Cancer
Risk3
at the
PHG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Trihalomethanes:

Chloroform
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0004 1x10-6 0.080* 2×10-4
(two per ten
thousand)13
Trihalomethanes:

Dibromochloro-
methane
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.0001 1x10-6 0.080* 8×10-4
(eight
per ten
thousand)14
Tritium carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)
400 pCi/L 1x10-6 20,000
pCi/L
5×10-5
(five per
hundred
thousand)
Uranium carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.43 pCi/L 1×10-6 20 pCi/L 5×10-5
(five per
hundred
thousand)
Vinyl chloride carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)

0.00005 1×10-6 0.0005 1×10-5
(one per
hundred
thousand)
Xylene neurotoxicity
(affects the senses,
mood, and motor
control)

1.8 (single
isomer or
sum of
isomers)
NA 1.75 (single
isomer or
sum of
isomers)
NA

* For total trihalomethanes (the sum of bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, and dibromochloromethane). There are no MCLs for individual trihalomethanes. 13 Based on 0.080 mg/L chloroform; the risk will vary with different combinations and ratios of the other trihalomethanes in a particular sample.
14 Based on 0.080 mg/L dibromochloromethane; the risk will vary with different combinations and ratios of the other trihalomethanes in a particular sample.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 15
Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals
Chemical Health Risk Category1

US EPA
MCLG2
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk3
at the
MCLG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Disinfection byproducts (DBPs)
Chloramines acute toxicity
(causes irritation)
digestive system toxicity
(harms the stomach)
hematotoxicity
(causes anemia)
45,6 NA7 none NA
Chlorine acute toxicity
(causes irritation)
digestive system toxicity
(harms the stomach)
45,6 NA none NA
Chlorine dioxide hematotoxicity
(causes anemia)
neurotoxicity
(harms the nervous
system)

0.85,6 NA none NA
Disinfection byproducts: haloacetic acids (HAA5)
Monochloroacetic
acid (MCA)
general toxicity
(causes body and organ
weight changes
8)

0.07 NA none NA

1 Health risk category based on the US EPA MCLG document or California MCL document unless otherwise specified.
2 MCLG = maximum contaminant level goal established by US 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 case 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
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 16
Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals
Chemical Health Risk Category1

US EPA
MCLG2
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk3
at the
MCLG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Dichloroacetic
acid (DCA)
Carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)
0 0 none NA
Trichloroacetic
acid (TCA)
hepatotoxicity
(harms the liver)

0.02 NA none NA
Monobromoacetic
acid (MBA)
NA none NA none NA
Dibromoacetic
acid (DBA)
NA none NA none NA
Total haloacetic
acids (sum of

MCA, DCA, TCA,
MBA, and DBA)
general toxicity,
hepatotoxicity and
carcinogenicity
(causes body and organ
weight changes, harms
the liver and causes
cancer)
none NA 0.06 NA
Radionuclides
Gross alpha
particles9
carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)
0 (210Po
included)
0 15 pCi/L10
(includes
radium but
not radon
and
uranium)
up to 1x10-3
(for 210Po,
the most
potent alpha
emitter)

9 MCLs for gross alpha and beta particles are screening standards for a group of radionuclides.

Corresponding PHGs were not developed for gross alpha and beta particles. See the OEHHA memoranda discussing the cancer risks at these MCLs at
http://www.oehha.ca.gov/water/reports/grossab.html
.
10 pCi/L = picocuries per liter of water.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Water Toxicology Section
February 2022 17
Table 2: Health Risk Categories and Cancer Risk Values for Chemicals without California Public Health Goals
Chemical Health Risk Category1

US EPA
MCLG2
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk3
at the
MCLG
California
MCL4
(mg/L)
Cancer
Risk at the
California
MCL
Beta particles
and photon
emitters
9 carcinogenicity
(causes cancer)
0 (210Pb
included)
0 50 pCi/L
(judged
equiv. to 4
mrem/yr)
up to 2x10-3
(for 210Pb,
the most
potent beta-
emitter)

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENT 4

DESCRIPTION OF COST ESTIMATE PROCEDURES

Estimate of Ion -Exchange Treatment Costs – Cost estimates were developed for ion -exchange treatment of arsenic with a strong-base anion (SBA) resin and radium treatment with a strong acid cation (SAC) resin. The SBA and SCA treatment costs were estimated f or arsenic and for radium- 226/radium-228, respectively, in the finished water . The cost estimates were developed for each individual well using the maximum concentration measured during 2019 – 2021 as the treatment design influent concentration for arsenic and radium and using the maximum well production during the same period. The cost estimates were developed with WQTS’ in -house SBA ion exchange treatment design and cost model. The cost estimates were based on 2013 costs and have an expected accuracy range of +50/ -30%. For the model to predict cost, it needed to make projections about treatment performance based on water quality, and then constructed capital and annual O&M cost based on specific unit costs of equipment, ch emicals, supplies, labor, energy, disposal fees, etc. Cost estimates assume that the treatment and operating costs using SBA resin would be similar to that of the SAC resin. The estimated costs also assume that the untreated liquid waste brine is discharged to the sewer. Some of the same wells that were reported in the City’s 2019 PHG report again detected arsenic above the PHG (and these wells had capital and O&M costs developed previously for 2018 dollars). In this PHG report the capital and annual O&M costs were adjusted from 2013 dollars and 2018 dollars to 20 21 dollars using the 20 -city national average Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for capital cost adjustment and the Consumer Price Index for O&M cost adjustment.

Estimate of Reverse Osmosis Treatment Cost – Cost estimates for gross alpha treatment of Wells 94 and 114 with reverse osmosis (RO) were estimated from cost equations generated for the removal of CrVI with RO technology and are reported in Seidel, et al. 2013. 4 Cost equations are provided for estimating capital and O&M costs in 2012 dollars. Capital costs are based on the design flow, whereas O&M costs are based on the average flow, which was set to 70% of the design flow. The cost equations assume that the RO concentrate is discharged to the sewer. The maximum water production for Well 94 during 2019 through 2021 was 679 gpm, and 460 gpm for Well 114, which were used as the design flow. The capital and annual O&M costs were adjusted from 2012 dollars to 2021 dollars using the 20-city national average Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for capital cost adjustment and the Consumer Price Index for O&M cost adjustment.

Estimate of GAC Treatment Cost – Cost estimates for PCE treatment of Well 112 with GAC were estimated using the EPA’s Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water Work Breakdown Structure Model for Granular Activated Carbon ( EPA, August 12, 2014). Treatment assumptions included an Empty Bed Contact Time of 7.5 minutes and 150,000 bed volumes and a maximum production of 556

4 Seidel, C. J., Najm, I. N., Blute, N. K., Corwin, C. J., & Wu, X. (2013). National and California treatment costs to comply with potential hexavalent chromium MCLs. American Water Works Association, 105(6), E320–E336.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

gpm. The capital and annual O&M costs were adjusted from 20 14 dollars to 2021 dollars using the 20-city national average Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for capital cost adjustment and the Consumer Price Index for O&M cost adjustment.

CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES 2022 PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT

ATTACHMENT 5

CITY OF SACRAMENTO – DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES

2019, 2020 AND 2021 CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORTS

YOUR WATER MEETS OR EXCEEDS

ALL FEDERAL AND STATE DRINKING

WATER STANDARDS
This report is presented to enhance your
understanding of where your water comes
from and what it contains.

Seventy percent of the City of Sacra-
mento’s water supply comes from the
American and Sacramento Rivers, with
the remainder supplied by groundwater
wells. The City of Sacramento takes many
steps to ensure high quality drinking
water, including source water protection,
water treatment, distribution system
operation, maintenance of potable water
facilities, and water quality testing.

The city water supply is routinely tested
for more than 100 substances; a complete
list of detections can be found in the
Water Quality Analysis Results for 2019
tables on pages 4–6.

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT
A watershed sanitary survey (WSS) focuses
on evaluating source water quality and
potential watershed contaminant sources
to provide key information to aid in
understanding how to maintain and
possibly improve source water protec-
tion, the ﬁrst barrier in protecting public
health. An evaluation of water treatment
plant capabilities and treated water
quality provides an assessment of the
ability of a water utility to treat their
source water.

Initial WSS reports for the City’s Sacra-
mento River and American River water
sources were completed in 2000 and
2001. These reports indicated that both
rivers are most vulnerable to contami-
nants from recreational activities and
that the Sacramento River is also most
susceptible to agricultural contaminants.

The City of Sacramento, in partnership
with several other water utilities, complete
WSS updates of the river water sources
every ﬁve years. The WSS updates were
most recently completed in 2015 and
2018 for the Sacramento and American
Rivers, respectively. Currently, the 2020
update for the Sacramento River WSS is
in process.

An assessment of the City’s groundwater
wells was completed in January 2001.

Due to the proximity to potential
contaminant sources, the wells north of
the American River are considered most
vulnerable to sewage collection systems,
leaking underground storage tanks,
known contaminant plumes, agricultural
drainage, gas stations, dry cleaners, metal
plating and chemical processing storage
facilities, electrical/electronic manufac-
turing, and automobile repair and body
shops. Wells south of the American River
are considered vulnerable to leaking
underground storage tanks and sewage
collection systems.

Despite these potential vulnerabilities,
your water continues to meet or exceed
all state and federal drinking water
standards. Copies of the complete
assessments are available for review at
the City of Sacramento, Department
of Utilities, 1395 35 th Avenue, or call
916-808-5454 to request a summary
of the assessments.

Important Drinking Water
Quality Information for the
Citizens of Sacramento
2 0 1 9 CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT

LEAD
If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious
health problems, especially for pregnant women and
young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with customer
service lines and home plumbing. The City of Sacramento is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in customer plumbing components. When your water has been sitting
for several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by ﬂushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are
concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize
exposure is available from the EPA Safe Drinking Water
Hotline or at http:/ /www.epa.gov/lead.

LEAD IN SCHOOLS
The City of Sacramento responded proactively to State
requirements enacted in 2017 to test for lead in schools; through the end of 2019 the City has tested over 600
samples from 132 schools, representing all public schools served by City water, as well as many private schools that opted to participate.

PER/hyphen.case AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES /parenleft.casePFAS/parenright.case PFAS are human-made substances that are an emerging
concern in drinking water. Two of these substances,
perﬂuorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perﬂuorooctanesul-
fonic acid (PFOS) have been extensively produced and
studied in the United States.

During 2019. the City of Sacramento conﬁrmed the
presence of these substances in some of its ground
water sources at levels which do not approach the
response levels established by the State Water Resources Control Board. The City of Sacramento is committed to
continuing to monitor this emerging situation. For more information, visit: https:/ /www.cityofsacramento.org/
Utilities/Water/Water-Quality/PFAS

ALGAL TOXINS
Microcystins and cylindrospermopsin are algal toxins
produced by naturally occurring cyanobacteria in
surface water sources (such as the American and
Sacramento Rivers). These compounds are subject to
a U.S. EPA Health Advisory and due to their potential
presence in our source waters, the City of Sacramento
voluntarily monitors for these compounds during
vulnerable seasons, typically summer through late fall.

There were no detections of microcystins or cylindros-
permopsin during routine 2019 monitoring.

EARTHY OR MUSTY TASTE AND ODOR
In late summer, some customers may notice an earthy
or musty taste in City water. This is due to the presence of Geosmin and 2-Methylisoborneol (MIB), odor
compounds which are not removed through conven-
tional water treatment. Although these compounds do
not impact the safety of the City’s drinking water, some customers ﬁnd the taste and odor to be objectional.

Chilling the water or adding lemon can help diminish
the taste.

What You Should Know About...

REQUIRED DISCLOSURES FOR

DRINKING WATER CONSUMERS
This information is presented to further educate consumers about drinking water contaminants.

The sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels over the surface of the land or through the ground, it dissolves naturally-occurring minerals and, in some cases, radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from the presence of animals or from human activity.

Contaminants that may be present in source water include:
• Microbial contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, that may come from sewage treatment plants, septic systems,
agricultural livestock operations, and wildlife.
• Inorganic contaminants, such as salts and metals, that can be naturally-occurring or result from urban stormwater
runoﬀ, industrial or domestic wastewater discharges, oil and gas production, mining, or farming.
• Pesticides and herbicides, that may come from a variety of sources such as agriculture, urban stormwater runoﬀ, and residential uses.
• Organic chemical contaminants, including synthetic and volatile organic chemicals, that are byproducts of indus- trial processes and petroleum production, and can also
come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoﬀ, agricul- tural application, and septic systems.
• Radioactive contaminants, that can be naturally-
occurring or be the result of oil and gas production
and mining activities.

In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and
the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water
Board) prescribe regulations that limit the amount of
certain contaminants in water provided by public water
systems. State Water Board regulations also establish
limits for contaminants in bottled water that provide the same protection for public health.

Drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at least small amounts of some
contaminants. The presence of contaminants does not
necessarily indicate that water poses a health risk. More information about contaminants and potential health
eﬀects can be obtained by calling the U.S. EPA’s Safe
Drinking Water Hotline (1-800-426-4791).

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants
in drinking water than the general population. Immuno-
compromised persons such as persons with cancer under-
going chemotherapy, persons who have undergone organ
transplants, people with HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants can be particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking water from their health care providers. U.S. EPA/ Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines on appropriate means to lessen the risk of infection by Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the U.S. EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline (1-800-426-4791).

UnitConstituent
State or
Federal Goal
PHGYear Sampled
Action
Level
Arsenic
Barium
Fluoride in source water A
Nitrate
(as Nitrogen)
Selenium
TOC / Control of DBP Precursors
Turbidity C
µg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
µg/L
mg/L
NTU
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2019
2019
2017 - 2019
2019
2019

0.004
2 1
10 30
NA
NA
10 1

2.0 10
50 [ TT ] 2.0 B
[ TT ] 1 NTU
[ TT ] 95% of samples ≤0.3 NTU
Lead
Copper
µg/L
mg/L
2017
2017

0.2 0.3
15 1.3
Chlorine
Fluoride A
Haloacetic Acids
Total Coliform Bacteria
Trihalomethanes
mg/L
mg/L
µg/L
% samples
positive
µg/L
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
[MRDLG] 4.0 (as Cl/two.denom )
1 NA
[MCLG] 0
NA
[MRDL] 4.0 (as Cl/two.denom)

2.0 60

5.0%
80 Constituent Unit
State or
Federal Goal
PHG
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCLYear Sampled
UnitConstituent
State or
Federal Goal
PHG
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCLYear Sampled
Regulated for Public Health - Primary MCL1
NOTES: (A) In accordance with State law, the City of Sacramento adjusts the natural levels of ﬂuoride in our water supplies to the optimal level determined by the Centers for Disease Control. More information about ﬂuoridation is available at: http:/ /www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/Fluoridation.shtml (B) Source water TOC less than 2.0 mg/L used as alternative criteria to exempt from removal ratio requirements.

Value given represents maximum running annual average of any quarter during 2019. (C) Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is a good indicator of the eﬀectiveness of our ﬁltration system. (D) Value given is the highest individual value measured during 2019. (E) 100% of turbidity measurements were in compliance during 2019. (F) Distribution samples with no detectable chlorine residual undergo further analysis to ensure compliance with microbiological water quality regulations. (G) Range is based on all individual sample values from 2019. (H) Average given is maximum of all locational running annual averages calculated during 2019. (I) Value given is the maximum percent positive of any month during 2019.

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
RESULTS FOR 2019
Your water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards.

ND - 4.2
ND - 0.2
ND - 0.2
ND - 3.6
ND - 8.8
NA
NA

2.5 ND

0.1 1.6
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Runoﬀ and leaching from fertilizer use; leaching from
septic tanks and sewage; erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Various natural and man-made sources
Soil runoﬀ

1.9 B

0.13 D
100% E
NA
ND F - 1.6
ND - 0.9
ND - 42 G

0.0% I
Drinking water disinfectant added for treatment
Water additive that promotes strong teeth
By-product of drinking water disinfection
Naturally present in the environment
By-product of drinking water disinfection1.9 - 74 G 60 H

0.7 0.7
38 H
Internal corrosion of household water plumbing systems
Internal corrosion of household water plumbing systems
62 62
ND

0.11 0
0 The State allows us to monitor for some contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations of these contaminants do not change frequently. Some of our data, though representative, are more than one year old. While the City of Sacramento tests for more than 100 substances, this report only lists those detected at or above the federal or state level for reporting.

Surface Water
Range Average
Groundwater
Typical SourcesRange Average
Distribution System
Typical Sources
Typical Sources
# of Samples
Collected
90 th Percentile
Level
# of Sites
Exceeding AL
NOTES: (A) In accordance with State law, the City of Sacramento adjusts the natural levels of ﬂuoride in our water supplies to the optimal level determined by the Centers for Disease Control. More information about ﬂuoridation is available at: http:/ /www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/Fluoridation.shtml (B) Source water TOC less than 2.0 mg/L used as alternative criteria to exempt from removal ratio requirements.

AverageRange
UnitConstituent
State or
Federal Goal
PHGYear Sampled
Action
Level
Arsenic
Barium
Fluoride in source water A
Nitrate
(as Nitrogen)
Selenium
TOC / Control of DBP Precursors
Turbidity C
µg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
µg/L
mg/L
NTU
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2019
2019
2017 - 2019
2019
2019

0.004
2 1
10 30
NA
NA
10 1

2.0 10
50 [ TT ] 2.0 B
[ TT ] 1 NTU
[ TT ] 95% of samples ≤0.3 NTU
Lead
Copper
µg/L
mg/L
2017
2017

2.0 60

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
RESULTS FOR 2019
Your water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards.

Chloride
Manganese
Speciﬁc Conductance
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids
mg/L
µg/L
µS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2018
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019

500
50 1600
500
1000
Color
Odor
Turbidity
color units
TON
NTU
2019
2019
2019

15 3
5 Constituent Unit
Surface Water
Range AverageYear Sampled Range
Total Alkalinity
Calcium
Hardness
Magnesium
Sodium
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
19 - 40
8 - 14
27 - 52
1 - 4
2 - 5
30 11
40 3
3 97 - 226
16 - 53
92 - 304
10 - 37
19 - 42
Groundwater
Regulated for Drinking Water Aesthetics - Secondary MCL2 Constituents With No Established MCL
Unregulated constituent monitoring helps determine where certain water constituents occur and whether they should be regulated Other Parameters of Interest to Customers
3 4
Constituent Unit
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCLYear Sampled
Constituent Unit MCLYear Sampled
Constituent Unit
Surface Water Groundwater
Range AverageYear Sampled Range AveragePHG
Androstene
Chlorate
1,4-Dioxane
Germanium
Hexavalent Chromium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Strontium
Testosterone
Total HAAS K
Total HAA6Br K
Total HAA9 K
Vanadium
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
µg/L
NA
NA
NA
NA

0.02 J
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2014
2014
2014
2019
2016 - 2019
2019
2014 - 2015
2014 - 2015
2014
2019
2019
2019
2014 - 2015
ND - 0.00034
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.3 ND
48 - 130
ND - 0.00026
NA
NA
NA

0.4 - 3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.3 ND
76 ND
NA
NA
NA

1.4 ND
ND
ND - 0.2
ND - 100
ND - 7.7
ND - 21
ND
190 - 380
ND
NA
NA
NA
15 - 41
ND
ND
ND

8.3 4.8

3.9 ND
265
ND
NA
NA
NA
25 (J) There is currently no MCL for hexavalent chromium. The previous MCL of 10 µg/L was withdrawn on September 11, 2017. (K) While ﬁve Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) are included in Table 1 due to routine distribution monitoring to protect public health, the Fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule requires monitoring for several unregulated Haloacetic Acid compounds in addition to HAA5.

ND
ND
89 - 139

5.6 - 15
45 - 83
ND
ND
114
10 64
14 - 76
ND - 22
310 - 740

3.3 - 34
226 - 466
38 ND
409
10 290
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Leaching from natural deposits
Substances that form ions when in water
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
ND - 3
ND - 2
ND - 1.0
ND
ND

0.1 Naturally occurring organic materials
Naturally occurring organic materials
Soil runoff
Surface Water Groundwater
Groundwater
Average
140
27 156
19 28
Key Terms and Abbreviations
µS/cm Microsiemens per centimeter; measure of electrical conductivity. 90 th Percentile The value for which 90 percent of samples had a lower result.

AL Action Level: The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow.

Constituent A chemical or parameter measured in the water supply DBP Disinfection By-Products: Substances that can form during a reaction of a disinfectant with naturally present organic matter in the water.

Cl 2 Free Chlorine: Chlorine available for disinfection.

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level: The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water.

Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHG (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. Secondary MCLs are set to protect the odor, taste, and appearance of drinking water.

MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal: 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. mg/L Milligrams per liter: Equivalent to 1 second in 11.5 years.

MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level: 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.

MRDLG Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal: The level of drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.

NA Not Applicable
ND Not Detected
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units: Measures cloudiness of water. pCi/L Picocuries per liter: Measures radiation.

PDWS Primary Drinking Water Standards: MCLs, MRDLs and treatment techniques (TTs) for contaminants that affect health, along with their monitoring and reporting requirements PHG Public Health Goal: The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. PHGs are set by Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

TOC Total Organic Carbon: A measurement of the potential of water to form DBPs.

TON Theshold Odor Number: The greatest dilution of a sample with odor-free water that yields a detectable odor.

TT Treatment Technique: A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water.
µg/L Micrograms per liter: Equivalent to 1 second in nearly 32 years.

Typical SourcesRange Average Range Average
Distribution System
Typical SourcesRange Average
Distribution System
Range Average
NA
ND - 61
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND - 1
48 - 370
NA

4.2 - 28

1.0 - 3.6

5.0 - 30

0.4 - 38
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
181
NA
22 2.1
24 14
(J) There is currently no MCL for hexavalent chromium. The previous MCL of 10 µg/L was withdrawn on September 11, 2017. (K) While ﬁve Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) are included in Table 1 due to routine distribution monitoring to protect public health, the Fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule requires monitoring for several unregulated Haloacetic Acid compounds in addition to HAA5.

Chloride
Manganese
Speciﬁc Conductance
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids
mg/L
µg/L
µS/cm
mg/L
mg/L
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2018
2017 - 2019
2017 - 2019

500
50 1600
500
1000
Color
Odor
Turbidity
color units
TON
NTU
2019
2019
2019

0.02 J
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2014
2014
2014
2019
2016 - 2019
2019
2014 - 2015
2014 - 2015
2014
2019
2019
2019
2014 - 2015
ND - 0.00034
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.3 ND
48 - 130
ND - 0.00026
NA
NA
NA

0.4 - 3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.3 ND
76 ND
NA
NA
NA

1.4 ND
ND
ND - 0.2
ND - 100
ND - 7.7
ND - 21
ND
190 - 380
ND
NA
NA
NA
15 - 41
ND
ND
ND

8.3 4.8

TO REPORT A CONCERN
City of Sacramento, Department of Utilities
311 or 916-264-5011
(24 hours a day, 7 days a week)
www.cityofsacramento.org/utilities

FOR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS REPORT CONTACT
Rory Hartkemeyer
916-808-3737

ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY

INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE
U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline
1-800-426-4791
http:/ /epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water

NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY

FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Sacramento City Council generally holds public
meetings the 1st and 4th Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m., and 2nd Tuesday of the month at 2 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 915 I Street, Sacramento. You can access
Council agendas at www.cityofsacramento.org/clerk.

Stay Connected!
Visit: cityofsacramento.org
www.facebook.com/SacramentoCityUtilities
www.twitter.com/saccityutility
www.instagram.com/sacdou
Daimntawv tshaj tawm no muaj lus tseemceeb txog koj cov dej haus.

Tshab txhais nws, los yog tham nrog tej tug neeg uas totaub txog nws.

Naaiv norm sou maaih jienv nyei fienx gorngv taux meih nyei wuom hopv. Faan fai gorngv bun mienh hiuv duqv.

Acest raport conține informații importante despre apa de băut.

Traduceți-o sau discutați cu cineva care o înțelege.

Этот отчет содержит важную информацию о вашей питьевой
воды. Переведите его или поговорите с тем, кто это понимает.

Este informe contiene información muy importante sobre su agua potable. Tradúzcalo o hable con alguien que lo entienda bien.

Цей звіт містить важливу інформацію про вашу питну воду.

Перекласти його, або поговорити з кимось, хто його розуміє.

Mahalaga ang impormasyong ito. Mangyaring ipasalin ito.

This report contains important information translations.

YOUR WATER MEETS OR EXCEEDS

ALL FEDERAL AND STATE DRINKING

WATER STANDARDS
This report is presented to enhance your
understanding of where your water comes
from and what it contains.

Seventy percent of the City of Sacra-
mento’s water supply comes from the
American and Sacramento Rivers, with
the remainder supplied by groundwater
wells and transfers from Sacramento
County Water Agency and Sacramento
Suburban Water District.

The city water supply is routinely tested
for more than 100 substances; all detect-
ed substances are disclosed in the tables
on the following pages.

An assessment of the City’s groundwater
wells was completed in January 2001.

Important Drinking Water
Quality Information for the
Citizens of Sacramento
2 0 20 CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT

Aluminum (mg/L)
Arsenic (µg/L)
Barium (mg/L)
Chlorine (mg/L)
Chromium Total (µg/L)
Copper (mg/L)
Fluoride in source water C (mg/L)
Fluoride in treated water C (mg/L)
Gross Alpha I (pCi/L)
Haloacetic Acids (µg/L)
Lead (µg/L)
Nitrate as Nitrogen (mg/L)
Selenium (µg/L)
Tetrachloroethylene (µg/L)
TOC / Control of DBP
Precursors (mg/L)
Total Coliform Bacteria
(% samples positive)
Trihalomethanes (µg/L)
Turbidity G (NTU)
Turbidity G
(% of samples ≤0.3 NTU)
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2012–2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
ND

2.8 0.03

0.7 ND
na

0.1 0.7
ND
34 D
na

1.4 ND
ND
na
na
54 D
na
na
Erosion of natural deposits; residual from some surface water treatment processes
Erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Drinking water disinfectant added for treatment
Discharge from steel and pulp mills and chrome plating; erosion of natural deposits
Internal corrosion of household water plumbing systems
Erosion of natural deposits
Water additive that promotes strong teeth
Erosion of natural deposits
By-product of drinking water disinfection
Internal corrosion of household water plumbing systems
Runoﬀ and leaching from fertilizer use; leaching from
septic tanks and sewage; erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Discharge from factories, dry cleaners, and auto shops
(metal degreaser)
Various natural and man-made sources
Naturally present in the environment
By-product of drinking water disinfection
Soil runoﬀ
Soil runoﬀ
Constituent (Unit) Typical Sources Year Monitored
System
Average
Regulated for Public Health - Primary MCL1
(A) Range of all results observed in Distribution system. (B) Distribution samples with ND chlorine residual undergo further analysis to ensure compliance with microbiological water quality regulations. (C) In accordance with State law, the City of Sacramento adjusts the natural levels of ﬂuoride in our water supplies to the optimal level determined by the Centers for Disease Control. More information about ﬂuoridation is available at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinking - water/Fluoridation.shtml (D) Maximum of all locational running annual averages calculated during 2020. (E) Source water TOC less than 2.0 mg/L used as alternative criteria to exempt from removal ratio requirements for surface water sources. Values given represents maximum running annual average of any quarter during 2020 for each source. (F) Highest value measured or calculated during 2020. (G) Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is a good indicator of water quality. High turbidity can hinder the eﬀectiveness of disinfectants. (H) Please see 2020 Consumer Conﬁdence Reports published by these agencies for more detailed water quality information; Sacramen - to County Water Agency https://waterresources.saccounty.net/ccr/ and Sacramento Suburban Water District https://www.sswd.org/departments/water-quality/consumer-conﬁdence-reports (I) Gross alpha is used as a general indicator for the presence of radiological constituents. The gross alpha result for one well was just over half the MCL. As required, the well was then tested for uranium and the result was 2.8 pCi/L, which is less than the uranium MCL of 20 pCi/L. Uranium was detected in Sacramento County Water Agency sources between ND—2.71 PCi/L and in Sacramento Suburban Water District sources between ND—3.2 PCi/L.

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
RESULTS FOR 2020
Your water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards. µg/L micrograms per liter: equivalent to
1 second in nearly 32 years
µS/cm microsiemens per centimeter:
measure of electrical conductivity
mg/L milligrams per liter: equivalent to 1
second in 11.5 years
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units:
measures cloudiness of water
pCi/L Picocuries per liter: measures
radiation
TON Theshold Odor Number: The greatest
dilution of a sample with odor-free
water that yields a detectable odor
Units

0.6 0.004
2 [MRDLG] 4 (as Cl 2 )
[MCLG] 100

0.3 1
1 [MCLG] 0
na

0.2 10
30 0.06
na
[MCLG] 0
na
na
na
1 10
1 [MRDL] 4.0 (as Cl 2 )
50 [AL] 1.3

2.0 2.0
15 60
[AL] 15
10 50
5 [TT] 2.0

5.0%
80 [TT] 1 NTU
[TT] 95% of samples
≤0.3 NTU
ND
ND
ND

0.05 ND
ND
ND
ND–7.4
ND–0.87
ND–0.05
ND–4.3
ND–0.14
ND
ND–4.6
ND–0.18
ND
ND
ND

1.3 E,F
ND
ND
ND

1.4 E,F
ND–3.5
ND
ND

1.1 ND–7.6
ND
ND
na
ND–3.8
ND–6.5
ND–1.8
na
ND ND ND–0.4 NDND–0.2
ND–1.3 A, B

0.4% F

9.2–66 A

0.0–0.9 A

3.5–29 A
62 samples collected; 90th percentile concentration: 0.09; 0 sites exceeding AL The State allows us to monitor for some contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations of these contaminants do not change frequently. Some of our data, though representative, are more than one year old. While the City of Sacramento tests for more than 100 substances, this report only lists those detected at or above the federal or state level for reporting.

State or
Federal Goal
PHG
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCL
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency
City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)

0.08 F
100% of samples
≤0.3 NTU

0.14 F
100% of samples
≤0.3 NTU

0.08 100% of samples
≤0.3 NTU
na
na
na
na
ND ND ND–10 NDND
ND ND ND–3.8 ND–6.8ND–8.0
62 samples collected; 90th percentile concentration: ND; 0 sites exceeding AL 90th Percentile The value for which 90 percent of samples had a lower result AL Action Level: The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow Constituent A chemical or parameter measured in the water supply DBP Disinfection By-Products: Substances that can form during a reaction of a disinfectant with naturally present organic matter in the water Cl 2 Free Chlorine: chlorine available for disinfection MCL Maximum Contaminant Level: The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHG (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. Secondary MCLs are set to protect the odor, taste, and appearance of drinking water MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal: 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
MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level: 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
MRDLG Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal: The level of drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reﬂect the beneﬁts of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants na Not applicable
ND Not detected
PHG Public Health Goal: 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
TOC Total Organic Carbon: a measurement of the potential of water to form DBPs TT Treatment Technique: A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water Key Terms and Abbreviations

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY WATER TRANSFERS H
(A) Range of all results observed in Distribution system.

Aluminum (µg/L)
Chloride (mg/L)
Copper (mg/L)
Color (units)
Manganese (µg/L)
Odor (units)
Speciﬁc Conductance (µS/cm)
Sulfate (mg/L)
Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)
Turbidity (units)
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
Erosion of natural deposits; residual from some surface water treatment processes
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Naturally occurring organic materials
Leaching of natural deposits
Naturally occurring organic materials
Substances that form ions when in water
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Soil runoﬀ
Constituent (Unit) Typical Sources Year Monitored
Regulated for Drinking Water Aesthetics - Secondary MCL2 Calcium (mg/L)
Chromium, Hexavalent J (µg/L)
Hardness (mg/L)
Magnesium (mg/L)
Sodium (mg/L)
Total Alkalinity (mg/L)
Germanium (µg/L)
Manganese (µg/L)
Total HAA5 K (µg/L)
Total HAA6Br K (µg/L)
Total HAA9 K (µg/L)
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2019–2020
2019–2020
2019–2020
2019–2020
2019–2020
28 3.8
146
18 26
133
ND

2.6 24.1
3 27

11.2 ND
37 2.2

2.6 26
ND

0.46–1.3
16 ND
62 5.6

7.6 54
ND
ND–0.74
17–50
ND–7.7
85–267

9.3–35
17–42
91–220
ND
ND–16.5
Constituent (Unit) Year Monitored
System
Average
Other Parameters of Interest to Customers / Constituents With No Established MCL3 City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)

4.2–35 A

1.0–7.8 A

5.0–38 A
UCMR

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY
(A) Range of all results observed in Distribution system. (J) There is currently no MCL for hexavalent chromium. The previous MCL of 10 µg/L was withdrawn on September 11, 2017. (K) While ﬁve Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) are included in Table 1 due to routine distribution monitoring to protect public health, the Fourth UCMR required monitoring for several unregulated Haloacetic Acid compounds in addition to HAA5. 89 8.5
64 139

15.8 98
310–740

3.5–31.8
210–420
100–1200
ND–13
76–710
160–510

1.4–29
130–340
ND

37.6 ND
ND
ND
ND
405
11 268
ND
200
500
1 15
50 3
1600
500
1000
5 ND

5.3 ND
53 6.3
ND
ND
5–270
ND–0.11
ND–54

3.3–66
ND–0.10
ND
13–72
ND
System
Average
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCL
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency
City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)
ND ND ND ND–41 ND–41
ND–5 A
ND–2 A
ND–1 A

4.4–73
na
20–330

2.0–34
16–120
48–230
ND–1.9
ND–25
16–58
na
74–270

8.4–32
11–56
75–180
ND–0.4
ND–36
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency

4.2–35A

1.0–7.8A

5.0–38A

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY WATER TRANSFERS

WATER TRANSFERS

PER- AND POLY-FLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFASs)
According to the California State Water Resources Control Board, exposure to Per- and Polyﬂuoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) through drinking water has become an increasing concern due to the tendency of PFASs to accumulate in groundwater. PFASs are a large group of human-made substances that have been used extensively in consumer products designed to be waterproof, stain-resistant or non-stick. In addition, they have been used in ﬁre-retarding foam and various industrial processes. Two of the PFAS, perﬂuorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perﬂuorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) have been extensively produced and studied in the United States. The following summarizes PFOA and PFOS detections in the City of Sacramento source water in 2020, in relation to Response and Notiﬁcation Levels established by the State of California:

ND Not Detected
ng/L Nanograms per Liter; Equivalent to 1 second in nearly 32,000 years Notiﬁcation Level Notiﬁcation levels are established as precautionary measures for contaminants that are candidates for drinking water standards but have not yet undergone or completed the regulatory standard setting process
Response Level A response level (RL) is set higher than a notiﬁcation level and represents a recommended chemical concentration level at which water systems consider taking a water source out of service or provide treatment if that option is available to them Key Terms And Units
As part of our mission to provide City customers with drinking water of the highest quality, the City of Sacramento is committed to continued monitoring, transparent public notiﬁcation, and eﬀective management of this emerging water quality issue. For more detailed information, visit: https:/ /www.cityofsacramento.org/Utilities/Water/Water-Quality/PFAS LEAD
If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious
health problems, especially for pregnant women and
young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with customer
service lines and home plumbing. The City of Sacramento is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in customer plumbing components. When your water has been sitting
for several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by ﬂushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are
concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize
exposure is available from the EPA Safe Drinking Water
Hotline 1-800-426-4791 or at http:/ /www.epa.gov/lead.

LEAD IN SCHOOLS
The City of Sacramento responded proactively to State
requirements enacted in 2017 to test for lead in schools; through the end of 2020 the City has tested over 600
samples from 132 schools, representing all public schools served by City water, as well as many private schools that opted to participate.

ALGAL TOXINS
Microcystins and cylindrospermopsin are algal toxins
produced by naturally occurring cyanobacteria in
surface water sources (such as the American and
Sacramento Rivers). These compounds are subject to
a U.S. EPA Health Advisory and due to their potential
presence in our source waters, the City of Sacramen-
to voluntarily monitors for these compounds during
vulnerable seasons, typically summer through late fall.

There were no detections of microcystins or cylin-
drospermopsin during routine 2020 monitoring.

EARTHY OR MUSTY TASTE AND ODOR
In late summer, some customers may notice an earthy
or musty taste in City water. This is due to the
presence of Geosmin and 2-Methylisoborneol (MIB),
odor compounds which are not removed through
conventional water treatment. Although these
compounds do not impact the safety of the City’s
drinking water, some customers ﬁnd the taste and
odor to be objectionable. Chilling the water or adding
lemon can help diminish the taste.

What You Should Know About...

Perﬂuorooctanoic Acid
[PFOA] (ng/L)
Perﬂuorooctanesulfonic
Acid [PFOS] (µg/L)

5.1 6.5
ND
ND
ND–10 L
ND–24
ND–4.8
ND–5.2
ND
ND
Perﬂuorooctanoic acid
exposures resulted in
increased liver weight and
cancer in laboratory animals.

Perﬂuorooctanesulfonic acid
exposures resulted in immune
suppression and cancer in
laboratory animals.

Chemical (Unit) Health Eﬀects
Notiﬁcation
Level
10 40
Response
Level
Sacramento
County Water
Agency
City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
American and
Sacramento
Rivers
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
(L) PFAS was detected at the response level of 10 ng/L in one well which was immediately removed from service.

REQUIRED DISCLOSURES FOR

DRINKING WATER CONSUMERS
This information is presented to further educate consumers about drinking water contaminants.

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants
in drinking water than the general population. Immuno-
compromised persons such as persons with cancer under-
going chemotherapy, persons who have undergone organ
transplants, people with HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants can be particularly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking water from their health care providers. U.S. EPA/ Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines on appropriate means to lessen the risk of infection by Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the U.S. EP A ’s Safe Drinking Water Hotline (1-800-426-4791).

TO REPORT A CONCERN
City of Sacramento, Department of Utilities
311 or 916-264-5011
(24 hours a day, 7 days a week)
www.cityofsacramento.org/utilities

FOR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS REPORT CONTACT
Rory Hartkemeyer
916-808-3737

ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY

INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE
www.sacramentowaterquality.com
U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline
1-800-426-4791
http:/ /epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water

NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY

FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Sacramento City Council generally holds public
meetings the 1 st and 4 th Tuesday of the month at 5 p.m., and 2 nd Tuesday of the month at 2 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 915 I Street, Sacramento. You can access
Council agendas at www.cityofsacramento.org/clerk.

Stay Connected!
Visit: cityofsacramento.org
www .f acebook.com/SacramentoCityUtilities
www .twitter .com/saccityutility
www.instagram.com/sacdou
Daimntawv tshaj tawm no muaj lus tseemceeb txog koj cov dej haus.

Tshab txhais nws, los yog tham nrog tej tug neeg uas totaub txog nws.

Naaiv norm sou maaih jienv nyei fienx gorngv taux meih nyei wuom hopv. Faan fai gorngv bun mienh hiuv duqv.

Acest raport conține informații importante despre apa de băut.

Traduceți-o sau discutați cu cineva care o înțelege.

Este informe contiene información muy importante sobre su agua potable. Tradúzcalo o hable con alguien que lo entienda bien.

Цей звіт містить важливу інформацію про вашу питну воду.

Перекласти його, або поговорити з кимось, хто його розуміє.

Mahalaga ang impormasyong ito. Mangyaring ipasalin ito.

This report contains important information translations.

IMPORTANT

DRINKING

WATER QUALITY

INFORMATION FOR

THE CITIZENS OF

SACRAMENTO

CONSUMER

CONFIDENCE
REPORT2021

WATER EFFICIENCY
Water-use eﬃciency is a California way of life, and the City of Sacramento continues to encourage water conservation. Find tips to save water and available rebates at SacWaterWise.com This report is presented to help City of Sacramento Water customers understand where their tap water comes from and what it contains. It summarizes the most recent testing results through December 2021. The City’s water supply is routinely tested for more than 100 substances in order to conﬁrm that your water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards.

As a provider of a critical and life-sustaining service we are committed to notifying customers of any change in our safe drinking water compliance status. This report is the most current for the period June 01, 2022 through May 31, 2023.

SOURCES OF WATER
Eighty percent of the City of Sacramento’s water supply comes from the American and Sacramento Rivers, with the remainder supplied by groundwater wells and transfers from Sacramento County Water Agency and Sacramento Suburban Water District. For more information on Sources of Water see Source Water Assessment on page 3.

Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant Intake StructureJeﬀrey Emocling, Senior Plant Operator Sacramento River, upstream of Sacramento River Intake Structures

REQUIRED DISCLOSURES FOR

DRINKING WATER CONSUMERS
This information is presented to further educate consum- ers about drinking water contaminants.

The sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels over the surface of the land or through the ground, it dissolves naturally-occur- ring minerals and, in some cases, radioactive material, and can pick up substances resulting from the presence of
animals or from human activity.

Contaminants that may be present in source water
include:
• Microbial contaminants, such as viruses and bacteria, that may come from sewage treatment plants, septic
systems, agricultural livestock operations, and wildlife. • Inorganic contaminants, such as salts and metals, that can be naturally-occurring or result from urban storm-
water runoﬀ, industrial or domestic wastewater
discharges, oil and gas production, mining, or farming. • Pesticides and herbicides, that may come from a variety of sources such as agriculture, urban stormwater runoﬀ, and residential uses.
• Organic chemical contaminants, including synthetic and volatile organic chemicals, that are byproducts of
industrial processes and petroleum production, and can
also come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoﬀ,
agricultural application, and septic systems.
• Radioactive contaminants, that can be naturally-occur- ring or be the result of oil and gas production and mining activities.

In order to ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the
State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) prescribe regulations that limit the amount of certain
contaminants in water provided by public water systems.

State Water Board regulations also establish limits for contaminants in bottled water that provide the same
protection for public health.

Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in
drinking water than the general population. Immu-
no-compromised persons such as persons with cancer
undergoing chemotherapy, persons who have undergone
organ transplants, people with HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants can be particu- larly at risk from infections. These people should seek advice about drinking water from their health care provid- ers. U.S. EPA/Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guide- lines on appropriate means to lessen the risk of infection by Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline
(1-800-426-4791).

Meter upgrade at EA Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT
A watershed sanitary survey (WSS) focuses on evaluat-
ing source water quality and potential watershed
contaminant sources to provide key information to aid
in understanding how to maintain and possibly improve
source water protection, a critical ﬁrst step in ensuring public health. An evaluation of water treatment plant
capabilities and treated water quality provides an
assessment of the ability of a water utility to treat their source water.

Initial WSS reports for the City’s Sacramento River and American River water sources were completed in 2000
and 2001. These reports indicated that both rivers are
most vulnerable to contaminants from recreational
activities and that the Sacramento River is also most
susceptible to agricultural contaminants. The City of
Sacramento, in partnership with several other water
utilities, complete WSS updates of the river water
sources every ﬁve years. The WSS updates were most
recently completed in 2018 and 2020 for the American
and Sacramento Rivers respectively.

An assessment of the City’s groundwater wells was
completed in January 2001. Due to the proximity to
potential contaminant sources, the wells north of the
American River are considered most vulnerable to
sewage collection systems, leaking underground
storage tanks, known contaminant plumes, agricultural
drainage, gas stations, dry cleaners, metal plating and chemical processing storage facilities, electrical/elec- tronic manufacturing, and automobile repair and body
shops. Wells south of the American River are consid-
ered vulnerable to leaking underground storage tanks
and sewage collection systems.

Despite these potential vulnerabilities, your water
continues to meet or exceed all state and federal
drinking water standards. Please call 916-808-5454 to
request a summary of the assessments or make an
appointment for an in-person viewing.
3 Chlorine as Cl2 (mg/L)
Haloacetic Acids (µg/L)
Trihalomethanes (µg/L)
Control of DBP Precursors - TOC (mg/L)
Aluminum (mg/L)
Arsenic (µg/L)
Barium (mg/L)
Chromium Total (µg/L)
Copper (mg/L)
Fluoride in source water D (mg/L)
Fluoride in treated water D (mg/L)
Lead (µg/L)
Nitrate as Nitrogen (mg/L)
Selenium (µg/L)
Total Coliform Bacteria
(percent samples positive)
E. Coli Bacteria (positive samples)
Gross Alpha (pCi/L)
Turbidity F (NTU)
Turbidity F (NTU)
2021
2021
2021
2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020
2021
2021
2020
2021
2020 – 2021
2021
2021
2014 – 2021
2021
2021

0.6 25 B
51 B
NA
ND

2.7 ND
ND
NA
ND

0.7 NA

1.3 ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
Constituent (Unit) Year Monitored
System
Average
Regulated for Public Health (PDWS)1
4 NA
NA
NA

0.6 0.004
2 100

0.3 1
1 0.2
10 30
0 0
0 NA
NA
4 60
80 2.0
1 10
1 50

1.3 [AL]

2.0 2.0
15 [AL]
10 50

5.0 percent of monthly
samples are positive
0 positive samples
15 1 NTU

at least 95% of samples
≤ 0.3 NTU
State or Federal Goal

PHG, MCLG
or MRDLG
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCL, MRDL or TT

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
RESULTS FOR 2021
Your water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards. µg/L micrograms per liter: equivalent
to 1 second in nearly 32 years
µS/cm microsiemens per centimeter:
measure of electrical
conductivity
mg/L milligrams per liter: equivalent
to 1 second in 11.5 years
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units:
measures cloudiness of water
pCi/L picocuries per liter: measures
radiation
TON Theshold Odor Number: The
greatest dilution of a sample
with odor-free water that yields
a detectable odor
Units

TREATMENT

TECHNIQUE
RADIO-

LOGICAL

DISINFECTION
and DBPINORGANICMICRO-

BIOLOGICAL
(A) Range of all results observed in distribution system; samples with ND chlorine undergo further analysis to ensure water supply safety.
(B) Compliance with MCL conﬁrmed quarterly (every three months); system average shown represents highest locational running annual average calculated during any of the four quarters of 2021 while range represents all results observed in distribution system.
(C) Compliance with TT conﬁrmed quarterly (every three months); value shown represents highest running annual average calculated during any of the four quarters of 2021.
(D) In accordance with State law, the City of Sacramento adjusts the natural levels of ﬂuoride in our water supplies to the optimal level determined by the Centers for Disease Control. More information about ﬂuoridation is available at: http://ww - w.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/Fluoridation.shtml (E) Starting July 1, 2021, the MCL changed from total coliforms to E. Coli; for more information see "Federal and State Revised Total Coliform Rule" on page 8.
(F) Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of the water. We monitor it because it is a good indicator of water quality. High turbidity can hinder the eﬀectiveness of disinfectants. (G) Please see 2021 Consumer Conﬁdence Reports published by these agencies for more detailed water quality information; Sacramento County Water Agency https://waterresources.saccounty.net/ccr/ and Sacramento Suburban Water District https://www.sswd.org/departments/water-quality/consumer-conﬁdence-reports 4 1.4 C
ND
ND
ND
ND

1.7 C

0.05 ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND – 8.7
ND – 0.87
ND – 10
NA
ND
ND – 4.3
ND – 0.14
ND
NA
ND

2.4 – 4.6
ND – 0.26
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND – 3.6
ND
ND – 6.7
ND
ND – 3.5
ND – 6.5
ND ND ND – 0.7 NAND – 0.2
ND

0.22 100%
ND

0.11 100%
ND – 5.1
NA
NA
ND – 5.7
NA
NA
ND – 5.8
NA
NA

8.0 – 71 B
62 samples collected; 0 individual samples exceeded AL 90th percentile concentration: 0.09 (Less than AL, meets requirement)
62 samples collected; 2 individual samples exceeded AL 90th percentile concentration: ND (Less than AL, meets requirement)

0.0 – 0.9 A

2.7 – 31 B

0.0 percent E
No positive samples E
ND – 1.4 A Drinking water disinfectant added for
treatment
By-product of drinking water disinfection
By-product of drinking water disinfection
Various natural and man-made sources
Erosion of natural deposits; residual from
some surface water treatment processes
Erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Discharge from steel and pulp mills and
chrome plating; erosion of natural deposits
Internal corrosion of household water
plumbing systems
Erosion of natural deposits
Water additive that promotes strong teeth
Internal corrosion of household water
plumbing systems
Runoﬀ and leaching from fertilizer use;
leaching from septic tanks and sewage;
erosion of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Naturally present in the environment
Human and animal fecal waste
Erosion of natural deposits
Soil runoﬀ
Soil runoﬀ
Typical Sources in Drinking Water
While the City of Sacramento tests for more than 100 substances, this report only lists those detected at or above the federal or state level for reporting.

The State allows us to monitor for some contaminants less than once per year because the concentrations of these contaminants do not change frequently. For this reason, some of our data, while representative, are more than one year old.

Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency
City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)
90th Percentile The value for which 90 percent of samples had a lower result AL Action Level: The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements that a water system must follow Constituent A chemical or parameter measured in the water supply DBP Disinfection By-Products: Substances that can form during a reaction of a disinfectant with naturally present organic matter in the water Cl2 Free Chlorine: chlorine available for disinfection
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level: The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as close to the PHG (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible.

Secondary MCLs are set to protect the odor, taste, and appearance of drinking water MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal: 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 MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level: 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 MRDLG Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal: The level of drinking water disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reﬂect the beneﬁts of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants
NA Not applicable - unable to calculate average or monitoring requirement does not apply to all drinking water sources ND Not detected
PDWS Primary Drinking Water Standard: MCLs, MRDLs and treatment techniques (TTs) for contaminants that aﬀect health, along with their monitoring and reporting requirements.

PHG Public Health Goal: 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 TOC Total Organic Carbon: a measurement of the potential of water to form DBPs TT Treatment Technique: A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water Key Terms and Abbreviations

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY WATER TRANSFERSG
5 (A) Range of all results observed in distribution system.

Aluminum (µg/L)
Chloride (mg/L)
Copper (mg/L)
Color (units)
Manganese (µg/L)
Odor (units)
Speciﬁc Conductance (µS/cm)
Sulfate (mg/L)
Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)
Turbidity (units)
Constituent (Unit)
Regulated for Drinking Water Aesthetics - Secondary MCL2 ND – 6 A
ND – 1 A
ND – 7.5 A
Calcium (mg/L)
Chromium, Hexavalent G (µg/L)
Hardness (mg/L)
Magnesium (mg/L)
Sodium (mg/L)
Total Alkalinity (mg/L)
Germanium (/uni03BCg/L)
Manganese (µg/L)
Total HAA5 (µg/L) H
Total HAA6Br (µg/L) H
Total HAA9 (µg/L) H
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2018 – 2020
2018 – 2020
2018 – 2020
2018 – 2020
2018 – 2020
27 4.3
140
17 25
130
ND

2.3 24.1
3 27
12 ND
40 2.4

3.0 27
ND

0.46 – 1.3
15 ND
60 5.5

6.9 52
ND
ND – 0.74
17 – 62
ND – 9.1
85 – 320

9.3 – 39
19 – 42
91 – 260
ND
ND – 16.5
Constituent (Unit) Year Monitored
System
Average
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2021
2020 – 2021
2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2020 – 2021
2021
ND
34 ND
ND
ND
ND
392
11 261
ND
Year Monitored
System
Average
Other Parameters of Interest to Customers / Constituents With No Established MCL3 City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)

4.2 – 35 A

1.0 – 7.8 A

5.0 – 38 A
UCMR4 H

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY
ND

5.3 ND
51 5.6
ND
ND
13 – 69
ND
ND 51 ND
98 9.9
75 150
14 100
294 – 790

5.1 – 32
210 – 480
City of
Sacramento
Groundwater
Sacramento
River Water
Treatment Plant
E.A. Fairbairn Water
Treatment Plant
(American River)

PRIMARY WATER SUPPLY
(A) Range of all results observed in distribution system. (G) As of December 31st, 2021 there was no MCL for hexavalent chromium. The previous MCL of 10 µg/L was withdrawn on September 11, 2017. (H) The federal government uses Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule(s) (UCMR) to collect data for contaminants that are suspected to be present in drinking water but do not have health-based standards set. The fourth UCMR (UCMR 4) required monitoring for 30 chemical contaminants including several unregulated haloacetic compounds in addition to the regulated compounds (also known as HAA5) presented in Table 1.

Sacramento River in Downtown Sacramento
6 200
500
1 15
50 3
1600
500
1000
5 Erosion of natural deposits; residual from surface water treatment processes Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Erosion of natural deposits
Naturally occurring organic materials
Leaching of natural deposits
Naturally occurring organic materials
Substances that form ions when in water
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Erosion or leaching of natural deposits
Soil runoﬀ
Typical Sources
Highest Amount
Allowed
MCL
ND – 6 A
ND – 1 A
ND – 7.5 A

4.4 – 73
NA
20 – 330

2.0 – 34
16 – 120
91 – 230
ND – 1.9
ND – 25
14 – 44
NA
26 – 230

5.2 – 29

7.8 – 27
67 – 190
ND
ND – 26
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency

4.2 – 35 A

1.0 – 7.8 A

5.0 – 38 A

WATER TRANSFERS
ND
5 – 270
ND
ND

3.3 – 66
ND – 0.10
Sacramento
Suburban Water
District
Sacramento
County Water
Agency
200 – 1200
ND – 13
170 – 710
160 – 510

1.4 – 29
130 – 340
ND – 23 ND – 30

WATER TRANSFERS
Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant
Sedimentation Basin at Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant 7 LEAD
If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young
children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with customer service lines
and home plumbing. The City of Sacramento is responsi - ble for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in customer plumb - ing components. When your water has been sitting for
several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead
exposure by ﬂushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are
concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize
exposure is available from the EPA Safe Drinking Water
Hotline 1-800-426-4791 or at http://www.epa.gov/lead.

LEAD IN SCHOOLS
Between 2017 and 2019 the City of Sacramento provided
lead testing to all public pre-kindergarten through 12th grade schools receiving City of Sacramento water supply as well as private schools that opted to participate. More than 600 samples were tested representing 132 schools
and results were less than 5 ppb in 97 percent of the
samples. All results are publicly available on the State Water Board’s website http:/ /www.waterboards.ca.gov-
/drinking_water/certlic/drinking-
water/leadsamplinginschools.html

CYANOTOXINS
Microcystins and cylindrospermopsin are algal toxins
produced by naturally occurring cyanobacteria in surface water sources (such as the American and Sacramento
Rivers). These compounds are subject to a U.S. EPA Health Advisory and due to their potential presence in our source waters, the City of Sacramento voluntarily monitors for these compounds during vulnerable seasons, typically
summer through late fall. There were no detections of
microcystins or cylindrospermopsin during routine 2021
monitoring.

EARTHY OR MUSTY TASTE AND ODOR
Some customers may notice an earthy or musty taste
in City water, most often occurring in late summer.

This is due to the presence of Geosmin and 2-Methyli-
soborneol (MIB), odor compounds which are not
removed through conventional water treatment.

Although these compounds do not impact the safety
of the City’s drinking water, some customers ﬁnd the
taste and odor to be objectionable. Chilling the water
can help diminish the taste.

FEDERAL AND STATE REVISED TOTAL COLIFORM
RULE
This Consumer Conﬁdence Report (CCR) reﬂects
changes in drinking water regulatory requirements
during 2021. These revisions add the requirements of
the federal Revised Total Coliform Rule, eﬀective
since April 1, 2016, to the existing state Total Coliform Rule. The revised rule maintains the purpose to
protect public health by ensuring the integrity of the
drinking water distribution system and monitoring for
the presence of microbials (i.e., total coliform and E. coli bacteria). The U.S. EPA anticipates greater public health protection as the rule requires water systems
that are vulnerable to microbial contamination to
identify and ﬁx problems. Water systems that exceed
a speciﬁed frequency of total coliform occurrences
are required to conduct an assessment to determine if
any sanitary defects exist. If found, these must be
corrected by the water system. The state Revised
Total Coliform Rule became eﬀective July 1, 2021.

What You Should Know About...

Freeport ReservoirSedimentation Basin at EA Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant 8 As part of our mission to provide City customers with drinking water of the highest quality, the City of Sacramento is committed to continued monitoring, transparent public notiﬁcation, and eﬀective management of this emerging water quality issue.

For more detailed information, visit:
https:/ /www.cityofsacramento.org/Utilities/Water/Water-Quality/PFAS PER/hyphen.case AND POLY/hyphen.caseFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES /parenleft.casePFASs/parenright.case According to the California State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW), exposure to Per- and Polyﬂuoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) through drinking water has become an increasing concern due to the tendency of PFASs to accumulate in groundwater. PFASs are a large group of human-made substances that have been used extensively in consumer products designed to be waterproof, stain-resistant or non-stick. In addition, they have been used in ﬁre-re - tarding foam and various industrial processes.

While PFASs do not yet have maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) set by regulation, DDW can recommend interim action for water providers by establishing Notiﬁcation Levels and Response Levels (levels at which providing health-based adviso - ries, and removing a source from service respectively are recommended. Three of the PFAS, perﬂuorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perﬂuorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and Perﬂuorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) have Notiﬁcation Levels and Response Levels established by DDW. Throughout 2021 monitoring did not indicate any PFASs compounds were present in American or Sacramento River sources. In City Groundwater, some very low concentrations of PFOA and PFBS were observed during 2021 below Notiﬁcation and Response Levels. PFOS was detected in Groundwater at levels ranging from Not Detected to 16 nanograms per Liter or ng/L (a unit of concentration equivalent to 1 second in nearly 32,000 years).

Since some results are above the Notiﬁcation Level of 5.1 ng/L the following Health Eﬀects language is provided: perﬂuo - rooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) exposures resulted in immune suppression and cancer in laboratory animals.

What You Should Know About...

Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant Intake Structure 9 TO REPORT A CONCERN
City of Sacramento, Department of Utilities
311 or 916-264-5011
(24 hours a day, 7 days a week)
www.cityofsacramento.org/utilities

FOR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS REPORT CONTACT
Rory Hartkemeyer
916-808-3738

ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY

INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE
www.sacramentowaterquality.com
U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline
1-800-426-4791
http:/ /epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water

NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY

FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Sacramento City Council generally holds public
meetings on Tuesday at 2 p.m. and/or 5 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 915 I Street, Sacramento. You can
access Council agendas at www.cityofsacramento.org/-
clerk.

POTABILITY STATEMENT
The City of Sacramento water supply meets all potability requirements as set forth by the United States Environ- mental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California
Safe Drinking Water Act, Title 22. This certiﬁcation
relates to City of Sacramento water that is provided up to the property line or backﬂow preventer, whichever
comes ﬁrst.

Tshab txhais nws, los yog tham nrog tej tug neeg uas totaub txog nws.

Naaiv norm sou maaih jienv nyei fienx gorngv taux meih nyei wuom hopv. Faan fai gorngv bun mienh hiuv duqv.

Acest raport conține informații importante despre apa de băut.

Traduceți-o sau discutați cu cineva care o înțelege.

Este informe contiene información muy importante sobre su agua potable. Tradúzcalo o hable con alguien que lo entienda bien.

Цей звіт містить важливу інформацію про вашу питну воду.

Перекласти його, або поговорити з кимось, хто його розуміє.

Mahalaga ang impormasyong ito. Mangyaring ipasalin ito.

Tanisha Parker, Customer Service Representative

UP-TO-DATE WATER QUALITY

INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE
www.sacramentowaterquality.com
10

Sacramento City CouncilNovember 15, 2022

Sacramento City Council
November 15, 2022