HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 18, 2004 G-01 PHAGENDA ITEM Q " I
JQ CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing to Receive Comments on and Consider Accepting the City of
Lodi's Public Health Goals Report
MEETING DATE: August18,2004
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council conduct a public hearing to receive comments
on and consider accepting the required Public Health Goals Report.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: City staff has prepared the attached report comparing Lodi's
drinking water with California EPA's public health goals (PHGs) and
with the US EPA's maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs).
PHGs and MCLGs are not enforceable standards and no action to
meet them is mandated.
California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 116470 mandates that a report be prepared every three
years. The report is intended to provide information to the public, in addition to the Annual Water Quality
Report mailed to each customer in April 2004. On June 30, 2004, a public notice appeared in the
Lodi News -Sentinel informing interested parties of the Public Health Goals Report and its availability.
The law also requires that a public hearing be held (which can be part of a regularly scheduled public
meeting) for the purpose of accepting and responding to public comment on the report. A notice of public
hearing was published in the Lodi News -Sentinel on July 10, 2004.
Our water system complies with a[[ of the health -based drinking water standards and maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs), as required by the California Department of Health Services and the
US EPA. No additional actions are required or recommended.
FUNDING- Not applicable.
4RIic'h.�r'd�PSrima, Jr.
Public Works Director
Prepared by Frank Beeler, Assistant WaterAlVastewater Superintendent
RCP/FB/dsg
Attachment
cc: Del Kerlin, Assistant Water/Wastewater Supedntendent
Mike Schafer, Laboratory Services Supervisor
APPROVED:
Janet S.Aeeter, Interim City Manager
Pu blicHeafthGoalsP H. doc r/ 81612004
CITY OF LODI
REPORT ON WATER QUALITY
RELATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS
JUNE, 2004
Back�azround
Provisions of the California Health and Safety Code, Title 22, Section 116470, specify that
larger water utilities (more than 10,000 service connections), are required to prepare a special
report every three years detailing if their water quality measurements have exceeded any
Public Health goals (PHGs). These are non -enforceable goals established by the Cal -EPA's
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. As of January 1, 2004 Cal -EPA has
adopted 71 PHGs. The law also requires that where Cal -EPA has not adopted a PHG for a
constituent, the water suppliers are to use the enforceable Maximum Contaminant Level
Goals (MCLGs) adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).
Only constituents which have a California primary drinking water standard and for which
either a PHG or MCLG has been set are to be addressed per regulations.
The law specifies what information is to be provided in the report. If a constituent was
detected in the water supply at a level exceeding an applicable PHG or MCLG, this report
provides the information required by law. Included are:
The numerical public health risk associated with the Maximum Contaminant Level
(MCL) and the PHG or MCLG;
The category or type of risk to health that could be associated with each constituent;
The best treatment technology available that could be used to reduce the constituent
level;
An estimate of the cost to install that treatment if it is appropriate and feasible.
What are PHGs?
PHGs are Public Health Goals set by the California Environmental Protection Agency's
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and are based solely on public health risk
considerations. None of the practical risk -management factors that are considered by the U.S.
EPA or the California Department of Health Services in setting enforceable drinking water
standards (Maximum Contaminant Levels or MCLs) are considered in setting the PHGs.
These factors include analytical detection capability, treatment technology available, benefits
and costs. The PHGs are not enforceable and are not required to be met by any public
water system. MCLGs are the federal equivalent to PHGs.
Water Qualily Data Considered:
All of the water quality data collected by our water system in 2003 for purposes of
determining compliance with drinking water standards was considered. This data was all
summarized in the attached 2003 Annual Water Quality Report which was mailed to our
PubhfflealthGoals-SetPH Attachment.doc 07/01/04
Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
June,2004
Page 2
customers in April 2004. The attached 2003 Annual Water Quality Report also contains
useful definitions for PHG, MCLG, MCL, microgram per liter, and milligram per liter.
Guidelines Followed:
The Association of California Water Agencies prepared guidelines for water utilities to use in
preparing these required reports, and these guidelines were used in the preparation of our
report. No guidance was available from state regulatory agencies.
Best Available Treatment Technology and Cost Estimates:
Both the U.S. EPA and the California Department of Health Services adopt what are known
as Best Available Technologies or BATs which are the best known methods of reducing
contaminant levels to the MCL. Costs can be estimated for such technologies. However,
since many PHGs and all MCLGs are set much lower than the MCL, it is not always possible,
nor feasible to determine what treatment is needed to further reduce a constituent downward
to or near the PHG or MCLG, many of which are set at zero. Estimating the costs to reduce a
constituent to zero is difficult, if not impossible, because it is not possible to verify by
analytical means that the level has been lowered to a zero. In some cases, installing treatment
to try and further reduce very low levels of one constituent may have adverse effects on other
aspects of water quality. For example; to meet the Copper PHG, chemicals to further coat
home plumbing would need to be added to Lodi's drinking water, and in GAC treatment
systems, more frequent change outs of carbon and larger vessels keeping water in contact with
activated carbon longer can both increase the risk of bacterial contamination.
The estimates below reflect only wellhead treatment capital and annual operation and
maintenance costs for typical wells. Design, potential costs for additional land and other site
specific requirements are not included. These costs are not indicative of the total past and
potential future costs to remediate groundwater throughout Lodi.
Constituents Detected That Exceed a PHG or a MCLG:
The following is a discussion of constituents that were detected in one or more of our drinking
water sources at levels above the PHG, or if no PHG, above the MCLG.
TrichloroeLhylene (TCEL The PHG for TCE is 0.8 micrograms per liter (ug/L or parts per
billion). The MCL or drinking water standard for TCE is 5 ug/l. We detected TCE at levels
not exceeding the MCL in the discharges from two (2) of Lodi's 25 City Wells used in 2003.
The averages for these City Wells in 2003 were:
City Well No. 2 - 1. 9 ug/I
City Well No. 24 - 0.33 ug/l
(City Well No. 24 -for information only. The above level is below the
State PHG but is higher than the MCLG. This well was not included in
the cost analysis below)
*All annual customer costs were based on an assumed annualized cost of capital expenditures equal to 10% of
capital costs plus annual and maintenance costs divided by 23,000 customers.
PubhfflealthGoals-SetPH Attachment.doc 07/01/04
Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
June,2004
Page 3
The category of health risk associated with TCE, and the reason that a drinking water standard
was adopted for it, is the people who drink water containing TCE above the MCL throughout
their lifetime could theoretically experience an increased risk of getting cancer. The
California Department of Health Services says that "Drinking water which meets this standard
(the MCL) is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe with
respect to TCE." (CDHS Blue Book of drinking water law and regulations, Section 64468.2,
Title 22, CCR.) The Best Available Technology for TCE to lower the level below the MCL is
either Granular Activated Carbon or Packed Tower Aeration. Since the TCE level in these
two City Wells is already below the MCL, a Granular Activated Carbon Treatment System
with larger vessels would likely be required to attempt to keep TCE levels to below 0.8 ug/L.
The estimated cost to install such a treatment system on one City Well and enhance the
capacity on one City Well with an existing treatment system that would reliably reduce the
TCE level to below 0.8 ug/L would be approximately $400,000 and require annual Operation
and Maintenance at a cost of approximately $62,000 per year. This would result in an
assumed increased cost for each customer of approximately $6*.
Dibromochloropropane (DBCP): The PHG for DBCP is 1.7 nanograms per liter (ng/L or
parts per trillion). The MCL for DBCP is 200 ng/L. We detected DBCP at levels not
exceeding the MCL in the discharges from 10 of Lodi's 25 City Wells used 2003. The annual
averages for these City Wells in 2003 were:
City Well No.
1R -
90
ng/l
City Well No.
6R -
140
ng/l
City Well No.
8 -
180
ng/l
City Well No.
13 -
90
ng/l
City Well No.
14 -
100
ng/l
City Well No.
17 -
170
ng/l
City Well No.
18 -
150
ng/l
City Well No.
19 -
140
ng/l
City Well No.
20 -
23
ng/l
City Well No.
21 -
10
ng/l
The category for health risk associated with DBCP, and the reason that a drinking water
standard was adopted for it, is the people who drink water containing DBCP above the MCL
throughout their lifetime could theoretically experience an increased risk of getting cancer.
The California Department of Health Services says that "Drinking water which meets this
standard (the MCL) is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe
with respect to DBCP." (CDHS Blue Book of drinking water law and regulations, Section
64468.3, Title 22, CCR.) The numerical health risk for an MCLG of zero is zero. The Best
Available Technology for DBCP to lower the level below the MCL is either Granular
Activated Carbon or Packed Tower Aeration. To attempt to maintain the DBCP levels at
zero, Granular Activated Carbon Treatment Systems with longer empty bed contact times and
more frequent carbon change -outs would likely be required. The estimated cost to install such
a treatment system on eight City Wells, and enhance capacities on six City Wells with
*All annual customer costs were based on an assumed annualized cost of capital expenditures equal to 10% of
capital costs plus annual and maintenance costs divided by 23,000 customers.
PubfifflealthGoals-SetPH Attachment.doc 07/01/04
Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
June, 2004
Paoe 4
existing treatment systems that would reliably reduce the DBCP level to zero would be
approximately S3.2 million. The increased annual Operation and Maintenance costs would be
approximately $470,000 per year. This would result in an assurned increased cost for each
I
customer of approximately S.)4 per year*. (Note: this increase cost may not be reimbursable
tinder the terms of Lodi's settlement agreement with DBCP manufacturers.)
1. 1.2.2- TetrachloroethvIene (PCE) : The PHG for PCE is 0.Pr- micrograms per liter (tia/I or
parts per billion). The MCL or drinkin2 water standard for PCE is 5 tia/I. We detected PCE at
levels not exceeding the MCL in the dischar2es from thiree (3) of Lodi , s 25 City Wells used in
2003. The averacles of these City Wells in 2�03 were:
1.7
City Well No. 6R - 0.61 ua/l
City Well No. 8 - 0.62 tia/I
lt7
City'\N"ell No. 12 - 0.54 tia/I
I
The category of health risk associated with PCE, and the reason that a drinkincy water standard
was adopted for it, is the people who drink water containing PCE above the MCL throughout
their lifetime could theoretically experience an increased risk of getting cancer. The
Califoniia Depai-ti-nent of Health Services says that "Drink -in-, water which rneets this standard
(the MCL) is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe with
respect to PCE." (CDHS Blue Book of drinkina �vatei- law ancl i-egulations, Section 64468.2,
Title 22, CCR.) The Best Available Technology for PCE to lower the level below the MCL is
0
either Granular Activated Carbon or Packed Tower Aeration. Since the PCE level in these
three City Wells is already below the MCL, a Granular Activated Carbon Treatment System
�,vith lar ' ger vessels would I I kely be required to attempt to keep PCE levels below the PHG.
The estimated cost to install such a treatment system on three City Wells that would reliably
reduce the PCE level to the PHG would be approximately S 1.2 mi I lion and require annual
Operation and Maintenance at a cost of approximately S 145,000 per year. This would result
in an assumed increased cost for each customer of approximately S I I *.
.Colifon-n Bacteria: In 2003, we collected 972 samples from our distribution systern for
colifoi-m. analysis. Of these samples, 0.4% were positive for coliforrn bacteria. In 2003)
maxii-nurn of 1.3% of these samples were positive for one month,
The MCL for colifon-n is 5% positive samples of all samples per month and the MCLG is
zero. The reason for the coliforrn drinkinc, water standard is to minimize the possibility of the
0
water containing pathogens �vvhich are organisms that cause waterboi-ne disease. Because
coliforrn is only an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens, it is not possible to state a
specific numerical health risk. While U.S. EPA normally sets MCLGs "at a level where no
known or anticipated adverse effects on persons would occur" they indicate that they cannot
do so with coliforrns.
Coliform bacteria are organisms that are found just about every -where in nature and are not
generally considered harmful. They are used as an indicator because of the ease in
*All annual custorner costs were based on an assurned annualized cost of capital expenditures equal to I 01/'n of
capital costs plus annual and maintenance costs divided by 23,000 customers.
J:\COUNCIL�104\PtiblicHeuliliGoals-SetPH—Aitaciiiiieiit.doc 07!02104
Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
June,2004
Page 5
monitoring and analysis. If a positive sample is found, it indicates a potential problem that
needs to be investigated and follow up sampling done. It is not at all unusual for a system to
have an occasional positive sample. It is difficult, if not impossible, to assure that a system
will never get a positive sample. A further test that is performed on all total coliform positive
results is for Fecal Coliform or E. Coli. There were no positive fecal Coliform or E. Coli
results in 2003.
To reduce the number of positive results for coliform bacteria, the City of Lodi occasionally
chlorinates the water system. The sources of water (City Wells) and all new or repaired water
mains follow disinfection procedures and pass bacteriological testing before being allowed
46on-line".
Full time chlorination will not guarantee that a system will never get a positive sample. If the
City were to go to full time chlorination of the drinking water system, the estimated cost to
install chlorine generation systems on 25 City Wells would be approximately $880,000 and
annual Operation and Maintenance cost would be approximately $55,000 per year. This
would result in an assumed increased cost for each customer of approximately $6 per year.*
Coppe : The PHG for copper is 0. 17 milligrams per liter (mg/L or parts per million). There is
no MCL for Copper. Instead the 90th percentile value of all samples from household taps in
the distribution system cannot exceed an Action Level of 1.3 mg/L.
The category of health risk for copper is gastrointestinal irritation.
All of Lodi's source water samples for copper in 2003 were less than the PHG. Based on
sampling of the distribution system in 2003, our 90 th percentile value for copper was 0.41
mg/L.
Our water system is in full compliance with the Federal and State Lead and Copper Rule.
Based on sampling, it was determined, based to State regulatory requirements, that Lodi
meets the Action Level for copper. Therefore, based on criteria set forth by the California
Department of Health Services we meet the criteria for "optimized corrosion control" for our
system.
In general, optimizing corrosion control is considered to be the best available technology to
deal with corrosion issues and with any copper findings. We continue to monitor our water
quality parameters that relate to corrosivity, such as the pH, hardness, alkalinity, total
dissolved solids, and will take action if necessary to maintain our system in an "optimized
corrosion control" condition.
Since we are meeting the "optimized corrosion control" requirements, there is no apparent
reason to initiate additional corrosion control treatment as it involves the addition of other
chemicals and there could be additional water quality issues raised. Therefore, no estimate of
cost has been included.
*All annual customer costs were based on an assumed annualized cost of capital expenditures equal to 10% of
capital costs plus annual and maintenance costs divided by 23,000 customers.
PubhfflealthGoals-SetPH Attachment.doc 07/01/04
Report on Water Quality Relative to Public Health Goals
June,2004
Page 6
Recommendations For Further Action:
The drinking water quality of the City of Lodi Public Water System meets all State of
California, Department of Health Services and U.S. EPA drinking water standards set to
protect public health. To further reduce the levels of the constituent's identified in this report
that are already below the Maximum Contaminant Levels established by the State and Federal
government, additional costly treatment processes would be required.
The effectiveness of the treatment processes to provide any significant reductions in
constituent levels at these already low values is uncertain. The theoretical health protection
benefits of these further hypothetical reductions are not at all clear and may not be
quantifiable. Therefore, staff is not recommending further action at this time. However, the
point of this process is to provide you with information on water quality in Lodi and rough
costs to make certain improvements.
This report was completed by City of Lodi Public Works Department staff. Any questions
relating to this report should be directed to: City of Lodi, Assistant Water/Wastewater
Superintendent Frank Beeler, 1331 South Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 or call (209) 333-6740.
*All annual customer costs were based on an assumed annualized cost of capital expenditures equal to 10% of
capital costs plus annual and maintenance costs divided by 23,000 customers.
PubhfflealthGoals-SetPH Attachment.doc 07/01/04
Annual Water Quality Report for 2003
City of Lodi, Published April 2004
(Este informe contiene informacion muy importante sobre su agua potable. Traduzcalo o hable con a1guien que
lo entienda bien.)
This 15th Annual Water Quality Report summarizes testing performed on Lodi's water supply by State
certified laboratories. This report follows the "Consumer Confidence Report" (CCR) format required by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the State of California.
WHO ARE WE?
In 1910 your City of Lodi Water Utility officially began operation along with the Electric Utility, and for 93 years, the
water system has been owned by the Citizens of Lodi. Ninety-two years ago there were only two wells and a few
miles of water mains. In 2003 there were 25 wells, over 210 miles of mains, a water tower and a 1 -million -gallon
storage tank. Lodi delivers water to approximately 23,000 residential, commercial and industrial customers.
Water rates, system expansion projects, and significant purchases are authorized by the Lodi City Council, which
serves as the water utility's official regulatory body. Lodi City Council meetings are open to the public and are
scheduled for the first and third Wednesdays of each month at 305 West Pine Street in Lodi at 7:00 p.m.
YOUR DRINKING WATER SYSTEM
25 computer controlled wells, located throughout the City, provide high quality groundwater, our sole source of
supply. The wells operate automatically on water pressure demand so that when water use increases, more wells
come on line. A new well is planned for 2004 to keep up with water supply demands. However, the groundwater
basin is being depleted. Lodi has purchased rights to some surface water in the Mokelumne River. The City is
currently studying the most effective and cost efficient use of this surface water.
Currently seven wells are fitted with emergency diesel -powered generators. (While these generators will help
maintain water pressure during power outages, please refrain from using water during power outages to save the
capacity for emergency uses, i.e., fire fighting.)The water delivered to your tap meets or is better than all federal
and state water quality standards.
BACTERIOLOGICAL WATER QUALITY — CHLORINATION
Lodi takes over 20 samples per week from throughout Lodi's water distribution system for bacterial water quality. In
2003 the City of Lodi's drinking water met all bacteriological standards.
The water may be periodically chlorinated as a proactive step to help keep the water system in compliance with
strict bacteriological standards, however, Lodi's water does not normally contain chlorine. The City will make an
effort to inform you in local papers before your water is chlorinated. When necessary however, the drinking water
may be chlorinated before you can be informed.
Recently the City of Lodi was ordered to start full time chlorination on the water system. After discussing the issue
in detail with State regulators, it was found that there was a misunderstanding on the results of City bacteriological
testing and the order was rescinded. The City is also following the development of U.S. EPA draft regulations which
may require that nearly every groundwater system like Lodi's chlorinate year-round.
DRINKING WATER SOURCE ASSESSMENT
"An assessment of the drinking water sources for the City of Lodi's water system was completed in February 2003.
The sources are considered most vulnerable to the following activities: gas stations (current and historic),
chemical/petroleum processing/storage, metal plating/finishing/fabricating, plastic/synthetics producers, dry
cleaners, known contaminant plumes, sewer collection systems, fleet/truck/bus terminals, machine shops, utility
stations -maintenance areas, agricultural drainage, and photo processing/printing."
A copy of the completed assessment is available at the Public Works Department, City of Lodi, 1331 South Ham
Lane, Lodi, CA 95242. You may request that a copy be sent to you by contacting Frank Beeler at (209) 333-6740.
A copy of the complete assessment is also available at the Department of Health Services, Drinking Water Field
Operations Branch, Stockton District Office, 31 E Channel Street, Room 270, Stockton, California 95202. You may
also request that a copy be sent to you by contacting Joseph 0. Spano, District Engineer, at (209) 948-7696.
DOWNTOWN SOILS CLEAN-UP
The City, working with regulatory agencies in a cooperative fashion, is pursuing a resolution to a contamination
problem in the north and central downtown Lodi area. While NO operating wells are out of compliance with any
drinking water standards, there is PCE (Tetrachloroethylene) and TCE (Trichloroethylene) found in soils and
shallow groundwater. The City continues to work towards clean-up/containment of these dry cleaning and industrial
solvents through litigation and mediation with the various potentially responsible parties.
DBCP (Dibromochloropropane) UPDATE
DBCP was used by area farmers to kill nematodes in vineyards. DBCP was banned in California in 1977, but is still
present in trace levels in some groundwater. The City of Lodi used 25 wells to provide drinking water in 2003. The
wells are rotated so over the course of time, water being delivered is a blend from these wells. Eleven of Lodi's
wells had no detectable DBCP. Six wells have filters to remove D13CP. The remaining eight meet State and
Federal standards, but have trace amounts of D13CP. The result is that the people of Lodi are being
served water below the DBCP level deemed safe by the U.S. EPA and the State of California.
DBCP has been shown to increase cancer nodules in rats and mice when exposed to very high levels over their
lifetimes. In theory these chemicals may also increase the risk of cancer in humans. Drinking water standards are
set to reduce this risk and include a safety factor for the general population and take into account the cost and
practicality of removing the particular contaminant. While there are scientists who say this theory is not justifiable,
there are also those who feel that the standards do not protect sub -groups, such as children.
As a counterpoint, this theoretical risk of cancer has also been applied to many chemicals that occur in everyday
foods. When chemicals that are found in everyday foods are tested in the same way, some scientists have found
that many foods have a greater theoretical cancer hazard than DBCP in drinking water.
For more info, see the web site: http:Hpotency. berkeley.edu/text/lehr.html (to better understand, the above web
site, DBCP levels in Lodi's water would have a HERP% of approximately 0.0005).
The U.S. EPA and State of California drinking water standard for DBCP has been set at 0.2 ppb to reduce the
theoretical risk of cancer. This theoretical risk is based on lifetime (70 years) exposure and drinking about two
quarts of water every day. The limit of 0.2 ppb equals one drop in 66,000 gallons of water. It would take over 350
years to drink 66,000 gallons of water at 2 quarts/day. Water meeting this standard is considered safe with respect
to DBCP by the U.S. EPA and State of Calibrnia Department of Health Services.
In 1996 the City settled a lawsuit against DBCP manufacturers, who have already paid the City for a large portion of
Lodi's costs related to DBCP treatment. The DBCP manufacturers will continue to pay a large portion of the City's
DIBCP related costs for the settlement's 40 -year life.
If you have any questions about this report or Lodi's water quality, please contact:
Assistant WaterlWaste water Superintendent - Frank Beeler
1331 S. Ham Lane, Lodi, CA 95242 - Telephone: (209) 333-6740 - E-mail. fbeeler@lodi.gov
To better understand the report, please note the description of terms and abbreviations
Terms and Abbreviations Used:
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. Primary MCLs are set as
close to the PHGs (or MCLGs) as is economically and technologically feasible. Secondary MCL's are set to protect the odor, taste, and
appearance of drinking water.
Public Health Goal (PHG): 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.
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG): The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no know n or expected
risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Regulatory Action Level (AL): The concentration of a contaminant which, if exceeded, triggers treatment or other requirements which
a water system must follow.
Primary Drinking Water Standard or PDWS: MCLs and MRDLs for contaminants that affect health along with their monitoring and
reporting requirements, and water treatment requirements.
Maximum residual disinfectant level (MRDL): The level of a disinfectant added for water treatment that may not be exceeded at the
consumer's tap.
Maximum residual disinfectant level goal (MRDLG): The level of a disinfectant added for water treatment below which there is no
known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs are set the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
mg/L or ppm: Milligrams per liter, or parts per million (one ppm equals a concentration of about one cup in a 60,000 gallon swimming
pool).
ug/L or ppb: Micrograms per liter, or parts per billion (one ppb equals about 4.5 drops in a 60,000 gallon swimming pool).
ppt: Parts per trillion (one ppt equals less than 1/200 of a drop in a 60,000 gallon swimming pool).
pC!/L: Picocuries per liter (a measurement of radiation).
NA: Not Applicable.
ND: Not Detected at measurable amounts for reporting purposes.
Grains/gal: Grains per gallon. A hardness measurement often used for softeners and dishwashers. (17.1 mg/L = 1 grain/gal).
umhos/cm: Micromhos per centimeter (a measurement of conductance).
* Means less than the amount shown.
* Means more than the amount shown.
City of Lodi Annual Water Quality Report for 2003,
(published April 2004)
Regulated Inorganic
Regulated
Average
Rangeof
PHG
PHG
Chemicals
of Lodi
Individual
or
Major sources in
*2001-2003 Data
MCL
wells
Detections
(MCLG)
Drinking water
Aluminum, mg/L
1
0.024
0.22 -ND
0.6
Erosion of natural deposits, residue
Radon, pCi/L
/month
378
568-268
NA
from some surface water treatment
Fecal Coliform & E. coli
>1/mo.
0
0-0
(0)
processes
Arsenic, ug/L
50
4.2
9.0 -ND
NA
Erosion of natural deposits (see
below the MCL.
1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-
6
0.02
0.81**-
I message below)
Barium, mg/L
1
0.064
0.23 -ND
2
Erosion of natural deposits
Fluoride, mg/L
1.4
0.11
0.22 -ND
1
Erosion of natural deposits
Nitrate as NO3, mg/L
45
8.6
36 -ND
45
Leaching from fertilizer use; leaching
0.09
3.0**-
0.8
Discharge from industries. Local
Found in Wells # 2 &
from septic tanks and sewage; erosion
ND
ground contamination from businesses
of natural deposits (see Nitrate
message)
Bacterial Water Quality
Regulated
Average
Monthly
PHG
PHG
Coliform Bacteria
Total
High -Low
or
Major sources in
2003 Data
MCL
Positive
Range
(MCLG)
Drinking water
Total Coliform, Positive
5%
0.5%
1.30/6- 0%
(0)
Naturally present in the environment
Radon, pCi/L
/month
378
568-268
NA
Erosion of natural deposits (See
Fecal Coliform & E. coli
>1/mo.
0
0-0
(0)
Human and animal fecal waste
Radioactivity,
Regulated
Average
Rangeof
PHG
PHG
pico Curies per Liter
of Lodi
Individual
or
Major sources in
*1999-2003 Data
MCL
Wells
Detections
(MCLG)
Drinking water
Gross Alpha, pCi/L
15
4.95
15.15-0.96
(0)
Erosion of natural deposits
Radon, pCi/L
NA
378
568-268
NA
Erosion of natural deposits (See
ND
and auto shops (metal degreaser)
message)
Uranium, pCi/L
20
5.81
11.7-2.57
NA
Erosion of natural deposits
Organic Chemicals with at least one confirmed detection in an operational City Well
Regulated
Average
Rangeof
PHG
Organic Chemicals
of Lodi
Individual
or
Major sources in
2003 Data
MCL
wells
Detections
(MCLG)
Drinking water
Comments:
Tetrachloroethylene,
5
0.07
1.3** -
0.06
Discharge from factories, dry cleaners,
Found in Wells # 6R,
(PCE) ppb
ND
and auto shops (metal degreaser)
8 & 12 at levels
below the MCL.
1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-
6
0.02
0.81**-
10
Discharge from industries. Local
Only in Well # 2 at
DCE), ppb
ND
ground contamination from businesses
levels below the MCL
using the chemical.
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
5
0.09
3.0**-
0.8
Discharge from industries. Local
Found in Wells # 2 &
ppb
ND
ground contamination from businesses
24 at levels below the
using the chemical. Breakdown product
MCL.
of T etrachloroethylene (PCE).
Dibromochloroproparre 200 40 350**- 1.7 � Banned nematocide that may still be See DBCP Update
(DBCP), ppt ND present in soils due to runoff/leaching
from former use on vineyards.
Secondary Standards
AL
Average
Rangeof
PHG
Aesthetic Purposes
Secondary
of Lodi
Individual
90th
*2001-2003 Data (see note)
MCL
Wells
Detections
Typical Source of Contaminant
Aluminum, ug/L
200
24
220 -ND
Erosion of natural deposits
Chloride, mg/L
500
15
55-2.8
Runoff/leaching from natural deposits; Seawater
2
0
Internal erosion of
influence
Color -Units
15
1.8
5 -ND
Naturally -occurring organic material
Foaming Agents (MBAS)
500
2.2
55 -ND
Substances that form ions in water, seawater
ug/L
systems; erosion of
influence
Specific Conductance,
1600
340
800-93
Municipal and industrial waste discharges
umhos/cm
Sulfate, mg/L
500
15
35 -ND
Runoff/leaching from natural deposits; industrial
wastes
Total Dissolved Solids, mg/L
1000
243
500-82
Runoff/leaching from natural deposits
Turbidity, NTU Units
5
0.11
0.49-0.02
Soil Runoff
Note: Aesthetic problems are only associated with taste, smell, and otherproblems which are not a health risk.
Lead & Copper Rule
AL
Average
Rangeof
PHG
# Samples Exceeding
Major
Customer Tap Monitoring
(Action
90th
Individual
or
AIL (of 52 samples
sourcesin
2003 Data
Level)
Percentile
Detections
(MCLG)
from 52 sites)
Drinking Water
Lead, 90th %, ug/L
15
<5.0
5.2 -ND
2
0
Internal erosion of
household plumbing
Copper, 90th %, mg/L
1.3
0.41
0.55 -ND
0.17
0
systems; erosion of
I natural deposits
Unregulated
AL
Average
Rangeof
Contaminats Detected
(Action
of Lodi
Individual
2003 Data
Level)
Wells
Detections
DCPA (total di -an -mono
NA
0.032
1.6 -ND
acid degredates), ug/L
340-55
pH, in pH units
I
Trichloropropane, ug/L
50
26
37-10
Vanadium, ug/L
0.005
0.0049
0.049 -ND
Other non-regulated water constituents found in your water (for your information only)
Non-regulated water
constituents, *2001-2003
Data
Average
of Lodi
Wells
Rangeof
Detections
Total Hardness, as mg/L
Total Hardness, as grains/gal.
129
7.6
330-30
19-1.8
Calcium, mg/L
29
75-5.9
Sodium, mg/L
21
52-7.2
Potassium, mg/L
6.5
12-2.1
Alkalinity (bicarbonate),
mg/L
164
340-55
pH, in pH units
7.3
7.7-6.9
Magnesium, mg/L
14
3
* Regulations call for monitoring of some constituents less than once per year because the concentrations on these constituents
do not changte frequently. Therefore, some of our data, though representative, are more than one year old.
** Averages are used for compliance determination due to the variable nature of individual analyses, and due the fact that any
associated theoretical risks are not acute, but theoretically only after years of exposure to levels above MCLs.
THE FOLLOWING MESSAGES ARE REQUIRED BY THE U.S. EPA AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. NOT ALL PORTIONS OF THESE MESSAGES NECESSARILY APPLY TO
LODI'S GROUNDWATER.
- 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 EPA's Safe Drinking
Water Hotline at (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 undergoing 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. USEPA/Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines on appropriate means to lesson the risk of
infection by Cryptosporidium and other microbial contaminants are available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline
(1-800-426-4791).
- 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 plant, 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, which may come from a variety of sources such as agriculture, urban storm water
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, and
septic systems.
- Radioactive contaminants, which 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, USEPA and the California Department of Health Services
(Department) prescribe regulations that limit the amount of certain contaminants in water provided by public water
systems. Department regulations also establish limits for contaminants in bottled water that must provide the same
protection for public health.
- Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that you can't see, taste, or smell. It is found throughout the U.S.
Radon can move up through the ground and into a home through cracks and holes in the foundation. Radon can
build up to high levels in all types of homes. Radon can also get into indoor air when released from tap water from
showering, washing dishes, and other household activities. Compared to radon entering the home through soil,
radon entering the home through tap water will in most cases be a small source of radon in indoor air. Radon is a
known human carcinogen. Breathing air-containing radon can lead to lung cancer. Drinking water containing radon
may also cause increased risk of stomach cancer. If you are concerned about radon in your home, test the air in
your home. Testing is inexpensive and easy. Fix your home if the level of radon in your air is 4 picocuries per liter
of air (pCi/L) or higher. There are simple ways to fix a radon problem that aren't too costly. For additional
information, call your State radon program or call EPA's Radon Hotline (1 -800-SOS- RADON).
ARSENIC: After a long debate, the drinking water standard for Arsenic will be lowered from 50 ppb (parts per
billion) to 10 ppb. The following message is required for systems that have some sources containing Arsenic below
the new standard of 10 ppb, but over half (5 ppb). The average in Lodi's wells is 4.2 ppb and the highest well is 9. 0
ppb -
While your drinking water meets the current standard for arsenic, it does contain low levels of arsenic. The standard
balances the current understanding of arsenic's possible health effects against the costs of removing arsenic from
drinking water. The California Department of Health Services continues to research the health effects of low levels
of arsenic, which is a mineral known to cause cancer in humans at high concentrations and is linked to other health
effects such as skin damage and circulatory problems.
NITRATE: The following message is required for systems that have some sources containing Nitrate below the
standard of 45 ppm (as NO3), but over half (23 ppm) of the standard. The average of Lodi's wells is 8.6 ppm and
the highest well is 36 ppm.
Nitrate in drinking water at levels above 45 mg/L is a health risk for infants of less than six months of age. Such
nitrate levels in drinking water can interfere with the capacity of the infant's blood to carry oxygen, resulting in a
serious illness; symptoms include shortness of breath and blueness of the skin. Nitrate levels above 45 mg/L may
also affect the ability of the blood to carry oxygen in other individuals, such as pregnant women and those with
certain specific enzyme deficiencies. If you are caring for an infant, or you are pregnant, you should ask advice
from your health care provider.
IVITBE
MTBE (Methyl-Tert-Butyl-Ether) is a controversial additive to gasoline that has been in the news the past few years.
One of the main concerns with MTBE is the threat of leaking from service stations into the groundwater. Monitoring
of City wells has NOT detected any traces of MTBE to date.
The City has a program of monitoring all City wells for MTBE. Wells that are at greater risk (i.e., closer to gasoline
stations) are monitored more frequently.
WATER CONSERVATION
In 2003, 5.422 billion gallons of water were pumped to meet Lodi's water demands. This is 23% less water use per
person than in 1986. As Lodi's and California's populations increase, water conservation becomes an important
part of meeting demands for fresh water.
The commitment of the citizens of Lodi to conserving water also helps conserve the electrical energy needed to
pump the water to homes and businesses. To further conserve water, electrical energy, and wastewater treatment
plant capacity, the City has instituted a rebate program for water saving devices such as low -flow toilets. See
details below.
Your diligent water conservation practices, as in the past, are needed in 2004. A report calculated dollar savings
from water conservation to be far above the cost of the Water Conservation Program! Your water conservation
efforts have also averted millions of dollars in capital costs, helping water rates stay as low as possible. The
millions of dollars in capital cost savings can easily be lost if water conservation is not continued.
See the summary of the Lodi Water Conservation Ordinance in the next column.
For more information or to report a water waste, call the Water Conservation office at 333-6829.
$ Water Conservation Rebate Program $
The City of Lodi is offering rebates on purchases of Water Conserving devices. The rebates are good for
installation at residential and commercial water customers within the City of Lodi.
Rebates of up to $44 are good for Ultra Low -Flow Toilets rated at 1.6 gallons per flush or less and must be
replacing units using a higher volume of water per flush. Rebates of up to $100 are available for pressure assist
PF/2 Ultra Low -Flow 1.6 gallon toilets. Additional rebates of 50% are available on Low -Flow Shower Heads,
Insulated Hot Water Blankets, and Hose Bib Manual Timers for outside water hoses.
The program is funded by the Water, Wastewater and Electric Utilities. The rebates, given at the time of purchase,
are only available at the following Lodi stores:
Ace Hardware - 827 West Kettleman Lane
Orchard Super Hardware - 360 South Cherokee Lane
Ferguson Enterprises, Inc - 1435 Academy Street
Contact the Water Conservation Office at (209) 333-6740 for more detail
Water Conservation Ordinance Summary
Ordinance Requirements —Water waste includes but is not limited to the following:
1. Allowing a controllable leak of water to go unrepaired.
2. Watering lawns, flower beds, landscaping, ornamental plants or gardens except on watering days as follows:
Odd -numbered addresses on Wednesday/ Friday/ Sunday; Even -numbered addresses on Tuesday/ Thursday/ Saturday.
(WATERING IS NOT ALLOWED ON MONDAYS)
3. Watering between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. from May I through September 30 each year. (You may NOT water during these
high evaporation times.)
4. Washing down sidewalks, driveways, parking areas, tennis courts, patios, other paved areas or buildings.
5. Washing any motor vehicle, trailer, boat, moveable equipment except with a bucket. A hose (see # 6 below) shall be used for
rinsing only and for not more than three (3) minutes.
6. Use of a hose without a positive shut off nozzle.
(NO OPEN HOSES)
7. Allowing excess water to flow into a gutter or any drainage area for longer than three (3) minutes.
8. Overwatering lawns or landscapes from November 1 st through February 28th, or during and immediately after a rain.
Water Wasting Rates and Enforcement — Education and cooperation is our first goal, but the following enforcement
procedures and charges will be followed for water waste.
-1 st Water Waste — City will leave an information sheet describing the waste so that it may be corrected.
o2nd Water Waste — City will give written notice requiring corrective action. (Within 12 months of a 1 st Water Waste)
o3rd Water Waste — City will give written notice, and a $35 charge will be added to the next utility bill. (Within 12 months of a
2nd Water Waste)
o4th Water Waste — City will give written notice, and a $75 charge will be added to the next utility bill. (Within 12 months of a
3rd Water Waste)
o5th and Subsequent Water Wastes — City will give written notice, and a $150 charge will be added to the next utility bill AND
the City may require a water meter and/or flow restrictor to be installed at the waster's expense. (Within 12 months of the
previous Water Waste)
If you have any questions, would like further information concerning water conservation, or to report water waste, please call the
Water Conservation Office at 333-6829.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
MAIMAN4 =11IMM 11111" 1 MiM PUMMU-4-1-01 MM Wilm WE":0 VA 0111AUP lalil
On Thursday, July 8, 2004 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a copy of
a Notice of Public Hearing to receive comments on and consider accepting the City of
Lodi's Public Health Goals Report (attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A"), was posted at
the following four locations:
Lodi Public Library
Lodi'City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on July 8, 2004, at Lodi, California,
Patricia Ochoa
Administrative Clark
formAdecpost.doc
MUNN
Jacqueline L. Taylor, CHIC
Deputy City Clerk
Jennifer M. Perrin, CMG
Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF LODI
Cariiegie Forijin
305 West Pine Street, Lodi
11410TICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: Augustl8,2004
Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regaTding this notice please contact:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Telephone. (209) 333-6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, August 18, 2004 at the hour of 7M p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a Public Hearing at the Carnegie Forum,
305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following mafter:
a) receive comments on and consider accepting the City of Lodi's Public Health Goa�s Report
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Public Works Department, 221 West Pine
Street, Lodi, California, All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this
matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein,
and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you chaflenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the Public Hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Dated: July 8, 2004
A , p , proved as to form:
D, Stephen Schwabauer
Interim City Attorney
J:NC1TYGLRnF0RM8\N01PW.d0G 7/8/04
W11644 - 0-i
:
Please immediately confirm receipt
qf thisfax by calling 333-6702
CITY OF LODI
P. 0, BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
DATED: THURSDAY, JULY 8,2004
ORDERED BY:
SUSAN BLACKSTON, CITY CLERK
City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
PATRICIA OC A
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
JACQUE 11 NE L. TAYLOR, CMC JENNIFER M. PERRIN, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK DEPUTY CITY CLERK
A
M=
Faxed to the Sentinel at 369-1084 at 2 (time-) on (date) (pages)
Jac ;0�'
I-LNS Phoned to confirm receipt of all Pages at time) Jac &FFiCla __jJen (initials)
forvos\advins.doc
PUBLIC NQTICE,.��,
NOTIOE OF PU13LIC HEARING
NOT)CE IS HF.REDY GIVEN that Orl
Wednesday, AugAst 18, 2064 at the hour of
7M p.m., Of as Soon therealtor as the met-
ior may be he4rd� the City Council wig con-
duct a PuWic-HeBrIng af_tho Carnegio,
Forum, 305 West Pine Street. Lodi, 10 con -
Sider the follbMs)g Matter:
a) . receive comments on and consider
accepting the City of Lodi's Public Health
Goals Report
Information regarding this item may be
obtained in the offioe of the Public Works
Department, 221 West PlnO Street, Lodi,
California,.All interested Persc;j$ are. Invited
to present their vieWs and comments on this
matter, Written statements may be filed with
the City Clark at e1hy time priorka the hearing
s0odufe(l hOrelft, and oral statements may
be made at said hearing,
if you challeqa the subject matter in. court,
you may be limited to valskng.;'only those
issues you or someone else �Alsbd at the
Futilic Hearing described in this notice of in
written corrg n.donce deltvered 00 the c4ty
C lark, 22, e
r
', Pine Street, at or prior to the
Pub4c. Hearing,
By Order of �he Lodi City Council:
Susan,l. Blackston
CIty Clerk
Dated: July 8, 2004
Approved as to form:
0, �tophen SchwabAusr
interim City Attorney'
july 10, 2004 ...
4ji-9j
?-(F-04
City of Lodi Water System
Public Health Goals (PHG)
State of California requirement
Not the same as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL's)
o MCL's are legal limits based on various factors including feasibility and cost
o PHG's are based solely on public health risk considerations
o PHG's are not enforceable
o PHG notification intended to better inform the public
Report format
• Identify constituent, MCL, PHG
• Describe "Best Available Technology" to remove/reduce level of constituent
• Provide cost information (estimates are very generalized and do not take
into account site specific factors)
• Costs shown below are capital and annual operating
Constituents that exceed a PHG:
Constituent
MCL
PHQ
QV
BAT: cos
Comments,
Detections
Risk
Trichlorethylene (TCE)
5 tig/L
0.8 pg/L
1.9 pg/L
GAC or
Well 2
aeration;
(minimum run);
$400k plus
cancer risk
$62k/yr
Dib romochlo ro propane
200 ng/L
1.7
10 to 180
GAC or
8 wells plus
(DBCP)
ng/L
ng/L
aeration;
enhanced
$3.2m plus
treatment on 6
$470k/yr
wells;cancer
risk
Tetrachloroethylene
5 pg/L
0.06
0.54 to
GAC or
3 wells; cancer
(PCE)
pg/L
0.62 pg/L
aeration;
risk
$1.2m plus
$145k/yr
Colifon'n Bacteria
5% Of
0%
0.4%
Full-time
Will not
samples
(1.3%
chlorlinattlon;
guarantee 0%;
max. one
$880k,
waterbome
month)
$55k/yr
disease risk
Copper
None
0.17
0.41 mg/L
Adjust
Lodi's water
(90%
mg1L
@ 9oth
water
meets
below
percentile
chemistry
optimized
"Action
for
parameters;
level" of
optimized
gastrointestinal
1.3 mg/L
corrosion
irritation risk
control; n/a
Approximate cost per customer
for all measures: $5.00/month