(1)Existing law prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.

Existing law requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system.

This bill would apply the above-described provisions relating to lead user service lines to a community water system, instead of a public water system, and would require, by July 1, 2020, the community water system to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board. The bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a community water system that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to (a) provide to the state board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the state board for replacement of those lead use service lines, and (b) provide findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline for the replacement of those user service lines.

(2)Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, imposes on the state board various responsibilities and duties relating to providing a dependable, safe supply of drinking water. The act prohibits a person from operating a public water system without a permit and requires any person who owns a public water system to ensure that the system, among other things, provides a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. Existing law authorizes the state board to issue an order, as specified, whenever the state board determines a person has violated or is violating the act. The act provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or representation in a report submitted, maintained, or used for purposes of compliance with the act or who violates an order issued by the state board pursuant to the act that has a substantial probability of presenting an imminent danger to the health of persons may be punished as a misdemeanor.

This bill would specifically authorize the state board to apply and enforce these provisions relating to lead user service lines in community water systems under the California Safe Drinking Water Act and would make a violation of a provision in (1) a violation for purposes of the act. Because a misstatement in the above-described compiled inventory would be a crime, and a violation of an order issued by the state board relating to the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free, as specified, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of a crime.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1)Existing law prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.

Existing law requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system.

This bill would apply the above-described provisions relating to lead user service lines to a community water system, instead of a public water system, and would require, by July 1, 2020, the community water system to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board. The bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a community water system that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to (a) provide to the state board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the state board for replacement of those lead use service lines, and (b) provide findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline for the replacement of those user service lines.

(2)Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, imposes on the state board various responsibilities and duties relating to providing a dependable, safe supply of drinking water. The act prohibits a person from operating a public water system without a permit and requires any person who owns a public water system to ensure that the system, among other things, provides a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. Existing law authorizes the state board to issue an order, as specified, whenever the state board determines a person has violated or is violating the act. The act provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or representation in a report submitted, maintained, or used for purposes of compliance with the act or who violates an order issued by the state board pursuant to the act that has a substantial probability of presenting an imminent danger to the health of persons may be punished as a misdemeanor.

This bill would specifically authorize the state board to apply and enforce these provisions relating to lead user service lines in community water systems under the California Safe Drinking Water Act and would make a violation of a provision in (1) a violation for purposes of the act. Because a misstatement in the above-described compiled inventory would be a crime, and a violation of an order issued by the state board relating to the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free, as specified, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of a crime.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1)Existing law prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.

Existing law requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system. Existing law requires the public water system, after completing the inventory, to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in the distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board. Existing law requires, by July 1, 2020, a public water system with areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to either determine the existence or absence of lead user service lines in these areas and provide that information to the state board or provide a timeline for replacement of the user service lines whose content cannot be determined.

This bill, bill would apply the above-described provisions relating to lead user service lines to a community water system, instead of a public water system, and would require, by July 1, 2020, would require a public the community water system to provide the a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to the state board. State Water Resources Control Board. The bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a public community water system that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to (a) provide to the state board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the state board for replacement of those lead use service lines, and (b) provide findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline for the replacement of those user service lines.

(2)Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, imposes on the state board various responsibilities and duties relating to providing a dependable, safe supply of drinking water. The act prohibits a person from operating a public water system without a permit and requires any person who owns a public water system to ensure that the system, among other things, provides a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. Existing law authorizes the state board to issue an order, as specified, whenever the state board determines a person has violated or is violating the act. The act provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or representation in a report submitted, maintained, or used for purposes of compliance with the act or who violates an order issued by the state board pursuant to the act that has a substantial probability of presenting an imminent danger to the health of persons may be punished as a misdemeanor.

This bill would specifically authorize the state board to apply and enforce these provisions relating to lead user service lines in public community water systems under the California Safe Drinking Water Act and would make a violation of a provision in (1) or (2) a violation for purposes of the act. Because a misstatement in the above-described compiled inventory would be a crime, and a violation of an order issued by the state board relating to the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free, as specified, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of a crime.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1)Existing law prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.

Existing law requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system. Existing law requires the public water system, after completing the inventory, to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in the distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board. Existing law requires, by July 1, 2020, a public water system with areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to either determine the existence or absence of lead user service lines in these areas and provide that information to the state board or provide a timeline for replacement of the user service lines whose content cannot be determined.

This bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a public water system to provide the timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to the state board. The bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a public water system that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to (a) provide to the state board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the state board for replacement of those lead use service lines, and (b) provide findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline for the replacement of those user service lines.

(2)Existing law requires the state board to either approve a proposed replacement timeline or deny and propose a revised replacement timeline to the public water system, as specified. If the public water system rejects the state boards revised timeline, existing law requires the public water system and the state board to develop a compromise timeline within 30 days.

This bill, if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, would require the public water system to comply with the state boards revised timeline. The bill would authorize the state board to amend its revised timeline by incorporating elements of the public water systems proposed timeline.

(3)Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, imposes on the state board various responsibilities and duties relating to providing a dependable, safe supply of drinking water. The act prohibits a person from operating a public water system without a permit and requires any person who owns a public water system to ensure that the system, among other things, provides a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. Existing law authorizes the state board to issue an order, as specified, whenever the state board determines a person has violated or is violating the act. The act provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or representation in a report submitted, maintained, or used for purposes of compliance with the act or who violates an order issued by the state board pursuant to the act that has a substantial probability of presenting an imminent danger to the health of persons may be punished as a misdemeanor.

This bill would specifically authorize the state board to apply and enforce these provisions relating to lead user service lines in public water systems under the California Safe Drinking Water Act and would make a violation of a provision in (1) or (2) a violation for purposes of the act. Because a misstatement in the above-described compiled inventory would be a crime, and a violation of an order issued by the state board relating to the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free, as specified, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of a crime.

(4)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1)Existing law prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.

Existing law requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system. Existing law requires the public water system, after completing the inventory, to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in the distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board. Existing law requires, by July 1, 2020, a public water system with areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to either determine the existence or absence of lead user service lines in these areas and provide that information to the state board or provide a timeline for replacement of the user service lines whose content cannot be determined.

This bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a public water system to provide the timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to the state board. The bill, by July 1, 2020, would require a public water system that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to (a) provide to the state board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the state board for replacement of those lead use service lines, and (b) provide findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline for the replacement of those user service lines.

(2)Existing law requires the state board to either approve a proposed replacement timeline or deny and propose a revised replacement timeline to the public water system, as specified. If the public water system rejects the state boards revised timeline, existing law requires the public water system and the state board to develop a compromise timeline within 30 days.

This bill, if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, would require the public water system to comply with the state boards revised timeline. The bill would authorize the state board to amend its revised timeline by incorporating elements of the public water systems proposed timeline.

(3)Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, imposes on the state board various responsibilities and duties relating to providing a dependable, safe supply of drinking water. The act prohibits a person from operating a public water system without a permit and requires any person who owns a public water system to ensure that the system, among other things, provides a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. Existing law authorizes the state board to issue an order, as specified, whenever the state board determines a person has violated or is violating the act. The act provides that a person who knowingly makes a false statement or representation in a report submitted, maintained, or used for purposes of compliance with the act or who violates an order issued by the state board pursuant to the act that has a substantial probability of presenting an imminent danger to the health of persons may be punished as a misdemeanor.

This bill would specifically authorize the state board to apply and enforce these provisions relating to lead user service lines in public water systems under the California Safe Drinking Water Act and would make a violation of a provision in (1) or (2) a violation for purposes of the act. Because a misstatement in the above-described compiled inventory would be a crime, and a violation of an order issued by the state board relating to the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not lead free, as specified, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of a crime.

(4)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Date of Hearing: July 19, 2017

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 427

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:May 15, 2017

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill provides clarifying changes to further the purpose of recently enacted legislation to established lead service line identification and replacement requirements. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires a community water system (CWS) to provide a timeline for the replacement of known lead service lines in its distribution system to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) by July 1, 2020.
2. Requires a CWS to provide SWRCB with a determination regarding any potential lead user service lines in use in areas of its distribution system or findings regarding any areas for which the CWS cannot determine the content of the user service lines, and a timeline for the replacement of both.
3. Clarifies the process by which SWRCB and the CWS must agree on a timeline for replacing user service lines known to contain lead.
4. Expressly authorizes SWRCB to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) related to lead in service lines of a public water system (PWS) and a CWS.

FISCAL EFFECT:

No additional state costs.

COMMENTS:

Background and Purpose. SB 1398 (Leyva), Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016, requires every public water system (PWS) to compile an inventory of all known leaded pipes in use in their systems, and to identify areas that may have lead pipes in use in their systems. A PWS is also required to establish a timeline for replacing those known lead pipes and a separate timeline for investigating and replacing the unknown pipes.

According to the author “The State Water Resources Control Board has brought to my attention the need for clarification in the current statutes in order to implement SB 1398. Without clarification, the goal of removing lead service lines and ensuring communities have access to clean water could be undermined. SB 427 provides the needed clean-up and clarification."

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 27, 2017

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS

Bill Quirk, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 427

Author:(Leyva) – As Amended Ver:May 15, 2017

SENATE VOTE: 28-9

SUBJECT: Public water systems: community water systems: lead user service lines

SUMMARY: Makes clarifying changes to current law related to lead service line identification and replacement. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, by July 1, 2020, a community water system (CWS) that has identified known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to provide a timeline for replacement of those service lines to the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board).
2. Requires a CWS that has identified areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system to do both of the following:
   1. Provide to the State Water Board its determination as to whether there are any lead user service lines in use in those areas of its distribution system and provide a timeline to the State Water Board for replacement of those lead user service lines that the CWS has identified; and,
   2. Provide its findings as to whether there are any areas for which it cannot determine the content of the user service lines and a timeline to the State Water Board for replacement of the user service lines whose content cannot be determined.
3. Clarifies the iterative process by which the State Water Board and the CWS need to agree on a timeline for replacing known user service lines containing lead.
4. Authorizes the State Water Board to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) related to lead in service lines of a public water system (PWS) and a CWS.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, by July 1, 2018, a PWS to compile an inventory of known lead user service lines in use in its distribution system and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system. (Health & Safety Code (HSC) § 116885 (a)) 
2. Defines a PWS as a system for the provision of water for human consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances that has 15 or more service connections or regularly serves at least 25 individuals daily at least 60 days out of the year. A public water system includes the following: (1) any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities under control of the operator of the system that are used primarily in connection with the system; (2) any collection or pretreatment storage facilities not under the control of the operator that are used primarily in connection with the system; and, (3) any water system that treats water on behalf of one or more public water systems for the purpose of rendering it safe for human consumption. (HSC § 116275(h))
3. Defines a CWS as a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by yearlong residents or regularly serves at least 25 yearlong residents of the area served by the system. (HSC § 116275(i))
4. Requires, pursuant to the federal SDWA and California SDWA, drinking water to meet specified standards for contamination (maximum contaminant levels, or MCLs) as set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) or the State Water Board. (HSC § 116270, et seq.)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill: According to the author, "California has made great strides in the fight for clean water and the complete elimination of lead exposure in drinking water. The provisions of SB 1398 [Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016] continues California’s leadership on eliminating lead exposure by removing all lead service lines in every public water system. The State Water Resources Control Board has brought to my attention the need for clarification in the current statutes in order to implement SB 1398. Without clarification, the goal of removing lead service lines and ensuring communities have access to clean water could be undermined. SB 427 provides the needed clean-up and clarification."

The problem with lead: Lead has been listed under California's Proposition 65 since 1987 as a substance that can cause reproductive damage and birth defects and has been listed as a chemical known to cause cancer since 1992. There is no level that has been proven safe, either for children or for adults.

Lead in plumbing: Beginning January 1, 2010, California law prohibited the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking that is not "lead free" as defined in statute. This includes kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets, and any other end-use devices intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking. However, service saddles, backflow preventers for non-potable services such as irrigation and industrial uses, and water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter and above are excluded.

Lead in water: The most prevalent sources of lead in drinking water are from pipes, fixtures, and associated hardware from which the lead can leach. According to Lead in Drinking Water and Human Blood Levels in the United States, published by the National Center for Environmental Health in 2012, nearly all lead in users' tap water does not come from the primary water source or from the municipal treatment plant, but is a result of corrosion resulting from materials containing lead coming into contact with water after it leaves the treatment plant. Lead can enter a building's drinking water by leaching from lead service connections, from lead solder used in copper piping, and from brass fixtures.

The amount of lead in tap water can depend on several factors, including the age and material of the pipes, concentration of lead in water delivered by the public utility (or, for private domestic wells, the concentration of lead in raw groundwater), and corrosivity (acidity, temperature, and the concentration of other mineral components) of the water. More corrosive water can cause greater leaching from pipes.

What do we know about California's pipes?: There are about 7,500 PWSs throughout the state. The State Water Board's Division of Drinking Water (DDW) regulates all PWSs and CWSs. Private well owners are not regulated by the state and therefore their drinking water is not overseen by the state's regulatory rules for drinking water standards.

California has stringent testing and monitoring protocols in place that ensure that drinking water supplies meet California's MCLs for water contaminants and that appropriate chemistry is maintained to inhibit corrosion of the pipes delivering drinking water that prevents a Flint, Michigan-type incident from occurring in California. More specifically, the State Water Board tracks all water sources in California for pH and salinity levels for potential corrosion, and tracks which water providers add corrosion inhibitors to their water supplies.

As it relates to pipes, the federal Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) established "action levels" for lead of 15 μg/L (or 15 ppb). The LCR requires PWSs to test water at the tap at a sample of their customers served for lead levels. The sample size is determined by the size of the customer base. If more than 10 percent of the samples collected are at, or exceed, the action level for lead, it can trigger ‘actions’ that include public education, water quality parameter monitoring, corrosion control treatment, source water monitoring/treatment, public education, and lead service line replacement. The LCR requires lead samples to be collected every 6 months. The LCR, however, is not an exhaustive requirement for identifying the real potential for leaded pipes in a PWSs territory.

Related Legislation: SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) requires PWSs to compile an inventory of all known leaded pipes in use in their systems, and identify areas that may have lead pipes in use in their systems. A PWS is required to establish a timeline for replacing those known lead pipes and a separate timeline for investigating and replacing the unknown pipes.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association of Professional Scientists

Clean Water Action

Community Water Center

East Bay Municipal Utility District

Environmental Working Group

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Paige Brokaw / E.S. & T.M. /

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 427

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/19/17

AYES: Wieckowski, Hill, Lara, Skinner, Stern

NOES: Stone, Bates

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill makes clarifying changes to help implement SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) which requires, by July 1, 2018, a community water system to identify and replace known lead service lines.

Senate Floor Amendments of 5/15/17 remove the provision that specifies that if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, then a public water system must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) revised timeline. Additionally, the amendments clarify that this statute applies to community water systems rather than all public water systems.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Defines a public water system as any water system with 15 or more service connections.
2. Defines a community water system as a public water system that serves at least 15 services connections that are used by yearlong residents or regularly services at least 25 yearlong residents of the area serviced by the system.
3. Requires public water systems to take specified actions to test for and remediate certain contaminants in drinking water, including lead and copper.
4. Prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not “lead free” in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.
5. Prohibits any person engaged in the business of selling plumbing supplies, except manufacturers, from selling solder or flux that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
6. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any solder or flux that is not “lead free” unless the solder or flux bears a label stating that it is illegal to use the solder or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human consumption.
7. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
8. Requires a public water system to compile an inventory of lead pipes in use by July 1, 2018.
9. Requires, after completing the inventory, the public water systems provide a timeline for replacement of lead pipes in the system to the SWRCB.
10. Requires the SWRCB to establish best practices to ensure that chemicals introduced into public water systems do not create corrosion or contamination within the system.

This bill makes a number of clarifying changes. Specifically:

1. Specifies that the deadline for community water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines for approval or denial by the SWRCB is July 1, 2020.
2. Specifies that the deadline for community water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of any user service lines whose content cannot be determined for approval or denial by the SWRCB is July 1, 2020.
3. Specifically authorizes SWRCB to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act related to lead in service lines of a community water system.

Background

1. Lead in Plumbing.

Lead is a common additive in plumbing materials such as lead solder, brass, bronze, and other alloys. Any plumbing product containing lead that is in contact with water is a potential source of drinking water contamination.

Lead primarily enters drinking water from the corrosion of plumbing materials that contain lead and are in contact with the water. Lead that leaches from household pipes and faucets into drinking water cannot be easily detected nor removed.

Exposure to lead in drinking water can cause a variety of adverse health effects, especially in children and infants. Their exposure to high levels of lead in drinking water can result in delays in physical or mental development, reduced intelligence, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, behavioral problems, stunted growth, impaired hearing and kidney damage.

For adults, high levels of exposure to lead in drinking water can result in kidney problems, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, fertility problems, muscle and joint pain, irritability, memory and concentration problems. Furthermore, pregnant women can pass lead contained in their bodies to their fetuses.

Lead exposure across the United States has fallen dramatically since the 1980s; however, no blood-lead level is considered completely safe. Children under age five, and especially infants and fetuses, bear the greatest risk of deleterious and irreversible health outcomes. From 2012 to the present (2016), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set a “reference level” of 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), in order to target for case management the 2.5% of young American children with the highest blood-lead levels. At 45 µg/dL, chelation therapy is considered.

Among the many ways lead can enter a modern American’s bloodstream is through lead plumbing. Acidic water makes it easier for the lead found in pipes, leaded solder, and brass faucets to be dissolved and to enter a home’s drinking water. Therefore, public water treatment systems are legally required to use control measures to make water less acidic. Plumbing that contains lead is often found in buildings built in the 1980s and earlier.

Beginning January 1, 2010, California law prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking that is not “lead free” as defined in statute. This includes kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets, and any other end-use devices intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking. However, service saddles, backflow preventers for non-potable services such as irrigation and industrial, and water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter and above are excluded.

1. Flint, Michigan.

The Flint, Michigan drinking water crisis started in April 2014. After Flint changed its water source from treated Detroit Water and Sewerage Department water (which was sourced from Lake Huron as well as the Detroit River) to the Flint River (to which officials had failed to apply corrosion inhibitors), its drinking water had a series of problems that culminated with lead contamination, creating a serious public health danger. The corrosive Flint River water caused lead from aging pipes to leach into the water supply, causing extremely elevated levels of the heavy metal. In Flint, between 6,000 and 12,000 children have been exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead and they may experience a range of serious health problems. Due to the change in water source, the percentage of Flint children with elevated blood-lead levels may have risen from about 2.5% in 2013 to as much as 5% in 2015. The water change is also a possible cause of an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease in the county that has killed 10 people and affected another 77.

Several lawsuits have been filed against government officials on the issue, and several investigations have been opened. On January 5, 2016, the city was declared to be in a state of emergency by the Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder, before President Barack Obama declared it as a federal state of emergency, authorizing additional help from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security less than two weeks later.

Four government officials—one from the City of Flint, two from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), and one from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)—resigned over the mishandling of the crisis, and one additional MDEQ staff member was fired and another has a termination hearing pending. Governor Snyder issued an apology to citizens and promised to fix the problem, and then sent $28 million to Flint for supplies, medical care and infrastructure upgrades, and later budgeted an additional $30 million to Flint that will give water bill credits of 65% for residents and 20% for businesses.

The water disaster called attention to the problem of aging and seriously neglected water infrastructure nationwide. The Flint crisis recalled recent lead contamination crises in the tap water in various cities, such as the lead contamination in Washington, D.C. drinking water (2001), Columbia, South Carolina (2005); Durham and Greenville, North Carolina (2006); Jackson, Mississippi (2015), and Sebring, Ohio (2015).

The New York Times notes in an article on February 8, 2016, written by Michael Wines & John Schwartz, entitled, “Unsafe Lead Levels in Tap Water Not Limited to Flint,” that “Although Congress banned lead water pipes 30 years ago, between 3.3 million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water by forces as simple as jostling during repairs or a change in water chemistry.” Inadequate regulation was cited as one reason for unsafe lead levels in tap water and “efforts to address shortcomings often encounter push-back from industries like agriculture and mining that fear cost increases, and from politicians ideologically opposed to regulation.” The crisis called attention to a “resource gap” for water regulators. The annual budget of the US EPA’s drinking water office declined 15% from 2006 to 2015, with the office losing over 10% of employees, and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators reported in 2013 that “federal officials had slashed drinking-water grants, 17 states had cut drinking-water budgets by more than a fifth, and 27 had cut spending on full-time employees, with serious implications for states’ ability to protect public health.”

1. Why Flint is not California.

In the April 6, 2016 oversight hearing of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee regarding the transfer of the Drinking Water Program from the Department of Public Health to the SWRCB, testimony was given by the Deputy Director of the Division of Drinking Water that California has stringent testing and monitoring protocols in place that ensure that drinking water supplies meet California’s Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and that appropriate chemistry is maintained to inhibit corrosion of the pipes delivering drinking water that prevents a Flint, Michigan type incident from happening in California.

However, like Michigan and most other states, California’s water system is aging, and that infrastructure poses a risk to public health, especially because the extent of old infrastructure is not known.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) required, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to identify and replace known lead service lines.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/16/17)

East Bay Municipal Utilities District

Community Water Center

Clean Water Action

Environmental Working Group

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/16/17)

None received

Prepared by:

5/19/17 10:08:38

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 427

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/19/17

AYES: Wieckowski, Hill, Lara, Skinner, Stern

NOES: Stone, Bates

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill makes clarifying changes to help implement SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) which requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to identify and replace known lead service lines.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires public water systems to take specified actions to test for and remediate certain contaminants in drinking water, including lead and copper.
2. Prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not “lead free” in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.
3. Prohibits any person engaged in the business of selling plumbing supplies, except manufacturers, from selling solder or flux that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
4. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any solder or flux that is not “lead free” unless the solder or flux bears a label stating that it is illegal to use the solder or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human consumption.
5. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
6. Requires a public water system to compile an inventory of lead pipes in use by July 1, 2018.
7. Requires, after completing the inventory, the public water systems provide a timeline for replacement of lead pipes in the system to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
8. Requires the SWRCB to establish best practices to ensure that chemicals introduced into public water systems do not create corrosion or contamination within the system.

This bill makes a number of clarifying changes. Specifically:

1. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines for approval or denial by the SWRCB is July 1, 2020.
2. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of any user service lines whose content cannot be determined for approval or denial by the SWRCB is July 1, 2020.
3. Provides, that if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, then a public water system must comply with the SWRCB’s revised timeline.
4. Specifically authorizes SWRCB to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act related to lead in service lines of a public water system.

Background

1. Lead in Plumbing.

Lead is a common additive in plumbing materials such as lead solder, brass, bronze, and other alloys. Any plumbing product containing lead that is in contact with water is a potential source of drinking water contamination.

Lead primarily enters drinking water from the corrosion of plumbing materials that contain lead and are in contact with the water. Lead that leaches from household pipes and faucets into drinking water cannot be easily detected nor removed.

Exposure to lead in drinking water can cause a variety of adverse health effects, especially in children and infants. Their exposure to high levels of lead in drinking water can result in delays in physical or mental development, reduced intelligence, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, behavioral problems, stunted growth, impaired hearing and kidney damage.

For adults, high levels of exposure to lead in drinking water can result in kidney problems, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, fertility problems, muscle and joint pain, irritability, memory and concentration problems. Furthermore, pregnant women can pass lead contained in their bodies to their fetuses.

Lead exposure across the United States has fallen dramatically since the 1980s; however, no blood-lead level is considered completely safe. Children under age five, and especially infants and fetuses, bear the greatest risk of deleterious and irreversible health outcomes. From 2012 to the present (2016), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set a “reference level” of 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), in order to target for case management the 2.5% of young American children with the highest blood-lead levels. At 45 µg/dL, chelation therapy is considered.

Among the many ways lead can enter a modern American’s bloodstream is through lead plumbing. Acidic water makes it easier for the lead found in pipes, leaded solder, and brass faucets to be dissolved and to enter a home’s drinking water. Therefore, public water treatment systems are legally required to use control measures to make water less acidic. Plumbing that contains lead is often found in buildings built in the 1980s and earlier.

Beginning January 1, 2010, California law prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking that is not “lead free” as defined in statute. This includes kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets, and any other end-use devices intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking. However, service saddles, backflow preventers for non-potable services such as irrigation and industrial, and water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter and above are excluded.

1. Flint, Michigan.

The Flint, Michigan drinking water crisis started in April 2014. After Flint changed its water source from treated Detroit Water and Sewerage Department water (which was sourced from Lake Huron as well as the Detroit River) to the Flint River (to which officials had failed to apply corrosion inhibitors), its drinking water had a series of problems that culminated with lead contamination, creating a serious public health danger. The corrosive Flint River water caused lead from aging pipes to leach into the water supply, causing extremely elevated levels of the heavy metal. In Flint, between 6,000 and 12,000 children have been exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead and they may experience a range of serious health problems. Due to the change in water source, the percentage of Flint children with elevated blood-lead levels may have risen from about 2.5% in 2013 to as much as 5% in 2015. The water change is also a possible cause of an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease in the county that has killed 10 people and affected another 77.

Several lawsuits have been filed against government officials on the issue, and several investigations have been opened. On January 5, 2016, the city was declared to be in a state of emergency by the Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder, before President Barack Obama declared it as a federal state of emergency, authorizing additional help from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security less than two weeks later.

Four government officials—one from the City of Flint, two from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), and one from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)—resigned over the mishandling of the crisis, and one additional MDEQ staff member was fired and another has a termination hearing pending. Governor Snyder issued an apology to citizens and promised to fix the problem, and then sent $28 million to Flint for supplies, medical care and infrastructure upgrades, and later budgeted an additional $30 million to Flint that will give water bill credits of 65% for residents and 20% for businesses.

The water disaster called attention to the problem of aging and seriously neglected water infrastructure nationwide. The Flint crisis recalled recent lead contamination crises in the tap water in various cities, such as the lead contamination in Washington, D.C. drinking water (2001), Columbia, South Carolina (2005); Durham and Greenville, North Carolina (2006); Jackson, Mississippi (2015), and Sebring, Ohio (2015).

The New York Times notes in an article on February 8, 2016, written by Michael Wines & John Schwartz, entitled, “Unsafe Lead Levels in Tap Water Not Limited to Flint,” that “Although Congress banned lead water pipes 30 years ago, between 3.3 million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water by forces as simple as jostling during repairs or a change in water chemistry.” Inadequate regulation was cited as one reason for unsafe lead levels in tap water and “efforts to address shortcomings often encounter push-back from industries like agriculture and mining that fear cost increases, and from politicians ideologically opposed to regulation.” The crisis called attention to a “resource gap” for water regulators. The annual budget of the US EPA’s drinking water office declined 15% from 2006 to 2015, with the office losing over 10% of employees, and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators reported in 2013 that “federal officials had slashed drinking-water grants, 17 states had cut drinking-water budgets by more than a fifth, and 27 had cut spending on full-time employees, with serious implications for states’ ability to protect public health.”

1. Why Flint is not California.

In the April 6, 2016 oversight hearing of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee regarding the transfer of the Drinking Water Program from the Department of Public Health to the SWRCB, testimony was given by the Deputy Director of the Division of Drinking Water that California has stringent testing and monitoring protocols in place that ensure that drinking water supplies meet California’s Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and that appropriate chemistry is maintained to inhibit corrosion of the pipes delivering drinking water that prevents a Flint, Michigan type incident from happening in California.

However, like Michigan and most other states, California’s water system is aging, and that infrastructure poses a risk to public health, especially because the extent of old infrastructure is not known.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) required, by July 1, 2018, a public water system to identify and replace known lead service lines.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/3/17)

East Bay Municipal Utilities District

Community Water Center

Clean Water Action

Environmental Working Group

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/3/17)

Association of California Water Agencies

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “California has made great strides in the fight for clean water and the complete elimination of lead exposure in drinking water. The provisions of SB 1398, which I authored last year, continues California’s leadership on eliminating lead exposure by removing all lead service lines in every public water system. The State Water Resources Control Board has brought to my attention the need for clarification in the current statutes in order to implement SB 1398. Without clarification, the goal of removing lead service lines and ensuring communities have access to clean water could be undermined. SB 427 provides the needed clean-up and clarification.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the Association of California Water Agencies, “SB 1398 (Leyva) which passed last year, already requires that a public water system has to compile, by July 1, 2018, an inventory of known lead service lines in use and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system…. Additionally, SB 1398 already sets forth a process where a public water system and the State Water Board work together to develop a service line replacement timeline. With SB 1398 only having been in effect for a few months, SB 427 would change this process. SB 427 would require that if no agreement on the timeline could be reached within 30 days from when the public water system rejects the State Water Board’s revised timeline, then the public water system would be required to comply with that revised timeline proposed by the State Water Board. This proposal could result in infeasible replacement timelines with penalties assessed for non-compliance. SB 1398 should be given time to work. SB 427 would not afford enough flexibility to achieve workable timelines.”

Prepared by:

5/3/17 15:10:56

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Wieckowski, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: SB 427

SUBJECT: Public water systems: lead user service lines

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires public water systems to take specified actions to test for and remediate certain contaminants in drinking water, including lead and copper.
2. Prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not “lead free” in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.
3. Prohibits any person engaged in the business of selling plumbing supplies, except manufacturers, from selling solder or flux that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
4. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any solder or flux that is not “lead free” unless the solder or flux bears a label stating that it is illegal to use the solder or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human consumption.
5. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
6. Requires a public water system to compile an inventory of lead pipes in use by July 1, 2018.
7. Requires, after completing the inventory, the public water systems provide a timeline for replacement of lead pipes in the system to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
8. Requires the board to establish best practices to ensure that chemicals introduced into public water systems do not create corrosion or contamination within the system

This bill: Makes a number of clarifying changes. Specifically:

1. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines for approval or denial by the board is July 1, 2020.
2. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of any user service lines whose content cannot be determined for approval or denial by the board is July 1, 2020.
3. Provides, that if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, then a public water system must comply with the SWRCB’s revised timeline.
4. Specifically authorizes SWRCB to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act related to lead in service lines of a public water system.

Background

1. Lead in Plumbing.

Lead is a common additive in plumbing materials such as lead solder, brass, bronze, and other alloys. Any plumbing product containing lead that is in contact with water is a potential source of drinking water contamination.

Lead primarily enters drinking water from the corrosion of plumbing materials that contain lead and are in contact with the water. Lead that leaches from household pipes and faucets into drinking water cannot be easily detected nor removed.

Exposure to lead in drinking water can cause a variety of adverse health effects, especially in children and infants. Their exposure to high levels of lead in drinking water can result in delays in physical or mental development, reduced intelligence, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, behavioral problems, stunted growth, impaired hearing and kidney damage.

For adults, high levels of exposure to lead in drinking water can result in kidney problems, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, fertility problems, muscle and joint pain, irritability, memory and concentration problems. Furthermore, pregnant women can pass lead contained in their bodies to their fetuses.

Lead exposure across the United States has fallen dramatically since the 1980s; however, no blood-lead level is considered completely safe. Children under age five, and especially infants and fetuses, bear the greatest risk of deleterious and irreversible health outcomes. From 2012 to the present (2016), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set a “reference level” of 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), in order to target for case management the 2.5% of young American children with the highest blood-lead levels. At 45 µg/dL, chelation therapy is considered.

Among the many ways lead can enter a modern American’s bloodstream is through lead plumbing. Acidic water makes it easier for the lead found in pipes, leaded solder, and brass faucets to be dissolved and to enter a home’s drinking water. Therefore, public water treatment systems are legally required to use control measures to make water less acidic. Plumbing that contains lead is often found in buildings built in the 1980s and earlier.

Beginning January 1, 2010, California law prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking that is not “lead free” as defined in statute. This includes kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets, and any other end-use devices intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking. However, service saddles, backflow preventers for non-potable services such as irrigation and industrial, and water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter and above are excluded.

1. Flint, Michigan.

The Flint, Michigan drinking water crisis started in April 2014. After Flint changed its water source from treated Detroit Water and Sewerage Department water (which was sourced from Lake Huron as well as the Detroit River) to the Flint River (to which officials had failed to apply corrosion inhibitors), its drinking water had a series of problems that culminated with lead contamination, creating a serious public health danger. The corrosive Flint River water caused lead from aging pipes to leach into the water supply, causing extremely elevated levels of the heavy metal. In Flint, between 6,000 and 12,000 children have been exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead and they may experience a range of serious health problems. Due to the change in water source, the percentage of Flint children with elevated blood-lead levels may have risen from about 2.5% in 2013 to as much as 5% in 2015. The water change is also a possible cause of an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease in the county that has killed 10 people and affected another 77.

Several lawsuits have been filed against government officials on the issue, and several investigations have been opened. On January 5, 2016, the city was declared to be in a state of emergency by the Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder, before President Barack Obama declared it as a federal state of emergency, authorizing additional help from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security less than two weeks later.

Four government officials—one from the City of Flint, two from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), and one from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)—resigned over the mishandling of the crisis, and one additional MDEQ staff member was fired and another has a termination hearing pending. Governor Snyder issued an apology to citizens and promised to fix the problem, and then sent $28 million to Flint for supplies, medical care and infrastructure upgrades, and later budgeted an additional $30 million to Flint that will give water bill credits of 65% for residents and 20% for businesses.

The water disaster called attention to the problem of aging and seriously neglected water infrastructure nationwide. The Flint crisis recalled recent lead contamination crises in the tap water in various cities, such as the lead contamination in Washington, D.C. drinking water (2001), Columbia, South Carolina (2005); Durham and Greenville, North Carolina (2006); Jackson, Mississippi (2015), and Sebring, Ohio (2015).

The New York Times notes in an article on February 8, 2016, written by Michael Wines & John Schwartz, entitled, “Unsafe Lead Levels in Tap Water Not Limited to Flint,” that “Although Congress banned lead water pipes 30 years ago, between 3.3 million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water by forces as simple as jostling during repairs or a change in water chemistry.” Inadequate regulation was cited as one reason for unsafe lead levels in tap water and “efforts to address shortcomings often encounter push-back from industries like agriculture and mining that fear cost increases, and from politicians ideologically opposed to regulation.” The crisis called attention to a “resource gap” for water regulators. The annual budget of the US EPA’s drinking water office declined 15% from 2006 to 2015, with the office losing over 10% of employees, and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators reported in 2013 that “federal officials had slashed drinking-water grants, 17 states had cut drinking-water budgets by more than a fifth, and 27 had cut spending on full-time employees, with serious implications for states’ ability to protect public health.”

1. Why Flint is not California.

In the April 6, 2016 oversight hearing of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee regarding the transfer of the Drinking Water Program from the Department of Public Health to the State Water Resources Control Board, testimony was given by the Deputy Director of the Division of Drinking Water that California has stringent testing and monitoring protocols in place that ensure that drinking water supplies meet California’s Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and that appropriate chemistry is maintained to inhibit corrosion of the pipes delivering drinking water that prevents a Flint, Michigan type incident from happening in California.

However, like Michigan and most other states, California’s water system is aging, and that infrastructure poses a risk to public health, especially because the extent of old infrastructure is not known.

Comments

Purpose of Bill. According to the author, “California has made great strides in the fight for clean water and the complete elimination of lead exposure in drinking water. The provisions of SB 1398, which I authored last year, continues California’s leadership on eliminating lead exposure by removing all lead service lines in every public water system. The State Water Resources Control Board has brought to my attention the need for clarification in the current statutes in order to implement SB 1398. Without clarification, the goal of removing lead service lines and ensuring communities have access to clean water could be undermined. SB 427 provides the needed clean-up and clarification.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system (PWS) to identify and replace known lead service lines.

SOURCE:

Author

SUPPORT:

None received

OPPOSITION:

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA)

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According ACWA, SB 1398 (Leyva) which passed last year, already requires that a public water system has to compile, by July 1, 2018, an inventory of known lead service lines in use and identify areas that may have lead user service lines in use in its distribution system…. Additionally, SB 1398 already sets forth a process where a public water system and the State Water Board work together to develop a service line replacement timeline. With SB 1398 only having been in effect for a few months, SB 427 would change this process. SB 427 would require that if no agreement on the timeline could be reached within 30 days from when the public water system rejects the State Water Board’s revised timeline, then the public water system would be required to comply with that revised timeline proposed by the State Water Board. This proposal could result in infeasible replacement timelines with penalties assessed for non-compliance. SB 1398 should be given time to work. SB 427 would not afford enough flexibility to achieve workable timelines.”

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Wieckowski, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: SB 427

SUBJECT: Public water systems: lead user service lines

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires public water systems to take specified actions to test for and remediate certain contaminants in drinking water, including lead and copper.
2. Prohibits the use of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, solder, or flux that is not “lead free” in the installation or repair of any public water system or any plumbing in a facility providing water for human consumption, except as specified.
3. Prohibits any person engaged in the business of selling plumbing supplies, except manufacturers, from selling solder or flux that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
4. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any solder or flux that is not “lead free” unless the solder or flux bears a label stating that it is illegal to use the solder or flux in the installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human consumption.
5. Prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption that is not “lead free” as defined in statute.
6. Requires a public water system to compile an inventory of lead pipes in use by July 1, 2018.
7. Requires, after completing the inventory, the public water systems provide a timeline for replacement of lead pipes in the system to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
8. Requires the board to establish best practices to ensure that chemicals introduced into public water systems do not create corrosion or contamination within the system

This bill: Makes a number of clarifying changes. Specifically:

1. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of known lead user service lines for approval or denial by the board is July 1, 2020.
2. Specifies that the deadline for public water systems to provide a timeline for replacement of any user service lines whose content cannot be determined for approval or denial by the board is July 1, 2020.
3. Provides, that if a compromise timeline is not developed within 30 days, then a public water system must comply with the SWRCB’s revised timeline.
4. Specifically authorizes SWRCB to enforce provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water Act related to lead in service lines of a public water system.

Background

1. Lead in Plumbing.

Lead is a common additive in plumbing materials such as lead solder, brass, bronze, and other alloys. Any plumbing product containing lead that is in contact with water is a potential source of drinking water contamination.

Lead primarily enters drinking water from the corrosion of plumbing materials that contain lead and are in contact with the water. Lead that leaches from household pipes and faucets into drinking water cannot be easily detected nor removed.

Exposure to lead in drinking water can cause a variety of adverse health effects, especially in children and infants. Their exposure to high levels of lead in drinking water can result in delays in physical or mental development, reduced intelligence, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, behavioral problems, stunted growth, impaired hearing and kidney damage.

For adults, high levels of exposure to lead in drinking water can result in kidney problems, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, fertility problems, muscle and joint pain, irritability, memory and concentration problems. Furthermore, pregnant women can pass lead contained in their bodies to their fetuses.

Lead exposure across the United States has fallen dramatically since the 1980s; however, no blood-lead level is considered completely safe. Children under age five, and especially infants and fetuses, bear the greatest risk of deleterious and irreversible health outcomes. From 2012 to the present (2016), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set a “reference level” of 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), in order to target for case management the 2.5% of young American children with the highest blood-lead levels. At 45 µg/dL, chelation therapy is considered.

Among the many ways lead can enter a modern American’s bloodstream is through lead plumbing. Acidic water makes it easier for the lead found in pipes, leaded solder, and brass faucets to be dissolved and to enter a home’s drinking water. Therefore, public water treatment systems are legally required to use control measures to make water less acidic. Plumbing that contains lead is often found in buildings built in the 1980s and earlier.

Beginning January 1, 2010, California law prohibits the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting, or fixture intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking that is not “lead free” as defined in statute. This includes kitchen faucets, bathroom faucets, and any other end-use devices intended to convey or dispense water for human consumption through drinking or cooking. However, service saddles, backflow preventers for non-potable services such as irrigation and industrial, and water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter and above are excluded.

1. Flint, Michigan.

The Flint, Michigan drinking water crisis started in April 2014. After Flint changed its water source from treated Detroit Water and Sewerage Department water (which was sourced from Lake Huron as well as the Detroit River) to the Flint River (to which officials had failed to apply corrosion inhibitors), its drinking water had a series of problems that culminated with lead contamination, creating a serious public health danger. The corrosive Flint River water caused lead from aging pipes to leach into the water supply, causing extremely elevated levels of the heavy metal. In Flint, between 6,000 and 12,000 children have been exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead and they may experience a range of serious health problems. Due to the change in water source, the percentage of Flint children with elevated blood-lead levels may have risen from about 2.5% in 2013 to as much as 5% in 2015. The water change is also a possible cause of an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease in the county that has killed 10 people and affected another 77.

Several lawsuits have been filed against government officials on the issue, and several investigations have been opened. On January 5, 2016, the city was declared to be in a state of emergency by the Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder, before President Barack Obama declared it as a federal state of emergency, authorizing additional help from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security less than two weeks later.

Four government officials—one from the City of Flint, two from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), and one from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)—resigned over the mishandling of the crisis, and one additional MDEQ staff member was fired and another has a termination hearing pending. Governor Snyder issued an apology to citizens and promised to fix the problem, and then sent $28 million to Flint for supplies, medical care and infrastructure upgrades, and later budgeted an additional $30 million to Flint that will give water bill credits of 65% for residents and 20% for businesses.

The water disaster called attention to the problem of aging and seriously neglected water infrastructure nationwide. The Flint crisis recalled recent lead contamination crises in the tap water in various cities, such as the lead contamination in Washington, D.C. drinking water (2001), Columbia, South Carolina (2005); Durham and Greenville, North Carolina (2006); Jackson, Mississippi (2015), and Sebring, Ohio (2015).

The New York Times notes in an article on February 8, 2016, written by Michael Wines & John Schwartz, entitled, “Unsafe Lead Levels in Tap Water Not Limited to Flint,” that “Although Congress banned lead water pipes 30 years ago, between 3.3 million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water by forces as simple as jostling during repairs or a change in water chemistry.” Inadequate regulation was cited as one reason for unsafe lead levels in tap water and “efforts to address shortcomings often encounter push-back from industries like agriculture and mining that fear cost increases, and from politicians ideologically opposed to regulation.” The crisis called attention to a “resource gap” for water regulators. The annual budget of the US EPA’s drinking water office declined 15% from 2006 to 2015, with the office losing over 10% of employees, and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators reported in 2013 that “federal officials had slashed drinking-water grants, 17 states had cut drinking-water budgets by more than a fifth, and 27 had cut spending on full-time employees, with serious implications for states’ ability to protect public health.”

1. Why Flint is not California.

In the April 6, 2016 oversight hearing of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee regarding the transfer of the Drinking Water Program from the Department of Public Health to the State Water Resources Control Board, testimony was given by the Deputy Director of the Division of Drinking Water that California has stringent testing and monitoring protocols in place that ensure that drinking water supplies meet California’s Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and that appropriate chemistry is maintained to inhibit corrosion of the pipes delivering drinking water that prevents a Flint, Michigan type incident from happening in California.

However, like Michigan and most other states, California’s water system is aging, and that infrastructure poses a risk to public health, especially because the extent of old infrastructure is not known.

Comments

Purpose of Bill. According to the author, “California has made great strides in the fight for clean water and the complete elimination of lead exposure in drinking water. The provisions of SB 1398, which I authored last year, continues California’s leadership on eliminating lead exposure by removing all lead service lines in every public water system. The State Water Resources Control Board has brought to my attention the need for clarification in the current statutes in order to implement SB 1398. Without clarification, the goal of removing lead service lines and ensuring communities have access to clean water could be undermined. SB 427 provides the needed clean-up and clarification.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 1398 (Leyva, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2016) requires, by July 1, 2018, a public water system (PWS) to identify and replace known lead service lines.

SOURCE:

Author

SUPPORT:

None received

OPPOSITION:

None received

-- END --