BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 962
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 8, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 962 (Anderson) - As Amended: June 25, 2012
Policy Committee: Environmental
Safety and Toxic Materials Vote: 9-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill increases, from 200 to 500, the limit on the number of
service connections served by a small community water system
that the Department of Public Health (DPH) may permit to use
point-of-use (POU) and point-of-entry (POE) water treatment in
place of centralized water treatment. The bill also:
1)Requires DPH to:
a) Certify, prior to approval of a permit for POU or POE,
that an adequate centralized water treatment facility will
be completed by the water system within five years of
application for the permit for POU or POE water treatment.
b) Conduct a full audit of the finances of a water system
utilizing POU or POE water treatment to examine why the
system cannot fund needed upgrades and maintenance.
c) Certify and approve POU and POE water treatment devices.
2)Authorizes DPH to charge a fee to a public water system
seeking a POU or POE permit or to amend such a permit,
sufficient to cover DPH's costs.
FISCAL EFFECT
Annual costs of approximately $200,000, from 2012-13 through
2016-17, to DPH to review POU and POE permit applications
(roughly $170,000 annually) and to audit public water systems
using POU or POU treatment (roughly $30,000 annually), assuming
one-quarter of the state's 158 small community water systems
SB 962
Page 2
apply for a POU or POE permit during this period (Safe Drinking
Water Account.) These costs should be largely covered by the
fee authorized by this bill.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. The author contends many small communities cannot
afford centralized water treatment systems at this time, yet
are too large to qualify for permit requirements that allow
low-cost, interim potable water treatment systems. The author
intends this bill to provide temporary water treatment options
for such communities while increasing transparency of water
system finances.
2)Background. Point-of-use treatment consists of a small device
that treats water, at or near its use within a building.
Point-of-entry treatment typically consists of a larger device
that treats water, as it enters a building. The federal Safe
Drinking Water Act allows systems to install POU and POE
treatment devices to achieve compliance with the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Current state law directs DPH to adopt regulations governing
the use of POU and POE treatment by public water systems in
lieu of centralized treatment where it can be demonstrated
that centralized treatment is not immediately economically
feasible. Use of such systems is to be limited to the
following:
a) Water systems with less than 200 service connections.
b) Usage allowed under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act
and its implementing regulations and guidance.
c) Water systems that have submitted preapplications to DPH
for funding to correct the violations for which the
point-of-use treatment is provided.
DPH has adopted emergency regulations, and is in the process
of adopting permanent regulations, consistent with the above
criteria, as well as limiting a water systems use of
point-of-use treatment to three years or until funding for
centralized treatment is available, whichever is sooner. To
demonstrate that a centralized system is not immediately
economically feasible, a community must report its median
SB 962
Page 3
household income to DPH, among other data.
DPH reports it currently certifies POU and POE water treatment
systems as part of its Water Treatment Device Certification
program.
3)Related Legislation. AB 2056 (Chesbro) exempts public water
systems serving 20 or fewer residential connections from the
three-year limit on the use of point-of-use treatment. The
bill passed the Assembly 78-0 and is pending before Senate
Environmental Quality.
4)Support . This bill is supported by the Pacific Water Quality
Association (sponsor), the Regional Council of Rural Counties
and several other organizations who argue small water systems
cannot afford centralized water treatment and need regulatory
flexibility to ensure ratepayers receive clean drinking water.
5)Opposition. This bill is opposed by the California
Association of Environmental Health Administrators and the
Health Officers Association of California, who contend POU and
POE systems are temporary measures taken in extreme situations
and that centralized treatment is the best way to ensure
potable water is not contaminated.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081