Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Chloramine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PUC staff recommends continuing chloramine disinfection while monitoring new science as public raises health complaints
Summary
PUC staff and the San Francisco Department of Public Health told the commission their literature review and local testing found no population‑level evidence linking chloramine to reported skin, respiratory or gastrointestinal complaints, and recommended continued use with monitoring; dozens of residents testified they experienced symptoms they believe are linked to chloramine and urged suspension or further studies.
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission staff presented a six‑month review of chloramine use in the distribution system on Nov. 14 and recommended the commission continue the current practice while monitoring emerging scientific evidence.
Staff said converting to chloramines in February 2004 reduced regulated disinfection byproducts roughly 50 percent and provided a more stable residual in a large, complex distribution system. San Francisco Department of Public Health epidemiologist June Weintraub summarized a literature and data review and told commissioners she found no published human‑population evidence linking monochloramine in drinking or bathing water to the symptoms described by some customers. "There is no evidence in the medical literature linking chloramine in drinking or bathing water to the health concerns raised," Weintraub said.
PUC staff described in‑house lab testing, outreach to other utilities and a range of regulatory and peer resources (EPA, California Department of Health Services, World Health Organization, American Water Works Association). Staff said the city has switched away from storing gaseous chlorine and uses sodium hypochlorite at plants; they also reported proactive lead and corrosion monitoring and said they have not observed a detectable increase in lead at customer taps.
Fifteen members of the public testified at the meeting, reporting diverse symptoms they attribute to chloramine — dermatitis, respiratory problems, digestive issues and worsened conditions following exposure. Several speakers described personal tests (switching to bottled water or point‑of‑use treated water and seeing symptom improvement) and asked the commission to fund independent exposure studies, inhalation sampling for showers, and clinical protocols so physicians can evaluate possible chloramine‑linked cases.
Staff and regulators pledged to continue monitoring and to push for research. The PUC suggested interim household mitigation options (NSF‑certified cold‑water filters for drinking, vitamin‑C shower attachments or letting water stand for some treatments) for customers seeking symptom relief. Commissioners asked staff to keep the commission updated on any new peer‑reviewed findings and to pursue research opportunities through national bodies such as the American Water Works Research Foundation.
No formal action to change disinfection practice was taken at the meeting.
