Tap WaterIndex

← California

Tap water quality report

City of Brisbane

EPA monitoring tested this supplier for 12 contaminants and detected 11. A detection doesn't automatically mean the water is unsafe — the level and EPA source for each is below.

12
contaminants tested
11
detected
3,402
people served
8
health-based violations
California rankingsLead in CaliforniaPFAS in California
Water source
SWP
Ownership
Local government
Counties served
San Mateo

Compliance record

Formal violations the EPA has on file for this supplier. A health-based violation means a contaminant limit or a required treatment was breached; the rest are monitoring or reporting failures — still violations, but not a measured health risk.

8
health-based violations
17
violations on file
0
still open
ViolationTypeStatusPeriod
MCL Health-based Resolved 2016-04-01 → 2016-06-30
MCL Health-based Resolved 2016-04-01 → 2016-06-30
MCL Health-based Resolved 2013-10-01 → 2013-12-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2013-10-01 → 2013-12-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2000-07-01 → 2000-07-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2000-07-01 → 2000-07-31
TT Health-based Resolved 1993-06-01 → 1993-06-30
TT Health-based Resolved 1993-06-01 → 1993-06-30
MR Monitoring Resolved 2012-08-01 → 2012-08-31
MR Monitoring Resolved 2012-08-01 → 2012-08-31

Other contaminants detected

Each bar shows the measured level as a share of the EPA limit: green is well under, amber is close to it, red is over. For lead and copper the limit applies to exactly the 90th-percentile figure shown, so red there means a real exceedance. For everything else the limit applies to a running annual average while the figure is the single worst sample on record — over 100% is worth reading, but is not by itself a violation. Formal violations are listed separately.
ContaminantLevel vs EPA limitDetection rateSourcePeriod
Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5)
65.1 µg/L 109%
of the EPA limit, in the worst sample — 60 µg/L
 54/54 SYR4 2012–2019
Dichloroacetic Acid
30 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 53/54 SYR4 2012–2019
Trichloroacetic Acid
32.2 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 53/54 SYR4 2012–2019
TTHM
52.8 µg/L 66%
of the EPA limit 80 µg/L
 52/52 SYR4 2012–2019
Chloroform
48.6 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 50/50 SYR4 2012–2019
Bromodichloromethane
5.8 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 39/50 SYR4 2012–2019
Monochloroacetic Acid
3.07 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 32/54 SYR4 2012–2019
Lead
0.0030 mg/L 20%
of the EPA limit 0.0150 mg/L
 19/19 LCR 2025
Dibromochloromethane
2.6 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 13/50 SYR4 2012–2019
Dibromoacetic Acid
3 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 9/54 SYR4 2012–2019
Monobromoacetic Acid
1.16 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 8/54 SYR4 2012–2019
1 contaminants tested, none detected
Bromoform

Utility contact

Contact
BOZORGINIA, MAZ
Phone
415-508-2131
Email
mbozorginia@brisbaneca.org

Frequently asked questions about City of Brisbane

Is City of Brisbane tap water safe to drink?

EPA monitoring detected 11 contaminants in City of Brisbane's water. A detection isn't the same as a violation — most levels are within federal limits. See each level and source above, and the utility's annual Consumer Confidence Report for its official compliance status.

What contaminants were detected in City of Brisbane's water?

EPA monitoring detected Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5), Dichloroacetic Acid, Trichloroacetic Acid, TTHM, Chloroform, and others. The full list with the level and data source for each is above.

How many people does City of Brisbane serve?

City of Brisbane reports serving 3,402 people in California, per its EPA record.

Has City of Brisbane had any water quality violations?

The EPA has 17 violations on file for City of Brisbane, of which 8 are health-based (a contaminant limit or required treatment was breached) and 0 remain open. The rest are monitoring or reporting failures.

Where does this data come from?

Every figure is official EPA drinking-water monitoring — the Lead & Copper Rule, the UCMR-5 nationwide testing program, and the EPA Six-Year Review — not our own testing. Each number is labelled with its source and period.