01The verdict: is Running Springs water safe?
Running Springs's tap water meets most EPA standards but has areas that warrant attention. With a grade of B (76.7/100), some contaminant levels or compliance issues suggest that residents may benefit from additional filtration. The city's 2 water systems serve approximately 5,638 residents using surface water (rivers, lakes, or reservoirs).
2 unresolved violations on record
EPA records show open compliance items for this system. Most are administrative, but unresolved items are worth watching.
See what was cited ↓6K people, 2 systems
All figures on this page come from federal EPA compliance and testing data for the systems serving this city.
See the systems ↓lithium is approaching its limit
Measured at 106.0000 µg/L — 120% of the 0.004 µg/L limit. Within the rules, but with less headroom than you'd want.
See the ledger ↓Running Springs's drinking water received a grade of B (76.7 out of 100), indicating good water quality. The city's 2 water systems serve approximately 5,638 residents using purchased surface water.
Lead levels were measured at 6.1 ppb (90th percentile), which is within EPA limits but above recommended levels. UCMR 5 testing detected 11 PFAS compounds, with levels exceeding EPA maximum contaminant levels in the water supply. The system has 13 violations on record, including 3 health-based violations. 2 remain unresolved.
Running Springs ranks #433 out of 690 cities in California for water quality, placing it below average in the state. The city draws from surface water sources, which are more susceptible to seasonal runoff and agricultural contamination, requiring extensive multi-barrier treatment including coagulation, filtration, and disinfection. Of particular concern: PFAS "forever chemical" levels exceed the 2024 EPA maximum contaminant levels. These synthetic compounds don't break down naturally and require specialized filtration such as reverse osmosis or granular activated carbon. While lead levels are within EPA limits, they are above the recommended 5 ppb threshold that health organizations consider ideal. A point-of-use filter adds an extra layer of protection. The system has seen 6 violations in the past five years, suggesting a pattern of compliance challenges that residents should monitor closely.
02What's in Running Springs's water
Every contaminant flagged in Running Springs, on one shared scale: distance to its own legal limit. The red line is the limit — anything past it is out of compliance, and the closer a bar gets, the less headroom the system has.
Full contaminants report
| Contaminant | Detected Level | EPA Limit | Unit | Category | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lead (90th percentile) LeadHeavy Metal A toxic heavy metal that can leach into drinking water from older pipes, solder, and fixtures. No amount of lead in water is considered safe. Health EffectsBrain and nervous system damage in children, kidney damage, high blood pressure, and reproductive problems in adults. EPA Limit15 ppb action level Common SourcesCorrosion of lead pipes, lead solder, brass faucets, and household plumbing. | 6.1 | 15 | ppb | Inorganic | Safe |
| 11Cl-PF3OUdS | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| 4:2 FTS | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| 6:2 FTS 6:2 FTSPFAS A fluorotelomer sulfonate commonly found at sites contaminated with aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) used in firefighting. Health EffectsPotential liver toxicity and endocrine disruption. Less studied but identified as a contaminant of concern. EPA LimitNo individual MCL (not yet regulated) Common SourcesFirefighting foam (AFFF), airports, military bases, and industrial facilities. | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| 8:2 FTS | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| 9Cl-PF3ONS | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| ADONA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| HFPO-DA HFPO-DA (GenX)PFAS A replacement for PFOA in manufacturing, marketed as safer but still a persistent "forever chemical." Also known as GenX. Health EffectsLiver and kidney effects, reproductive toxicity, immune system effects, and potential cancer risk. EPA Limit10 ppt MCL Common SourcesFluoropolymer manufacturing (used as PFOA replacement), industrial wastewater discharge. | ND | 0.01 | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| lithium LithiumInorganic A naturally occurring alkali metal found in groundwater. Monitored under UCMR 5 to assess occurrence in drinking water. Health EffectsKidney effects at high doses. Low-level exposure effects under study; some research suggests neurological effects. EPA LimitNo MCL (monitoring only under UCMR 5) Common SourcesNatural mineral deposits, geothermal water, and industrial discharge. | 106.000 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| NEtFOSAA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| NFDHA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| NMeFOSAA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFBA PFBAPFAS One of the shortest-chain PFAS compounds. Very mobile in water and difficult to remove with standard filtration. Health EffectsThyroid effects, potential developmental toxicity. Shorter half-life in body than long-chain PFAS. EPA LimitNo individual MCL (not yet regulated) Common SourcesDegradation of longer-chain PFAS, industrial discharge, and firefighting foam. | 0.006 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFBS PFBSPFAS A short-chain PFAS used as a replacement for PFOS. While it clears the body faster than long-chain PFAS, it still persists in the environment. Health EffectsThyroid effects, reproductive and developmental toxicity, kidney effects. EPA LimitPart of Hazard Index (1.0) Common SourcesIndustrial discharge, firefighting foam, and as a replacement chemical in manufacturing. | 0.012 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFDA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFDoA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFEESA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFHpA PFHpAPFAS A medium-chain PFAS compound found in various environmental samples. Less studied than PFOA/PFOS but still considered a contaminant of concern. Health EffectsLiver effects, potential developmental toxicity, and endocrine disruption. EPA LimitPart of Hazard Index (1.0) Common SourcesDegradation of longer-chain PFAS, industrial discharge, and contaminated water sources. | 0.013 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFHpS | 0.005 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFHxA PFHxAPFAS A short-chain PFAS replacement chemical widely used after manufacturers phased out longer-chain PFAS. Very commonly detected in water. Health EffectsLiver and kidney effects, potential thyroid disruption. Considered less toxic than long-chain PFAS but still persistent. EPA LimitNo individual MCL (not yet regulated) Common SourcesIndustrial processes, firefighting foam (AFFF), food packaging, and textile treatment. | 0.019 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFHxS PFHxSPFAS A medium-chain PFAS found in firefighting foam and consumer products. It has a long half-life in the human body, similar to long-chain PFAS. Health EffectsImmune system effects, thyroid disruption, and potential reproductive and developmental harm. EPA LimitPart of Hazard Index (1.0) Common SourcesFirefighting foam (AFFF), waterproof textiles, food packaging, and industrial discharge. | 0.096 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFMBA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFMPA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFNA PFNAPFAS A long-chain PFAS compound used in manufacturing fluoropolymers. It bioaccumulates in the body and is very persistent in the environment. Health EffectsDevelopmental effects, liver toxicity, immune suppression, and potential cancer risk. EPA LimitPart of Hazard Index (1.0) Common SourcesFluoropolymer manufacturing, industrial emissions, and contaminated water sources. | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFOA PFOAPFAS A long-chain PFAS ("forever chemical") once widely used in nonstick coatings and firefighting foam. It persists in the body and environment for years. Health EffectsLinked to kidney and testicular cancer, thyroid disease, elevated cholesterol, and reproductive issues. EPA Limit4.0 ppt MCL Common SourcesIndustrial discharge, firefighting foam (AFFF), nonstick cookware manufacturing, and contaminated groundwater. | 0.016 | 0.004 | µg/L | PFAS | Over MCL |
| PFOS PFOSPFAS A long-chain PFAS compound historically used in stain-resistant coatings and firefighting foam. One of the most studied and persistent PFAS chemicals. Health EffectsLiver damage, immune system suppression, thyroid disruption, increased cholesterol, and potential cancer risk. EPA Limit4.0 ppt MCL Common SourcesFirefighting foam (AFFF), industrial sites, stain-resistant fabric treatments, and contaminated groundwater. | 0.236 | 0.004 | µg/L | PFAS | Over MCL |
| PFPeA PFPeAPFAS A short-chain PFAS compound commonly detected in drinking water. One of the most frequently found PFAS in UCMR 5 monitoring. Health EffectsLess studied than PFOA/PFOS. Potential liver and thyroid effects. Research is ongoing. EPA LimitNo individual MCL (not yet regulated) Common SourcesIndustrial discharge, firefighting foam degradation, and consumer products. | 0.014 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFPeS | 0.011 | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Detected |
| PFTA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFTrDA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
| PFUnA | ND | HI | µg/L | PFAS | Not Detected |
Cities ranked by 90th-percentile lead PF PFAS in California
Cities ranked by compounds detected Cu Copper in California
Cities ranked by 90th-percentile copper
03Running Springs's ten-year track record
Each box is one year. A green check means no EPA violations; a numbered badge counts that year's violations — red if any were health-based, amber if they were monitoring or paperwork issues. The system has 13 violations on record, including 3 health-based violations. 2 remain unresolved.
7 of the last ten years were clean. The numbered years had EPA violations — red when any were health-based, amber when they were paperwork or missed-testing issues.
▼ Down 0.90 ppb since 1992. Latest reading: 8.1 ppb (2025) — 54% of the action level. Sampled at higher-risk homes (90th percentile).
04Where Running Springs's water comes from
Running Springs's drinking water comes primarily from surface water sources such as rivers, lakes, or reservoirs.
Purchased Surface Water
Rivers, lakes, or reservoirs — more exposed to runoff, agriculture, and seasonal swings than groundwater.
Wholesale supplier
Multi-barrier treatment: coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection to meet EPA standards.
2 systems
2 water systems, operated under local government ownership.
5,638 people
Residents served across Running Springs's service area.
Surface water systems require multi-stage treatment including coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection to meet EPA Safe Drinking Water Act standards. These sources can be impacted by seasonal changes, stormwater runoff, upstream agriculture, and industrial discharge. The system is operated by local government ownership and serves approximately 5,638 people through 2 water systems.
| System name | PWSID | Population | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT | CA3610062 | 5,268 | Purchased Surface Water |
| SMILEY PARK COUNTRY CLUB | CA3600260 | 370 | Groundwater |
Water bodies near Running Springs
As a surface-water system, these water bodies may directly influence Running Springs's drinking water supply.
05Pressure on Running Springs's watershed
Outside forces that shape what reaches the treatment plant. None of these is a verdict on the tap by itself — but each adds pressure worth knowing about.
Industrial discharge
2 facilities within 10 miles reported 0 lb released to surface water in the latest EPA Toxics Release Inventory. Proximity doesn't equal tap contamination — treatment and hydrology decide — but it's pressure on the watershed.
Flood & storm history
10 federal disaster declarations on record for San Bernardino County. Flooding and severe storms can overwhelm treatment plants, cause sewage overflows, and push runoff into supplies.
Drought
San Bernardino County is in D1 (moderate drought) per the U.S. Drought Monitor (week of Jul 2026). Drought can raise disinfection-byproduct levels and taste/odor issues as utilities draw from lower reservoirs.
06How Running Springs compares
Scores for nearby California cities on one line, with the average marked.
dashed line = California average (57/100)
Running Springs scores 76.7/100 — above the California average of 57/100. It outscores 7 of 10 nearby cities. Full California rankings →
42.8 / 100FSan Jose, CA
28 / 100BOakland, CA
77.9 / 100FSan Diego, CA
39.7 / 100FSacramento, CA
31.2 / 100ABurlingame, CA
89.2 / 100
Compare all cities in the county — grades, violations, and contaminant data side by side.→
07What to do at home
Steps matched to what testing actually found in Running Springs's water — not generic advice.
Filter drinking & cooking water
Reverse osmosis system. Lead detected at 6.1 ppb
Compare tested filters →Flush taps & check your service line
Lead leaches from pipes as water sits. Run cold water 30 seconds before drinking (especially mornings), and ask the utility whether your address still has a lead service line.
Lead risks explained →Watch for Running Springs alerts
This area has a history of flood declarations — after severe weather, watch for boil-water advisories from the utility, and check the live alerts on this page.
All water alerts →Frequently asked questions
Is Running Springs, CA tap water safe to drink?
Running Springs's water quality earned a grade of B (76.7/100). Some concerns have been identified. Consider a water filter for an extra layer of protection. The city ranks #433 out of 690 cities tested in California.
What contaminants are in Running Springs's water?
Lead was measured at 6.1 ppb (90th percentile). 11 PFAS compounds were detected. 13 violations are on record.
How is Running Springs's water quality grade calculated?
The grade is based on four factors: violation history (40%), lead and copper levels (25%), PFAS contamination (25%), and regulatory compliance (10%). The score is also adjusted based on how complete the available data is. See our methodology page for full details.
Do I need a water filter in Running Springs?
While lead levels are within EPA limits, a filter adds extra protection. PFAS compounds exceed EPA limits — a reverse osmosis or activated carbon filter is recommended.
Where does Running Springs's water come from?
Running Springs's water is sourced from Purchased surface water. The city has 2 water systems serving approximately 5,638 residents.
What health violations has Running Springs's water system had?
Running Springs has 3 health-based violations on record. The most recent violation was recorded in March 2025. Health-based violations mean the water exceeded EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for a regulated substance. 2 violations remain unresolved.
Why does Running Springs have so many PFAS compounds in its water?
11 different PFAS "forever chemical" compounds were detected in Running Springs's water supply during UCMR 5 testing. PFAS contamination often originates from proximity to military installations (AFFF firefighting foam), airports, industrial manufacturing sites, or wastewater treatment facilities. Some levels exceed the 2024 EPA maximum contaminant levels — a reverse osmosis or NSF-certified activated carbon filter is strongly recommended.
How does Running Springs's water compare to other cities?
Running Springs ranks #433 out of 690 cities in California (better than 37% of state cities) and #9106 out of 15382 cities nationally (41th percentile). The grade of B reflects the combined assessment of violation history, lead and copper levels, PFAS contamination, and regulatory compliance.