FWIW, according to the American Cancer Society, the UV we get from the sun is 95% UVA and 5% UVB. UVA and even moreso UVB can cause skin cancer, but are only moderately effective at killing bacteria and viruses. UVC, the UV that is used for disinfecting, aka "germicidal UV" is a different part of the light spectrum--approximately 254nm. UVC is the UV used in water treatment. UVC does not penetrate the atmosphere, even at the equator, so you don't get the "good UV" from sunlight (although there is some indication that some UVC might be getting through at the south pole.) So UVC is man made down here at the earth's surface.
The combination of UV and ozone are claimed to eliminate chlorine compounds. In my tests, "CC" is always -0-. There is also evidence that chlorine-resistant bacteria and parasites are killed by O3 and UV systems. For some people the evidence is sufficient to use O3 and UV in addition to chlorine. I won't start an argument for or against, as from what I've read here and elsewhere, the Yes/No for O3+UV seems comparable to the Yes or No, For or Against the value of a manual thumb safety on a defensive handgun. Those opposed will not be swayed in their beliefs, nor will those for. Luckily both groups can have it their way, as it is a preference, not a law.
When considered in the context of the entire cost of a swimming pool and spa, the addition of O3 and UV treatment is not much money. Like I said, FWIW.
Hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving and has a Merry Christmas.
Bill
Bookmarks