SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Today California’s State Water Resources Board convened a hearing on its proposed drinking water limit for hexavalent chromium, commonly known as chromium-6, the notorious “Erin Brockovich” carcinogen.
The water board is recommending a maximum contaminant level, or MCL, limiting allowable chromium-6 in drinking water to 10 parts per billion, or ppb. But the state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, has suggested a much more protective public health goal of 0.02 ppb.
The Environmental Working Group has urged the water board to reflect that goal in the MCL.
Chromium-6 is a cancer-causing chemical, so it is vital the water board finalize a strict drinking limit to safeguard communities at risk from exposure to this hazard.
Last year, EWG released an analysis of California’s water systems that found more than 35 million people are exposed to chromium-6 at levels above 0.02 ppb.
But the water board’s proposed MCL is 500 times higher than OEHHA’s recommended level, which could lead to a significant cancer risk for Californians consuming the water.
"We are disheartened that it has taken so long to achieve so little," said Bill Allayaud, vice president of California government affairs at EWG. “The California water utilities have opposed even the modest proposal of 10 ppb.”
“Even if this legal limit is ever finalized, millions of Californians would still remain unprotected from cancer-causing chromium-6 in their drinking water. What is taking so long to prioritize the well-being and safety of Californians?” said Allayaud.
The water board's own analysis supports setting the standard at 3 ppb, rather than 10 ppb, as it is proposing and debated at today’s hearing. While the water board must consider the feasibility of utilities’ compliance with the MCL, its primary focus should be to preserve public health. A limit of 3 ppb, though not a complete solution, would still force utilities to protect many more Californians from the chemical than the current proposal would.
Increased cancer risk
“I am deeply concerned and troubled by the water board’s reluctance to shield Californians from potential chromium-6 exposure,” said Tasha Stoiber, Ph.D., a senior scientist at EWG. “State scientists consider chromium-6 to be carcinogenic, even at exceptionally low levels of ingestion.
“The recommended MCL exceeds what California’s own scientists have found safe for long-term exposure, posing an elevated risk of cancer," Stoiber said.
“Far too many residents are exposed to this cancer-causing substance in their drinking water. Access to clean and affordable drinking water is a fundamental right that must be guaranteed to all people. It is essential that the water board take immediate action and set stricter standards to safeguard public health effectively,” she added.
In 2012, California adopted a law, which is embedded in the State Water Code as Section 106.3, recognizing that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.”
In addition, the proposed MCL of 10 ppb falls short of fulfilling the water board’s legal obligations. Under state law, those obligations require setting the limit “as close as feasible to the corresponding public health goal.”
And the timeline for implementation proposed by the water board could lead to further delays in improving water quality, especially for some of the most affected community water systems in California. Water systems would have between two and four years to comply with the MCL, depending on their size. This delay could worsen the challenges faced by these communities and delay their access to clean water.
“This disparity between what is legal and the safe exposure level puts millions of residents who have chromium-6 in their drinking water at risk,” said Stoiber. “Surely California can and must do better.”
The water board assessed three treatment technologies to remove chromium-6: ion exchange, reduction/coagulation/filtration, and reverse osmosis. These technologies not only effectively remove chromium-6 but also reduce the concentrations or eliminate several other drinking water contaminants of concern. These improvements can be achieved without significantly affecting the overall cost of water treatment.
Apart from chromium-6, some of California's drinking water contains harmful levels of arsenic, nitrates, radon, radium, perchlorate and the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS, all of which pose significant health risks to its residents.
Contamination concerns
Researchers analyzed federal and state water testing data to create EWG’s interactive map, which details where chromium-6 contaminates tap water serving 251 million people, exceeding levels considered safe by scientists. Chromium-6 is found in water in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam.
Based on OEHHA’s analysis, water utilities should regularly and prominently inform all customers whenever chromium-6 levels exceed the public health goal of 0.02 ppb.
Industrial and ongoing operations have contaminated the state’s water, and it is unacceptable for these polluters to evade responsibility while ratepayers and the state bear the burden of their legacy pollution.
Chromium-6 is used to lower the temperature in electrical power plants’ cooling towers. Contamination can originate in the improper disposal of industrial wastes, especially those created during the manufacture of chrome metal plating, wood and textiles products, and stainless steel.
EWG says the California Environmental Protection Agency and the state attorney general should identify and prosecute polluters that have contributed to the health and economic burden of chromium-6’s impact on hundreds of communities and millions of residents.
###
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.
