EPA Rejects Chromium 6 Concerns

Rejecting Glendale’s bid to shut down a water treatment plant, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday the city must continue to operate the facility even though it will pump treated water containing chromium 6.

Glendale officials have argued they should not have to deliver any supplies to residents as long as the water contains detectable levels of chromium 6--a heavy metal and suspected carcinogen that is a byproduct of manufacturing.

The city also has insisted that federal officials close the treatment plant for the next four years so the city can build a separate facility to purge chromium 6 from ground water.

But in a letter Thursday to Glendale officials, EPA official Loren E. Henning noted that Glendale had signed a consent decree in August agreeing to keep the plant running to help remove decades of solvent contamination in the San Fernando Valley aquifer, a federal Superfund site.

In the letter to Glendale Water Services Administrator Donald Froelich, Henning said that the agency’s primary concern is removing solvents such as perchloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) from the ground water.

The “EPA is sympathetic to the city’s concerns regarding public perception of chromium 6,” wrote Henning, who oversees the Superfund site. “However, EPA’s primary consideration must be, as set forth in the consent decree, to continue to address elevated levels of volatile organic compounds in ground water, and therefore keep the treatment facility operating at as full capacity as possible.”

Glendale officials have complained that the treatment facility does not rid the water of chromium 6 contamination.

The EPA letter comes as city and federal officials prepare to meet Monday in San Francisco to try to settle their differences over the fate of the treatment plant.

“We are reviewing our alternatives,” Glendale spokesman Ritch Wells said Thursday. “Our goal is not to see any degradation in our water quality.”

Since September, Glendale officials have dumped more than $1 million worth of treated ground water into the Los Angeles River rather than deliver it to residents.

At the time, the city asked the EPA to delay the start-up of the new facility. As a compromise, the parties agreed to run the plant but dump the treated water.

Glendale officials told the EPA in January they would need four years to study the extent of the chromium 6 pollution and to build a treatment plant that removes the heavy metal. During that time, the city proposed shuttering the solvent treatment plant.

The city’s current water supply has less than 1 part per billion of chromium 6, city officials said. The water from the treatment plant has measured as high as 17 ppb, they said.

A state agency has recommended that chromium 6 should not exceed 0.2 ppb for optimum safety. That recommendation is now under review by the state Department of Health Services.

One problem is that the federal government and the state have different standards for total chromium, which is meant to also limit chromium 6. However, at this time there are still no standards for chromium 6, a toxic version of the naturally occurring metal. EPA officials say the water is safe because it meets both the current federal standard of 100 ppb and the tougher state standard of 50 ppb for total chromium.

Both sides have discussed alternatives that include shutting down wells with the highest concentrations of chromium 6, pumping less water from the basin and blending the ground water with higher percentages of chromium-free imported water.

Ultimately, officials say, a compromise could involve a combination of any or all of those three alternatives, making it difficult to predict the outcome.

Howard Gantman, a spokesman for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), added that whatever the ultimate decision on the facility, the EPA would be mindful of local concerns during their negotiations with Glendale.

“We’ve expressed our concern to the EPA in the past about the possibility of chromium 6-contaminated water being provided to residents,” Gantman said. “We are hopeful the EPA and Glendale can reach an acceptable accommodation.”

On Wednesday, Ignacio Troncoso, director of Glendale Water and Power, reiterated the city’s official response that the treatment plant should be shut down while additional treatment options are pursued. But he also expressed confidence that a compromise can be reached.

“We’re hoping we can all find a common ground,” he said. “We’re all going to try to be reasonable on this and I hope they will be reasonable too.”

Mel Blevins, the watermaster who oversees ground water pumping rights for the Upper Los Angeles River Area, said Thursday that if Glendale is allowed to continue dumping treated water into the Los Angeles River, he may take both Glendale and the EPA to court on grounds that the arrangement wastes water.