2 State Agencies to Set Chromium 6 Standards

Two state agencies announced Tuesday that they will develop a specific public health standard to limit chromium 6 in drinking water.

The move is a departure from their previous policy of indirectly regulating the suspected carcinogen by setting limits on total chromium.

The action was taken after well water surveys showed that chromium 6 was appearing in much higher concentrations than officials had anticipated, said David Spath, drinking water chief for the state Department of Health Services.

“A total chrome standard doesn’t make a lot of sense because it includes chromium 3, which is an essential nutrient and not a health risk in the levels we see in water,” Spath said. “It makes more sense to focus on chromium 6, which is the chemical of concern.”

Chromium 6, a chemical used in paint pigments, chrome plating and other manufacturing processes, has been detected in water systems across the state, including industrial areas of Los Angeles and the San Fernando and San Gabriel valleys. Scientists say the chemical is a known carcinogen when inhaled as a vapor, but disagree over safe limits when it is ingested in water.

The separate standard for chromium 6 was proposed jointly by the Department of Health Services and the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

Spath said the standard would be the first in the nation.

To address that issue, the California Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday that the University of California will convene a panel of expert scientists from across the country to review the health hazard posed by chromium 6 when ingested in water.

California now limits total chromium to 50 parts per billion. Two years ago, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment asked the state Department of Health Services to slash that level to 2.5 ppb, saying the tougher standard is needed to ensure optimum safety.

The health hazard office recommendation was based on an assumption that chromium 6 makes up about 7.2% of total chromium in water. But in reviewing that request, Health Services officials conducted a survey that found chromium 6 comprised, on average, “more than 50% of total chromium,” department Director Diana M. Bonta said in a memo Tuesday to health hazard office Director Joan Denton.

“Subsequent testing done by local water agencies, particularly in the Los Angeles area, appear to confirm the department’s finding,” Bonta wrote.

The Health Services survey found:

* In Daly City near San Francisco, chromium 6 made up 67% to 100% of total chromium, at levels of up to 28 ppb.

* In Davis, chromium 6 made up 44% to 94% of total chromium sampled, at levels of up to 34 ppb.

* In the Los Angeles County cities of Arcadia, La Puente and San Gabriel, chromium 6 was 58% to 85% of total chromium (that survey did not disclose the parts per billion).

An environmental health hazard official said the discrepancy between their initial scientific assumptions and recent test results can be explained by a lack of studies focused on chromium 6.

“The 7.2% figure for chromium 6 was the best available number when we were putting together our public health goal back in 1998 and there’s definitely more information about its prevalence in water now,” said health hazard office spokesman Allan Hirsch. “We’ve been open about the fact that there was very little data on this when we started three years ago.”

A new public health standard for chromium 6 in drinking water is expected to be ready by 2004, Spath said.

State Sen. Deborah Ortiz (D-Sacramento), who had introduced legislation calling for a separate standard, applauded the action.

“This is what we had asked for. To make this a priority,” Ortiz said. “To help us gather the data and the scientific information necessary to make sound policy decisions.”

The state is also waiting for the results of an extensive study of chromium 6 in the San Fernando Valley conducted after bill SB 2127 was signed last year by Gov. Gray Davis. The bill was triggered by Times stories detailing delays in acting on the environmental health hazard office recommendation.

In addition to calls for tighter chromium standards on the state level, U.S Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (both D-Calif.) have called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to tighten federal standards for chromium from its standard of 100 parts per billion.

Alexis Strauss, director of the federal EPA’s water division, said the agency supports the state’s effort to devise a separate standard for chromium 6 and to reassess its health threat.

“I think it’s a positive step,” Strauss said. “We need to address this matter, which is of such a concern in Southern California. And I trust that through this process a consensus will emerge.”