Davis Signs Bill Speeding Water Testing for Chromium 6

Gov. Gray Davis has signed legislation requiring state regulators to speed up testing for chromium 6 in local drinking water wells amid increasing worries the chemical is a public health threat.

SB 2127, signed late Thursday, gives the state Department of Health Services until January 2002 to report to the governor and the state Legislature on the amount of chromium 6 in the San Fernando Valley aquifer, which supplies up to 15% of the drinking water for Los Angeles, as well as water for the cities of Burbank and San Fernando.

The agency also faces the same deadline to assess the health threat of chromium 6 statewide. The chemical, a byproduct of metal-plating and other industrial processes, is classified as a carcinogen when inhaled as particles or fumes, but its status as a health risk when consumed in water is still debated by experts.

“My administration is working proactively to evaluate the issues related to chromium 6 in the drinking water supply,” Davis wrote in his signing letter. “This will allow for a statewide assessment of chromium 6 levels which is critical for the establishment of a maximum contaminant level.”

“Although the water testing requirements in this bill will also be addressed in the [state] regulations, the special concerns on the part of San Fernando Valley residents warrant a signature on this legislation,” Davis added.

Decades of defense work have made the Valley a hot zone for chemical contamination. Parts of Burbank, Glendale and North Hollywood were declared a federal Superfund cleanup site in 1986.

“While the study will focus on the San Fernando Valley, its conclusions, particularly with regard to health impacts, will be relevant statewide,” said the bill’s author, state Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank).

But Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles) said the new law would not go far enough to protect public safety.

“The Schiff bill is well intended and is a prod to DHS to get moving,” Hayden said. “But it does not mandate a chromium 6 standard and won’t protect public health. Nobody should be under the illusion that this will protect the drinking water.”

The legislation was introduced after The Times reported Aug. 20 that the state health department had yet to implement a tougher chromium standard--which would therefore limit levels of its toxic byproduct, chromium 6--two years after it was first recommended by an official in the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

The health department’s drinking water chief, David Spath, initially told The Times it could take another five years to act on the proposal.

After the Legislature approved SB 2127, however, Spath said his agency intends to use its emergency powers to order local water agencies to start testing for chromium 6 in a matter of months.

And in a Sept. 27 letter to Hayden, DHS director Diana Bonta said a new chromium or chromium 6 standard could be in place within two years after the agency adopts a requirement for water utilities to test for chromium 6.

“The Department’s proposed emergency regulations for monitoring chromium 6 will significantly reduce the time frame,” Bonta said.

“However, collection of sufficient chromium 6 occurrence data . . . will take at least one year.” A cost-benefit analysis, she said, “will require a minimum of six months to complete.”

Chromium 6 was at the center of a famous toxic case in Hinkley, Calif., that became the basis for the movie “Erin Brockovich.” Brockovich, a legal investigator, appeared before the Los Angeles City Council this month to urge tougher standards for chromium 6.

Hinkley residents won a $333-million settlement from Pacific Gas & Electric because the utility’s underground tanks leaked chromium 6 into the water. But levels there were 24 parts per million--exponentially higher than levels measured in local water ground water.

Although a formal chromium 6 standard has not been established, the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment believes drinking water should not contain more than 0.2 parts per billion of chromium 6, said Alan Hirsch, an agency spokesman.

Some scientists believe chromium 6 should not be present in water at all. But water officials say concentrations in local water supplies are safe, and that a 2.5 ppb standard for total chromium would cause them to shutter many wells and hike customers water rates.

Because most utilities don’t test for chromium 6, the state has presumed that chromium 6 comprises about 7.2% of total chromium in water.

Over the past year, the state health department surveyed 30 water systems around California to determine more precisely how much of the chromium--which is not toxic--was composed of chromium 6.

In samples taken from the San Gabriel Valley Water Co., for example, chromium 6 comprised up to 85% of the total chromium--much higher than the presumption.

While the state did not report actual levels of chromium 6 in water in the San Gabriel Valley, amounts range from 3.6 parts per billion to 11 parts per billion, according to Carol Williams, executive officer for the San Gabriel Valley watermaster’s office.

In tests on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power wells, chromium 6 was as high as 4.65 parts per billion, said Pankaj Parekh, the DWP’s manager of regulatory compliance.

Last month, Parekh said the DWP closed two wells where total chromium levels registered about 20 parts per billion. He said officials did not test for chromium 6 levels in those wells.

“We felt better to be safe than sorry,” he said.

Also in response to The Times story, Los Angeles County officials launched tests of tap water at 100 facilities countywide, including fire stations, health centers and courthouses. According to preliminary results, chromium 6 levels ranged from trace amounts to as high as 7.5 parts per billion in several places, said Wasfy Shindy, director of the county’s environmental toxicology lab. He said complete results are expected to be ready next week.