BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 403
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 26, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS
Bob Wieckowski, Chair
AB 403 (Campos) - As Amended: April 14, 2011
SUBJECT : Public drinking water standards: hexavalent
chromium.
SUMMARY : Extends the date by which the California Department of
Public Health (DPH) must establish a primary drinking water
standard for hexavalent chromium from on or before January 1,
2004 to on or before January 1, 2013. Authorizes DPH to adopt
the standard without the review of any agency that is required
by law to review the standard prior to adoption. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Makes legislative findings and declarations related to
hexavalent chromium.
2)Requires DPH to report to the Legislature on its progress in
developing a primary drinking water standard for hexavalent
chromium annually, and report any delays caused by other
agencies, including, but not limited to, delays caused by the
Department of Finance (DOF).
3)Requires DPH to establish a primary drinking water standard
for hexavalent chromium on or before January 1, 2013.
4)Authorizes DPH to adopt the primary drinking water standard
for hexavalent chromium without the review or report of any
agency that is required by law to review or report before a
primary drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium is
adopted, if that agency has not done so within 90 days of DPH
making the request for the report or review.
5)Requires any state agency that has not remitted a review or
report within 90 days, as required, to report to the
Legislature explaining the delay.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Under the California Safe Drinking Water Act (Health and
Safety Code Section 116275 et seq.):
a) Requires DPH to adopt primary drinking water standards
AB 403
Page 2
for contaminants in drinking water that are based upon
specified criteria and that are not less stringent than the
national primary drinking water standards adopted by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA).
b) Requires each primary drinking water standard adopted by
DPH to be set at a level that is as close as feasible to
the corresponding public health goal (PHG), published by
the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
(OEHHA), placing primary emphasis on the protection of
public health, and that, to the extent technologically and
economically feasible, meets specified public health
requirements. Requires the PHG to contain an estimate of
the level of the contaminant in drinking water that is not
anticipated to cause or contribute to adverse health
effects, or that does not pose any significant risk to
health.
c) Requires DPH to establish a primary drinking water
standard for hexavalent chromium on or before January 1,
2004.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown.
COMMENTS :
Need for the bill : The author argues that, "In 2001, Senator
Ortiz introduced SB 351, Chapter 602, which required DPH to
adopt a primary drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium
by January 1, 2004. However, DPH never complied due to the lack
of a Public Health Goal. DPH is tasked to provide a Maximum
Contaminant Level (MCL) based primarily on the Public Health
Goal and other regulatory and feasibility processes?
Water agencies test for total chromium which has a limit of 50
parts per billion in California. However, there is no standard
in place for chromium 6, which is the most harmful of its forms.
Testing for chromium 6 is required in the state of California,
but without a standard to strive for, the testing does not
necessarily benefit consumers?
This bill will simply ensure that DPH complies in a timely
manner and sets a standard that has been long overdue in order
to ensure our communities are provided with drinking water that
is safe and meets stringent requirements."
AB 403
Page 3
Health effects of hexavalent chromium exposure : According to
OEHHA, hexavalent chromium, also known as chromium 6, is a heavy
metal that is commonly found at low levels in drinking water.
It can occur naturally but can also enter drinking water sources
by historic leaks from industrial plant hazardous waste sites.
Various other sources also contribute to the amount of
hexavalent chromium in groundwater. Chromium 6 is known to be a
potent carcinogen when inhaled. It was recently found to also
cause cancer in laboratory mice and rats that were exposed
through drinking water.
A 2007 National Toxicology Program (NTP) study found significant
numbers of gastrointestinal tumors in rats and mice that
consumed drinking water containing chromium 6. In addition,
OEHHA's analysis of data collected from China found increased
rates of stomach cancer in people exposed to high levels of
chromium 6 from drinking water.
Scientific studies have found a higher than average rate of lung
and gastrointestinal cancers in workers who inhaled chromium 6
on the job. There is substantial evidence that chromium 6 can
damage DNA.
Prevalence of chromium 6 in California : According to the
Environmental Working Group (EWG), in California-the only state
to require tap water tests for chromium 6-the chemical was
detected in 2,208 out of the more than 7,000 tap water systems
analyzed as of 2008 (DPH 2009). These tests could only detect
hexavalent chromium down to 1 ppb, which is significantly higher
than the current proposed public health goal of 0.02 ?g/L.
About 10 percent of the tap water samples had levels of 5 ppb or
higher.
EWG's tap water quality database shows that 13.7 million
Californians could be drinking water contaminated with at least
1 ppb of hexavalent chromium (EWG 2009). With a more sensitive
test, hexavalent chromium is likely to be detected in far more
water systems.
Current status of the chromium 6 MCL : California has long
recognized the public health risks of exposure to chromium 6.
As far back as 1977, California established a drinking water
standard (or maximum contaminant level, or MCL) for total
chromium to address exposures to chromium 6, which is considered
AB 403
Page 4
to be the more toxic form of chromium.
In March 2001, the Department of Health Services, DPH's
predecessor agency, requested OEHHA to prepare a PHG for
chromium 6 in preparation for a MCL on chromium 6 alone. In
October 2001, SB 351 (Ortiz) required, in HSC § 116365.5, DPH to
adopt an MCL for chromium 6 by January 1, 2004. HSC § 116365(a)
requires DPH to establish an MCL at a level as close as is
technically and economically feasible to the contaminant's PHG.
OEHHA's initial draft PHG for chromium 6 of 0.06 ?g/L was
released in August 2009. In December 2010, OEHHA, after
consideration of early-in-life exposures for cancer potency,
released a revised draft PHG of chromium 6 of 0.02 ?g/L for
public comment. The public comment period closed on February
15, 2011. OEHHA's website states, "OEHHA will evaluate all the
comments received and revise the document as appropriate. The
final document will be posted on the OEHHA web site along with
responses to the major comments received during the public
review and scientific comment periods."
Issues:
1)Statutory requirement for a chromium 6 drinking water
standard : Current law (Health and Safety Code 116365.5)
requires DPH to establish a primary drinking water standard
for hexavalent chromium on or before January 1, 2004. This
bill extends that requirement to January 1, 2013. Even though
DPH's predecessor department requested that OEHHA prepare a
PHG for chromium 6 in March 2001, OEHHA has failed to do so.
Without a PHG, DPH is unable to proceed with adopting a
drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium. Will
extending the date by which a chromium 6 drinking water
standard is required to be adopted, without addressing the
lack of a PHG or putting enforcement provisions in place,
expedite the adoption of a standard?
2)Statutory requirements for the approval of regulations :
Current law (Government Code section 11349.3) requires the
Office of Administrative Law (OAL) to either approve or
disapprove a regulation within 30 working days after the
regulation has been submitted, or the regulation will be
deemed approved.
This bill authorizes DPH to adopt the primary drinking water
standard for hexavalent chromium without the review of any
AB 403
Page 5
agency that is required by law to review the regulation that
has not done so within 90 days of DPH making the request.
Therefore, this bill has a more lenient standard than the
current OAL requirement for approval or rejection of a
proposed regulation.
As the author's intent is to ensure an expeditious adoption of
the drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium by
ensuring that the proposed regulation isn't held at the DOF
for review, and does not wish to weaken the current
requirement for OAL approval, the author may wish to consider
amending the bill to focus on a DOF deadline.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Water Association
Planning and Conservation League
Of a previous version of the bill:
County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors
Health Officers Association of California
Opposition
Of a previous version of the bill:
Association of California Water Agencies
California Cement Manufacturers Environmental Coalition
Desert Water Agency
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Analysis Prepared by : Shannon McKinney / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965