Santa Cruz Good Times

Wednesday
Oct 01st
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Well, All Right

news waterShould Soquel Creek Water District be worried about chromium levels?

While most of the discussions around water in Santa Cruz County have focused on quantity, a new draft report released by a state environmental agency has some local water districts also looking closely at quality.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment released a draft report in April, examining, among other things, contaminants in water supplies throughout the state. The report is essentially a screening methodology to help identify California communities that are “disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution,” according to state officials. Its coverage is highly granular—broken down into more than 8,000 census tracts.

The draft report looked at 12 carcinogenic contaminants, only two of which—arsenic and hexavalent chromium, or chromium-6—are regularly detected in local water sources. Both are considered naturally occurring and aren’t a consequence of man-made activities, according to Taj Dufour, a water engineer with the Soquel Creek Water District.

Four out of 16 of the Soquel Creek Water District’s wells—Altivo, Seascape, San Andreas and Bonita—ranked above California’s public health goal limit of .02 parts per billion (ppb) for chromium-6, and in some cases, above the state’s maximum contaminant level (MCL) standard of 10 ppb, which went into effect on July 1—after an MCL of 50 ppb since the 1970s. (A part per billion is about one drop in an Olympic-size swimming pool.)

The chromium treatment issues represent a different kind of water problem than what the Soquel Creek Water District has been dealing with in recent months as California’s drought worsens to what some scientists are calling historic levels.

Dufour says the chromium is largely traced to the natural geology of the wells—the element leaches out from the ground itself. The SCWD ceased normal pumping operations at Altivo well, which had the highest levels of chromium-6, and reduced pumping at the other affected wells—all of which receive water from the Aromas Red Sands aquifer, which extends from Aptos Creek through the Pajaro Valley. At the Aromas Red Sands aquifer, chromium-6 levels detected ranged from 1.5 ppb to 40 ppb.

Chromium-6, an odorless and tasteless element may be a carcinogen if ingested, according to a long-term study by the Department of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program. It is much more dangerous when it is airborne, but it wasn’t until 2008 that the EPA began a rigorous ongoing review of the health effects of orally ingested chromium-6. California’s new MCL of 10 ppb is a conservative one, well below the federal standard of 100 ppb.

While the report gave comparatively lower marks to local water supplies than might have been expected, local water officials cautioned that the draft report’s methodology could be misleading. They say our drinking water is safe and the report should be taken with a grain of salt.

The discrepancy, says County Water Resources Director John Ricker, largely boils down to the difference between two existing thresholds when it comes to standards for substances in drinking water.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sets the maximum contaminant levels by determining how much of a particular contaminant can be present with no adverse health effects. MCLs are considered the enforceable drinking water standards that must be met by public water systems.

This draft report, however, used a different standard called public health goals (PHGs), which are set by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, a sub-agency of the California EPA. The MCL for chromium-6 is 500 times higher than the public health goal most recently set in 2011, and the MCL for arsenic is 250 times higher than the public health goal, set in 2004.
Unlike MCLs, PHGs are not enforceable and aren’t required to be met by any public water system. Like their name suggests, they are set as goals based on public health risk considerations and include a wide margin of safety—established at the “one-in-a-million” risk level, meaning not more than one person in a population of one million people drinking water daily for 70 years would be expected to develop cancer as a result of exposure.

A spokesperson for the OEHHA said the agency wouldn’t comment on the report until it’s finalized.

“We’ve not been shown the specific data used,” says Christine Mead, operations and maintenance manager at Soquel Creek Water District. “We’re well within our limits.”

The Association of California Water Agencies (CWA) took umbrage with the report as well, writing to the state agency that the CWA has “significant policy, technical and process concerns” with it. One major concern is that the public agencies and other water departments responsible for providing safe drinking water to the public weren’t consulted for the report.

The district released its own water quality report in April that showed it was within standards set by the U.S. EPA, whose standards are not as strict as California’s.

“The levels we have aren’t a toxic dump or anything like that,” Dufour says. These aren’t new levels, either, he explained. Rather, laboratory testing technology has vastly improved, meaning that smaller and smaller amounts can now be detected.

“Over the last three or so years, we’ve been conducting all sorts of studies to focus on water quality programs—specifically focusing on chromium-6,” Dufour says.

The district is currently working to install a treatment program that’s expected to take care of the chromium as soon as it gets going—and will bring those levels back down to under 10 ppb billion, with a goal of 8 ppb. That’s expected to happen by the end of August, and the new equipment—which is temporary—can treat 1,000 pounds of water per minute. This will get the district through the next 18 months or so that it expects will be needed to install a more permanent treatment system.

Still, Dufour says the district hasn’t had any of its customers reach out to them with concerns about the report, which he emphasizes is still in draft mode.

Comments (1)Add Comment
Chromium Treatment
written by Raschovich Panda, August 10, 2014
Thanks for the informative article. What is the proposed temporary equipment for reducing chromium levels?

Also, is it really treating 1000 lbs of water per minute? That's an unusual way to measure water, are you sure its not gallons instead?

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

On the Waterfront

As the wharf celebrates its centennial, a personal reflection on its essential place in Santa Cruz’s history

 

Rosh Hashanah

Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, occurs this year during Libra, the sign of creating right relations with all aspects life and with earth’s kingdoms. We contemplate (the Libra meditation) forgiveness, which means, “to give for another.” Forgiveness is not pardon. It’s a sacrifice (fire in the heart, giving from the heart). Forgiveness is giving up for the good of the other. This is the law of evolution (the path of return).

 

The New Tech Nexus

Community leaders in science and technology unite to form web-based networking program

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of September 26

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Good Times weekly newsletter
Get the latest news, events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Melinda’s

New Capitola bakery takes gluten-free goods to the next level

 

Do you think you are addicted to technology?

Santa Cruz  |  Unemployed

 

Best of Santa Cruz County

The 2013 Santa Cruz County Readers' Poll and Critics’ Picks It’s our biggest issue of the year, and in it, your votes—more than 6,500 of them—determined the winners of The Best of Santa Cruz County Readers’ Poll. New to the long list of local restaurants, shops and other notables that captured your interest: Best Beer Selection, Best Locally Owned Business, Best Customer Service and Best Marijuana Dispensary. In the meantime, many readers were ever so chatty online about potential new categories. Some of the suggestions that stood out: Best Teen Program and Best Web Design/Designer. But what about: Dog Park, Church, Hotel, Local Farm, Therapist (I second that!) or Sports Bar—not to be confused with Bra. Our favorite suggestion: Best Act of Kindness—one reader noted Café Gratitude and the free meals it offered to the Santa Cruz Police Department in the aftermath of recent crimes. Perhaps some of these can be woven into next year’s ballot, so stay tuned. In the meantime, enjoy the following pages and take note of our Critics’ Picks, too, beginning on page 91. A big thanks for voting—and for reading—and an even bigger congratulations to all of the winners. Enjoy.  -Greg Archer, EditorBest of Santa Cruz County Readers’ Poll INDEX

 

Apricot Wine for Dessert

Thomas Kruse Winery, a participant in the new Santa Clara Wine Trail, has been around for a long time—since 1971, to be exact. When our little group arrived to try some wine at the Kruses’ low-key tasting room, Thomas Kruse and his wife Karen were there to greet us. Theirs is a small operation, and they’re proud to offer quality wine at affordable prices. “Because we are small and low-tech, it’s easy to relate to the whole winemaking process,” says Karen—and the Kruses take pride in making wine “just like it has been made for centuries.”