Chromium 6 was highlighted as a carcinogenic compound found in most of America’s tap water in the 90’s by Erin Brockovich, an activist and consumer advocate who inspired a film by the same name in 2000. The film and her work highlighted a major gap in the drinking water contaminant standards for Hinkley, a southern California town. She went on to win one of the largest settlements ever claimed in a direct-action lawsuit at that time, a whopping $333 million, and leveraged that platform to shine the light on this national blindspot. With all of this press and later an Oscar winning film you’d think that this issue would have been resolved more than two decades later. Unfortunately, despite the wealth of research that has established Chromium 6 as a carcinogen, the EPA has dragged its feet on setting a Chromium 6 specific standard. They have a “total chromium” standard which includes chromium 3 but the safety levels for these two versions of chromium are wildly different.
Chromium 3, for reference, is an element necessary for healthy functioning and most individuals get a suitable amount in their diet without needing to supplement. It is thought to be effective in the metabolism of protein, carbohydrates and lipids and promoting insulin action. It is considered an essential nutrient and is found in fruits, veggies and whole grains. A lack may even be linked to glucose intolerance and diabetes. Bottom line, Chromium 3 is good for you in the amounts you receive within a balanced diet.
In contrast, Chromium 6 is an industrial by-product that is known to cause a variety of cancers, ulcers, convulsions, and sometimes death. Why then would the EPA insist on lumping both types of chromium together when setting national standards for our drinking water? Why, indeed. By doing this, the EPA is essentially raising the standard for our drinking water from a research based standard held by some forward thinking communities of 0.02ppb to 100ppb. They are allowing companies and counties to serve up water polluted with a known carcinogen at 500 times the research grounded standard for safety. It’s easy to understand that having to regulate the thousands of companies and counties that are currently out of compliance with the safer standard is a big job but it’s also important to understand that doing so is precisely the EPA’s responsibility and the point of having such an organization at the federal level in the first place. Last year, federal legislation was passed(INVEST), including an amendment requiring the EPA to set a Chromium 6 specific standard. Only time will tell whether or not the EPA will follow through on an actionable and responsible standard closer to the research based safe levels we need.
As always, we want to address what we, the consumers, should do about this gap in our march towards clean water. Like with PFAS, it isn’t enough to simply find the best filter for your home and move on. Clean water is a resource that should be available to all. Additionally, we are all (hopefully) eating vegetation that is being grown with water that is likely at an even higher level of contamination. No matter what you do for your own home, this is something that we should all be pushing for and supporting accountability for in our own communities, towns and ultimately national government. The EPA may establish a standard in the next two years but it is incredibly important that we are all paying attention to whether or not it is a legitimately safe one.
Resources: