‘Erin Brockovich’ chemical could be in your water. Should districts get legal cover? – CalMatters

Report on California Water Quality Legislation and Sustainable Development Goals

A legislative proposal in California, Senate Bill 466, seeks to provide legal protection to water districts facing litigation over hexavalent chromium contamination. This initiative highlights the complex challenges of balancing public health, economic viability, and environmental regulation, touching upon several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

I. Public Health and Water Purity: Aligning with SDG 3 and SDG 6

The core of the issue is the state’s new, nation-leading standard for hexavalent chromium (chromium-6), a carcinogen found in drinking water. This regulation directly addresses targets within SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation).

A. Health Risks and Regulatory Action (SDG 3.9)

Contaminant: Hexavalent chromium is a toxic chemical linked to cancer with long-term exposure.
Regulation: State regulators have established a new drinking water standard of 10 parts per billion to protect public health. This action aims to reduce illnesses from hazardous chemicals, in line with SDG Target 3.9.
Public Health Concerns: Despite the new standard, some advocates argue it is not sufficiently protective, noting that it still allows for a cancer risk of one case per 2,000 people over a lifetime.

B. Ensuring Safe and Accessible Water (SDG 6.1 & 6.3)

Scope of Impact: The new standard is intended to protect over 5 million Californians whose water sources report levels above the new limit. Affected areas include the Central Valley, Inland Empire, and coastal regions.
Water Quality Improvement: The regulations compel water suppliers to reduce pollution from this contaminant, contributing to SDG Target 6.3 (improve water quality by reducing pollution).
Compliance Deadlines: The state water board has set compliance deadlines of two years for large suppliers and four years for smaller systems, with provisions for state-approved compliance plans for those unable to meet the initial timeline.

II. Economic and Social Equity Challenges: The Intersection of SDG 10 and SDG 11

The high cost of compliance presents a significant obstacle, raising concerns about affordability and equity, which are central to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

A. Financial Burdens on Utilities and Communities

Infrastructure Costs: Compliance requires tens to hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure upgrades. For example, the Coachella Valley Water District estimates a cost of $400 million, while the city of Los Banos faces a $65 million expense, equivalent to half its annual budget.
Impact on Water Rates: Utilities report that compliance costs will lead to substantial increases in consumer water bills. The Coachella Valley Water District anticipates that rates will double, and the mayor of Los Banos expressed concern about the potential for rates to quadruple.

B. Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Populations (SDG 10.2)

Social Inequality: The expected rate hikes will disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities and fixed-income populations, such as retirees, potentially exacerbating economic inequality in contravention of the principles of SDG 10.
Affordability Crisis: The rising costs threaten the “affordability” component of SDG Target 6.1 (achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water).

III. Governance and Institutional Frameworks: Pursuing SDG 16 and SDG 12

Senate Bill 466 represents a legislative attempt to create an effective institutional framework for managing the transition to cleaner water, reflecting the aims of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).

A. Senate Bill 466: A “Safe Harbor” for Compliance

Legislative Goal: Introduced by Senator Anna Caballero, the bill aims to shield water districts from civil liability as long as they are making demonstrable progress on a state-approved compliance plan.
Rationale: The measure is designed to ensure that ratepayer funds are directed toward infrastructure improvements for water safety rather than being diverted to legal defense costs.
Institutional Accountability: The bill does not limit the enforcement authority of state regulators, maintaining institutional oversight as called for in SDG 16.

B. Stakeholder Collaboration and Responsible Production (SDG 12.4)

Legislative Compromise: The bill was amended to address concerns from the Consumer Attorneys of California, who initially opposed it for providing overly broad immunity. The group has since taken a neutral position, demonstrating a responsive and collaborative legislative process.
Addressing Pollution at the Source: Complementing the water treatment regulations, the California Air Resources Board approved a ban in 2023 on the use of hexavalent chromium in the chrome plating industry. This action aligns with SDG Target 12.4, which calls for the environmentally sound management of chemicals and the reduction of their release to air, water, and soil.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The article directly addresses public health by focusing on the health risks associated with a toxic chemical in drinking water. It highlights the state’s effort to protect citizens from a known carcinogen.

Evidence from the article: The text identifies hexavalent chromium as a “cancer-causing toxic chemical” and notes that “Drinking water with trace amounts of the chemical over long periods has been linked to cancer.” The new regulations are explicitly “intended to protect more than 5 million Californians from the toxin.”

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

This is the central theme of the article. The entire discussion revolves around the quality of drinking water, the establishment of new safety standards, the challenges of treating contaminated water, and ensuring access to safe water for communities.

Evidence from the article: The article discusses the approval of a “nation-leading drinking water standard for the chemical,” the contamination of groundwater, and the need for water districts to “work to meet strict new state standards.” It also touches on the affordability of water, a key component of this goal, by mentioning that compliance will “jack up their customers’ water bills.”

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

The article details the significant infrastructural and financial challenges that water districts face in complying with the new water quality standards. It underscores the need for major investments in water treatment infrastructure.

Evidence from the article: It states that compliance will require “upgrades to prevent contamination.” Specific examples of required investment are given, such as the “$65 million in infrastructure” needed for the city of Los Banos and the “$400 million” the Coachella Valley Water District will have to spend.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

The article highlights the impact of water contamination and the cost of remediation on specific communities, particularly concerning the affordability of basic services like water for all residents, including disadvantaged groups.

Evidence from the article: The issue affects communities in the “Central Valley, Inland Empire and along the coast.” The financial burden is a major concern, as rising costs will have an “enormous impact on the large disadvantaged communities that we serve, and it will also impact the retiree population.” The mayor of Los Banos expresses concern about having to “quadruple water rates.”

SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article focuses on the legislative process and the creation of legal frameworks to manage the transition to stricter environmental standards. It describes the role of state regulators, lawmakers, and legal challenges in shaping public policy.

Evidence from the article: The core of the article is about “Senate Bill 466,” which aims to “give California’s water districts legal cover from lawsuits.” It describes the legislative process, including committee hearings and amendments made to address concerns from groups like the “Consumer Attorneys of California.” This demonstrates the functioning of institutions to create and refine laws.

Specific Targets Identified

Under SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
- Explanation: The article is entirely focused on mitigating the health risks of a hazardous chemical, hexavalent chromium, in the water supply. The new state standard and the required upgrades by water districts are direct actions to reduce potential illnesses (cancer) from water contamination.

Under SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
- Explanation: The article discusses the state’s effort to ensure “safe” drinking water by setting a new standard for chromium-6. It also heavily emphasizes the challenge of keeping it “affordable,” as compliance costs are expected to “double” or “quadruple” water rates, impacting disadvantaged communities and retirees.
Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution… and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials…
- Explanation: The primary goal of the regulations discussed is to improve water quality by reducing the concentration of the hazardous chemical hexavalent chromium to a new, safer level.

Under SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all.
- Explanation: The article explicitly states that water districts must invest in “upgrades to prevent contamination” and new “infrastructure.” The costs mentioned ($65 million for Los Banos, $400 million for Coachella Valley) demonstrate the scale of infrastructure development needed to provide reliable and safe water, while the debate over rising water bills speaks to the challenge of ensuring “affordable and equitable access.”

Under SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
- Explanation: The article describes the actions of several institutions: the state water board setting standards and compliance plans, the legislature debating and passing Senate Bill 466 to create a legal framework, and local water districts working to comply. The bill’s progress and amendments reflect an institutional process that is responsive to stakeholder feedback (like that from the Consumer Attorneys of California).

Indicators for Measuring Progress

Implied and Mentioned Indicators

Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services (Indicator 6.1.1):
- Explanation: The article provides several metrics that feed into this indicator. The new standard for hexavalent chromium is set at “no more than 10 parts per billion.” The number of contaminated water sources (“about 330 sources”) and the population affected (“more than 5 million Californians”) are baseline measures. Progress would be measured by the reduction in these numbers as districts come into compliance.
Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, unsafe sanitation and lack of hygiene (Indicator 3.9.2):
- Explanation: A specific risk level is mentioned as an indicator: “Under the new standard, for every 2,000 people who drink the water for a lifetime, one person would be at risk of cancer.” This provides a quantifiable health risk metric that the regulations aim to manage.
Financial Investment in Infrastructure and Impact on Affordability:
- Explanation: The article provides clear financial indicators. These include the total cost of compliance for water districts (e.g., “$65 million” for Los Banos, “$400 million” for Coachella Valley) and the impact on consumers, measured by the expected increase in water rates (“water rates are expected to double,” “quadruples water rates”). These figures can be tracked to measure the financial burden and progress of infrastructure upgrades.
Implementation of Regulatory and Legal Frameworks:
- Explanation: The progress and status of “Senate Bill 466” serve as an indicator of institutional action. Furthermore, the deadlines for compliance set by the water board (“two years” for large suppliers, “four years” for smaller ones) and the requirement for “state-approved plans” are concrete, trackable measures of regulatory implementation.

Summary of Findings

SDGs	Targets	Indicators
SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being	3.9: Substantially reduce illnesses from hazardous chemicals and water pollution.	Cancer risk level: 1 case per 2,000 people over a lifetime at the new standard. Number of people protected by the new regulation: Over 5 million.
SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	6.1: Achieve universal access to safe and affordable drinking water. 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution from hazardous chemicals.	Maximum allowable level of hexavalent chromium: 10 parts per billion. Number of contaminated drinking water sources: Approximately 330. Expected increase in water rates: “double” or “quadruple” in some areas.
SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure	9.1: Develop quality, reliable, and resilient infrastructure with a focus on affordability.	Cost of infrastructure upgrades for specific districts: $65 million (Los Banos), $400 million (Coachella Valley).
SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities	11.1: Ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable basic services.	Impact on specific populations: “large disadvantaged communities” and “retiree population.” Affordability metric: Potential for water rates to “quadruple.”
SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions	16.6: Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.	Legislative action: The introduction and progress of Senate Bill 466. Regulatory deadlines for compliance: 2 years for large suppliers, 4 years for smaller ones. Requirement for state-approved compliance plans.

Source: calmatters.org