Drinking water: primary standard for hexavalent chromium: exemption.

Senator Caballero, joined by Assembly Members Macedo and Soria, advances a narrowly targeted safeguard for drinking water compliance: public water systems that already meet California’s total chromium standard would not be deemed in violation of the primary hexavalent chromium standard while they implement or await approval of a state board–approved plan to address Cr(VI).

The measure would create a new provision in the Health and Safety Code that, during the period a board-approved Cr(VI) compliance plan is being implemented or while action on a proposed plan is pending, a system’s determinations of Cr(VI) violations may be deferred so long as the system remains compliant with the total chromium MCL. The safe harbor applies solely to hexavalent chromium and does not alter requirements or enforcement for other contaminants; it ends if the board rejects the Cr(VI) plan, and it preserves the authority of the State Board and the Attorney General to enforce applicable laws regarding hexavalent chromium.

Contextualizing this within existing law, California’s Safe Drinking Water Act requires the board to establish primary standards for contaminants, including hexavalent chromium, and grants authority to grant variances. The proposed measure links enforcement posture to the status of a Cr(VI) compliance plan, without repealing or changing the broader standard-setting or variance framework, and it leaves the board and the attorney general’s enforcement powers intact outside the safe harbor window.

Implementation and fiscal considerations reflect current drafting: there are no explicit deadlines for plan development or board action, and the duration of the safe harbor is not time-limited within the text. The measure calls for a fiscal committee review but does not authorize new appropriations; any costs would stem from plan development, monitoring, and potential related actions by utilities, the board, or local agencies, rather than from a dedicated funding mechanism. The broader policy context emphasizes facilitating Cr(VI) remediation planning while preserving existing enforcement authority and the overarching regulatory framework.