Skip to main content
Log in

Chemistry and controversy: the regulation of environmental chromium

  • Published:
Environmental Engineering and Policy

Abstract

The regulation of chromium in drinking water and sludge illustrates some of the challenges of regulating a chemical with complex environmental chemistry in a dynamic regulatory environment. The controversies evoked in setting environmental standards for chromium reflect technical uncertainties and the conflicting values of affected parties including regulators, citizens potentially exposed to chromium pollution, polluting industries, and research scientists. Regulatory limits for chromium in water and sludge recognize the paradoxical nature of chromium chemistry but also illustrate how the use of risk assessment can alter the regulatory approach. The framework of rationality as described by Crawford-Brown is suggested as a useful tool for evaluating regulatory limits for environmental contaminants. Science-based policies are most rational when they reflect the characteristics of rationality with respect to the ends or objectives sought, the means chosen to achieve these ends, and the beliefs that substantiate the chosen means and ends. If scientific research is to be applied to regulatory or environmental policy questions, then the traditional focus on the rationality of empirically based scientific beliefs must be expanded to consider the focus of the research question and the methodologies used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (1993) Toxicological profile for chromium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, TP-92/08

  • Anderson RA (1989) Essentiality of chromium in humans. Sci Total Environ (Special issue: The chromium paradox in modern life) 86: 75–81

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson RS (1996) Chromium: an essential carcinogen. In: Proccedings of the Chromium Symposium 1986: an update. Industrial Health Foundation, Inc., Arlington, Va.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett RJ, James BR (1979) Behavior of chromium in soils. III. Oxidation. J Environ Qual 8: 31–35

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett RJ (1986) Chromium oxidation in soils and water: measurements and mechanisms. In: Proceedings of the Chromium Symposium: an update. Industrial Health Foundation, Pittsburgh, Pa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett RJ (1991) Chromium cycling in soils and water: links, gaps, and methods. Environ Health Perspect 92: 17–24

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brinton WF (1995) Deconstruction is compost maturity. Biocycle Dec., pp 83–84

  • Bunge M (1987) Seven desiderata for rationality. In: Agassi J, Jarvie I (eds) Rationality: the critical view. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrington CD (1997) An administrative view of model uncertainty in public health. Risk Health Safety Environ 8: 273–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MD et al. (1993) Mechanisms of chromium carcinogenicity and toxicity. Crit Rev Toxicol 23: 255–281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford-Brown DJ, Brown KG (1992) Hazard identification in carcinogen risk analysis. Kenneth G. Brown Inc., Chapel Hill, N.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastern Research Group (1992) Technical support document for land application of sewage sludge, vol 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, EPA 822-R-93-002

  • Fendorf SE (1995) Surface reactions of chromium in soils and waters. Geoderma 67: 55–71

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel AM (1990) Confronting uncertainty in risk management: a guide for decision makers. Center for Risk Management, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber S, Vogt C (1989) Development of the revised drinking water standard for chromium. Sci Total Environ 86: 43–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hem JH (1989) Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural water. U.S. Geological Survey No. 2254

  • James BR, Bartlett RJ (1983) Behavior of chromium in soils. VI. Interactions between oxidation-reduction and organic complexation. J Environ Qual 12: 173–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • James BR (1992) The uses and misuses by regulatory agencies of the research of Bruce James on the redox chemistry of chromium in soils. In: Hexavalent Chromium Analytical Methods Workshop. Industrial Health Foundation, Inc., Arlington, Va.

    Google Scholar 

  • James BR (1996) Personal communication, University of Maryland at College Park

  • James BR et al (1997) Oxidation-reduction chemistry of chromium: relevance to the regulation and remediation of chromate -contaminated soils. J Soil Contam 66: 569–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino HE (1990) Science as social knowledge. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell N (1984) From knowledge to wisdom. Basil Blackwell Publ. Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieboer E, Shaw SL (1988) Mutagenic and other genotoxic effects of chromium compounds. In: Nriagu JO, Nieboer E (eds) Chromium in the natural and human environments. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • NOFA-NH (Nottingham Organic Farmers Association of New Hampshire) (1993) BiosolidspSludgepBe Aware. Concord, N.H.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer CD, Puls RW (1994) Natural attenuation of hexavalent chromium in ground water and soils. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA/540/S-94/505

  • Popper KR (1994) The myth of the framework: In: Defence of science and rationality. Routledge, London, pp 104

    Google Scholar 

  • Schardt D, Schmidt S: Chromium. Nutr Act Health Lett 23: 10–11

  • Southworth RM (1996) Comments on sludge regulations for chromium. U.S. EPA, Bioremediation Office, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson PB (1996) Pragmatism and policy: the case of water. In: Light A, Katz E (eds) Environmental pragmatism. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. EPA (1991) Rules and regulations: final rule. Federal Register 56: 3527

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. EPA (1991) Rules and regulations: Chromium (III) compounds; toxic chemical release reporting; community right-to-know. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register 56, 226: 58859–58862

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. EPA (1992) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) for Chromium (III): health assessment. http://www.epa.gov/ngispgm3/iris/irisdat/0028.DAT

  • U.S. EPA (1994) National primary drinking water regulations. Disinfectants and disinfection byproducts; proposed rule. Fed Register 59: 38668–38829

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. EPA (1994) Drinking water regulations and health advisories. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 822-R-94-001

  • U.S. EPA (1995) Rules and regulations: standards for the use or disposal of sewage sludge; final rule and proposed rule — 40CFR Parts 403 and 503. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register 60, 206: 54763–54770 (Online via GPO access [wais.access.gpo.gov])

    Google Scholar 

  • Yassi A, Nieboer E (1988) Carcinogenicity of chromium compounds. In: Nriagu JO, Nieboer E (eds) Chromium in the natural and human environments. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bartlett, L., Vesilind, P.A. Chemistry and controversy: the regulation of environmental chromium. Environmental Engineering and Policy 1, 81–86 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/s100220050008

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s100220050008

Navigation