In May, we reported on developments involving a case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania involving water contamination and exposure to per- and polyfluoralkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS is a family of man-made chemicals that includes PFOA, PFOS, and PFNA (and many others). The chemicals are commonly found in many consumer products, including stick-proof food packaging, waterproof clothing, and non-stick cookware. The plaintiffs in the PA case alleged that aqueous film forming foams (AFFF) used for firefighting drills at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base in Willow Grove, PA, another source of PFAS, had found their way into local groundwater supplies, causing plaintiff’s bladder cancer.
Concern in Pennsylvania and elsewhere has increased due to publicity from these suits, and from perceived admissions from the government that these toxins could be more harmful than originally suspected due to a report from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases Registry (ATSDR) released in June that recommended safe exposure levels to be significantly lower than the EPA’s health advisory threshold limits from the prior two years.
Late last month, officials from the EPA and the Department of Defense met in Horsham, PA in close proximity to the naval base with township supervisors, state lawmakers, activists and concerned citizens to address the topic of the contamination of the local drinking water supply with PFAS. This was the EPA’s second community engagement event on the management of PFAS, following a similar event staged in Exeter, NH in mid-June, and two other engagement events in August in Colorado Springs, CO and Fayatteville, North Carolina. A final event is scheduled to occur in Leavenworth, KS on September 5, 2018.
Prior to the recent community events, the EPA issued a statement that the Agency will take four “concrete actions” to address rising concerns about environmental and health risks of PFAS. First, the EPA will vet the need for a “maximum contaminant level” for the substances, and then will move forward with designating PFAS as “hazardous substances” through available statutory mechanisms, possibly to include CERCLA Section 102. The EPA will then move forward with development of groundwater cleanup recommendations for the substances at contaminated sites, to be completed in the fall of 2018. And finally, the EPA will develop toxicity values for PFAS-related chemicals in collaboration with federal and state partners. After receiving input from the communities, the EPA plans to issue a PFAS Management Plan later this year.
Accounts from the events in Horsham and Fayatteville show tensions in financial obligations related to treatment of PFAS in water supplies, and skepticism in the ability of the EPA to recognize and address potential health risks. Representatives from utilities in North Carolina estimated a 7% increase in water and sewer bills to defray costs associated with implementing granular activated carbon and ion exchange water treatment measures. And, residents of Horsham noted that their water bills remained high even four years after the contamination was discovered. State and local officials in Horsham expressed dismay that clean-up costs have been passed along to consumers, rather than to be remediated financially on a federal level since the US Navy was a suspected sources of the contaminants.
We’re watching, along with residents of the impacted communities, the EPA’s slow march towards the likely federal regulation of PFAS while witnessing states like NJ and others sprint full speed and lap the feds when it comes to setting enforceable and extremely low maximum contaminant levels (in contrast to the current unenforceable federal advisory limits).