Industry has caused widespread PFAS soil pollution - NH state drags feet on regulation
Change often comes slowly but after decades of regulatory inaction large swaths of southern NH’s drinking water have been polluted with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals or “PFAS” which have been dubbed “forever chemicals.” The widespread drinking water pollution is the result of unabated emissions from industries like Saint Gobain Performance Plastics in Merrimack and Textile Coatings Inc. in Manchester and Amherst and activities by the US Air Force in Portsmouth.
For decades, we have been exposed to PFAS without our knowledge or consent from drinking contaminated drinking water, and from using 1,000s of consumer products like cosmetics, sunscreens, rain jackets, Teflon pans, contact lenses, and food.
Of great concern is that we don’t fully understand the effects of PFAS exposure on unborn babies and young children - PFAS chemicals cross the placental barrier and are transferred to babies before they are even born during important developmental stages as well as early in life from contaminated breast milk or formula. As proof this happens, studies have shown that babies often have higher serum PFAS concentrations than their mothers and increasing PFAS serum levels with longer breastfeeding duration.[1]
Now, 98% of humans over age 12 in the US have some level of one of the 12,000 PFAS in their blood.[2] What are the long-term consequences of decades of exposure?
When I was elected to the NH House in 2016, my first bill filed attempted to match Vermont’s regulations and curb human exposure to PFAS-contaminated drinking water. Concerns were raised during legislative testimony that passing this law would expose NH to lawsuits by manufacturers. This was not an unfounded concern, PFAS manufacturers had filed lawsuits against New Jersey – which eventually failed - for their PFAS regulations. However, fear of legal action should not prevent legislators and the agencies charged with protecting public health from doing their job.
Finally, in 2018, my bill was passed into law which curbed exposure to four of the more than 12,000 PFAS chemicals. The bill wasn’t enough - both in terms of the number we regulate, and the risk still posed by the lower exposure limits.
Scientists know that no level of exposure to these dangerous chemicals is safe.
But the bill's passage was a start. However, the day the law went into effect, 3M, the manufacturer of PFAS chemicals, blocked the new regulations in NH Superior Court. Finally, in 2019 the legislature circumvented the polluter court action and NH was on the leading edge in the US of regulating human exposure to PFAS-contaminated drinking water.
In the meantime, NH Attorney General filed two class action lawsuits against PFAS manufacturers for the environmental and public health damages caused by their chemicals. Perhaps to understand the scope of the lawsuit, 100 soil samples were collected from across NH.[3] The shallow soil samples (from the surface to 6 inches below the surface) were analyzed to see if only 36 of the more than 12,000 PFAS chemicals could be detected.
Unfortunately, NH has not maintained its lead by regulating exposure to PFAS-contaminated soil and Massachusetts has leapfrogged ahead more strictly regulating soil and drinking water. In 2019, Massachusetts implemented strict standards to protect people from direct exposure to PFAS contamination in surface soil and drinking water.[4]
NH has no limit on PFAS-contaminated soil, so many are left scratching their heads over what the new soil data mean. The sample locations “were randomly determined through an equal-area grid approach…targeting undisturbed areas” - in other words, the samplers avoided areas that we know are contaminated with PFAS - so we would not expect to see PFAS contamination in these samples.[3] For example, we would see high levels of PFAS-contaminated soil in places like Merrimack, NH due to pollution from Saint Gobain - but no soil samples were collected in Merrimack. Besides known industrial sources, we know that PFAS contamination originates from landfills, Superfund sites (NH has 20 Superfund sites), bio sludge spreading areas, and wastewater treatment plants are all sources of PFAS pollution, the extent of the pollution related to many of these sources has not been fully evaluated in NH.
Figure 1. Soil samples collected from 100 locations across NH and 66 locations across Vermont are compared to MA S-1 standards. Also shown are locations of known PFAS air pollution from Saint Gobain in NY, VT, and NH, and Textile Coatings, Inc. of Amherst, NH. In NH, 72 of the soil samples have at least one PFAS above the corresponding MA S-1 standard (red) while 28 samples are below all corresponding S-1 standards for the 6 PFAS (green). In VT, 39 soil samples exceed MA S-1 standards (red) while 27 do not. Also shown for reference are locations of Saint Gobain Performance Plastics in Merrimack, NH, Hoosick Falls, NY, and Bennington, VT and Textile Coatings, Inc. of Amherst, NH; all of which are significant known sources of PFAS air pollution. You can interact with this map by clicking here.
In the absence of NH regulations, when the new soil samples are compared with Massachusetts limits, 72 of the soil samples have at least one PFAS above the corresponding MA S-1 standard while 28 samples are below all corresponding S-1 standards for the 6 PFAS (see Figure 1). Also shown on Figure 1 are “background” soil samples collected in the state of Vermont in 2019.[5] These are also compared with MA soil regulations for reference.
The soil sample results are a sobering reality that decades of no action by regulatory agencies have enabled industry and others to profit while indiscriminately polluting our state and New England. The impact of deliberate inaction is widespread and but that doesn’t make it right.
Federal action has been slow but in In June 2022, EPA revised health advisories for six PFAS (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2022). The new EPA health advisories are low and indicate that the EPA determined there is no safe level of exposure to PFAS in drinking water.
In March of 2023, EPA proposed to regulate six PFAS chemicals under the Safe Drinking Water Act (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2023). The EPA proposed to limit drinking water exposure to two PFAS chemicals at 4 parts per trillion (ppt).
EPA has asked for comments on this rule-making proposal by May 30th, 2023. So far, 103 comments have been made publicly available – most of which appear to be a coordinated effort on the part of industry and water suppliers - to slow down or stop EPA’s rulemaking process. It is unclear what will eventually happen; the final MCLs may differ from the limits proposed in March 2023. But people are suffering from decades of unknowingly being exposed to these chemicals without any or sufficient safety testing.
How to comment:
Let EPA know what you think by May 30, 2023. You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2022-0114 by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: (our preferred method) comments can be provided at https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/EPA-HQ-OW-2022-0114-0027 under Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2022-0114.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water Docket, Mail Code 2822IT, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center's hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Federal Holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided.
Comments must be submitted during the public comment period that ends on May 30, 2023.
You can find more writing tips in my previous post here:
[1] (Fromme et al., 2010; Gyllenhammar, et al, 2018; Papadopoulou et al. 2016; VanNoy et al., 2018.
[2] Calafat, A. M., Wong, L., Kuklenyik, Z., Reidy, J. A., & Needham, L. L. 2007. Polyfluoroalkyl Chemicals in the U.S. Population: Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2004 and Comparisons with NHANES 1999-2000. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(11), 1596-602.
[3] Santangelo, L.M., Tokranov, A.K., Welch, S.M., Schlosser, K.E.A., Marts, J.M., Drouin, A.F., Ayotte, J.D., Rousseau, A.E., and Harfmann, J.L., 2022, Statewide survey of shallow soil concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and related chemical and physical data across New Hampshire, 2021: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KG38B5.
[4] https://www.mass.gov/doc/final-pfas-related-changes-to-the-mcp-2019-12-13/download.