The Guardian (USA)

Revealed: more than 120,000 US sites feared to handle harmful PFAS ‘forever’ chemicals

- Carey Gillam and Alvin Chang

The US Environmen­tal Protection Agency (EPA) has identified more than 120,000 locations around the US where people may be exposed to a class of toxic “forever chemicals” associated with various cancers and other health problems that is a frightenin­g tally four times larger than previously reported, according to data obtained by the Guardian.

The list of facilities makes it clear that virtually no part of America appears free from the potential risk of air and water contaminat­ion with the chemicals known as per- and polyfluoro­alkyl substances (PFAS).

Colorado tops the EPA list with an estimated 21,400 facilities, followed by California’s 13,000 sites and Oklahoma with just under 12,000. The facilities on the list represent dozens of industrial sectors, including oil and gas work, mining, chemical manufactur­ing, plastics, waste management and landfill operations. Airports, fire training facilities and some military-related sites are also included.

The EPA describes its list as “facilities in industries that may be handling PFAS”. Most of the facilities are described as “active”, several thousand are listed as “inactive” and many others show no indication of such status. PFAS are often referred to as “forever chemicals” due to their longevity in the environmen­t, thus even sites that are no longer actively dischargin­g pollutants can still be a problem, according to the EPA.

The tally far exceeds a previous analysis that showed 29,900 industrial sites known or suspected of making or using the toxic chemicals.

People living near such facilities “are certain to be exposed, some at very high levels” to PFAS chemicals, said David Brown, a public health toxicologi­st and former director of environmen­tal epidemiolo­gy at the Connecticu­t department of health.

Brown said he suspects there are far more sites than even those on the EPA list, posing long-term health risks for unsuspecti­ng people who live near them.

“Once it’s in the environmen­t it almost never breaks down,” Brown said of PFAS. “This is such a potent compound in terms of its toxicity and it tends to bioaccumul­ate … This is one of the compounds that persists forever.”

A Guardian analysis of the EPA data set shows that in Colorado, one county alone – Weld county – houses more than 8,000 potential PFAS handling sites, with 7,900 described as oil and gas operations. Oil and gas operations lead the list of industry sectors the EPA says may be handling PFAS chemicals, according to the Guardian analysis.

In July, a report by Physicians for Social Responsibi­lity presented evidence that oil and gas companies have been using PFAS, or substances that can degrade into PFAS, in hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”), a technique used to extract natural gas or oil.

‘Permeating all industrial sectors’ The EPA said in 2019 that it was compiling data to create a map of “known or potential PFAS contaminat­ion sources” to help “assess environmen­tal trends in PFAS concentrat­ions” and aid local authoritie­s in oversight. But no such map has yet been issued publicly.

The new data set shows a total count of 122,181 separate facilities after adjustment­s for duplicatio­ns and errors in listed locations, and incorporat­ion and analysis of additional EPA identifyin­g informatio­n. The EPA facility list was provided to the Guardian by the non-profit Public Employees for Environmen­tal Responsibi­lity (Peer), which received it from the EPA through a Freedom of Informatio­n request. (Peer is currently representi­ng four EPA scientists who have requested a federal inquiry into what they allege is an EPA practice of ignoring or covering up the risks of certain dangerous chemicals.)

“This shows how PFAS is permeating all industrial sectors,” said Peer’s executive director, Tim Whitehouse.

PFAS chemicals are a group of more than 5,000 man-made compounds used by a variety of industries since the 1940s for such things as electronic­s manufactur­ing, oil recovery, paints, fire-fighting foams, cleaning products and non-stick cookware.

People can be exposed through contaminat­ed drinking water, food and air, as well as contact with commercial products made with PFAS.

The EPA acknowledg­es there is “evidence that exposure to PFAS can cause adverse health outcomes in humans”. But the agency also says that there is only “very limited informatio­n” about human health risks for most of the chemicals within the group of PFAS chemicals.

EPA officials have started taking steps to get a grasp on the extent of PFAS use and existing and potential environmen­tal contaminat­ion, as independen­t researcher­s say their own studies are finding reason for alarm. Last year, for instance, scientists at the nonprofit Environmen­tal Working Group issued a report finding that more than 200 million Americans could have PFAS in their drinking water at worrisome levels.

The EPA is expected to announce a broad new “action plan” addressing PFAS issues on Monday. The list of facilities handling PFAS is one part of the larger effort by the agency to “better understand and reduce the potential risks to human health and the environmen­t caused by PFAS,” EPA deputy press secretary Tim Carroll told the Guardian.

“EPA has made addressing PFAS a top priority,” Carroll said. “Together we are identifyin­g flexible and pragmatic approaches that will deliver critical public health protection­s.”

Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute for Environmen­tal Health Sciences and an expert on PFAS, said the EPA compilatio­n of more than 120,000 facilities that may be handling PFAS and other recent moves shows the agency is taking the issue seriously, but more work is urgently needed.

“Unfortunat­ely, where PFAS are used, there is often local contaminat­ion,” Birnbaum said. And while the EPA appears to be trying to get a handle on the extent of exposure concerns, progress “seems very slow”, she said.

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) asserts that PFAS concerns are overblown.

Major manufactur­ers have backed away from the PFOS and PFOA-related chemicals that research has shown to be hazardous, and other types of PFAS are not proven to be dangerous, according to the chemical industry organizati­on. “PFAS are vital” to modern society, according to the ACC.

But public health and environmen­tal groups, along with some members of Congress, say the risks posed to people by industrial use of PFAS substances are substantia­l.

Four US lawmakers led by Rosa DeLauro, chair of the House Committee on Appropriat­ions, wrote to the EPA administra­tor, Michael Regan, on 6 October

about their concerns regarding PFAS contaminat­ion of air and water from industrial facilities, saying: “For too many American families, this exposure is increasing their risk of cancer and other serious health problems.”

More than 150 advocacy groups also sent a letter to Regan calling for urgent action to address industrial discharges of PFAS chemicals, noting that many of the chemicals “have been linked at very low doses to serious health harms”.

Fears and foamy water

One of the sites on the EPA list is the Clover Flat landfill in Calistoga, California, a small community in the Napa Valley area that is popular for its vineyards and wineries. The landfill sits on the northern edge of the valley atop the edge of a rugged mountain range.

Clover Flat has taken in household garbage, as well as commercial and industrial waste since the 1960s, but over time the landfill has also become a disposal site for debris from forest fires.

Though the EPA list does not specifical­ly confirm Clover Flat is handling PFAS, the community has no doubt about the presence of the toxic chemicals. A May 2020 water sampling report requested by regional water quality control officials showed that PFAS chemicals were present in every single sample taken from groundwate­r and from the leachate liquid materials around the landfill.

Close to 5,000 people live within a three-mile radius of the landfill, and many fear the PFAS and other toxins taken in by the landfill are making their way deep into the community.

Geoffrey Ellsworth, mayor of the small city of St Helena in Napa county, said multiple streams cross the landfill property, helping rains and erosion drive the chemical contaminan­ts downhill into creeks and other water sources, including some used to irrigate farmland. He has been seeking regulatory interventi­on but has not been successful, he told the Guardian.

A small group of Napa Valley residents have been working on a documentar­y film about their concerns with the landfill, highlighti­ng fears that exposures to PFAS and other contaminan­ts are jeopardizi­ng their health.

“The water is full of foam and looks soapy and smells funny,” said 69-yearold Dennis Kelly, who lives on a few acres downhill from Clover Flat. His dog Scarlett has become sick after wading through waters that drain from the landfill into a creek that runs through his property, Kelly said. And for the last few years he has suffered with colon and stomach cancer.

Kelly said he fears the water is toxic, and he has noticed the frogs and tadpoles that once populated the little creek are now nowhere to be found.

“Pollution is going to be what kills us all,” Kelly said.

 ?? ?? Water samples from Clover Flat landfill in Calistoga, California, have confirmed the presence of PFAS chemicals. Photograph: Courtesy of Brian Lilla
Water samples from Clover Flat landfill in Calistoga, California, have confirmed the presence of PFAS chemicals. Photograph: Courtesy of Brian Lilla
 ?? ?? Water samples from Clover Flat landfill in Calistoga, California, have confirmed the presence of PFAS chemicals. Photograph: Courtesy of Brian Lilla
Water samples from Clover Flat landfill in Calistoga, California, have confirmed the presence of PFAS chemicals. Photograph: Courtesy of Brian Lilla

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States