by Max Sullivan, originally posted on January 15, 2017

The Environmental Protection Agency is working to determine a health advisory level for perfluorochemicals in surface water, but advocates for cleaning up the Coakley landfill Superfund site are concerned it will take too long to help them.

Jim Murphy, a spokesman for the EPA Region 1 in New England, said his office sent the EPA headquarters information that could be used to calculate an advisory level for surface water about a week ago. He said Region 1 is one of a few regions from which concern has been raised about PFC contamination in surface water.

PFCs are classified by the EPA as “contaminants of emerging concern.” Officials have said PFCs can affect the developing fetus and child, including possible changes in growth, learning and behavior. They also may decrease fertility and interfere with the body’s natural hormones, increase cholesterol, affect the immune system and increase cancer risk.

Greenland residents who fear Coakley is leaching contaminants into local drinking water said Monday they were concerned that no health advisory level for PFCs in surface water has been established by the EPA. The discussion occurred in a meeting with Greenland selectmen, led by the Governor’s Task Force on the Seacoast Pediatric Cancer Cluster, which has investigated Coakley as a potential cause of a cancer cluster discovered in Portsmouth, Rye, Greenland, North Hampton and New Castle.

Test results taken by the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) were presented during the meeting that showed PFCs were present in surface water in Berry’s Brook, next to the landfill, and Murphy, who was present, said EPA officials would not be surprised if Coakley were the source of the contaminants.

Without an advisory level for surface water in place, the EPA would not require the group responsible for Coakley — the Coakley Landfill Group (CLG) — to ensure residents near Coakley were provided safe drinking water. The CLG, composed of municipalities and organizations that used the landfill, denied a request by Greenland selectmen for municipal water last year, but residents are still working to get them to provide the water.

A more stringent advisory level for PFCs in drinking water was established by the EPA last spring, and officials have said groundwater and surface water are closely related. A New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services representative at Monday’s meeting, Robin Mongeon, said surface water can be used to recharge groundwater and that groundwater can discharge into surface water.

Murphy said it is unclear when the EPA will come up with an advisory level for surface water, which, when exceeded, would require responsible parties to take action to ensure residents had safe drinking water. He said part of the uncertainty is due to the current changes in Washington, including changes to EPA leadership.

Murphy said the advisory level for surface water will likely be much higher than the advisory level for drinking water of 70 parts per trillion.

Advocates for residents living near Coakley said they would prefer advisory levels for both drinking water and surface water to be lower than existing EPA guidelines. Tests of surface water in Berry’s Brook showed levels of PFCs coming up as high as 198 parts per trillion for the contaminant PFOA and 70.5 parts per trillion for PFOS. Members of CLF, as well as some from the governor’s task force, believe the surface water advisory level should be closer to one set in the state of Michigan, which is 11 parts per trillion for PFOS and 42 parts per trillion for PFOA.

In addition to the concern that contaminated surface water could recharge groundwater that goes to residential wells, PFCs in surface water can enter the foodstream through local fisheries, according to state Rep. Mindi Messmer, D-Rye, who is on the task force.

Messmer said she is considering a push for legislation that would establish a PFC surface water advisory level that would be on par with Michigan’s standard.

Monday, residents questioned whether the EPA was dragging its feet in addressing PFC contamination. Murphy said on the phone this week that it is difficult for the EPA to produce an advisory level quickly since the standard would have implications for the entire nation, not just New Hampshire.

Jeff Barnum, CLF’s Great Bay-Piscataqua waterkeeper who conducted the tests at Berry’s Brook, said he trusts the EPA has the intent of protecting human health. However, he believes EPA officials should find a way to move more quickly in addressing residents’ concerns about contamination around Coakley.

“They have processes and protocol to follow, and I understand that it takes time, but this is a case where near-term action is really important to both our surface water health and safe drinking water,” Barnum said. “People need to feel confident about their drinking water and they’re not.”