Thursday, North Carolina’s Environmental Management Commission decided to move forward with plans to set forever chemicals called PFAS limits in groundwater. In November, the people will be able to give their thoughts on the proposed standards. By the middle of 2025, the rules might be in place.
People who care about clean water say this is a good first step, but they are worried that other standards are not moving forward.
“A standard for groundwater is good for the state and for people.” Dana Sargent, executive head of Cape Fear River Watch, said, “It’s about time.”
People have made PFAS chemicals, which are toxic and can be found in some rivers in North Carolina. These are the different types of PFAS. Research that has been done so far shows that PFAS can lead to kidney cancer, birth problems, and higher cholesterol.
The Environmental Protection Agency set limits for 8 types of PFAS in drinking water in April.
The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality is trying to set standards for both surface water and groundwater. This is partly because both types of water are often used for drinking.
Groundwater standards for three PFAS move forward to public comment
The move on Thursday has been planned for years. In 2022, DEQ began giving out information about PFAS groundwater guidelines.
In July, DEQ asked the EMC’s Groundwater & Waste Management Committee to move forward with plans to set guidelines for eight types of PFAS in groundwater. The group chose PFOS, PFOA, and GenX as the only ones to move forward with.
The move was explained in more detail by Committee Chairman Joe Reardon at the most recent meeting of the group on Wednesday.
“What (DEQ) wanted to do was let more of these compounds into the water than is currently allowed at the PQL,” Reardon said, referring to the realistic quantitative limits that are set for groundwater in labs.
“The committee decided to regulate these three here, but to let DEQ continue to regulate the other five at lower levels, as described in the PQL.” We didn’t want to make these chemicals more likely to be in the water.
The DEQ staff said that some of the suggested standards were higher than the current PQLs because science had shown that those levels would not hurt people’s health.
The DEQ staff also said that PQL numbers can be different between labs, which could cause problems in the future.
“That’s part of our message here: setting standards and being sure of them,” said Michael Scott, who is in charge of the waste management section.
State officials working to establish interim groundwater standards
EMC is working on writing down groundwater rules for three PFAS, and DEQ is also setting up temporary groundwater rules for eight PFAS.
Anyone can ask DEQ to set a temporary standard for a substance for which there isn’t yet a groundwater standard, according to state rules.
A private person from Graham named Jonathan Gordon sent this kind of request to DEQ in July.
“(My community) just found out that our wells were contaminated with very high levels of PFAS.” “Our groundwater is no longer safe to drink, so we don’t feel at peace,” Gordon wrote in his letter to DEQ. “We have lived in these homes for decades and have raised our kids and grandkids on this land, all while drinking the contaminated groundwater.”
The public has until October 4 to give DEQ feedback on these interim guidelines.
Proposed surface water standards stay in committee
The EMC’s Water Quality Committee met on Wednesday for more than two hours to talk about suggested PFAS standards for surface water. The Regulatory Impact Analysis of the plan caused a lot of concern among the committee members.
Members were most concerned about a part of the paper that talked about how people could be exposed to PFAS through food. Members were worried that the information given made it sound like food grown in North Carolina is “laden” with PFAS.
Researchers have found that PFAS in public water can get into crops if that water is used to water fields.
“PFAS regularly move from soils to nearby surface water and/or groundwater because of their high mobility and persistence,” in a 2021 study. “Irrigating crops or managing livestock for milk and meat production using adjacent waters can be detrimental to human health.”
In the end, the committee agreed to meet with food experts, such as the Food and Drug Administration, to learn more about the issue before going forward with the impact analysis.
Before it can be sent to the whole commission, the analysis has to be approved by the group.
Environmental groups want federal intervention
A group called the Southern Environmental Law Center asked the EPA in August to “take back North Carolina’s authority to regulate water pollution.”
The EPA is required by law to control pollution, but North Carolina is in charge of that instead. This is how most states do things.
Environmental groups, on the other hand, say that the North Carolina General Assembly has consistently weakened state environmental officials “to the point where the state can no longer effectively protect its waters.”
SELC’s North Carolina office head, Mary Maclean Asbill, said, “The people of North Carolina deserve clean water, but the state legislature is stopping the state from limiting toxic pollution of our waterways and drinking water.”
At its meeting on Thursday, the commission passed a move to make sure that its members are involved in any talks DEQ may have with EPA about this petition.
EMC Chairman J.D. Solomon said, “I think it’s smart (…) that we be at the table if or when the EPA moves on this.”