Pam & Len O'Connell's property at Salt Ash have been in Pam's family for 100 years, they dreamed of a peaceful retirement on this land .....now they are desperate to leave!

<div>Pam &amp; Len O'Connell's property at Salt Ash have been in Pam's family for 100 years, they dreamed of a peaceful retirement on this land .....now they are desperate to leave!</div>

Talking PFAS contamination with those who live on or near it; with a wide range of experts who study PFAS and its health effects; with those who have worked with this toxic chemical; with those who are trying to remove it from the environment & people, and with the politicians and Government who have the power to fix this problem

PFAS contamination is an Australian & Global Issue affecting people, water, food-chain and our environment

TalkingPFAS

Pam & Len O'Connell's property at Salt Ash have been in Pam's family for 100 years, they dreamed of a peaceful retirement on this...

Ep 2 - "We just don't want to live on contaminated land" Len & Pam O'Connell

Talking PFAS Episode 44 Show Description/Notes/Links

INTRO:

Welcome back to Talking PFAS podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.  If you are new to the podcast, I encourage you to have a binge listen, as the content is, of course, still very relevant today as attention, regulation and litigation regarding PFAS chemicals continues to accelerate. 

Today’s discussion is an Interview with two guests who were training people at the CRC Care Risk to Remediation Masterclass in Newcastle from the 1-5 May, 2023.

My guests are Paul Nathanail from Nottingham, England, Technical Director of LQM, which specialises in contaminated land management in England and around the world.   I have previously interview Paul before, when he was a keynote speaker at CRC Care International Clean Up Conference in Adelaide, South Australia.  You can hear that very important discussion in episode 37.

My second guest is Scott Warner, from California, who is a geologist, and has specialised as a hydrogeologist studying and assessing groundwater conditions, for 40 years.  Scott is the Principal Hydrogeologist for the BBJ Group.  

In early May I had the privilege of attending one of the training days at the CRC Care’s 4th Risk to Remediation Masterclass.  This course was held from the 1-5 May, 2023, at Newcastle (NSW), Australia.  I interviewed Paul and Scott at the end of a long week and a long day of very in depth training.  It is important to clarify that this was not a course that was solely dedicated to PFAS remediation but remediation in general, which included PFAS. 

CRC Care provided me with this information following the event:

“The CRC are Risk to Remediation Masterclass was a five-day course that provided participants with the cutting edge skills to manage and remediate contaminated sites in Australia and globally.  This course was developed in response to the critical need to build capacity to address the growing global contamination crisis.

While technical lessons learned through the study of past projects an advantage of this course was the semi-structured discussions problem-solving and personal interactions that allowed participants to consider the many facets of modern contaminant site assessment and remedial design. 

The course also discussed aspects of sustainable low impact remediation approaches, climate change considerations, policy and regulatory matters and economic considerations, all within the context of gaining and maintaining a social licence to operate.                               

There were 75 delegates present, and the Masterclass 2023 was attended by delegates from Australia and from overseas.  The delegates were from a varied background and experience.  They were from Department of Defence, regulators for EPA VIC and EPA Tasmania, Federal Government, consultants and practitioners, academia, scientists, researchers and early career professionals.  And the overseas delegates were from Malaysia and South Africa.  Now to my discussion with Paul Nathanail from the UK and Scott Warner from California.

Special thanks to CRC Care for allowing me to attend.

LINKS: 

Link to Scott Warner’s survey: https://forms.office.com/r/iSZdvnN6XS

Link to Scott Warner’s Wiley paper: https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21753

Link to Scott Warner’s company BBJ Group: https://www.bbjgroup.com/

Link to Paul Nathanail company LQM: https://www.lqm.co.uk/pages/meet-the-team

Link to CRC Care: https://crccare.com/

OUTRO:          (With Important PFAS News from Australia)

I hope to bring you some information from the ALGA event that I attended at the end of April later in this season.  

PFAS NEWS AUSTRALIA

I have some big. Australia PFAS news.  You might have heard me mention a Super Class Action which is now being referred to as a Multi-Site PFAS Class Action. 

The following information is largely taken from a Shine Lawyers media release, but not all is a direct quote.

The applicants in the multi-site PFAS Class Action represented by Shine Lawyers have reached an ‘in principle’ agreement with the Commonwealth to settle the multi-site PFAS Contamination class action against the Department of Defence.

These are residents from seven communities across Bullsbrook (WA), Richmond (NSW), Wagga Wagga (NSW), Wodonga/Bandiana (VIC), Edinburgh (SA), Darwin (NT), and Townsville (QLD).  Shine Lawyers state that those seven communities were set to head to the Federal Court for the start of a trial which would examine the Commonwealth’s alleged responsibility for the spread of PFAS chemicals from military bases across the country into neighboring communities soil and groundwater.  

Shine lawyers fought to compensate residents living near these military bases after their properties lost value due to contamination caused by these toxic chemicals and the parties have agreed in principle on an amount of $132.7 million and the break-up of that amount is yet to be determined but it could include up to 30,000 people.  Shine Lawyers joint head of class actions Craig Allsop said while the news is positive the outcome is still subject to approval by the Federal Court. 

Shine Lawyers will continue to pursue compensation for residents of Wreck Bay in the matter of Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community Council and Anor -v- the Commonwealth.  And Justice Lee ordered a further remediation in the Wreck Bay proceeding and stood the hearing down until the 29th of May.

I hope to bring you more about the super class action in the future in the podcast.  And I encourage any of the residents who were involved in this class action and would like to share their PFAS story to please reach out to me at TalkingPFAS@gmail.com

If you have not subscribed to the podcast I encourage you to subscribe so that you will not miss an episode.  As always all information in today’s episode is copyright but please feel free to share the episode via email or social media or wherever you share your podcasts and please contact me for republishing permissions. 

Thanks again for listening - I value your feedback and suggestions.

Listening Tip:  I know most of my listeners prefer to listen on their mobile, and I personally like to listen to podcasts on my mobile with earbuds, but for some people this episode might be better to listen to on a desktop.  This is only if you don’t like very mild background noise from the nearby bingo that was happening outside the room we interviewed in at the event venue.

Talking PFAS Episode 44 Show Description/Notes/Links
INTRO:
Welcome back to Talking PFAS podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.  If you are new to the podcast, I encourage you to have a binge listen, as the content is, of course, still very relevant today as attention, regulation and litigation regarding PFAS chemicals continues to accelerate. 
Today’s discussion is an Interview with two guests who were training people at the CRC Care Risk to Remediation Masterclass in Newcastle from the 1-5 May, 2023.
My guests are Paul Nathanail from Nottingham, England, Technical Director of LQM, which specialises in contaminated land management in England and around the world.   I have previously interview Paul before, when he was a keynote speaker at CRC Care International Clean Up Conference in Adelaide, South Australia.  You can hear that very important discussion in episode 37.
My second guest is Scott Warner, from California, who is a geologist, and has specialised as a hydrogeologist studying and assessing groundwater conditions, for 40 years.  Scott is the Principal Hydrogeologist for the BBJ Group.  
In early May I had the privilege of attending one of the training days at the CRC Care’s 4th Risk to Remediation Masterclass.  This course was held from the 1-5 May, 2023, at Newcastle (NSW), Australia.  I interviewed Paul and Scott at the end of a long week and a long day of very in depth training.  It is important to clarify that this was not a course that was solely dedicated to PFAS remediation but remediation in general, which included PFAS. 
CRC Care provided me with this information following the event:
“The CRC are Risk to Remediation Masterclass was a five-day course that provided participants with the cutting edge skills to manage and remediate contaminated sites in Australia and globally.  This course was developed in response to the critical need to build capacity to address the growing global contamination crisis.
While technical lessons learned through the study of past projects an advantage of this course was the semi-structured discussions problem-solving and personal interactions that allowed participants to consider the many facets of modern contaminant site assessment and remedial design. 
The course also discussed aspects of sustainable low impact remediation approaches, climate change considerations, policy and regulatory matters and economic considerations, all within the context of gaining and maintaining a social licence to operate.                               
There were 75 delegates present, and the Masterclass 2023 was attended by delegates from Australia and from overseas.  The delegates were from a varied background and experience.  They were from Department of Defence, regulators for EPA VIC and EPA Tasmania, Federal Government, consultants and practitioners, academia, scientists, researchers and early career professionals.  And the overseas delegates were from Malaysia and South Africa.  Now to my discussion with Paul Nathanail from the UK and Scott Warner from California.
Special thanks to CRC Care for allowing me to attend.
LINKS: 
Link to Scott Warner’s survey: <a href="https://forms.office.com/r/iSZdvnN6XS">https://forms.office.com/r/iSZdvnN6XS</a>
Link to Scott Warner’s Wiley paper: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21753">https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21753</a>
Link to Scott Warner’s company BBJ Group: <a href="https://www.bbjgroup.com/">https://www.bbjgroup.com/</a>
Link to Paul Nathanail company LQM: <a href="https://www.lqm.co.uk/pages/meet-the-team">https://www.lqm.co.uk/pages/meet-the-team</a>
Link to CRC Care: <a href="https://crccare.com/">https://crccare.com/</a>
OUTRO:          (With Important PFAS News from Australia)
I hope to bring you some information from the ALGA event that I attended at the end of April later in this season.  
PFAS NEWS AUSTRALIA
I have some big. Australia PFAS news.  You might have heard me mention a Super Class Action which is now being referred to as a Multi-Site PFAS Class Action. 
The following information is largely taken from a Shine Lawyers media release, but not all is a direct quote.
The applicants in the multi-site PFAS Class Action represented by Shine Lawyers have reached an ‘in principle’ agreement with the Commonwealth to settle the multi-site PFAS Contamination class action against the Department of Defence.
These are residents from seven communities across Bullsbrook (WA), Richmond (NSW), Wagga Wagga (NSW), Wodonga/Bandiana (VIC), Edinburgh (SA), Darwin (NT), and Townsville (QLD).  Shine Lawyers state that those seven communities were set to head to the Federal Court for the start of a trial which would examine the Commonwealth’s alleged responsibility for the spread of PFAS chemicals from military bases across the country into neighboring communities soil and groundwater.  
Shine lawyers fought to compensate residents living near these military bases after their properties lost value due to contamination caused by these toxic chemicals and the parties have agreed in principle on an amount of $132.7 million and the break-up of that amount is yet to be determined but it could include up to 30,000 people.  Shine Lawyers joint head of class actions Craig Allsop said while the news is positive the outcome is still subject to approval by the Federal Court. 
Shine Lawyers will continue to pursue compensation for residents of Wreck Bay in the matter of Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community Council and Anor -v- the Commonwealth.  And Justice Lee ordered a further remediation in the Wreck Bay proceeding and stood the hearing down until the 29th of May.
I hope to bring you more about the super class action in the future in the podcast.  And I encourage any of the residents who were involved in this class action and would like to share their PFAS story to please reach out to me at <a href="mailto:TalkingPFAS@gmail.com">TalkingPFAS@gmail.com</a>
If you have not subscribed to the podcast I encourage you to subscribe so that you will not miss an episode.  As always all information in today’s episode is copyright but please feel free to share the episode via email or social media or wherever you share your podcasts and please contact me for republishing permissions. 
Thanks again for listening - I value your feedback and suggestions.
Listening Tip:  I know most of my listeners prefer to listen on their mobile, and I personally like to listen to podcasts on my mobile with earbuds, but for some people this episode might be better to listen to on a desktop.  This is only if you don’t like very mild background noise from the nearby bingo that was happening outside the room we interviewed in at the event venue.

Ep 44 Talking PFAS CRC Care Masterclass with Paul Nathanail (UK) & Scott Warner (US)

Show Notes: Talking PFAS with Peter Murphy, MD EPOC Enviro (OPEC Systems) regarding PFAS remediation using their SAFF Foam Fractionation Technology – Published Wed 26/4/2023

Welcome back to Talking PFAS podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.  If you are joining us for the first time a very big welcome. I encourage you to listen to past episodes, with a range of really excellent guests from around the world.

Just before I introduce today’s guest, I encourage you to have a listen to Episode 42, which published yesterday.  It is an update of the US EPA's proposed regulations regarding  PFAS in drinking water.   If the proposed MCLs are approved they will become mandatory levels.  As discussed in last week’s episode the guidelines and regulatory limits for certain PFAS keep going down. The number of PFAS lawsuits keep increasing, and the number of PFAS contaminated sites keeps growing.  This means there will be no shortage of PFAS remediation work for quite some time.

In fact, in a PFAS remediation special edition of the Environmental Business Journal published in 2019 they state, and I quote:

“The Environmental Business Journal has wrestled with the extent and scale of the PFAS Era in market terms.  The EBJ has published a working model which reflects a consensus on the scale of the emerging PFAS market.  The EBJ model includes major contributions from both waste and wastewater system upgrades and lifestyle costs as well as remediation.  The model published in 2019 points to the possibility of expenditures in excess of $160 billion over the next 20-30 years and over 40,000 sites or facilities where significant PFAS contamination will likely be identified and treated or remediated at some level.”                                     

Today’s discussion is another chat about a PFAS remediation method.   Today’s guest is Peter Murphy Managing Director of an Australian based company, OPEC Systems.  OPEC Systems trades as EPOC Enviro around the rest of the world which stands for Emerging Pollutants of Concern. 

Today we will be discussing at length EPOC’s PFAS remediation technology for removing PFAS from water and landfill leachate using their SAFF systems.  We also discuss the challenges that short chain PFAS compounds continue to present to remediators and how the SAFF has navigated these challenges so far. 

SAFF system trials have already been conducted in Oakey QLD at a Department of Defence site, and at a landfill site in Telgay Sweden.  These two systems have now moved out of their trial period into a fixed contract period.  SAFF has also been trialed in UK, as well as an undisclosed location in the US on the East Coast of New York and will be involved in projects in Spain, Germany, Massachusett’s and Minnesota. 

And just recently announced on the 13/4/2023 EPOC Enviro announced plans to open a major manufacturing facility in Statesville, North Carolina, with the first US built SAFF units scheduled to start PFAS remediation work in July 2023.

Pete Murphy from EPOC states in their recent media release: “Our award-winning SAFF technology has already visited eight different US states, and we are looking forward to leveraging this impact to all corners of the globe including back home in Australia to help communities remediate their PFAS impacted waters.”

However, despite the huge investments in remediation technology that are happening around the world, very little if any money has been invested to come up with solutions to clean up private land or farms that have been contaminated by PFAS.  That is certainly the case in Australia and indeed also in many other parts of the world.  I discussed this scenario very briefly with Pete today at the end of the episode.

Please note: I am an independent journalist and a podcaster no money was received for today’s interview.  If in the future money is received from remediation companies (as sponsorship) to support the continuation of this podcast I will disclose this.  Also any discussions with remediation companies is for information purposes, I am not endorsing any product or remediation method over another.

Copyright:  Please share the episode (in whole) with acknowledgement via social media or website, but anyone wishing to edit, alter, or republish any information from this podcast in another form is subject to copyright and must contact the rights holder at TalkingPFAS@gmail.com.

OPEC Information

For more information on SAFF: www.epocenviro.com

Phone: +1 844 662 3762

Email:  info@epocenviro.com

Wiley articles:

"PFAS Removal from Groundwaters Using Surface-Active Foam Fractionation" Burns et al Published 24/8/2021

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rem.21694

"Commercial Scale Remediation of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances from a Landfill leachate catchment using Surface Active Foam Fractionation (SAFF)"  Burns et al 1/6/2022

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rem.21720

Show Notes: Talking PFAS with Peter Murphy, MD EPOC Enviro (OPEC Systems) regarding PFAS remediation using their SAFF Foam Fractionation Technology – Published Wed 26/4/2023
Welcome back to Talking PFAS podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.  If you are joining us for the first time a very big welcome. I encourage you to listen to past episodes, with a range of really excellent guests from around the world.
Just before I introduce today’s guest, I encourage you to have a listen to Episode 42, which published yesterday.  It is an update of the US EPA's proposed regulations regarding  PFAS in drinking water.   If the proposed MCLs are approved they will become mandatory levels.  As discussed in last week’s episode the guidelines and regulatory limits for certain PFAS keep going down. The number of PFAS lawsuits keep increasing, and the number of PFAS contaminated sites keeps growing.  This means there will be no shortage of PFAS remediation work for quite some time.
In fact, in a PFAS remediation special edition of the Environmental Business Journal published in 2019 they state, and I quote:
“The Environmental Business Journal has wrestled with the extent and scale of the PFAS Era in market terms.  The EBJ has published a working model which reflects a consensus on the scale of the emerging PFAS market.  The EBJ model includes major contributions from both waste and wastewater system upgrades and lifestyle costs as well as remediation.  The model published in 2019 points to the possibility of expenditures in excess of $160 billion over the next 20-30 years and over 40,000 sites or facilities where significant PFAS contamination will likely be identified and treated or remediated at some level.”                                     
Today’s discussion is another chat about a PFAS remediation method.   Today’s guest is Peter Murphy Managing Director of an Australian based company, OPEC Systems.  OPEC Systems trades as EPOC Enviro around the rest of the world which stands for Emerging Pollutants of Concern. 
Today we will be discussing at length EPOC’s PFAS remediation technology for removing PFAS from water and landfill leachate using their SAFF systems.  We also discuss the challenges that short chain PFAS compounds continue to present to remediators and how the SAFF has navigated these challenges so far. 
SAFF system trials have already been conducted in Oakey QLD at a Department of Defence site, and at a landfill site in Telgay Sweden.  These two systems have now moved out of their trial period into a fixed contract period.  SAFF has also been trialed in UK, as well as an undisclosed location in the US on the East Coast of New York and will be involved in projects in Spain, Germany, Massachusett’s and Minnesota. 
And just recently announced on the 13/4/2023 EPOC Enviro announced plans to open a major manufacturing facility in Statesville, North Carolina, with the first US built SAFF units scheduled to start PFAS remediation work in July 2023.
Pete Murphy from EPOC states in their recent media release: “Our award-winning SAFF technology has already visited eight different US states, and we are looking forward to leveraging this impact to all corners of the globe including back home in Australia to help communities remediate their PFAS impacted waters.”
However, despite the huge investments in remediation technology that are happening around the world, very little if any money has been invested to come up with solutions to clean up private land or farms that have been contaminated by PFAS.  That is certainly the case in Australia and indeed also in many other parts of the world.  I discussed this scenario very briefly with Pete today at the end of the episode.
Please note: I am an independent journalist and a podcaster no money was received for today’s interview.  If in the future money is received from remediation companies (as sponsorship) to support the continuation of this podcast I will disclose this.  Also any discussions with remediation companies is for information purposes, I am not endorsing any product or remediation method over another.
Copyright:  Please share the episode (in whole) with acknowledgement via social media or website, but anyone wishing to edit, alter, or republish any information from this podcast in another form is subject to copyright and must contact the rights holder at TalkingPFAS@gmail.com.
OPEC Information
For more information on SAFF: www.epocenviro.com
Phone: +1 844 662 3762
Email:  <a href="mailto:info@epocenviro.com">info@epocenviro.com</a>
Wiley articles:
"PFAS Removal from Groundwaters Using Surface-Active Foam Fractionation" Burns et al Published 24/8/2021
<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rem.21694">https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rem.21694</a>
"Commercial Scale Remediation of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances from a Landfill leachate catchment using Surface Active Foam Fractionation (SAFF)"  Burns et al 1/6/2022
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rem.21720

Ep 43 (PFAS Australia) EPOC Enviro Peter Murphy SAFF - PFAS removal using Foam Fractionation  - 26:4:2023, 10.11 pm

Show Notes

Talking PFAS Episode 42 – Published 25/4/2023

Welcome back to Talking PFAS Podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.

Today’s episode is the launch of Season 6, and I want to give a big thank you to everybody who continually listens to Talking PFAS podcast, and for sending me your emails on how much you enjoy it.  If you are new to the podcast, I encourage you to have a binge, as the content, of course, is still very relevant today as attention, regulation and litigation regarding PFAS chemicals continues to accelerate. 

In the Talking PFAS episode today we will be taking a closer look at what US EPA is doing regarding their proposed PFAS drinking water regulation. And it is important to note that I will be giving an overview, from their overview, so for you to get the full context of what they are doing, I strongly encourage you to look at their website. 

Also I really encourage you to look at their two webinars.  One was on the 16/3/23 and one was on the 29/3/23.  They are excellent.  They will give you all the information that you need whether you are somebody affected by PFAS contamination, or responsible to keep it out of drinking water, or responsible to clean it up.  And also, they go into great detail in parts of these webinars, but for the most part they are very easy to understand.

I just need to mention, in the intro, the proposed PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation,  that US EPA has proposed, is not an enforceable regulation yet, as some information online  and some news articles have reported that it is.  It is simply a proposal at this point.

Today I am going to share some key information from the US EPA webinars on these proposed  changes to drinking water regulation and I will put a link in my show notes.  And also the US EPA is running a virtual public hearing on May 4 and they are asking people to register and submit comments.  They will also take oral comments and written comments for this public hearing on May 4.  Throughout today’s discussion I am always talking about US EPA if I just say the word EPA, just for clarification.

I will also be sharing some of my interview with Boston Attorney John Gardella from CMBG3 Law.  This is a repeat from Episode 33 but I will not be publishing the whole of Episode 33.  But as we were discussing all of these changes it is relevant to today’s episode just to give people who are concerned about the legal ramification of these proposed changes.  So, I will be replaying it for the benefit of those listeners that are interested in litigation.

So why is the US EPA proposing these drinking water regulations regarding PFAS.  As they stated in the webinar, “they are taking this action because safe drinking water is fundamental to healthy people and thriving communities.”  EPA stated, “we rely on water from the moment we wake up and make a cup of coffee to when we brush our teeth at night.  Every person should have access to clean, safe drinking water.  That is why EPA is acting now to protect people’s drinking water from PFAS contamination.” 

As they stated in the webinar “The science is clear.  Long-term exposure to certain PFAS is linked to significant health risks.”  They continue to quote “people can be exposed to PFAS in a number of ways and when their drinking water is contaminated with PFAS it can be a significant portion of a person’s total PFAS exposure.”  This is very important to note, “based on EPA’s evaluation of current best available science,  PFOA and PFOS, are found to be likely human carcinogens.”

Commenters on the proposed rule have until May 30th this year, 2023, to provide comments to the agency on the proposed rule.  Comments must be submitted to the public docket by May 30th for consideration.

So, EPA is proposing a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) to establish legal enforceable levels called Maximum Contaminant Levels, (MCLs) for short.

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA has the authority to set enforceable National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for drinking water contaminants and require monitoring of public water supplies.  To date EPA has regulated more than 90 drinking water contaminants but has not established National drinking water regulations for any PFAS.

Now the Agency is developing a proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for PFOS and PFOA and additional certain other PFAS.  The EPA is also considering regulatory actions to address groups of PFAS.   The Agency expects to issue a final drinking water regulation by the end of 2023, after considering public comments on the proposal.

I am now going to play a portion of my interview with Boston Attorney John Gardella from Episode 33,  and I will ADD in some more relevant US EPA information around this, including the impacts that the new mandatory drinking water limits, if passed,  will have on public water system providers.

Now Boston Attorney, John Gardella, has been a regular guest on the Talking PFAS podcast.  It is always a great, open and easy to understand conversation with him.  He is well-versed on PFAS and writes frequently in the National Law Review and you can catch up on his multiple PFAS articles there.

All information is copyright – people can share links to the whole episode and share the show notes with full attribution to Kayleen Bell, journalist and producer Talking PFAS Podcast.  Permission must be sought from the rights holder at TalkingPFAS@gmail.com for any other reproduction/republishing use.

Next episode to publish Wed 26/4/23 Interview with OPEC Systems (EPOC Enviro) regarding their SAFF PFAS remediation.

Thanks again for listening :) 

SHOW NOTE LINKS:

Link to Episode 33 https://omny.fm/shows/talkingpfas/ep-33-boston-attorney-john-gardella-major-pfas-dev?in_playlist=podcast

US EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency

https://www.epa.gov/pfas

Suggested – EPA actions to address PFAS

You can find information on the US EPA website above about all of these things we discussed in today’s Talking PFAS episode (and much more) :
PFAS Strategic Roadmap
National drinking water standard to limit six PFAS
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding for PFAS and Emerging Contaminants in Drinking Water
Proposed Hazardous Substance Designation for PFOA and PFOS
Science Advisory Board Review of Draft PFOA/PFOS Scientific Documents
Rule Development for designating PFOA/PFOS as CERCLA Hazardous Substances

To watch the webinars I mentioned regarding the Proposed PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation go to https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas

Scroll down to find the webinars:

March 29, 2023 Technical Overview of the Proposed PFAS NPDWR and

March 16, 2023 General Overview Webinar on the Proposed PFAS NPDWR

Read more about: Emerging Contaminants (EC) in Small or Disadvantaged Communities Grant (SDC)

https://www.epa.gov/dwcapacity/emerging-contaminants-ec-small-or-disadvantaged-communities-grant-sdc#press

Plus access the above link and then scroll down until you see “Funding Allotments” or go to this link:

https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/FY22_FY23_Combined_BIL_EC_Allotments%20Memo%20to%20WDDs_February%202023_signed.pdf

This is the 3-page US EPA – Office of Water Memorandum regarding the Allotment of Funding FY 2022 & FY 2023 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Dated 13 February 2023 – that I mentioned in the Talking PFAS Podcast

OEHHA – Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Listings and Responses)

https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/crnr/notice-interested-parties-chemical-listed-effective-february-25-2022-known-state  “Effective February 25, 2022, for purposes of Proposition 65, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is adding perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) (CAS RN 335-67-1) to the list of chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer.”

OEHHA Response to Comments Pertaining to the Notice of Intent to List Perfluorooctanoic Acid as Causing Cancer Under Proposition 65

https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/responsecommentspfoa022522.pdf

Show Notes
Talking PFAS Episode 42 – Published 25/4/2023
Welcome back to Talking PFAS Podcast.  I am a journalist and your host Kayleen Bell.
Today’s episode is the launch of Season 6, and I want to give a big thank you to everybody who continually listens to Talking PFAS podcast, and for sending me your emails on how much you enjoy it.  If you are new to the podcast, I encourage you to have a binge, as the content, of course, is still very relevant today as attention, regulation and litigation regarding PFAS chemicals continues to accelerate. 
In the Talking PFAS episode today we will be taking a closer look at what US EPA is doing regarding their proposed PFAS drinking water regulation. And it is important to note that I will be giving an overview, from their overview, so for you to get the full context of what they are doing, I strongly encourage you to look at their website. 
Also I really encourage you to look at their two webinars.  One was on the 16/3/23 and one was on the 29/3/23.  They are excellent.  They will give you all the information that you need whether you are somebody affected by PFAS contamination, or responsible to keep it out of drinking water, or responsible to clean it up.  And also, they go into great detail in parts of these webinars, but for the most part they are very easy to understand.
I just need to mention, in the intro, the proposed PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation,  that US EPA has proposed, is not an enforceable regulation yet, as some information online  and some news articles have reported that it is.  It is simply a proposal at this point.
Today I am going to share some key information from the US EPA webinars on these proposed  changes to drinking water regulation and I will put a link in my show notes.  And also the US EPA is running a virtual public hearing on May 4 and they are asking people to register and submit comments.  They will also take oral comments and written comments for this public hearing on May 4.  Throughout today’s discussion I am always talking about US EPA if I just say the word EPA, just for clarification.
I will also be sharing some of my interview with Boston Attorney John Gardella from CMBG3 Law.  This is a repeat from Episode 33 but I will not be publishing the whole of Episode 33.  But as we were discussing all of these changes it is relevant to today’s episode just to give people who are concerned about the legal ramification of these proposed changes.  So, I will be replaying it for the benefit of those listeners that are interested in litigation.
So why is the US EPA proposing these drinking water regulations regarding PFAS.  As they stated in the webinar, “they are taking this action because safe drinking water is fundamental to healthy people and thriving communities.”  EPA stated, “we rely on water from the moment we wake up and make a cup of coffee to when we brush our teeth at night.  Every person should have access to clean, safe drinking water.  That is why EPA is acting now to protect people’s drinking water from PFAS contamination.” 
As they stated in the webinar “The science is clear.  Long-term exposure to certain PFAS is linked to significant health risks.”  They continue to quote “people can be exposed to PFAS in a number of ways and when their drinking water is contaminated with PFAS it can be a significant portion of a person’s total PFAS exposure.”  This is very important to note, “based on EPA’s evaluation of current best available science,  PFOA and PFOS, are found to be likely human carcinogens.”
Commenters on the proposed rule have until May 30th this year, 2023, to provide comments to the agency on the proposed rule.  Comments must be submitted to the public docket by May 30th for consideration.
So, EPA is proposing a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) to establish legal enforceable levels called Maximum Contaminant Levels, (MCLs) for short.
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA has the authority to set enforceable National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for drinking water contaminants and require monitoring of public water supplies.  To date EPA has regulated more than 90 drinking water contaminants but has not established National drinking water regulations for any PFAS.
Now the Agency is developing a proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for PFOS and PFOA and additional certain other PFAS.  The EPA is also considering regulatory actions to address groups of PFAS.   The Agency expects to issue a final drinking water regulation by the end of 2023, after considering public comments on the proposal.
I am now going to play a portion of my interview with Boston Attorney John Gardella from Episode 33,  and I will ADD in some more relevant US EPA information around this, including the impacts that the new mandatory drinking water limits, if passed,  will have on public water system providers.
Now Boston Attorney, John Gardella, has been a regular guest on the Talking PFAS podcast.  It is always a great, open and easy to understand conversation with him.  He is well-versed on PFAS and writes frequently in the National Law Review and you can catch up on his multiple PFAS articles there.
All information is copyright – people can share links to the whole episode and share the show notes with full attribution to Kayleen Bell, journalist and producer Talking PFAS Podcast.  Permission must be sought from the rights holder at <a href="mailto:TalkingPFAS@gmail.com">TalkingPFAS@gmail.com</a> for any other reproduction/republishing use.
Next episode to publish Wed 26/4/23 Interview with OPEC Systems (EPOC Enviro) regarding their SAFF PFAS remediation.
Thanks again for listening :) 
SHOW NOTE LINKS:
Link to Episode 33 <a href="https://omny.fm/shows/talkingpfas/ep-33-boston-attorney-john-gardella-major-pfas-dev?in_playlist=podcast">https://omny.fm/shows/talkingpfas/ep-33-boston-attorney-john-gardella-major-pfas-dev?in_playlist=podcast</a>
US EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/pfas">https://www.epa.gov/pfas</a>
Suggested – EPA actions to address PFAS
You can find information on the US EPA website above about all of these things we discussed in today’s Talking PFAS episode (and much more) :
<ul>
<li>PFAS Strategic Roadmap</li>
<li>National drinking water standard to limit six PFAS</li>
<li>Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding for PFAS and Emerging Contaminants in Drinking Water</li>
<li>Proposed Hazardous Substance Designation for PFOA and PFOS</li>
<li>Science Advisory Board Review of Draft PFOA/PFOS Scientific Documents</li>
<li>Rule Development for designating PFOA/PFOS as CERCLA Hazardous Substances</li>
</ul>
To watch the webinars I mentioned regarding the Proposed PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation go to <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas">https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas</a>
Scroll down to find the webinars:
March 29, 2023 Technical Overview of the Proposed PFAS NPDWR and
March 16, 2023 General Overview Webinar on the Proposed PFAS NPDWR
Read more about: Emerging Contaminants (EC) in Small or Disadvantaged Communities Grant (SDC)
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/dwcapacity/emerging-contaminants-ec-small-or-disadvantaged-communities-grant-sdc#press">https://www.epa.gov/dwcapacity/emerging-contaminants-ec-small-or-disadvantaged-communities-grant-sdc#press</a>
Plus access the above link and then scroll down until you see “Funding Allotments” or go to this link:
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/FY22_FY23_Combined_BIL_EC_Allotments%20Memo%20to%20WDDs_February%202023_signed.pdf">https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/FY22_FY23_Combined_BIL_EC_Allotments%20Memo%20to%20WDDs_February%202023_signed.pdf</a>
This is the 3-page US EPA – Office of Water Memorandum regarding the Allotment of Funding FY 2022 &amp; FY 2023 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Dated 13 February 2023 – that I mentioned in the Talking PFAS Podcast
OEHHA – Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Listings and Responses)
<a href="https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/crnr/notice-interested-parties-chemical-listed-effective-february-25-2022-known-state">https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/crnr/notice-interested-parties-chemical-listed-effective-february-25-2022-known-state</a>  “Effective February 25, 2022, for purposes of Proposition 65, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is adding perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) (CAS RN 335-67-1) to the list of chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer.”
OEHHA Response to Comments Pertaining to the Notice of Intent to List Perfluorooctanoic Acid as Causing Cancer Under Proposition 65
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/responsecommentspfoa022522.pdf

Ep 2 - "We just don't want to live on contaminated land" Len & Pam O'Connell

In 1 playlist(s)

TalkingPFAS

Follow podcast

Recent clips