State Grapples With Nonexistent PFAS Limits as Utility Says Positive Tests Date to 2019

The affected wells tested far below a federal lifetime health advisory.

It’s the first time the contaminants—known to be present in high concentrations in groundwater beneath Cannon Air Force Base just outside Clovis—have been found in a public drinking water supply in the state. New Mexico Environment Department Secretary James Kenney said that even at low levels, their presence is significant.

“The facts are that Cannon has used those aqueous firefighting foams, those have migrated into the groundwater, now, we’re seeing those PFAS chemicals that are in those aqueous firefighting foams in the drinking water,” he said in an interview with NMPBS this week. “So while we haven’t done a forensic analysis to see if it’s the same chemical, the likelihood in my opinion is that it’s moving in that direction—the plume is moving in that direction, the groundwater is moving in that direction, and that might be what we’re seeing.”

State Rep. Randal Crowder, R-Clovis, doubts the contamination is coming from Cannon. The wells that tested positive for PFAS—including one about 30 feet from his own property—are upgradient of the plume, he said. He also noted that many of the impacted wells are close to stormwater features, playas, and lakes, such as the city’s Greene Lake and Dennis Chavez Park. These could be affected by debris or wastewater containing PFAS, he said.

PFAS chemicals are found in common household goods ranging from non-stick cookware and stain-resistant carpets, to furniture and fast food containers, to pizza boxes and rain-resistant clothing.

Below Cannon, however, concentrations were alarming—more than 370 times what federal regulators currently consider safe for a lifetime of exposure. Tests within a four-mile perimeter of the base, conducted in 2018, showed contamination of private drinking wells. Some of the affected wells included those supplying water to dairies, a key component of the local economy.

As a precaution at that time, EPCOR’s Calkins said the utility shut down two of its wells downgradient of the plume and in the presumed path of groundwater migrating from beneath the base. He said EPCOR has taken any wells that have tested positive for PFAS out of service.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has yet to set a regulatory threshold for PFAS, which includes more than 7,000 different contaminants. Instead, the federal agency issued a lifetime health advisory of 70 parts per trillion for two of those chemicals, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS). Exposure to PFOA is linked to reproductive and developmental systems, liver and kidneys, and immune system, as well as high cholesterol, low infant birth weights, cancer, while PFOS is associated with problems like thyroid hormone disruption.

The EPA failed to propose a national drinking water regulatory determination for PFOA and PFOS in 2019, as called for in the agency’s own PFAS Action Plan. Federal regulators are also behind schedule on a number of other actions in that plan, including to finalize toxicity assessments and values for other PFAS, including GenX chemicals, PFBS, PFBA, PFHxA, PFHxS, PFNA and PFDA.

The lack of enforceable federal limits means that state regulators, in New Mexico and around the nation, can’t rein in polluters.

When the EPA sets regulatory limits on contaminants—as it does for substances such as lead, arsenic and uranium—states can impose requirements on public drinking water systems. “On the flip side of that, where we have emerging contaminants that have not yet had the regulatory process play out, we don’t have a maximum level that is regulated for these systems,” said Rebecca Roose, director of NMED’s Water Protection Division.

New Mexico state Sens. Pat Woods, R-Broadview, and Stuart Ingle, R-Portales, introduced a bill that would provide NMED with $700,000 to test wells in Curry and Roosevelt counties for PFAS. With the legislative session entering its final week, the senators’ best hope for funding was to insert the language of their bill into the Senate’s version of the final budget. As of Friday, the money had not been placed in the spending bill.