Media response - PFAS at McLaren Vale
Published on 27 July 2020
Response to The Advertiser.
Earlier this month Council requested and received a briefing on the proposed storage of PFAS from the EPA.
The information in that briefing, along with information from the EPA community engagement, and direct feedback to Council from our residents and businesses, has informed our position.
It’s important to remember that Council has no development powers to intervene in any decision about the storage of PFAS at this facility. This is the EPA's responsibility.
With that said, the following comments outlining Council’s concerns can be attributed to Mayor Erin Thompson.
Council is concerned with PFAS being disposed of at the proposed facility close to one of Australia’s, and the world’s, premier wine regions.
Aside from the potential safety aspects, the City of Onkaparinga and the entire state gain huge economic benefits from McLaren Vale’s branding and reputation as a sustainable wine region.
The perception alone of storage of PFAS contaminated material within 500 metres of the closest vineyards is very likely to undermine decades of promotion for the region, and negatively impact our international reputation for ‘clean and green’ produce.
Chemicals under the umbrella name of PFAS have only recently been identified, so it’s reasonable to assume the full long-term effect of these chemicals on the environment is not yet fully known.
However, initial studies have shown significant risks relating to PFAS, including increased cholesterol among exposed populations, and more limited findings with links to low infant birth weights, immune system impacts, cancer (for PFOA) and thyroid hormone disruption (for PFOS).
One thing we do know is that PFAS compounds easily dissolve in water, making it likely that any leaching or accidental leaking from the facility would impact surrounding ground water resources.
In the EPA report it states they will not license the disposal of liquid waste at the proposed site, yet throughout the report the term sludge is used, which is a thick slurry of both liquid and solids. It’s likely that leaching could still occur through the liquid components of any slurry disposed of at the site.
We also have significant concerns about the EPA’s engagement process relating to this proposal.
While the EPA stated they engaged beyond statutory obligations, the engagement occurred during COVID-19, negating the opportunity to hold large public meetings.
Despite this, the EPA received 115 submissions from community members, and these were overwhelmingly opposed to the proposal, mentioning threat to vineyards, reputational damage and a very strong message to “dump it elsewhere, not in McLaren Vale”.
The EPA’s response to those submissions was that “the purpose of lining a landfill cell was to minimise risk to ground water”.
Our view is ‘minimising’ risk is not as effective as not introducing it in the first place, and that a more appropriate site be found well away from residential homes and a protected internationally renowned wine region.
The strong community opposition to this proposal should not be ignored.
But there appears to be a presumption, reinforced by the fact that construction has commenced on site, that regardless of the feedback from community and industry, this facility will proceed and be managed by an EPA licence as yet unseen.
We strongly urge the EPA to share the draft licence conditions with the community for consultation before any final approvals are given.
ENDS