People living in parts of Mullumbimby in the Byron Shire hinterland are being warned to avoid using groundwater or harvesting homegrown fruit and vegetables after PFAS chemicals were detected.

The NSW Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NSW Fire and Rescue have contacted residents in 80 homes near the town’s fire station following the discovery of the toxic chemicals. 

EPA director of regulatory operations David Gathercole said the detection was one of thousands across the state since 2016.

“We’ve undertaken about 1,038 investigations across the state,” he said.

“So at this stage we’re aware of this detection and a more detailed investigation now needs to be undertaken.” 

Bore water concern

PFAS is a broad term used for more than 4,000 chemicals that have historically been used in firefighting foams among a range of other uses.

Advice from an Australian government website says most people are likely to have very low levels of PFAS in their bodies through exposure to household items like protective sprays, cosmetics, sunscreens, and some non-stick cookware.

The website states “some people living near sites where PFAS have been released into the environment in large amounts — usually due to the use of PFAS-containing fire-fighting foams — may have higher levels in their bodies, particularly if they have been drinking contaminated bore water”.

“There is … limited to no evidence of human disease or other clinically significant harm resulting from PFAS exposure at this time,” the advice said.

But Mr Gathercole said people living near the Mullumbimby Fire Station should take precautions.

“The advice cautions that PFAS exposures may be associated with mild elevated cholesterol levels and affects some hormone levels in some kidney function,” he said. 

“Don’t use your groundwater bore for now.

One resident, who asked not to be named, said he was doorknocked by NSW Fire and Rescue on Monday and warned his bore water-irrigated veggie patch may have been contaminated.

“They went to the bore and took some samples, took some samples out of the garden, and said they were going to test them,” he said. 

PFAS payouts

In May last year the federal government settled a class action over PFAS contamination from firefighting foam at seven sites across the country, paying out $132.7 million to about 30,000 claimants.

The affected sites were in Wagga Wagga and Richmond in New South Wales, Wodonga in Victoria, Darwin in the Northern Territory, Townsville in Queensland, Edinburgh in South Australia, and Bullsbrook in Western Australia.

Shine Lawyers’ Craig Allsopp, who represented the claimants, described the payout at the time as “compensation for property value”.

In 2020, the Commonwealth paid $212 million to affected residents of Oakey, Katherine, and Williamtown who had also launched a class action over the loss of property value.

‘Forever chemicals’

A senior adviser at the International Pollutants Elimination Network, Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, said there was a reason PFAS was known as “forever chemicals”.

“They’re a group of chemicals that never break down in the environment,” she said.

Dr Lloyd-Smith said people in the affected area should be given more information about the extent of contamination.

“People need to be empowered to ask questions,” she said.

“If someone’s knocking on your door and saying there’s contamination, you want to know ‘well, what detection levels?'”

The ABC has asked Fire and Rescue NSW for more information about the severity and extent of the contamination in Mullumbimby, but is yet to receive a reply.

‘Mullumbimby’s turn’

The current testing of samples from Mullumbimby is part of a broader scheme across the state to remediate sites potentially exposed to PFAS.

Deputy commissioner for field operations at Fire and Rescue NSW, Paul McGuiggan, said authorities were attempting to re-trace the steps of fire crews across the decades.

“It’s now Mullumbimby’s turn,” he said.

“The information that we got back was there was the potential of historical use of the firefighting foams on that site.

“That’s the current running theory as to why the detection is right there near the station.”