Regulators Overlook Toxic Chemicals Near Lancashire Plant

Concerns are mounting as regulators fail to test for a toxic substance produced by AGC Chemicals at its facility in Lancashire, even though independent analyses have detected this chemical in local soils. This substance, known as EEA-NH4, is classified as reprotoxic, indicating potential risks to sexual function, fertility, and child development. Despite its harmful nature, regulatory bodies have not included it in their monitoring efforts, which has raised alarm among environmental experts and local residents.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as “forever chemicals,” are manmade compounds commonly found in consumer products and firefighting foams. These substances do not decompose easily, leading to accumulation in the environment, wildlife, and human bodies. Scientific studies have linked certain PFAS to serious health issues, including cancer and hormone disruption.

AGC Chemicals has been under scrutiny since reports from The Guardian and Watershed Investigations revealed elevated levels of the banned carcinogenic PFAS, PFOA, being discharged into the River Wyre. Local residents have been advised against consuming produce from their gardens due to the presence of PFOA in vegetables.

The Environment Agency is conducting soil and water sampling around the AGC site and has confirmed the presence of PFOA. However, it has not tested for EEA-NH4, despite evidence that approximately 800 kg is emitted into the River Wyre annually. The agency has stated that it can only test for PFAS with established analytical standards, which EEA-NH4 currently lacks. Dr. David Megson, a forensic scientist and PFAS expert, criticized this approach, stating, “Our results showed that the soil surrounding the site consistently contains EEA-NH4 and hydrogen-substituted carboxylic acids (H-PFCAs).”

Dr. Megson emphasized the importance of including these compounds in health risk assessments, arguing that overlooking them could result in an underestimation of potential health risks. “Any contaminated land investigation should carefully consider the source, receptor, and pathway,” he added, highlighting the inadequacy of focusing solely on commonly detected PFAS.

Experts are calling for more stringent oversight of PFAS emissions. Prof. Hans Peter Arp from the Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology remarked, “This is not just a UK problem but a global one. Citizens need to know how much PFAS is being released so that polluters can be held accountable.”

Crispin Halsall, a professor of environmental organic chemistry at Lancaster University, suggested that the Environment Agency should broaden its testing parameters to include EEA-NH4 and other shorter-chain PFAS. He indicated that incorporating these substances into current analytical procedures could significantly alter risk assessments, potentially revealing greater risks to human health than previously recognized.

AGC Chemicals Europe Ltd responded by asserting its commitment to environmental standards and community safety. A spokesperson noted that the company has volunteered for a third-party environmental assessment, which is currently underway and includes both current and legacy chemicals. They highlighted that the use of EEA-NH4 is permitted under the site’s regulations, subject to REACH registration, an EU regulatory framework.

The Environment Agency reiterated its focus on compliance with environmental permits while investigating historical contamination at the site. A spokesperson stated, “There is no strong evidence to suggest EEA-NH4 contamination is widely present in land surrounding the site.”

As concerns over PFAS emissions continue, the situation remains under close observation by both regulators and local communities, highlighting the urgent need for comprehensive testing and accountability in chemical production practices.