PFAS, Part 4: Sleuthing for PFAS in Gerry, NY
Nearly two years ago, my husband and I moved to Gerry, a rural town in southern Chautauqua County, NY. We liked the property’s location up in the hills, away from conventionally-farmed vineyards and cornfields on the plain near Lake Erie. With plans to grow much of our own food, it was a priority to reduce the chances of pesticide drift onto our property.
As I shared in PFAS Article 1, I learned by way of the Last Week Tonight show that Gerry is on Environmental Working Group’s PFAS Contamination in the US map. This map pins two WNY military sites with known PFAS drinking water contamination: one at the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station, and the other at Gerry Army Reserve Center—less than two miles away from our home.
In this article, I’ll share what I’ve learned about PFAS contamination here in Gerry. Most importantly, I’ll walk you through my process of gathering information—including roadblocks I encountered and dead-end calls I made. Far from being a savvy navigator of public records, I often wasn’t sure which office or department to contact with my questions. Perhaps the most important skill I’m learning is to just pick up the phone or send that email. If the individual on the other end isn’t the right person to talk to, they lead me one step closer by directing me elsewhere. This may happen several times before I find what I’m looking for—or learn that the data doesn’t exist. If I’m willing to keep asking questions and reaching out to that next person, I’m often surprised by what I can learn.
Image: Me harvesting yellow zinnias & sunflowers in front of our Gerry home. I’m wearing a straw hat and precariously holding metal pruners. Photo by Sara Jablonski.
Gerry Army Reserve Center
Our search for a home introduced me to the Chautauqua County parcel viewer map and parcel history database. I hoped that the parcel history would lend clues about past uses of the Gerry Reserve Center land (4455 Gerry-Levant Rd). Unfortunately, I didn’t glean much about the ownership history. It’s currently owned by the Army Corps of Engineers, but there’s no info about who owned the property previously.
Googling “Gerry Reserve Center” showed that this was an army-affiliated site. Google also gave me a phone number for the Center. I called, and the phone was disconnected.
I got in touch with another Army Reserve Center I found in Jamestown, just a 10-minute drive from the Gerry building. I called to ask if they have PFAS use or storage records from the Gerry Center. I was told that the Gerry Center was closed and moved north to the Niagara Falls area. The Niagara Center might have the records I’m looking for.
I paused on making phone calls and used the National Army Reserve Center’s general contact form on their website to send this message:
Hello! I recently learned that the Gerry Reserve Center site (4455 Gerry Levant Rd, Gerry, NY) is contaminated with PFAS, a toxic class of chemicals that are slow to break down in the environment and cause health issues at very low levels. The national PFAS map below includes basic info about this site. PFAS were most likely used in firefighting foam at this location. The chemicals easily travel by air and water. www.ewg.org/interactive-map
As a vegetable gardener who lives close to the site, I'm interested in learning specifically which PFAS were used, how much was released, and when. Though well water tests for PFAS are available, I would need to know which PFAS were used in order to test our water and remediate as needed.
I called Gerry Reserve Center to request records and found that the number was disconnected; this Center has closed. Could you please let me know how I can access PFAS usage records for this location?
Thanks for your time!
Next, I visited the Town of Gerry website to see who I might contact to request information. I guessed that the town clerk was a good person to reach out to. I sent them an email similar to my note to the National Army Reserve Center, asking if the town has records pertaining to PFAS contamination at this site.
Image: A bounty of gourds and squash harvested from our garden rests on our kitchen table.
Correspondence with Town Supervisor & Army
My army contact form submission went to the Army Human Resources Command (HRC). They replied and directed me to the Army Public Affairs Office.
In the meantime, Gerry Town Supervisor Rick Heath kindly responded to my email to the town clerk. Throughout our correspondence, Mr. Heath communicated exactly as I’d hope a public official would. He was honest about the limits of his knowledge, sharing that this was the first the Town had heard about ground contamination at this site. I’ve often seen folks in a position of power assume that if they don’t already know about something, it must not be worth considering or researching. (I’ve encountered this quite a bit at the doctor’s office.) Instead, Mr. Heath took responsibility for doing further research. He said he would look into it and keep me abreast of what he learned. (Mr. Heath has my vote in the next local election!)
A representative from the US Army Reserve replied to Mr. Heath, and he forwarded their email to me. I’m grateful that this individual attached water testing data from 2016 and 2019, as well as a map of the facility showing that water flows from west to east through the property (away from our home). The Army Reserve went above and beyond, also sharing a memorandum from the 99th Readiness Division Environmental Chief that was specifically prepared to address my questions. The memorandum included information about why water testing occurred at this site. (It was essentially routine testing, and wasn’t sparked by a concern or risk specific to this facility.) The memorandum also included property history that I wasn’t able to find online; more about this in my email below.
In their email, the Army Reserve representative noted that sites that used or stored AFFF (firefighting foam) may have had PFAS contamination occur in their ground, drinking, wastewater, and/or storm water. This is common at airports, firefighter training centers, and on ships to extinguish fires. However, since Gerry Reserve Center was home to a Drill Sergeant Detachment, they assured us that the facility is considered low-risk for PFAS exposure. They noted that PFAS were not detected when the groundwater was re-tested in 2019, and expressed confidence that Gerry residents are not at risk of PFAS exposure from the Army Reserve Center.
Image: A swallowtail butterfly caterpillar creeps along a dill inflorescence in our garden.
Observations from the Data
After reading over the materials and water testing data provided, I sent the following reply to my Army Reserve contacts and Mr. Heath:
This is Sarah Sorci, the Gerry resident that Richard kindly reached out to you on behalf of. I want to thank you for taking the time to share these reports, and also to explain why Gerry residents are at low risk for PFAS exposure (partly because the facility was occupied by a Drill Sergeant Detachment, and partly because many residents are upgradient). I appreciate you sharing in the memorandum that the facility was an elementary school prior to the ARC acquiring it in 1987; knowing the prior history of a property is highly relevant to alleviating contamination concerns as well. I do feel more at ease about our proximity to this facility and the low likelihood of PFAS existing in our well water.
(Given the info you shared about the Drill Sergeant Detachment there, I wonder if the PFOA detected in 2016 actually originated from firefighting activity in the town not related to the ARC--though that's another story!)
I'll share my observations and questions that arose as I reviewed the reports you shared, in case you have further feedback.
I first looked at the data reported by Lancaster Laboratories Environmental from their 2019 testing. If I understand the report correctly, the detection limit is .41 ng/l, which is equal to 410 parts per trillion (ppt)--so, the lab couldn't detect PFAS/PFOA present below this concentration.
According to this Environmental Protection Agency webpage, "To provide Americans, including the most sensitive populations, with a margin of protection from a lifetime of exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water, EPA has established the health advisory levels at 70 parts per trillion." This means that PFOA levels would need to be over 5 times the limit recommended by the EPA for Lancaster Laboratories to be able to detect them. [Update: the EPA has since significantly lowered its Lifetime Health Advisory for PFAS Exposure from 70 ppt for PFOA and PFOS to .004 ppt for PFOA and .02 ppt for PFOS (EPA, June 2022)].
It was great to see that the Test America Lab had more sensitive equipment. Their results (PFOA at 1.1 ppt) and the 2016 testing year match what is on the Environmental Working Group (EWG) PFAS map, so I imagine this is the report EWG drew from when adding Gerry Reserve Center to their map.
Since I'd mentioned above that 70 ppt is the EPA's recommended limit, it would seem that 1.1 ppt is securely in the "safe" range. However, the EPA has a reputation for setting contamination limits that are far above the level that actually may cause disease. Some toxins, including PFAS/PFOA, cause health issues at extremely low levels when folks are exposed over time. Some states have set lower advisory levels because of this, as noted by the Water Quality Association. [See bracketed update above.]
Since the 2019 testing was done with less sensitive equipment at Lancaster Labs, as explained above, my assumption is that levels are still at around 1.1 ppt.
Thanks again for your time and attention!
I did not receive a reply from anyone copied on this email—I imagine because they didn’t have further information to add to the conversation.
Image: dandelion leaf + flower pesto, made from dandelions growing on our Gerry lawn.
Home Water Testing
Because groundwater from Gerry Reserve Center presumedly flows away from our home, and because home PFAS water testing isn’t in our budget at the moment (TapScore charges $299), I’m satisfied with the information I have for now and will continue merrily gardening at our home. If we find ourselves with the means to test our water at some point, we’re lucky to know at least one PFAS compound to test for (PFOA) thanks to the Army Reserve sharing their water testing data. PFAS tests look for one or more specific PFAS compounds. They can’t detect all PFAS, which means it’s possible to get false negative results if the PFAS present aren’t registered by the equipment. If you’re considering doing PFAS testing at your home due to a specific contamination issue or exposure, it’s worth finding out which PFAS chemicals might be there before paying for a home water test.
Final Thoughts
If there’s anything I can impart, dear reader, it’s that you are capable of interpreting scientific data if only you are given access. Though I took a few chemistry classes in college, poring over scientific data sometimes makes me “go dead inside,” as Glennon Doyle might say. I like reading, writing, and teaching about science, but I find doing science—collecting and analyzing data—to be boring as hell. The gumption to look up the abbreviated measurement units in the Army’s water testing data came on the heels of procrastination. My avoidance was partly rooted in the fear that I wasn’t capable of making sense of what I’d find in these files.
And—when gumption arrived, I made relevant observations about the data that experts presumedly had not noticed themselves. If I can do it, so can you.
There may be times when the scientific jargon used to present data feels too overwhelming to understand without help. First, take heart, knowing that just asking for this info shows folks in power that environmental health and safety are important to the community. To make sense of the data, try contacting someone who can help—perhaps the company that was contracted to do the testing, or a university professor.
When environmental contamination questions arise in your community, I wish you a satisfying, enlightening, and well-supported sleuthing process.
Never miss an article: Join the Sweet Flag Herbs newsletter to receive an email when a new A Nourishing Harvest article is posted.
