Levels of PFAS in Proposed Burrillville Turf Field Focus of Testimony
Both sides rested their case last week
By Colleen Cronin / ecoRI News staff
December 16, 2024
PROVIDENCE — After several weeks of testimony, attorneys for both sides in a dispute over an artificial turf field in Burrillville rested their cases on Thursday.
Town resident and conservationist Roberta Lacey had filed a complaint against Burrillville officials and the company FieldTurf in September, alleging that a turf field slated to be installed at Burrillville High School could release chemicals — per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known PFAS or “forever chemicals” — that could contaminate drinking water, and that the field hadn’t gone through the proper zoning channels before being approved.
The town denied that the field would have an adverse effect on drinking water and countersued Lacey, stating in its own complaint that her suit was “based on speculative and unsubstantiated fears.”
Associate Justice Melissa E. Darigan placed a temporary restraining order on the construction of the field earlier this fall while the case was heard in Providence Superior Court.
During hours of testimony, both sides called town officials and experts to help make their cases. They highlighted information about the chemicals in the turf slated for the field and the town zoning and planning procedures that did and didn’t occur before the field was approved.
Here is what you need to know about what happened in the courtroom:
PFAS were detected in the turf material, but lawyers on both sides argued over how significant those results were.
According to testimony presented at trial, testing detected PFAS in the turf carpet that will be used for the Burrillville athletic field.
PFAS are a class of chemicals that include thousands of substances used in such things as firefighting foam and non-stick pans, some of which have been linked to serious health conditions like decreased immunity to vaccines and developmental issues in children.
Karen Vetrano, a witness for the defense and principal toxicologist at engineering and consulting firm TRC, testified that the “trace” levels of four PFAS found in testing were “below any health standards or regulations.”
The town of Burrillville hired TRC earlier this year to assess the risk the artificial turf field could pose to human health, resulting in a report released in September.
Currently, the state of Rhode Island regulates PFAS concentration in drinking water, while stricter regulations set by the federal Environmental Protection Agency will not be enforceable until 2029. Any system in Rhode Island that tests above 20 parts per trillion (ppt) for six different PFAS has to work to lower the concentration of the chemicals in the water, according to the state Department of Health, and any system above 70 ppt is issued a no-drinking order.
Vetrano said the few PFAS detected in TRC’s testing were in concentrations well below enforceable standards.
Marisa Desautel, an attorney for the plaintiff, on cross-examination asked Vetrano about the EPA’s maximum contaminant level goal — “the non-enforceable level at which no known or adverse effects on the health of persons are anticipated to occur and which allows for an adequate margin of safety. It does not account for limits of detection and treatment technology effectiveness,” according to the agency, which is set at zero.
Vertrano said it wasn’t a measure used by TRC because it isn’t a realistic or enforceable goal.
“Zero is not attainable,” Vertrano said on the stand. “Everybody in this courtroom has measurable levels of PFAS in their blood.”
A town official testified he believed the field should have been brought before the Planning Board before it was approved.
Raymond Goff, Burrillville’s town planner, initially testified that he did not review the preliminary plan for the field and did not believe that it needed to be reviewed by the town’s Planning Board.
But after questioning and a review of town ordinances by Michelle Hawes, another attorney representing Lacey, Goff revised his opinion.
Goff said the artificial turf field is a “structure,” according to the ordinance; the project would require construction; and its location is in an aquifer overlay zone — specifications that the town ordinances dictate should trigger a review.
“Would you like to revise your opinion about whether or not development plan review was required for the installation of the artificial turf field?” plaintiff’s counsel asked.
“My opinion is that based upon the ordinance, yes, it would be triggered to go to development plan review,” Goff said.
The judge asked attorneys to send post-trial memos to the court by early next year.
Darigan asked counsel for both sides to submit post-trial memos to the court by Jan. 6, summarizing the legal arguments they are using.
“It does not need to be your most beautiful writing,” she said, “this is not a Supreme Court brief.”
“I will not be offended if you use bullets,” she added.
Darigan said she would review the documents and likely schedule future hearing dates to ask questions and hear oral arguments next year.
SOURCE: https://ecori.org/levels-of-pfas-in-proposed-burrillville-turf-field-focus-of-testimony/
