Document VOogMpD44RZDZQn84DxeGogq

Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Jones, Enesta [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=65B8E6C6E5CA4A7A9AE85D98A4C8EEDB-EJONES02] Ex. 6 '??s'fl7o"=E'xcRngelabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=b293283291dc44eOb5dlc36be9281d8a-Press] Re: NH reporter seeking data on PFAs Hi Ken, our response below is attributable to an EPA spokesperson: Drinking water health advisories are levels of a contaminant in drinking water at which adverse health effects are not anticipated to occur over specific exposure durations. EPA did not have the data to establish a specific level of blood serum concentrations that would lead to health effects. Thus, the 70 ppt drinking water health advisory level for PFOA is based on exposure to the contaminant in animal studies and was not modeled to correlate to specific blood serum concentrations in humans. Variables including gender, age, initial blood serum level, and the percent of total exposure contributed by the drinking water versus diet, indoor dusts etc. are all factors that need to be taken into account in such a calculation. Additionally, whether or not the serum measurement represented steady state is also important. Steady state is the serum level where the intake and excretion are balanced causing the serum level to remain constant. Once that point has been reached the serum levels no longer increase as long as the exposures stay relatively constant. This point is not the same for everyone so steady state for one person will not be that for others. For people not at steady state, serum levels will continue to rise even after the drinking water concentration goes down because there can still be some exposure from other sources i.e., nondrinking water sources. However, levels will not increase at the same rate as they did before the drinking water exposure was lowered. For those that may have preexisting body burden of PFOA/PFOS, the concentration in serum will slowly drop from existing levels once the exposure from their drinking water is decreased to 70 ppt, presuming there is no additional significant exposure from other sources. All actions taken to reduce the other sources of exposure such as dusts in the home, workplace and cars will increase the rate of decline. From:! Ex. 6 I i_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ : Sent: Friday, December 01, 2017 1:27 PM To: Jones, Enesta cJones.Enesta@epa.gov> Subject: Re: NH reporter seeking data on PFAs Hi Ernesta, This is what I don't understand: According to an EPA report, individuals should not consume water that contains levels of PFOA above 70 parts per trillion. Blood tests of New Hampshire residents exposed to water with PFOA report these results: PFOA concentration: 62 with less than 3.0 micrograms / liter 89 with3.0-4.9 micrograms/liter 36 with 5.0-6.9 micrograms/liter 30 greater than or equal to 7 micrograms/liter How do the micrograms/liter Us relate to the ppt Us??? Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00022115-00001 Ken Liebeskind, The Telegraph, Nashua, NH, -j Ex. 6 ---- Original Message----- From: Jones, Enesta <Jones.Enesta@epa.gov> To: Deegan, Dave <Deegan.Dave@epa.gov> Cc: kenrunz <j Ex. 6 |; Press <Press@epa.gov> Sent: Fri, Dec 1, 2017 11:31 am Subject: Re: NH reporter seeking data on PFAs Thanks, Dave. Ken, any follow-up questions you may have, you can send to me directly. Thanks, Enesta On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Deegan, Dave <Deegan.Dave@epa.gov> wrote: Hi Ken, Thanks for reaching out. Our office in Boston does not have data such as you're seeking. Here's a link to EPA's latest info on PFAs (https://www.epa.gov/pfas) and our latest fact sheet on health protections (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-ll/documents/2017-ll-21 pfas fact sheet final.508.pdf). I'm also copying my press office colleagues in EPA HQ who can help you with any follow up questions. Best Regards, Dave Dave Deegan U.S. EPA, New England Regional Office Media Relations I Social Media I Web Content phone: 617.918.1017 Ex. 6 email: deegan.dave@epa.pov <image001.jpg> <irnage003,jpg> From:; Ex. 6 Sent: l^riday7DecemBe70172'017T0:00'AM'' To: Deegan, Dave <Deegan.Dave@epa.gov> Subject: Hi, I'm a reporter for the Telegraph in Nashua, NH working on a story on the blood tests that were taken after PFOA was discovered in water in the Merrimac, NH area near the Saint-Gobain plant. I'd like EPA data on studies done to determine the health effects of exposure to PFOA. I have some data from 2014 and I'm wondering if there is any more recent data. Please contact me as soon as possible, thanks, Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00022115-00002 Ken Liebeskind j Ex. 6 Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00022115-00003