MRLs for PFAS in beef may be needed to meet international food standards: scientist

EPA Victoria's chief environmental scientist Professor Mark Taylor said food in Australia was "ultra high quality" compared to the US, China, Europe and the UK, and an assessment by FSANZ (Food Standards Australia New Zealand) indicated PFAS levels in food in Australia were lower than those countries.

He said MRLs were probably not necessary at this point in time when one looked at Australia's overall food produce.

"But, certainly in places where it's impacted (by PFAS contamination), I think logic would have it that you would want to make sure you're not introducing contaminated food into the food chain," he said.

Prof Taylor said the question about setting maximum residue levels for PFAS in Australia was complicated.

"But the European Union themselves have decided there should be maximum residue limits and no doubt the (United) States will follow...so it maybe just a matter of time before we start doing it," he said.

"At this point, I would have thought that people would consider it's not necessary, but the new standards set for maximum residue limits in Europe may then precipitate us to consider doing something like that in the future to ensure we meet international food standards."

Prof Taylor said there had been work done looking at PFAS in cattle, but there were questions about the hot spots where PFAS contamination had occurred and what to do with them.

He said the argument in the past that PFAS was not a problem in cattle in Australia was because there were so few areas impacted relative to the total area that produced beef.

"That's the argument that's been put forward and I haven't seen any data that would contradict that argument," he said.

"But, the localised areas (where there is PFAS contamination) are problematic and it may be that because of those areas we may end up having to set maximum residue levels to protect our markets."

When asked about PFAS and what Cattle Australia was doing about the issue, CA CEO Dr Chris Parker said he had meet with one of the cattle producers affected by PFAS contaminated water, Larry Acton, at Beef last week and had numerous phone conversations with him.

Dr Parker said CA needed to look at how industry managed the point source of contamination with PFAS.

"Hopefully, we'll be working with Safemeat about how we might be able to provide advice to producers who are in positions like Larry's where there is point source contamination," he said.

"What we are aware of and what we are pleased about is that more broadly across the supply chain and in food, and FSANZ has shown this with their studies, there is very limited contamination or any PFAS in any of the food and that food remains safe.

"And that's the important message, but we do have some challenges for those producers who are around those point source contamination."

When asked if the guidelines should be changed in relation to cattle drinking PFAS contaminated water, Dr Parker said they needed to look at the best available science and the manner in which those producers that were at point source contamination were dealt with.

"That's a matter for Larry about requesting clean water for his cattle and he can work his way through what that looks like," he said.

"What we want to do to support him and other producers in his position is to simply say that we need to be able to have a set of guidelines for producers both for water, feed and how they want to use their properties to deal with, when they have high levels of point source contamination.

"It's a matter we've raised with Safemeat and we're looking forward to working with Safemeat to have science based recommendations for producers who might find themselves in this space."

The bore water on Mr Acton's property at Biloela tested positive to high levels of PFAS alleged to have leached into the underground aquifer from the Callide Power Station which used PFAS fire fighting foam that is now banned.

CS Energy, which manages the Callide Power Station, has supplied Mr Acton with clean water for his house and garden, but has refused to supply clean drinking water for his cattle.