FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

Drinking water supply: Mains water in the area is supplied by United Utilities. We hold no PFAS results for local tap water, so this page says nothing about it either way; for water quality at your address, contact United Utilities. The high readings below come from discharge water at points north of the site, not from tap water.

What has been measured:

• In one day's sampling on 12 February 2023, independent researchers measured PFOA at between 891 and 20,624 ng/L (nanograms per litre) across three points north of the Hillhouse site: a discharge beside a lagoon the study identifies as a former ICI effluent pit, a land drain and a leaking pipe. The paper gives one range for the three together, and they are not permitted emission points. The authors write that the high PFOA concentrations "are likely attributable to the extensive use of APFO for PTFE production at the plant between 1955 and 2012". This was not the main permitted outfall, which measured 30 ng/L total PFAS and was the lowest point sampled (Dalmijn et al., ES&T 2025; what the measurements show)
• For scale comparison: the limit in the EU Drinking Water Directive is 100 ng/L for 20 PFAS combined, making the highest of those readings around 206 times that benchmark
• Important: These measurements are from discharge water at the site, not treated drinking water supplies. The EU standard applies to water at the tap, so the comparison shows scale, not a breach.

Residents with private water supplies (wells, boreholes) may wish to consider testing. PFAS analysis is available through commercial laboratories (costs vary; consult laboratories directly for current pricing).

What has been measured: elevated PFAS was found in every egg sample from the four poultry keepers tested in Phase 3, and the Environment Agency's contaminated-land conclusion for Occupation Road Allotments was based on PFOA found in the produce grown there, not only in the soil (Information and Resources). The European Food Safety Authority's tolerable weekly intake for four PFAS combined, including PFOA, is 4.4 nanograms per kilogram of body weight per week, a limit on total intake from all sources (EFSA, 2020).

What has been advised (Food Standards Agency, UKHSA and Wyre Council, recorded to September 2026):

• Do not eat eggs from poultry kept "within 1km of the Hillhouse site", and birds kept for egg laying there should not enter the food chain (FSA/Wyre Council, 2 February 2026)
• Occupation Road Allotments closed, the Environment Agency concluded this site meets the criteria to be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, based on PFOA found in soil and produce (Wyre Council, 5 March 2026)
• Sandringham Avenue Allotments closed precautionarily on 5 March 2026 (Wyre Council, 5 March 2026). On 12 August 2026 Wyre Council told residents that the Environment Agency has concluded this site, like Occupation Road, meets the criteria to be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A
• Wash and peel home-grown vegetables before eating (continuing FSA advice); consider raised beds with fresh soil for gardens within 1km (added on 5 March 2026: Wyre Council, 5 March 2026)
• Gardens can be used as normal; wash hands after contact with soil (UKHSA advice, as relayed in Wyre Council's letter to residents of 12 August 2026: Information and Resources)

Soil testing results: PFOA detected in 287 of 291 soil samples (98.6%) in Phase 2 testing. At one residential property sampled in Phase 3, whose results were issued in February 2026, all 25 samples exceeded WSP's 1.4 µg/kg allotment screening value, and 24 of 25 exceeded the 7.6 µg/kg residential garden value.

On "wash and peel": The Environment Agency's conclusion that Occupation Road allotments meet the criteria to be determined as contaminated land was based on PFOA found in the produce itself, not only in the soil. Plants can take up PFAS from soil and water as they grow. Washing removes soil on the surface, and peeling removes what is in the skin.

Not tested, as far as we know: no PFAS results for milk from local livestock, honey or fish from local waters appear in the investigation documents we hold.

The 1 km zone in the official advice is not a measured edge of the contamination. Official documents describe it in different ways and do not say what point the kilometre is measured from (Start here).

The investigation's garden testing was designed to cover properties within 1 km of the facility, so living further out does not mean your garden has been tested. Its first phase did sample council-owned land within about 5 km of the facility, including school playing fields, public open space and parks, and detected PFOA in 187 of 199 samples. Those totals cover the survey as a whole, not only land beyond 1 km, and a detection shows PFOA is present; it does not by itself mean a level above the screening values (The Numbers).

PFOA travels further than a kilometre. It has been detected in air samples at Hazelrigg, about 20 km from the site (timeline), and independent research has detected EEA-NH4 there too (the 1 km zone). The egg advice covers poultry kept "within 1km of the Hillhouse site", a line that, as above, is not a measured edge.

No. PFAS has been reported in soil, in food, in water at the site, in air samples and in the blood of a group of residents. Each finding is below with its source. The blood results and the other findings tell us what has been measured; they do not tell us what it means for any one person.

• Soil: PFOA was detected in 287 of 291 soil samples (98.6%) in Phase 2 of the investigation for the Environment Agency, from gardens and public open space within 500 m of the site. Detected means above the laboratory's detection limit, not above a safety level (The Numbers).
• Home-grown produce and eggs: the Environment Agency's conclusion that Occupation Road Allotments meet the criteria to be determined as contaminated land was based on PFOA found in the produce grown there, not only in the soil (Wyre Council, 5 March 2026). The Food Standards Agency and Wyre Council advise against eating eggs from poultry kept within 1 km of the site (FSA/Wyre Council, 2 February 2026). More in the food answer.
• Water at the site: independent sampling on 12 February 2023 found PFOA at up to 20,624 ng/L (nanograms per litre) at points north of the site that are not permitted emission points (Dalmijn et al., ES&T 2025). This is discharge water at the site, not tap water. See the tap water answer.
• Air, about 20 km away: the same research team collected 21 air samples at the Hazelrigg Meteorological Station, Lancaster University, between 11 June and 24 September 2021. The paper describes the station as about 20 km north-east of the site. PFOA was detected in 20 of the 21 samples, at 0.51 to 2.50 pg/m³ (picograms per cubic metre of air; a picogram is a millionth of a millionth of a gram), and EEA-NH4 in three. The authors describe their evidence on what drives these air levels as "largely circumstantial and based on a limited sample size (n = 21)" (Dalmijn et al., ES&T 2025; timeline).
• Residents' blood: results were reported for 49 residents on 23 September 2026. Press reports said 69.4% were above 20 ng/ml, the level at which US National Academies guidance advises additional health screening, and that EEA-NH4 was detected in 10 residents. That level is a prompt for screening, not a diagnosis. The US bands apply to a combined total of seven PFAS, so the reported figure may describe that total and not PFOA alone. These are reported figures, not published data. The 49 took part in a programme arranged by a law firm, how they came to be tested has not been published, and the figures describe the people tested, not the whole area (Blood test results for 49 residents).

What is not known: what any of these levels means for one person's health. Leigh Day's fact sheet for the people tested says: "your blood results alone cannot determine whether PFAS exposure has caused, or will cause, any particular health condition" (quoted in our article). See Is PFAS blood testing available?

PFAS are chemicals, not an infection. They are not caught from another person in the way a virus is.

You can ask, but the council says it will not sample on request. When a resident asked in September 2026, Wyre Council's multi-agency team replied on 29 September 2026:

"the law we are working under does not allow us to choose sampling locations in response to individual requests, so we are unable to do this. Instead, sampling locations are identified using a scientifically robust, grid-based approach."

What "grid-based" means here: WSP, the Environment Agency's contractor, used grids of different spacing in different areas: 100 m and 150 m within 500 m of the facility in Phase 2, and in Phase 3 about 50 m to the south-east and 200 m or more beyond 500 m, all within 1 km. According to the WSP Phase 3 report, earlier results and an Environment Agency air dispersion model (AQMAU-C2478-RP02, 2023) had indicated higher deposition to the south-east, where sampling was densest. We have asked the Environment Agency for the model (below); what it covers, and for which years, is not stated in the report. Property selection required accessible garden soil, no significant soil imports or exports during ownership, and consent; where consent was not granted, an alternative property nearby was sought (WSP Phase 3 report, March 2026).

What we have asked: on 29 September 2026 we asked Wyre Council which law prevents sampling on request, and asked the Environment Agency for the model, the sampling design and the sample locations. Both requests are public on WhatDoTheyKnow. The normal response deadline is 27 October 2026 (Open questions). If you want your own garden tested, see private testing below.

The official testing: the investigation for the Environment Agency chose which properties to sample. Phase 2 sampled the gardens of 46 homes within 500 m of the facility in early 2025, and Phase 3 sampled 71 gardens within 1 km in autumn 2025. In February 2026 Wyre Council began writing to individual residents in the Phase 3 area with their own soil results (timeline).

Private testing: commercial laboratories offer PFAS analysis of soil (costs vary; ask laboratories directly). If you commission a test, it is worth asking which PFAS compounds the analysis covers, and at what depth samples are taken: the Phase 3 report says "average PFOA concentrations appear to increase with depth across the dataset, with the biggest increase being seen between 0.4 and 0.6m depth", and 0.6 m was the deepest that report sampled (WSP Phase 3 report, March 2026; The Numbers).

Reading a result: England has no statutory PFAS soil limit. The investigation compares PFOA results with precautionary screening values applied by WSP, the Environment Agency's contractor: 7.6 µg/kg for gardens where vegetables are grown and 1.4 µg/kg for allotment soil. These are screening values, not legal limits, and a soil result on its own does not show where the PFOA came from or whether it has caused harm.

Results of the Leigh Day testing (September 2026): 49 residents received results on 23 September 2026. See Blood test results for 49 residents for what was reported and what is not yet known.

What the US National Academies recommend: the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommends that clinicians be advised to "offer PFAS blood testing to patients who are likely to have a history of elevated exposure, such as those with occupational exposures or those who live in areas known to be contaminated", with the decision taken together after discussing the benefits and harms (NASEM, 2022). Its guidance is also what the local results were interpreted against (the results).

NHS testing: The NHS does not currently offer PFAS blood testing as a routine service. No NHS or council biomonitoring (blood and urine testing to check for chemicals in the body) programme has been set up for the local population. Privately arranged testing gave results to 49 residents in September 2026 (the results).

Formal position (6 March 2026): Wyre Council formally responded to an FOI request asking why biomonitoring had not been conducted. The council replied, relaying advice from UKHSA and Lancashire County Council that biomonitoring was "not appropriate in the context of this investigation", that "individual results are often uninterpretable", and that uncertainty in interpreting them "can lead to additional distress for residents" (WhatDoTheyKnow.com, 6 March 2026). (Corrected 27 September 2026: this previously said results "would be" uninterpretable and testing "would cause" distress. The response says individual results are "often" uninterpretable and that uncertainty "can lead to" distress.)

On 3 March 2026 the ENDS Report quoted the Leader of Wyre Council calling for blood tests for residents and a "proper inquiry" into local health (ENDS Report, 3 March 2026; subscription).

Private testing: Some private laboratories offer PFAS blood analysis (costs vary; consult laboratories directly). UKHSA's guidance, published on 22 September 2026, says: "PFAS biomonitoring is not currently recommended for individuals through the NHS or private blood tests. At this time, such tests are unlikely to provide clear or helpful information for individuals and can sometimes create unnecessary worry." The US National Academies, quoted above, take a different approach for people who live in areas known to be contaminated (what UKHSA's position leaves out).

International context: Blood-testing programmes around comparable sites in Belgium and the USA included thousands of residents: 8,568 people gave a blood sample near 3M's plant at Zwijndrecht, with group results published on 18 March 2025 (Departement Zorg, Flanders), and 69,030 joined the C8 Health Project at Parkersburg in 2005–06 (The Numbers).

As of September 2026, the NHS does not offer PFAS blood testing as a routine service, and no NHS or council biomonitoring programme has been set up for the local population. In March 2026 Wyre Council, replying to an FOI request, relayed advice from UKHSA and Lancashire County Council that biomonitoring was "not appropriate in the context of this investigation" (see the answer above).

The testing that did take place, with results given to 49 residents on 23 September 2026, was arranged by the law firm Leigh Day and carried out by Manchester Metropolitan University (the results). For Leigh Day's testing arrangements, see Contacting Leigh Day. Hillhouse Watch is not part of Leigh Day. The person who runs it is a client of Leigh Day in its investigation of a possible claim, and could benefit financially if a claim succeeds (About).

Hillhouse workers are in a published study. Consonni and colleagues (2013) followed 4,773 men exposed at six plants that made tetrafluoroethylene and PTFE, which at the time were the whole of that manufacturing in Europe and the USA. Follow-up ran from the start of production, between 1950 and 1970, to between 2001 and 2008 depending on the site. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) names Thornton-Cleveleys as one of the six, and lists 756 of the workers as from the UK. Across all six plants together, none of the increases in deaths was statistically significant. The numbers were small: deaths from liver cancer (8), kidney cancer (10) and leukaemia (12) were above national rates. The study could not separate the effect of PFOA from that of tetrafluoroethylene, the gas used to make PTFE. We have not found separate results for the Thornton-Cleveleys workers in the sources we checked (Consonni et al., American Journal of Epidemiology, 2013; IARC Monograph 110, Table 2.1, for the 756; IARC Monograph 135).

What we have not found: in the reports, FOI responses, correspondence and published studies we hold and searched for this answer, we have not found published results of any blood testing of Hillhouse workers for PFOA, or any statement from the Health and Safety Executive, the UK Health Security Agency, Wyre Council or a trade union about workers' exposure to it. This describes what we searched. It does not show that no testing took place.

What is known from other plants (US companies, not ICI or AGC; these figures do not describe Hillhouse): in 26 retired production workers from the company 3M, the level of PFOA in the blood when first tested averaged 691 ng/mL, ranging from 72 to 5,100 (Olsen et al., 2007). The US Environmental Protection Agency records that DuPont studied PFOA in pregnant workers and their babies in 1981, and that the agency did not learn of the human data showing PFOA passing from mother to fetus until a residents' lawyer sent it in 2001 (EPA memorandum, 2005).

If you worked at the site: you may want to ask your GP to record your work history on your medical record. The NHS does not offer routine PFAS blood testing (see the blood-testing answer above). The law firm Leigh Day is investigating possible legal action (more on Leigh Day). Hillhouse Watch is not part of Leigh Day. The person who runs it is a client of Leigh Day in its investigation of a possible claim, and could benefit financially if a claim succeeds (About).

Added 27 September 2026. We will update this answer as we find more.

The C8 Science Panel: the C8 Health Project enrolled 69,030 people living near a PFOA plant in the USA, where drinking water had been contaminated with PFOA. Drawing on studies of that community, the C8 Science Panel identified probable links between PFOA and six conditions: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease), high cholesterol and pregnancy-induced hypertension, including pre-eclampsia (a serious pregnancy condition involving high blood pressure) (C8 Health Project; C8 Science Panel; Evidence).

Cancer classification: in November 2023 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified PFOA in Group 1, "carcinogenic to humans", on the basis of sufficient evidence in experimental animals, limited evidence for cancer in humans (kidney and testicular cancer) and strong mechanistic evidence. IARC states that the classification "does not indicate the level of cancer risk associated with exposure at different levels or in different scenarios" (IARC; Evidence).

How long it stays in the body: Olsen and colleagues estimated an average half-life in the blood of 3.8 years in 26 retired fluorochemical production workers (Olsen et al., 2007). That figure shows how slowly PFOA leaves the body. Those workers' exposure was occupational, and the study does not show what is happening in residents.

Important: these findings do not establish the cause of any individual's illness or predict whether someone will become ill. See the Health Information page for details and sources.

This site does not give property or legal advice. What is on the public record: the Environment Agency has concluded that the Occupation Road and Sandringham Avenue allotments meet the criteria to be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Wyre Council, 5 March and 12 August 2026: Information and Resources). We have not seen a formal determination announced in Wyre Council's published updates. Results for individual gardens were sent to the householders concerned and are not published by address.

For what you must tell a buyer, or what to ask as one, consult a conveyancing solicitor.

Leigh Day, an environmental law firm, is investigating potential legal action relating to contamination from the Hillhouse estate. See Contacting Leigh Day for how to reach the firm, what to include and what to expect.

This site is not part of Leigh Day and does not provide legal advice. The person who runs it is a client of Leigh Day in its investigation of a possible claim, and could benefit financially if a claim succeeds (About).

Site operators:

• ICI (1950s-1999): Original operator. PFOA used as processing aid.
• AGC Chemicals Europe (1999 to date): Operator of the site. Used PFOA as a processing aid until 2012, then EEA-NH4 (a fluorochemical used as a replacement for PFOA in manufacturing). A written answer from Defra and the Environment Agency on 17 April 2026 says "[a] small amount of PFOA is also generated through the current manufacturing process" (The Numbers). AGC announced a proposal to end production on 13 July 2026 and confirmed the decision on 14 September 2026 (AGC Chemicals Europe). What is on record about what follows is in What happens when the factory closes?
• Other tenants: The Hillhouse Technology Enterprise Zone hosts multiple industrial operators.

Regulatory oversight:

• Environment Agency: Issues the site's environmental permit, which sets no PFAS emission limit on any of its air emission points (The Numbers). Its April 2023 risk evaluation used AGC's figure of about 783 kg of EEA-NH4 discharged to the River Wyre in 2019, from a discharge point with no specific PFAS limit (Start here)
• Wyre Council: Local authority, leading multi-agency investigation

What is on record: on 14 September 2026 AGC Chemicals Europe said production "is expected to cease by 31 December 2026, when AGCCE will begin winding down the site". It also said it "will continue to work collaboratively with Wyre Council, the Environment Agency and other authorities regarding the future of the site" and "remains committed to ensuring compliance with all regulatory obligations, including maintaining the necessary staff for plant decommissioning, environmental permit compliance and any environmental monitoring that may be required" (AGC Chemicals Europe, 14 September 2026). Its 13 July 2026 announcement of the proposal had used similar wording about permit compliance and monitoring (AGC Chemicals Europe, 13 July 2026).

On the council side, Cllr Michael Vincent, Leader of Wyre Council, responded to the July proposal: "The announcement does not affect the ongoing investigation, which is being progressed in accordance with the relevant regulatory processes. We will continue to monitor the situation closely" (Blackpool Gazette, 16 July 2026). As of 4 October 2026 we have not found a council statement dated after the 14 September confirmation.

What the law says about closing a permitted site: the site operates under an environmental permit issued by the Environment Agency (permit EPR/BU5453IY, shown as "Effective" on the Environment Agency public register on 4 October 2026). An operator that wants to give up a permit of this kind has to apply to surrender it (Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016, regulation 25). GOV.UK guidance says that for an installation permit "you can apply to surrender all or part of your permit", sending the forms to the Environment Agency together with "the surrender section of your site condition report" (GOV.UK: Change, transfer or cancel your environmental permit). A site condition report is a record of the condition of the land and groundwater at the site at particular points in time (GOV.UK: H5 site condition report).

Who decides, and on what test: the regulator, here the Environment Agency, "must grant or refuse a duly-made application" and "must accept an application for the surrender of an environmental permit in whole or in part ... if it is satisfied that the necessary measures have been taken (a) to avoid a pollution risk resulting from the operation of the regulated facility ... and (b) to return the site of the regulated facility to a satisfactory state, having regard to the state of the site before the facility was put into operation" (the 2016 Regulations, Schedule 5, paragraphs 12 and 14). In plain terms: the company applies, and the Environment Agency decides whether the test is met.

What has been published about this site's closure: as of 4 October 2026 we have not found a published plan for decommissioning, for an application to surrender the permit, or for the condition the site will be left in. We looked in: AGC's announcements of 13 July and 14 September 2026; Wyre Council's Hillhouse and multi-agency pages and its news list; the Environment Agency public register entry for the permit (its document list did not load when we checked, so we could not read it); and web searches of the Environment Agency's consultation hub, which found no 2026 consultation on AGC or Hillhouse (the hub's own search could not be used). This describes where we looked. It does not show that nothing exists.

What would answer the question, and who holds it: the Environment Agency, as the permit regulator, and AGC, as the permit holder. The questions we intend to put to them are listed on Open questions: whether AGC has applied, or intends to apply, to surrender the permit and on what timetable; what the Environment Agency will require in the site condition report and what "the state of the site before the facility was put into operation" means for a site used industrially since the 1950s; and whether any surrender application will be published for comment.

Added 4 October 2026. We will update this answer when a plan is published.

What we know:

• PFOA was used at the site to manufacture PTFE from the 1950s until 2012, and EEA-NH4 has been used since (Start here). Defra and the Environment Agency say a small amount of PFOA is still generated by the current process (written answer, 17 April 2026: The Numbers). Figures reported to the Environment Agency record historical PFOA discharges covering both the ICI and AGC eras (The Numbers)
• The single highest Phase 3 garden reading, 181 µg/kg, was to the south-east, and the report's data shows the highest concentrations in two directions from the site, south-east and west-north-west (Phase 3 soil results). The WSP Phase 3 report says earlier results and an Environment Agency air dispersion model had indicated higher deposition to the south-east (WSP Phase 3 report, March 2026). WSP, the Environment Agency's contractor, said the lack of a clear link between concentration and distance "may be attributed" in part to "the aerial nature of PFOA deposition" (WSP Phase 3 report, March 2026)
• Attributing any individual measurement to a particular source still requires separate evidence

Open questions:

• PFOS was detected in local eggs; its source has not been identified
• Press reports say EEA-NH4 was detected in 10 of the 49 residents whose blood was tested. These are reported figures, not published data, and they do not identify where anyone's exposure came from (the results)
• Soil contamination may reflect contributions from multiple sources including legacy ICI operations, current operations, chemicals that settled from the air over decades, and shared estate infrastructure
• Source attribution remains unresolved in the material we have reviewed; AGC states that it has "commissioned a specialist third party to conduct the voluntary on-site investigation", to "sample and test soil, groundwater and surface water" on land it owns (AGC Chemicals Europe, Site Investigation page, accessed 3 September 2026). No results from it have been published (The Numbers)

This site distinguishes between data from operator disclosures and contamination where the source is not identified.

Current actions (as of September 2026):

• Wyre Council multi-agency soil testing programme: Phase 3 complete. 71 residential gardens sampled in autumn 2025; an interpretive report from the Environment Agency is still awaited (Information and Resources)
• Environment Agency concluded Occupation Road Allotments meets the criteria to be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A, 5 March 2026
• Sandringham Avenue Allotments: closed precautionarily 5 March 2026; on 12 August 2026 the Environment Agency concluded it also meets the Part 2A criteria
• Food Standards Agency egg and produce advisory in effect. Elevated PFAS was found in every egg sample taken from the four poultry keepers tested in Phase 3
• UK Government PFAS Plan published (February 2026)
• AGC Chemicals Europe confirmed on 14 September 2026 that it will end production at the site (What happens when the factory closes?)

Not currently in place: Biomonitoring provided by the NHS or the council (testing was arranged privately by the law firm Leigh Day over summer 2026, and results for 49 residents were given out on 23 September 2026: Blood test results for 49 residents).

Not found: in the council and Environment Agency material we hold, we have not found published data from any ongoing PFAS air monitoring around the estate, or a published programme to remediate residential gardens (Start here; The Numbers). This describes what we have found. It does not show that none exists.

For full details including the timeline of how official guidance has changed since 2024, see What To Do.

See the European Site Comparison for data on regulatory responses at comparable sites including 3M Zwijndrecht (Belgium), DuPont Parkersburg (USA), and Chemours Dordrecht (Netherlands).

See Common criticisms, and what the record shows. It answers the responses residents hear most often, such as "what did you expect, moving next to a chemical factory?" and "you should have known from your survey", each from published documents and each with its own link to share.