Located on a former sand and gravel pit just a few hundred feet from the Kennebec River in central Maine, Riverside Station pumps 500,000 gallons of fresh groundwater every day. The well station processes water from two of the five wells on either side of the river operated by the Greater Augusta Utilities District (GAUD), providing drinking water to approximately 6,000 local households. Most of them live in Augusta, the capital of Maine, just a few miles south. In general, GAUD prides itself on the quality of its water supply. “It’s completely safe to drink from the ground,” said Brian Tarbuck, general manager of GAUD.
However, in March 2021, environmental sampling of Riverside’s well water detected trace amounts of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), or better known as “forever chemicals.” Tarbuck said he was relieved that Riverside’s levels did not exceed Maine’s drinking water standard of 20 parts per trillion. Still, he and his utility company colleagues were wary. PFAS have been linked to a variety of health problems, and at the time, Maine lawmakers were debating tighter restrictions on the chemicals. Mr. Tarbuck knew that standards would eventually drop. The only question was when.
After all, stricter standards are expected to be imposed early this year. At that time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is expected to make a final decision. Enforceable upper limit PFAS in drinking water requires GAUD and thousands of other utilities across the country to update their treatment methods. This standard, known in regulatory parlance as the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), limits the allowable amounts of two of the most studied and ubiquitous PFAS compounds, PFOA and PFOS, to just 4 ppt each in drinking water. According to the EPA, this is approximately the equivalent of one drop from five Olympic-sized swimming pools, and that current analytical instruments reliably “within certain limits of accuracy and precision under routine laboratory operating conditions.” This is the lowest detectable concentration. Four other PFAS, PFHxS, PFNA, PFBS, and HFPO-DA (also known as GenX chemicals), are regulated by combining acceptable levels into one value. It takes utilities three to five years to bring their systems into compliance.
Agency officials estimate that between 3,400 and 6,300 water systems will be affected by the regulation. This is the first PFAS standard in EPA’s history and the first MCL the agency has set for chemicals in drinking water in more than 25 years. PFOA and PFOS account for the majority of expected excesses.
Tarbuck said GAUD is preparing to spend $3 million to $5 million on PFAS removal technology, much of which will be passed on to customers in the form of higher water bills. Nationwide, initial costs to meet the standards could exceed $37 billion and annual operating costs could exceed $650 million, according to the American Water Works Association (AWWA), a nonprofit lobbying group representing water utilities. It is said that there is a sex. This far exceeds the EPA’s cost estimate of $777 million to $1.2 billion, which includes increased cybersecurity and “replacing all large outdated and leaking water pipes” that carry water from treatment facilities. That would be a huge burden on an industry already grappling with other costly priorities. Mark Edwards, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech, said it would install “from the power plant to the service lines” that connect to homes. AWWA regulatory technology manager Chris Moody said most of the funding would be spent over the next few years. Utilities are racing to install PFAS removal systems and other infrastructure needed to meet compliance deadlines.
In proposing the limits, EPA officials said they used the latest science to protect the public from PFAS contamination.environmental organization welcomed the move after a long time. But the standard has drawn widespread criticism from the water utility industry and some scientists, who argue that small drops in PFAS water levels have little effect on exposure or health in many places. “There are other strategies to achieve a safer, public health-protective approach to PFAS that does not include the very stringent standards that EPA is proposing,” said Ned Kalonji, Colorado Public Schools Associate Dean for Public Health Practice. says Mr.Health and 2022 National Academy of Sciences Chairs report About PFAS exposure, testing, and clinical follow-up.
EPA officials estimate that between 3,400 and 6,300 water systems will be affected by this regulation. This is EPA’s first PFAS standard.
A key problem, critics say, is that the standard traps too many utilities, even though PFAS exceedances are very small. According to AWWA, approximately 98 percent of the nation’s drinking water utilities, including GAUD, have maximum levels of PFOA and PFOS below 10 ppt. Ian Cousins, an environmental chemist at Stockholm University and one of the world’s leading researchers on PFAS exposure, says that if levels are already very low, even cutting trillions of trillions more will “lower the total exposure intake.” “It won’t have a big impact on volume.” , via email to Undark.
Drinking water is just one of the many ways people can be exposed to PFAS. Chemicals are also found in crops, fish, meat, outdoor soil, house dust, nonstick cookware, cosmetics, fast food wrappers, stain- and water-resistant fabrics, and other products. How much each of these sources contributed to his PFAS exposure is the subject of ongoing research. However, the EPA estimates that Americans will experience symptoms such as: 80 percent Cousins said most of the PFAS intake comes from sources other than drinking water, and most human exposure is likely through diet. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has required the phaseout of some PFAS in food packaging. But “food is contaminated through bioaccumulation in agriculture and the marine food chain,” Cousins said. “You can’t purify food the same way you add treatment processes to drinking water.”
