Tag: PFAS

Emerging Contaminants, Evolving Solutions: Treating PFAS and Manganese in 2026

In 2026, waterwork utilities are facing unprecedented challenges in safeguarding our drinking water. Between emerging contaminants, evolving solutions, and limited federal action, it’s safe to say it’s uncharted territory. Contaminants that were once considered to be low priority risks are now commanding attention, shaping operational strategies, and challenging current treatment methods.

Among these, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and manganese stand out as two of the more pressing risks to our drinking water. However, they’re not the only contaminants that require our undivided attention. Tackling these contaminants requires understanding their unique properties, the risks they pose, and whether current treatment strategies are truly effective.

PFAS: The “Forever Chemicals”

PFAS are synthetic chemicals known for their strong carbon-fluorine bonds, making them heat, water, and oil resistant. While these qualities have made them popular in manufacturing, the characteristic that defines them best is persistence. Often referred to as “forever chemicals,” PFAS are not easy to break down and can accumulate in water sources and the human body over time. Despite being used for more than 80 years, PFAS are still classified as “emerging contaminants,”a term that feels misleading given their long history and lack of federal regulations on allowable limits.

In 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) led the charge on critical treatment methods and finalized the first national drinking water standards for six PFAS compounds under the Safe Drinking Water Act. While the new regulations significantly lowered the allowable concentrations for PFAS in our drinking water — and ultimately reduced exposure and deaths — it required many utilities to implement new processes.

For utilities, the challenge is not simply compliance. PFAS exist in complex chemical cocktails, vary by water source, and require specialized treatment processes. Effective treatment relies on a combination of advanced technologies,  such as activated carbon filtration, ion exchange or novel media, as well as vigorous monitoring and reporting systems and extensive regulatory frameworks to get the job done.

When treating PFAS, our team evaluates water chemistry, projected regulatory thresholds, and long-term disposal considerations before recommending any solutions. Pilot testing plays a central role, allowing systems to be optimized under real-world conditions prior to any full-scale implementation. More information on how our PFAS treatment strategies have helped our local communities can be found in the following projects:

Manganese: From Aesthetic Issue to Health Concern

Unlike PFAS, manganese is not man-made but rather a naturally occurring element found in soils and rock formations. For decades, manganese was thought to be mainly an aesthetic issue, often associated with black staining, metallic taste, and buildup in pipes and delivery systems. Once considered to be safe in low concentrations, it is now under increased scrutiny as awareness of potential health impacts, particularly for infants, brings a more urgent emphasis on treatment.

emerging-contaminantsWhile not regulated on a federal level, the EPA does list it as a secondary contaminant and recommends a limited exposure. For manganese treatment to be effective, it must be carefully selected based on a number of factors, including concentration and water chemistry. The most common and effective treatment is a two-step process of oxidation and filtration. Oxidants such as chlorine, potassium permanganate, or ozone are used to convert soluble manganese into an insoluble form, which can then be removed through filtration. Though seemingly straightforward, it requires extensive monitoring of oxidant dosages and overall effectiveness.

For manganese treatment, our team not only emphasizes extensive water quality assessments, but makes it our mission to ensure that the treatment upgrades address both compliance and safeguarding of water quality. By integrating modeling, monitoring, and operational planning, we help utilities implement solutions that are not only effective but sustainable. This level of commitment and expertise is represented in our previous work in the following communities:

Other Emerging Contaminants on the Horizon

Unfortunately, PFAS and manganese represent only a fraction of the emerging contaminants now being detected. Microplastics are now found worldwide, urging research into advanced filtration technologies. 1,4-dioxane, a groundwater solvent stabilizer, is immune to traditional adsorption (or activated carbon) methods, meaning advanced oxidation processes are required. To add, pharmaceuticals and personal care products are also being heavily scrutinized and studied, specifically when it comes to their impact by way of wastewater discharge.

Each of these contaminants carry not only unique chemical properties, but equally unique and complex treatment challenges. In 2026, utilities can no longer rely solely on decades-old treatment methods. Instead, they must adopt strategies and methods that are adaptable and supported by comprehensive data and validated by trial testing.

emerging-contaminants-water

How T&H is Leading the Way

At Tata & Howard (T&H), we research and implement these advanced strategies for you. We stay at the forefront of this new era through extensive technical expertise and a practical, science-based, and utility-focused approach. We combine pilot testing, detailed water quality analysis, and full-scale design expertise to create treatment systems that are capable of effectively treating PFAS, manganese, and other emerging contaminants.

Beyond our projects, we contribute to industry dialogue by participating in conferences, building partnerships with regulatory and research partners, investing in data-driven decision making, and are always seeking out new innovations and technologies. This constant engagement with our industry ensures that we stay one step ahead of the curve when it comes to providing our clients with cutting edge solutions, helping them gain access to safe drinking water.

Contact us for assistance or questions about emerging contaminants or any other water quality or treatment issue. We are here to help!

Knowledge is Power: Understanding PFAS and the Role of Water Utilities

Often in times of innovation, we as a society face unintended consequences. One that has held our attention for quite some time is the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in our water sources. PFAS are commonly found in everyday products and have made their way into our water supplies, posing a significant threat to public health.

In the ongoing battle against PFAS, water utilities have found themselves on the front lines, battling mitigation efforts, a lack of funding, and a complex web of responsibilities.

Understanding PFAS

PFAS are manufactured compounds that are characterized by their strong carbon-fluorine bonds, making them resistant to heat, water, and oil. (So right off the bat we know that we don’t want these anywhere near our water supply.) While these properties have led to widespread use in manufacturing, they have also led to contamination in our water supplies thanks to industrial discharges, firefighting activities, and the destruction of consumer products.

Despite being in use for the past eight decades, these synthetic toxins are still categorized as emerging contaminants. For context, emerging contaminants are grouped into eight main categories: pharmaceuticals, PCPs, hormones and steroids, disinfectants, flame retardants, herbicides and pesticides, industrial additives, and gasoline additives.

This classification represents the lack of necessary regulatory limits for how much of these compounds can legally be in public drinking water. Since it is virtually impossible to destroy them (and it can be even harder to completely avoid them), the possibility of producing adverse side effects over time is high, with the potential to cause severe complications in both the environment and within the human body.

So, where can PFAS most commonly be found today?

  • Soil, water, and/or PFAS-containing equipment and materials from PFAS-grown agricultural products.
  • Drinking polluted groundwater from stormwater runoff near landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and firefighter training facilities.
  • Household items such as nonstick products (e.g., Teflon), polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning agents, and fabrics with stain and water repellency.
  • Firefighting foams expelled at airports and military bases during firefighting exercises.
  • Industrial facilities that utilize PFAS when manufacturing chrome plating, electronics, and oil recovery.

Mitigation Efforts

The role water utilities play in mitigating PFAS contamination simply cannot be overstated. In order to protect the community from contamination, utilities require a robust toolbelt: a combination of advanced technologies, vigorous monitoring and reporting systems, and extensive regulatory frameworks.

There’s also the option for more advanced treatment technologies, like activated carbon filtration and ion exchange, that can be used when trying to eliminate these toxic, persistent substances. Activated carbon filtration is when water passes through a bed of activated carbon particles that aid in absorbing PFAS contaminants. Ion exchange is another similar method that instead replaces the PFAS ions with less harmful ones, helping to reduce contamination levels.

Utilities take it one step further by conducting routine monitoring and testing at the sources, as it is crucial to being able to identify contamination early on and act fast. Combined with ongoing research, utilities are able to keep themselves on top of their mitigation practices and existing technologies.

Funding Difficulties

Now, we know that water utilities receive very limited funding and are the ones left behind to clean up the mess (pun intended). While grants can be incredibly helpful, they’re not guaranteed and can be far and few between.

In the summer of 2022, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) introduced new health advisories related to PFAS contamination in public drinking water. This act aligned with President Biden’s initiative to provide clean drinking water to the American people, alongside an initial $1 billion grant, which was part of a larger $5 billion initiative. The grant was extended nationwide and was designated for comprehensive water testing, technical support, contractor training, and other essential action items. In addition, President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $9 billion over five years to help communities that are on the frontlines of PFAS and other contamination reduce levels in drinking water.

However, $1–9 billion simply won’t cut it.

The insufficient amount is hardly enough to supply testing on a national scale, a necessary feat in rectifying almost 100 years of damage from PFAS contamination. Water utilities are then forced in between a rock and a hard place, leaving them with limited funds and ill-equipped to fix the contaminated waterways. The responsibility, unfortunately, falls onto utilities, when in reality, it should fall on the corporations that originally introduced PFAS, given the years of profiting from these compounds.

We’ve entered a time where it is now up to these corporations to contribute to the cleanup of our land and water, especially considering that public water systems are often the ones burdened with the financial repercussions.

Role of Manufacturers

Manufacturers, who have historically utilized PFAS in their products, play a significant role in addressing the contamination crisis. Even while advancements in alternative chemicals are currently underway, the responsibility to rectify the issue should really fall on to those who have played a hand in its creation. (Essentially, you break it, you buy it!)

As we know, the costs of detecting, treating, and preventing PFAS contamination place a hefty burden on water utilities. Manufacturers can help alleviate this financial strain. And besides, if manufacturers can express transparent acknowledgment of their past actions and make a full commitment to not only rectifying their wrongdoings but fronting the bills, it would build trust among the consumers and communities affected, making it some sort of a win-win.

Conclusion

In the face of PFAS contamination, knowledge is indeed power. Water utilities are armed with an understanding of the issue and have accepted their mission as the bodyguards of public health.

However, the challenges they face, including a lack of proper funding and the need for cooperation from manufacturers, often put a spotlight on the complexity of the issue. It is crucial for us as a society to recognize the shared responsibility in addressing PFAS contamination, making the intentional effort towards collaboration between stakeholders to make sure the burden does not disproportionately fall on those working diligently to provide safe and clean water to communities.

Through collective efforts and informed decision-making, we can pave the way for a sustainable and PFAS-free future.

The PFAS Problem

Perfluorinated alkyl substances, also known as PFAS, are a group of manufactured compounds that include perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perffluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perflouroheptanoic acid (PFHpA), and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS). (Talk about a mouthful.)

PFAS have been on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) radar for quite some time now. The question is, why is the EPA so focused on these compounds? Well, for starters, they are human-made, widely used, and nearly impossible to dissolve and break down, which means that over time they start to spread and grow, more and more, both within the human body and in our environment. These compounds are also resistant to heat, oil, grease, and water, and —what’s worse — is that the EPA has found traces of all the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 3 (UCMR 3) (i.e., the long p-words mentioned earlier) in our country’s water supply in recent years.

Even with a history of use dating back to the 1940s, these manufactured toxins are still considered emerging contaminants, meaning that there aren’t any already established regulatory limits for how much of these compounds can legally be in our drinking water. These seemingly forever-lasting compounds can in turn have adverse side effects and cause complications in our planet’s ecology and within the human body.

Today, PFAS can be found in the following:

  • PFAS-grown agricultural products result in contaminated soil, water, and/or handled with PFAS-containing equipment and materials.
  • Drinking water contaminated from polluted groundwater from stormwater runoff near landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and firefighter training facilities.
  • Household products, including nonstick products (e.g., Teflon), polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning products, and stain and water-repellent fabrics.
  • Firefighting foams, which is a major source of groundwater contamination at airports and military bases where firefighting training occurs.
  • Industrial facilities that utilize PFAS when manufacturing chrome plating, electronics, and oil recovery.

When looking at the bigger picture, it is clear there is an immense need and opportunity for further research to see how PFAS can affect humans, as most of the research so far has been in animals. While PFAS aren’t even manufactured in the country anymore (thankfully), they are just as present across the globe and are still shipped in products and food from overseas.

All of this is to show that PFAS are…definitely not something we want near our food, water, and goods. So what has the EPA been doing to help?

Well, in 2016, the EPA set Health Advisory (HA) levels of how many micrograms per liter (µg/L) for the combined concentrations of two PFAS compounds, PFOS and PFOA. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) also took action and established drinking water guidelines that were required to follow the EPA’s HA levels, but applied them to all five PFAS chemicals (PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, PFHXS, and PFHpA). If the level of risk was then raised due to potential health risks, the Public Water Systems (PWS) must take action in order to restore safe HA levels.

During the summer of 2022, the EPA announced four new drinking water health advisories for PFAS as part of President Biden’s action plan to deliver clean drinking water to the American people. In addition, a $1 billion grant (the first of $5 billion) has been offered to territories and states across the country to pay for quality water testing, technical assistance, contractor training, and more.

MassDEP, EPA, and other federal agencies have been continuing their testing and research on PFAS both in the lab and in the field, PWS have been running tests on local water, and partnerships have been made between MassDEP and PWS in order to identify areas where our environment has been affected by PFAS.

All seemingly good things.

So let’s repeat the question: what has the EPA been doing to help?

All of these efforts are necessary in order to begin to identify the presence and consequences of PFAS, restore clean drinking water, help those affected, and more. That said, we also must get to the root of the problem: we need corporations to end the manufacturing of man-made toxins and compounds.

At the end of the day, our planet’s drinking water has been affected on a national and global level thanks to the work of PFAS manufacturers. People, animals, and our entire ecosystem have been tainted. Now, water utilities are tasked with cleaning up the mess (literally). Grants are helpful but they’re not guaranteed and, frankly, $1-5 billion isn’t nearly enough for testing on a national scale, which is necessary due to the almost 100 years of damage PFAS have caused.

Water utilities are already at a disadvantage when it comes to limited capital resources and are not adequately equipped to fix contaminated waterways. The responsibility should fall on the corporations who created PFAS to help clean up our land and water. After all, they profited off the manufacturing of these compounds for years, while PWS are now left holding the bill.

The Road to PFAS-Free Drinking Water

The News

The PFAS Action Act of 2019, H.R. 535, a bill that would require the Pentagon to work with communities to cleanup contamination from PFAS, was passed by the House last week. The bill passed 247-159, with 24 Republicans in favor. The PFAS Action Act would require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to declare two types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as hazardous and would help in aiding the removal of toxic, chemical substances from drinking water supplies across the country.

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluoroactanesulfonic acid (PFOS), the key ingredients of aqueous film-forming foams used by the U.S. military for firefighting, would be labeled as toxic substances if the bill is enacted. As such, areas contaminated with these substances would subsequently become Superfund Sites and move up the ladder in terms of priority cleanup.

Action Items

The bill would also create maximum allowable drinking water levels for both PFOA and PFOS and establish stricter guidelines for the use of firefighting foams containing the hazardous substances. Currently, there is no maximum contaminant level for PFAS chemicals, however, the EPA has enforced a non-mandatory health advisory level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for the sum of PFOA and PFOS.

So far, the Pentagon has identified 401 active and former military and National Guard sites where PFOA and PFOS use has been detected. Additionally, five to 10 million people across the country may be exposed to water contaminated with PFAS. These chemicals have been linked to testicular and kidney cancer, thyroid disease, high cholesterol, birth defects and high blood pressure in pregnant women.

Future Concerns

While the bill has passed the House, there may still be resistance in the Senate due to the significant scope and cost of the contamination cleanup. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the PFAS Action Act of 2019 would cost at least $300 million in the next decade, but could be much higher given that it would obligate the federal government to mitigate contamination on former federal properties that have since become state, local or privately owned.

Another foreseeable concern that surfaced from the White House just two days before the vote noted that the bill would overstep the EPA’s authority surrounding the issue. The EPA currently has an Action Plan in place to address PFAS and protect public health.

Looking Ahead

On the contrary, the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an advocacy organization pushing for stricter controls over PFAS, is hopeful that the bill will be passed. Scott Faber, senior vice president of governmental affairs for the EWG stated that “it’s time for Congress to set meaningful deadlines for the EPA.” In doing such, he added, “the PFAS Action Act will immediately designate PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances, which will kickstart the clean-up process at contaminated sites.”

As this bill continues to play out in Washington, 2020 presidential candidates are also taking stands to address the PFAS issues and crack down on these chemicals if elected. In the absence of federal regulations, individual states are also implementing their own efforts to clean up contaminated drinking water and prevent future contamination from PFAS.

PFAS Sites Increasing Across the Country

Contaminants known as Per- and polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are increasingly being detected in water samples both in the United States and around the world. As of June 2022, 2,858 locations in 50 states and two territories are known to be contaminated.

What are PFAS?

PFAS are manmade chemicals that have been used in both industry and consumer products since the 1950s. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) are the most extensively produced and studied compounds of these chemicals. Both chemicals are very persistent in the environment and in the human body. Consequently, they don’t break down and they can accumulate over time.

PFAS Most Commonly Seen In:

  • Non-stick cookware
  • Products that resist grease, water and oil
  • Water-repellent clothing
  • Stain resistant fabrics
  • Firefighting foams
  • Some cosmetics
Jake May/The Flint Journal, via Associated Press

Exposure to PFAS can happen through a variety of ways including:

  • Drinking contaminated municipal water or private well water
  • Eating fish from a source contaminated with PFAS
  • Swallowing contaminated soil or dust
  • Eating food packaged in material containing PFAS
  • Using consumer products including the ones listed above

PFAS Sites and Treatment

A recent analysis of Massachusetts public water systems by the Sierra Club finds that 70% of communities have detectable levels of the six most dangerous PFAS chemicals in their ground and surface waters. When looking at a wider range of PFAS chemicals, 91% of communities have detectable amounts in at least one of their drinking water sources (pre-treatment).

As a leader in water, wastewater, stormwater, and environmental engineering services, Tata & Howard has proven expertise in the removal of PFOA and PFOS. For instance, recent treatment experience includes the design of the new Maher Filtration Plant in Barnstable, Massachusetts. Tata & Howard designed this plant in an effort to treat the elevated levels of PFOA, PFOS, 1,4 Dioxane, and iron and manganese in the three drinking water production wells at the existing treatment facility. Using granular activated carbon filtration, the successful removal of PFOS/PFOA will be obtained in the new filtration plant.  The greensand pressure filtration will remove the iron and manganese while also extending the useful life of the granular activated carbon.

To learn more about treatment options, please contact us directly at 508.303.9400.

PFAS to be Classified as Hazardous Substances Under New Bipartisan Senate Bill

The PFAS Action Act

A bipartisan senate bill was introduced on March 1 to mandate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classify Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) as hazardous substances eligible for cleanup under the Superfund toxics law, a massive step in efforts to eliminate widespread contamination by these compounds across the country. Under the PFAS Action Act of 2019, legislation would require responsible parties to report the excess release of PFAS into the environment and allow the government to sue polluters to recover the costs of cleanup.

Scott Faber, Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at the Environmental Working Group (EWG) said that “this proposal could assist potentially hundreds of communities throughout the country struggling with PFAS contamination by securing the resources required to begin the cleanup process and holding polluters accountable.”

What are PFAS?

PFAS are manmade chemicals that have been used in both industry and consumer products since the 1950s.  The most common products that PFAS are used in include:

  • Non-stick cookware
  • Products that resist grease, water and oil
  • Water-repellant clothing
  • Stain resistant fabrics
  • Firefighting foams
  • Some cosmetics


Exposure to PFAS can happen through a variety of ways including:

  • Drinking contaminated municipal water or private well water
  • Eating fish caught from a source that was contaminated with PFAS
  • Swallowing contaminated soil or dust
  • Eating food that was packaged in material containing PFAS
  • Using consumer products including the ones listed above

As PFAS are produced and used, they can migrate into soil and water inducing hugely detrimental effects on the environment, people, and animals. While scientists are still learning about the health effects to exposure of PFAS, some studies show that PFAS exposure may affect:

  • Growth
  • Learning
  • Behavior of infants and children
  • The ability to get pregnant
  • Natural hormones in the body
  • Cholesterol levels
  • Immune system
  • Risk of cancer

 

Why is the PFAS Action Act of 2019 Necessary?

Tests performed by the EPA have detected PFAS pollution of public water supplies for 16 million Americans in 33 states, a statistic that is considered a severe underestimate of the scope of the problem. EWG and researchers at Boston’s Northeastern University have tracked 172 PFAS contamination sites in 40 states – a number that does not include public water systems with PFAS contamination. In May 2018, EWG released a data analysis that estimated more than 1,500 drinking water systems, serving up to 110 million Americans, may be contaminated with similar fluorinated chemicals.

The map below from EWG and SSEHRI at Northeastern University shows contamination sites and EPA tap water detections. Click here to view an interactive version of this map. The blue circles show where PFAS chemicals were detected between 2013 and 2016 in public drinking water systems, and the red circles show sites in Northeastern’s PFAS Contamination Site Tracker.

Should this bill be enacted into law, these 1,500 contaminated drinking water systems across the country would soon be cleaned up as part both short-term and long-term actions included in the Action Plan, potentially resulting in clean water supplies and safe drinking water.

PFAS Action Act – Action Items

The EPA is leading the national effort to understand PFAS and reduce risks to the public through implementation of this Action Plan and through active engagement and partnership with other federal agencies, states, tribes, industry groups, associations, local communities, and the public.

Key actions to PFAS related challenges include:

  • Expanding toxicity information for PFAS
  • Developing new tools to characterize PFAS in the environment
  • Evaluating cleanup approaches
  • Developing guidance to facilitate the cleanup of contaminated groundwater
  • Using enforcement tools to address PFAS exposure in the environment
  • Using legal tools such as those in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to prevent future PFAS contamination
  • Addressing PFAS in drinking water using regulatory and other tools
  • Developing new tools and materials to communicate about PFAS

(See all priority actions, short-term actions, and long-term actions here.)

1ewg.org
2shaheen.senate.gov
3epa.org
4atsdr.cdc.gov
5michigan.gov

 

PFAS – Emerging Contaminants in Drinking Water

Health Advisory Guidelines for Per- and polyfluoroalkyl Substances Detected in Public Water Systems

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) announced in early June, and through the Office of Research and Standards (ORS), its recommendations on the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 3 (UCMR 3) for emerging contaminants-specifically Perflourinated Alkyl Substances (PFAS).

PFAS or Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are a group of man-made compounds that include perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perffluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perflouroheptanoic acid (PFHpA), and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS).

US map of PFASAccording the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), all these UCMR 3 PFAS compounds have been detected in public water supplies across the US. Since PFAS are considered emerging contaminants, there are currently no established regulatory limits for levels in drinking water. However, in 2016, the EPA set Health Advisory levels (HA) of 0.07 micrograms per liter (µg/L) or 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for the combined concentrations of two PFAS compounds, PFOS and PFOA.

MassDEP’s ORS established drinking water guidelines that follows the EPA’s recommendations for health advisory levels at 70 ppt, which applies to the sum total of five PFAS chemicals – PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, PFHXS, and PFHpA.  And, if the level of contamination poses unacceptable health risks to its customers, Public Water Systems (PWS) must take action to achieve safe levels. They also must provide public notice.

The EPA and MassDEP’s recommended guidelines for PFAS include:

  • Public Water Suppliers take immediate action to reduce levels of the five PFAS to be below 70 ppt for all consumers.
  • Susceptible health-risk groups (pregnant women, infants, and nursing mothers) should stop consuming water when the level is above 70 ppt.
  • Public Water Systems must provide a public Health Advisory notice.

Water testingThe EPA also recommends that treatment be implemented for all five PFAS when one or more of these compounds are present.

Although, PFAS are no longer manufactured in the United States, PFAS are still produced internationally and can be imported in to the country1.  PFAS have been in use since the 1940’s and are persistent chemicals that don’t breakdown, accumulate over time in the environment and in the human body.  Evidence shows that prolonged exposure PFAS can have adverse effects on human health and the ecology.

PFAS can be found in:

  • Agricultural products grown in PFAS-contaminated soil or water, and/or handled with PFAS-containing equipment and materials.
  • Drinking water contaminated from chemical groundwater pollution from stormwater runoff near landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and firefighter training facilities2.
  • Household products, including nonstick products (e.g., Teflon), polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning products, and stain and water-repellent fabrics.
  • Firefighting foams2, which is a major source of groundwater contamination at airports and military bases where firefighting training occurs.
  • Industrial facilities that manufactured chrome plating, electronics, and oil recovery that use PFAS.
  • Environmental contamination where PFAS have built-up and persisted over time – including in fish, animals and humans.

While most states are relying on the EPA’s Health Advisory levels (including Massachusetts), some, such as Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, Arizona, and Colorado have addressed other UCMR 3 PFAS pollutants as well.

Boy drinking waterMost research on the effects of PFAS on human health is based on animal studies. And, although there is no conclusive evidence that PFAS cause cancer, animal studies have shown there are possible links. However, PFAS ill-health effects are associated with changes in thyroid, kidney and liver function, as well as affects to the immune system.  These chemicals have also caused fetal development effects during pregnancy and low birth weights.

PFAS are found at low levels throughout our environment—in foods we consume and in household products we use daily. PFAS in drinking water at levels higher than the EPA’s recommendations does not necessarily mean health risks are likely. Routine showering and bathing are not considered significant sources of exposure. And, while it is nearly impossible to eliminate all exposure to these chemicals, the risk for adverse health effects would likely be of concern if an individual continuously consumed higher levels of PFAS than the guidelines established by the EPA’s Health Advisory.

MassDEP is continuing its research and testing for PFAS in Public Water Systems.  Large Public Drinking Water Systems have already been tested and sampling indicated that approximately 3% had levels of PFAS detected. MassDEP is currently working with smaller Public Water Systems to identify areas where PFAS may have been used or discharged to the environment.

As more information and regulations develop on this emerging contaminant, MassDEP will continue to communicate their findings. Tata & Howard is also available for any questions that may arise, as well as, assist with testing and recommend treatment options for our clients.

 

1 In 2006, the EPA and the PFA industry formed the PFOA Stewardship program to end the production of PFAs.

2 MassDEP in partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Fire Services (MassDFS), announced in May a take-back program to remove hazardous pre-2003 firefighting foam stockpiles and be neutralized. Manufacturers stopped making PFAS foam in 2002 and have since developed fluorine-free and more fluorine stable foams that are safer to the environment.