After Decades of Disinformation, the US Finally Begins Regulating PFAS Chemicals

by Derrick Z. Jackon, Fellow

Earlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would regulate two forms of PFAS contamination under Superfund laws reserved for “the nation’s worst hazardous waste sites.” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said the action will ensure that “polluters pay for the costs to clean up pollution threatening the health of communities.”

That was an encore to the Food and Drug Administration announcing in February that companies will phase out food packaging with PFAS wrappings and the mid-April announcement by Regan that the EPA was establishing the first-ever federal limits on PFAS in drinking water. At that time, he declared, “We are one huge step closer to finally shutting off the tap on forever chemicals once and for all.”

One can forever hope the tap will be eventually shut, since it took seemingly forever for the nation to begin to crack down on this class of per-and polyfluoroalkyl synthetic chemicals. The chemical bonds of PFAS, among the strongest ever created, resulted in an incredible ability to resist heat, moisture, grease and stains. PFAS chemicals seemed like miracle substances in the 20th-century quest for convenience. They became ubiquitous in household furnishings, cookware, cosmetics, and fast-food packaging, and a key component of many firefighting foams.

The bonds are so indestructible they would impress Superman. They don’t break down in the environment for thousands of years, hence the “forever” nickname. Unfortunately for humans, the same properties represent Kryptonite.

Today, the group of chemicals known as PFAS is the source of one of the greatest contaminations of drinking water in the nation’s history. Flowing from industrial sites, landfills, military bases, airports, and wastewater treatment discharges, PFAS chemicals, according to the United States Geological Survey, are detectable in nearly half our tap water. Other studies suggest that a majority of the US population drinks water containing PFAS chemicals—as many as 200 million people, according to a 2020 peer-reviewed study conducted by the Environmental Working Group.

PFAS chemicals are everywhere

No one escapes PFAS chemicals. They make it into the kitchen or onto the dining room table in the form of non-stick cookware, microwave popcorn bags, fast-food burger wrappers, candy wrappers, beverage cups, take-out containers, pastry bags, French-fry and pizza boxes. They reside throughout homes in carpeting, upholstery, paints, and solvents.

They are draped on our bodies in “moisture-wicking” gym tights, hiking gear, yoga pants, sports bras, and rain and winter jackets. They are on our feet in waterproof shoes and boots. Children have PFAS in baby bedding and school uniforms. Athletes of all ages play on PFAS on artificial turf. PFAS chemicals are on our skin and gums through eye, lip, face cosmetics, and dental floss. Firefighters have it in their protective clothing.

As a result, nearly everyone in the United States has detectable levels of PFAS in their bodies. There is no known safe level of human exposure to these chemicals. They are linked to multiple cancers, decreased fertility in women, developmental delays in children, high cholesterol, and damage to the cardiovascular and immune systems. A 2022 study by researchers from Harvard Medical School and Sichuan University in China estimated that exposure to one form of PFAS (PFOS, for perfluorooctane sulfonic acid), may have played a role in the deaths of more than 6 million people in the United States between 1999 and 2018.

As sweeping as PFAS contamination is, exposures in the United States are also marked by clear patterns of environmental injustice and a betrayal to military families. An analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that people of color and low-income people were more likely to live near non-military sources of PFAS contamination than wealthier, white people.

Another study by UCS found that 118 of 131 military bases had PFAS contamination concentrations at least 10 times higher than federal risk levels. A federal study last year found a higher risk of testicular cancer for Air Force servicemen engaged in firefighting with PFAS foams.

Tobacco-like disinformation

In the end, the whole nation was betrayed, in a manner straight out of the tobacco disinformation playbook. Behind the image of convenience, manufacturers long knew that PFAS chemicals were toxic. Internal documents uncovered over the years show how DuPont and 3M, the two biggest legacy makers of PFAS, knew back in the 1960s that the compounds built up in blood and enlarged the livers of laboratory animals. By 1970, a DuPont document referring to a PFAS chemical under its famed “Teflon” trademark said that it “is highly toxic when inhaled and moderately toxic when injected.”

By the late 1970s, DuPont was discovering that PFAS chemicals were affecting the liver of workers and that plant employees were having myocardial infarctions at levels “somewhat higher than expected.” But that did not stop the industry from downplaying the risk to workers.

One internal 3M document in 1980 claimed that PFAS chemicals have “a lower toxicity like table salt.” Yet, a study last year of documents by researchers at the University of California San Francisco and the University of Colorado found that DuPont, internally tracking the outcome of worker pregnancies in 1980 and 1981, recorded two cases of birth defects in infants. Yet, in 1981, in what the researchers determined was a “joint” communication to employees of DuPont and 3M, the companies claimed: “We know of no evidence of birth defects” at DuPont and were “not knowledgeable about the pregnancy outcome” of employees at 3M who were exposed to PFAS.

The same suppression and disinformation kept government regulators at bay for decades. The San Francisco and Colorado researchers found internal DuPont documents from 1961 to 1994 showing toxicity in animal and occupational studies that were never reported to the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act. As one example, DuPont, according to a 2022 feature by Politico’s Energy and Environment News, successfully negotiated in the 1960s with the Food and Drug Administration to keep lower levels of PFAS-laden food wrapping and containers on the market despite evidence of enlarged livers in laboratory rats.

A patchwork response

Eventually, the deception and lies exploded in the face of the companies, as independent scientists found more and more dire connections to PFAS in drinking water and human health and lawsuits piled up in the courts. Last year, 3M agreed to a settlement of between $10.5 billion and $12.5 billion for PFAS contamination in water systems around the nation. DuPont and other companies agreed to another $1.2 billion in settlements. That’s not nothing, but it is a relatively small price to pay for two industrial behemoths that have been among the Fortune 500 every year since 1955.

In the last two decades, the continuing science on PFAS chemicals and growing public concern has led to a patchwork of individual apparel and food companies to say they will stop using PFAS in clothes and wrapping. Some states have enacted their own drinking water limits and are moving forward with legislation to restrict or ban products containing PFAS. In 2006, the EPA began a voluntary program in which the leading PFAS manufacturers in the United States agreed to stop manufacturing PFOA, one of the most concerning forms of PFAS.

But companies had a leisurely decade to meet commitments. Even as companies negotiated, a DuPont document assumed coziness with the EPA. “We need the EPA to quickly (like first thing tomorrow) say the following: Consumer products sold under the Teflon brand are safe. . .there are no human health effects to be caused by PFOA [a chemical in the PFAS family].”

Two years ago, 3M announced it will end the manufacture of PFAS chemicals and discontinue their application across its portfolio by the end of next year. But the company did so with an insulting straight face, saying on its products are “safe and effective for their intended uses in everyday life.”

EPA action finally, but more is needed

The nation can no longer accept the overall patchwork or industry weaning itself off PFAS at its own pace. The EPA currently plans to issue drinking water limits for six forms of PFAS and place two forms under Superfund jurisdiction. The Superfund designation gives the government its strongest powers to enforce cleanups that would be paid for by polluters instead of taxpayers.”

But there are 15,000 PFAS compounds, according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. There is nothing to stop companies from trying to play around with other compounds that could also prove harmful. Cleaning up the PFAS chemicals that have already been allowed will take billions of dollars and water utilities around the country are already screaming, with some justification, that the federal government needs to provide more money than it is offering. And even the Superfund designation does not actually ban their use.

It would be better if the United States were to follow the lead of the European Union which is now considering a ban or major restrictions on the whole class of chemicals, fearing that “without taking action, their concentrations will continue to increase, and their toxic and polluting effects will be difficult to reverse.”

The effects are scary to quantify. Regan said in his drinking water announcement that the new rules would improve water quality for 100 million people and “prevent thousands of deaths and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses across the country.” A draft EPA economic analysis last year predicted that tight standards could save more than 7,300 lives alone from bladder cancer, kidney cancer and cardiovascular diseases, and avoid another 27,000 non-fatal cases of those diseases.

That makes it high time that the federal government borrow from DuPont’s arrogant assumption that it could push around the EPA. We need the EPA to quickly (like first thing tomorrow) say the following: Consumer products with PFAS are not safe and are causing unacceptable environmental consequences. We are shutting off the tap on ALL of them.”

How to Take Care of your Private Water Well

Here is some advice for private well owners extracted from the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) and the Illinois State Water Survey (ISWS).

Most private wells which are properly constructed and maintained provide safe water for years. However, contamination can occur due to improper construction, poor maintenance, or releases of contaminants into the well’s aquifer. Many contaminants cannot be detected by sight, taste, or smell. Even if there is no indication of problems with the water, it is the well owner’s responsibility to properly maintain the well and regularly test it for potential contaminants to ensure the safety of their drinking water. 

People should be reminded regularly that testing is an essential part of protecting your drinking water and in being a good steward of the water supply. Along with testing, being informed by understanding how your well works, where your water comes from, and how to take care of your water system is the best way to protect your family’s drinking water and health.

Potential contaminants in private wells include:  

• Bacteria
• Nitrate/nitrite
• Metals
• Pesticides
• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
• Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, often referred to as “forever chemicals”)

Contamination may come from man made or natural sources and can cause a variety of health effects, ranging from developmental problems in children to a risk of cancer. Authorities recommends testing for bacteria (known as a total coliform test) and nitrate/nitrite every year and testing for metals every 3 years.

Most local health departments can provide well-owners with an affordable sampling kit for total coliform and nitrate/nitrite testing. Commercial labs are available for metals testing.

Testing for other chemicals such as VOCs, pesticides, and PFAS may be recommended if such contamination has been found in the area. This testing is only available from commercial labs and can be very expensive. If a well-owner is concerned about the possibility of contamination from VOCs, pesticides, or PFAS, testing through a commercial laboratory is in order, and if treatment is needed, advice can be had from appropriate state agencies and/or water treatment professionals.

Even if no contaminants are found, wells should still be inspected every year to make sure the well remains sealed and clear of debris, including yard waste. Look for damage to the well cap and cracks in the above-ground portion of the well casing. It is also important for well owners to maintain their septic system by following these guidelines:  

• Do not dispose of kitchen grease or household chemicals in the sink
• Do not flush personal hygiene products besides toilet paper  
• Pump septic tanks every three to five years. 

Finally, record keeping is important. Keep records of all testing and all work done on the well.

People who live in cities can depend on the city water department to keep an eye on things.  If you have a well, you are the water department.

Reference Source.

Leading Water News Stories for April 2024

Without question, the month’s leading water story was the EPA’s announcement of the establishment of enforceable for PFAS.

“A huge victory for public health”

The EPA has published its National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for six PFAS chemicals. The ruling includes Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL), the legally enforceable limits, and MCL Goals for six PFAS chemicals.

The rule is expected to take effect in 2027 and requires public water systems to monitor and notify the public of the levels of these PFAS in water supplies. The rule also allows public water systems five years to reduce PFAS exposure if they exceed these MCLs and implement solutions by 2029.

This is a significant achievement.

Full text of the EPA announcement is on the Pure Water Gazette website.

New Mexico’s rivers, which include the Rio Grande, Gila, San Juan and Pecos, are America’s most threatened waterways, according to a new report. This is largely due to a 2023 US supreme court decision that left more than 90% of the state’s surface waters without federal protections from industrial pollution, according to state officials.

Consumer Reports has found unhealthy levels of pesticides in about 20% of US produce and The Guardian detailed the six fruits and vegetables with the highest pesticide risk – blueberries, bell peppers, potatoes, watermelons, green beans, and kale and mustard greens.

Ocean waves crashing on the world’s shores emit more PFAS into the air than the world’s industrial polluters, new research has found, raising concerns about environmental contamination and human exposure along coastlines.

The EPA has been asked to address a “long-ignored health crisis” in Iowa drinking water stemming from dangerously high nitrate levels. According to a legal petition filed by environmental and health advocacy groups last week, “For decades, Northeast Iowa residents have been exposed to dangerous levels of nitrate contaminated water. As the state reckons with high cancer levels and ongoing pollution regulation rollbacks, federal action is needed to safeguard the right to clean water. EPA must exercise emergency authority to hold polluters accountable and deliver safe drinking water in Iowa.”

The mayor of Paris expressed confidence that water quality in the river Seine will allow Olympic swimming.

In Mexico, angry subsistence farmers are staging a revolt against the thirsty avocado orchards of corporate farmers.

Just 56 companies are responsible for more than 50% of the world’s plastic pollution, according to a study published in Science Advances.  The top five polluters were the Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Nestlé, Danone and Altria, accounting for 24% of the total branded count.

Because of extreme heat and severe drought, several major cities in Mexico are facing a shortage in their water supply.

The U.S. government, in what an attorney says is a “monumental admission,” said last year that it caused injury to thousands of people on the Hawaiian island of Oahu when jet fuel from its storage facility leaked into the drinking water system.

Perrier has been ordered to destroy two million bottles of water after bacteria “of faecal origin” was discovered in one of its wells in Gard, in southern France.

PFAS Basics.  The Significance of the EPA’s Recently Imposed Limits on PFAS Levels in Drinking Water

 Extracted from a Statement from Guardian Editor Georgia Warren

April 2024

With so many big, splashy headlines fighting for our attention every day, it’s easy to miss those vital stories that build drip by drip, slowly over many years.

Falling into that bucket this week was the news that the US government has imposed the first-ever limits on levels of PFAS in our drinking water. The Guardian has been aggressively covering the health threat posed by PFAS for years, including a year-long investigation with Consumer Reports that revealed the extent to which these so-called “forever chemicals” have permeated US drinking water supplies.

For those who haven’t been following this story, this acronym masks a dangerous issue that everyone with a human body should be aware of.

OK, so what are PFAS?
PFAS (short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group of about 15,000 human-made chemical compounds used widely in manufacturing to make products resistant to water, stains or heat – meaning they’re in everything from aerospace engineering components to takeout containers. Also known as “forever chemicals”, PFAS are unable to break down naturally in the environment or in our bodies.

Why should we care about them?
In recent years, scientists have discovered that exposure to PFAS is linked to a myriad of serious health problems, including cancer, obesity and birth defects. While many of the vast number of PFAS compounds remain unstudied, it is understood today that any exposure to some of the known highly toxic varieties is considered a health and cancer risk.

Are we all being exposed to these chemicals?
In short: yes – everywhere, all the time. In the past two months alone, the Guardian has published stories revealing that PFAS are entering our bodies via sources as disparate as bandages, artificial turf, plastic sandwich baggies and household dust. However, our biggest exposure to PFAS is via our food and water – which takes us to this week’s big news.

What happened with PFAS this week?
On Wednesday, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced legally enforceable drinking water limits for a group of the most dangerous PFAS compounds, after years of issuing only advisories. All US water providers will soon have to test their water and then install treatment systems that can filter PFAS if the results exceed EPA limits.

Is the PFAS problem solved then?
Public health advocates say it’s a great step – but not enough, as drinking water represents only about 20% of human PFAS exposure. Diet is likely a larger problem, as PFAS enter our food system via packaging, storage and machinery in factories, as well as during the farming process via contaminated water and sewage sludge used as fertilizer.

Is there hope for further action?
According to reporter Tom Perkins, who has been leading our PFAS coverage and provided this excellent analysis on the state of play following the EPA’s announcement this week: “Where there’s most hope is at the state level, where legislatures have started banning PFAS for all non-essential uses. It’s already happening in Maine and Minnesota. In turn, that creates market pressure on companies to stop using the chemicals altogether, because what are you going to do: produce shoes that can be sold in Mississippi but not in Maine? That wouldn’t make any sense.” Indeed, 3M, one of the world’s largest producers of the chemicals, announced last year that it would no longer make the compounds, citing in part the regulatory and legal environment.

That’s a lot of information: it seems the Guardian has really been on top of this issue.
Indeed. According to environment editor Mark Oliver: “In 2019, we launched a series called Toxic America, inspired by the idea that compared with the EU and other places, US safeguards and regulations around the threat of toxic chemicals were weaker. It’s one of those times where our outsider lens on the US can be helpful for how we see issues that perhaps other outlets aren’t seeing with as much alarm. We got a lot of engagement from readers on that series, and they helped us fund more journalism in that area. We’ve been in the vanguard of coverage around this ever since.”

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Source: U.S. EPA

Nearly half of US prisons draw water from sources likely contaminated with toxic PFAS “forever chemicals”, new research finds.

At least around 1m people incarcerated in the US, including 13,000 juveniles, are estimated to be housed in the prisons, and they are especially vulnerable to the dangerous chemicals because there is little they can do to protect themselves, said Nicholas Shapiro, a study co-author at the University of California in Los Angeles.

“We need to think about who is exposed and who has the least agency to mitigate their exposure – that’s why this is such a unique population,” he said. “We see the dehumanization of incarcerated people across the country, and these exposures are symptoms of that larger problem.”

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make products resistant to water, stains and heat. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down, and are linked to cancer, liver problems, thyroid issues, birth defects, kidney disease, decreased immunity and other serious health problems.

The study analyzed the likelihood that watersheds serving the nation’s 6,118 carceral facilities were contaminated with PFAS. The authors zoomed in on hydrologic unit codes to identify those regions near prisons most likely to be contaminated from nearby airports, military sites, landfills, wastewater treatment plants and a range of manufacturing facilities.

The study found that testing has only been performed on several hundred of the drinking water sources identified, and better monitoring is “desperately needed”, the authors wrote. The true number of incarcerated people drinking contaminated water is likely much higher, they noted.

Shapiro highlighted a women’s prison near Tampa, Florida, that draws from groundwater highly contaminated by PFAS-laden firefighting foam from by a nearby firefighting school. Foam is one of the largest sources of PFAS water pollution in the US.

Levels in the groundwater were 170 times higher than state health guidelines, and officials warned residents who drew the water – but no one alerted the incarcerated people or did anything to prevent their exposure. Even when incarcerated people learned of the threat, the state would not provide clean water.

That is especially a problem because the nation’s prison population is generally in poorer health than the non-incarcerated population, and the issue disproportionately threatens people of color and people with lower incomes, Shapiro noted.

“For all of these reasons, we need to take extra care to understand these exposures and mitigate them,” he said.

Source: The Guardian

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Why We Send Postcard Reminders

If you have a product of ours that requires regular replacement parts, we send you a postcard reminder once a year. Reminders go to customers who need filter cartridges for whole house or drinking water filters or reverse osmosis units, washing machine or garden hose filters. Even shower filters.  UV customers also get cards to remind them to replace the ultraviolet lamp.

Cards are sent with the broad assumption that cartridges and lamps need to be replaced once a year. It’s an imperfect system, and once a year is as close as we can get. We fully realize that in some homes one person uses the shower filter while in others six do.   People often tell us things like the filter is in a summer home that is unoccupied much of the year, or that their daughter has gone away to college, so they don’t need replacements as often. That’s way too complicated for us. We are simple people and it’s a simple system.  Once a year. And it’s once a year from your last purchase: If we send a card in February and you purchase in April, you’ll get your next reminder in April. And if you don’t purchase, you don’t get another postcard.

And if you get a card and don’t buy anything, you won’t get another card until you buy something, so rest assured that buying a countertop water filter from us does not put you on a never-ending mailing list. We aren’t like the Vet who’ll keep sending cards until you take Bowser in for his rabies shot.

Postcards may be the most popular thing we do, judging from the many thank-you notes we get. Cards make re-ordering easy. They tell you what you need to know to order by phone or from our website.

Why don’t we send email reminders instead? Email is cheaper and easier. We’ve tried, and email isn’t even remotely as effective as a postcard.

Do KDF Filters Remove Chloramine from Water?

Contrary to popular legends, KDF 55 and KDF 85 do not remove chloramine from water. In filters where KDF is mixed with carbon, there may be some chloramine reduction, but the KDF has nothing to do with it.

Drinking water and wastewater managers throughout the U.S. are keenly aware of just how pervasive per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) can be in the environment. But now, new research has found that all rainwater around the world contains these contaminants to unsafe degrees.

“Atmospheric levels of toxic ‘forever chemicals’ are so high that rainwater everywhere contains amounts that are unsafe for long-term human consumption according to safety guidelines,” Vice reported. “‘Even in these remote and sparsely populated regions, such as Antarctica and the Tibetan plateau, the most stringent PFAS guidelines are exceeded,’ according to a study.”

The rising prevalence of PFAS in drinking water around the country has prompted the U.S. EPA to commit to more stringent regulations around the contaminants, has initiated a “seismic shift” in the legal landscape for industrial polluters, and has prompted existential questions about how drinking water and wastewater operations are supposed to respond.

But this latest study underscored the fact that PFAS are nearly impossible to avoid, no matter what actions water and wastewater systems take.

“This new study, which looks at four specific chemicals in the class, suggests that levels of one PFAS in rainwater around the globe often ‘greatly exceed’ US drinking water advisory levels,” according to the BBC. “The study’s findings lead the authors to conclude that a planetary boundary has been crossed — that there simply is no safe space on Earth to avoid these substances.”

As researchers learn more about PFAS and the potential harm that can come from exposure to them, regulations are becoming stricter. And while the production of products containing PFAS has been largely phased out, these so-called forever chemicals remain in the environment for a notoriously long time.

With the global environment now found to be totally inundated with PFAS, much of the burden for keeping these compounds away from consumers continues to fall on drinking water treatment operations.

“Removing the chemicals in the study from drinking water at treatment plants is possible, if expensive,” per BBC. “But getting below the US advisory levels is extremely challenging, according to the authors.”

Water Online

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Ultrapure Water Is Not For Drinking

While we think that water straight from the RO unit is wonderful, water can indeed by too pure for human consumption.