Communities await first US limits for “Forever Chemicals”

The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to propose perpetuity restrictions on harmful chemicals in drinking water after determining they are dangerous in amounts so small as to be undetectable. But experts say removing them will cost billions, a burden that will hit small, resource-poor communities hardest.

Concerned about the chemicals’ ability to weaken children’s immune systems, the EPA said last year that PFAS could cause damage at levels “much lower than previously thought”.

“We, as a community of scientists, policymakers and regulators, missed the boat really early,” said Susan Pinney, director of the Center for Environmental Genetics at the University of Cincinnati.

There is also evidence linking the compounds to low birth weight, kidney cancer and a host of other health problems. It’s unclear what the EPA will now propose and how well it will protect people from these recently understood harms.

PFOA and PFOS are part of a larger family of compounds called PFAS, for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances that are widespread, do not degrade in the environment and have existed for decades. They have been used in non-stick pans, food wrap, and fire-fighting foam. Their use is now largely phased out in the United States, although some remain.

Water utilities are gearing up for rigorous standards and testing that will no doubt uncover PFOA and PFOS in communities that don’t yet know the chemicals are in their water.

“This rule would help prevent communities from being poisoned,” said Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, lead advocate for Toxic Exposure and Health at Earthjustice.

In the last ten years, more and more cities and communities often bordered on production sites or air force basesSuddenly she realized they had a problem. In 2016, for example, Sarah McKinney was on maternity leave when she learned that the tap water in her Colorado Springs suburb contained too much PFOA and PFOS. She picked up her few-week-old daughter and rushed out to buy enough bottled water for her family of five.

“If I just spit it out, can I brush my teeth?” She remembers wondering.

In response to concerns from people who have been drinking the water for years, McKinney’s water utility switched to another source, providing water bottle filling stations and installing a $2.5 million treatment system that Lucas says is the first of its kind in the country was Hale, the water district manager. The chemicals had entered the water from nearby Peterson Air Force Base, which then built a treatment plant.

For communities with the pollutants, this is not a cheap problem to solve.

It could cost around $38 billion nationwide to remove enough chemicals to meet a strict EPA rule that limits them to areas where they are not detected, according to an estimate by engineering firms Black & Veatch for the American Water Works Association can become industrial group. There are also running costs for filter material and tests.

The consultant examined federal and state test results and estimated that 4% to 12% of water utilities nationwide required treatment for PFAS as a result of EPA regulation.

Experts say smaller, poorer communities will find it harder to afford the new systems and train staff on how to use them. And generally smaller water utilities with fewer resources already hurting the water quality Rules more often than utilities serving large cities.

“Small systems often require technology that is easier to use,” said Jonathan Pressman, an engineer and EPA water researcher. The agency offers technical assistance to states and local governments, and recently provided states with $2 billion for pollutants like PFAS.

At the EPA’s Cincinnati research facility, a series of vertical, forearm-sized glass tubes were partially filled with a resin material capable of removing PFAS. The work ensures the agency knows how long it will last and how much it will remove. This is important for the design of treatment systems.

Last year, the agency lowered its conservative, voluntary health thresholds to levels that tests can’t even detect — a fraction of a part per trillion. In 2016 it was 70 ppt. Before that it was even higher. Because the EPA recognizes the increased danger of these compounds, it means people who were once told their water was safe to drink will find out that it does, in fact, need treatment.

When people feel fooled about the safety of their tap water, they do drink it less often. Instead, they are more likely to drink expensive bottled water and consume sugary drinks more often, which leads to health problems such as diabetes.

“We have challenges in this community of faith,” said Abel Moreno, the district manager for the South Adams County Water & Sewer District, which supplies Commerce City, an industrial area of ​​Denver where pollutants from a nearby chemical plant leaked decades ago though the district set up a facility to treat the problem, sparking long-simmering suspicions in the predominantly Latino neighborhood and questions about how long people had been exposed.

Last year, Betty Rivas was startled by a letter telling her that the drinking fountains her 8-year-old used at school were not safe. PFAS stories had been on the local news and the school district urged families to use bottled water. It increased Rivas’ fears.

“With this recent PFAS issue, that’s all the more reason to be sure you shouldn’t be drinking the water in Commerce City,” she said.

Moreno responded that the district tested for PFAS in 2018 well before the news reports. Extremely high levels were found in certain wells, but when the water passed through the treatment plant, it did not exceed the EPA health advisor’s threshold time. Moreno’s agency closed the wells. He said the letter Rivas received was frustrating because PFAS hadn’t spiked – it just made the headlines. Now the district buys Denver water and blends it to keep chemicals at undetectable levels and plans to build a wastewater treatment plant for a permanent solution.

In the US, only local utilities and state regulators have so far imposed changes, not the federal government. Michigan set a drinking water limit and paid for the test. Those tests helped quickly find and fix some spots of contamination, and Michigan officials have since said their limits have proven cost-effective.

However, new standards will force compromises, according to Charlie Seidel, president of a water consultancy.

“Resources devoted to addressing this issue are somewhat at the expense of other needs, such as removing hazardous lead piping and replacing aging water lines,” he said.

Earthjustice’s Kalmuss-Katz said too many people are drinking contaminated water. Costs should not be an obstacle.

“The solution is to do whatever you have to do to make sure people don’t get sick,” he said.

___

Phillis reported from St. Louis.

___

The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for reporting on water and environmental policies. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental reporting, go to https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment