A lawsuit filed by the Grand Strand Water and Sewer Authority alleges that 14 companies released wastewater contaminated with PFAS — sometimes called forever chemicals — into local water sources that supply water to Horry County residents.
PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are toxic, man-made chemicals that have been used for decades in products like non-stick cookware, stain-resistant textiles, makeup and more.
These chemicals are extremely difficult to break down and accumulate in the human body, creating health risks even in small amounts. PFAS have been linked to cancer, decreased fertility, impacts on breastfeeding, developmental delays, increased cholesterol and obesity, behavioral changes and decreased immune system abilities.
Bathing in water contaminated with forever chemicals is generally considered safe, as only a small amount of PFAS enters the body through the skin. However, ingesting PFAS can be dangerous as the chemicals enter and accumulate in the body.
The EPA’s drinking water standard announced this April sets a non-enforceable goal of zero parts per trillion (ppt) of PFAS called PFOA and PFOS. “This reflects the latest science showing that there is no level of exposure to these contaminants without risk of health impacts, including certain cancers,” according to the EPA.
However, the enforceable limits for PFOA and PFOS will be 4 ppt, which the EPA says are the lowest feasible levels for effective implementation. For other PFAS, including PFNA, PFHxS and GenX Chemicals, the agency is setting limits at 10 ppt.
The EPA will give public water systems three years to complete initial monitoring for PFAS and five years to implement solutions to reduce PFAS in drinking water that exceeds the limits set.
What the suit alleges
The lawsuit names Aladdin Manufacturing Corporation, Burlington Industries Inc., Delta Mills Inc., Domtar Paper Company LLC, Elevate Textiles Inc., Fiber Industries LLC–also referred to as Darling Fibers, GFL Environmental USA Inc., JP Stevens & Company LLC, Nan Ya Plastics Corporation America, Pret Advanced Materials LLC, Red Rock Disposal LLC, Sampson County Disposal LLC and Waste Industries LLC as defendants it alleges polluted water supplies with PFAS.
The 14 companies dumped PFAS and chemicals that degrade into PFAS into the Pee Dee River Watershed, Intracoastal Waterway and the Waccamaw River, and created wastewater lagoons on manufacturer properties, according to the suit.
GSWSA alleges that the chemicals ended up in Lake City, Johnsonville and Lumberton Wastewater Treatment Plants, which are unable to remove the PFAS. As a result, the chemicals entered consumers’ water supplies.
GSWSA treatment plants don’t have the technology to filter out PFAS, but the lawsuit seeks to address the companies’, “intentional, willful, wanton, reckless and/or negligent acts and omissions and the nuisance thereby created, maintained and continued,” and make the defendants fund the acquisition and installation of treatment technology that can remove the chemicals.
Boiled and bottled water
In the meantime, consumers who want to protect themselves from the forever chemicals have a few options. While boiling water or consuming only bottled water seem like intuitive solutions when dealing with polluted water, they’re not the best options for PFAS. Boiling or heating water cannot remove PFAS from water.
Bottled water may be safer, but there’s no guarantee. The FDA regulates bottled water and doesn’t currently have any standards for PFAS in it. However, the FDA is in the process of evaluating appropriate standards. The FDA analyzed PFAS in bottled water through its Total Diet Study samples and a 2016 targeted survey and didn’t detect PFAS in any samples.
However, a 2021 study led by Johns Hopkins University researchers published Water Research found PFAS in about 40% of bottled waters tested. Of the brands tested, less than 20 contained more than 1 ppt of PFAS.
If you want to remove PFAS out of your water at home, these three filter options are recommended by experts.
Granulated activated carbon treatments
According to the EPA, activated carbon treatments are the most-studied method of PFA removal. Activated carbon is highly porous and excellent at absorbing contaminants, so it’s often used to absorb compounds and chemicals from drinking water.
Granular activated carbon, commonly referred to as GAC, is made of organic materials with high carbon content, like wood and coal. Treatment systems pump contaminated water through a filter, and contaminants are absorbed in the GAC.
Depending on factors like the type of carbon, flow rate of water and PFAS, GAC treatments can be, “100% effective for a period of time,” according to EPA researcher Thomas Speth.
However, while the EPA says GAC water treatment systems excel at removing longer-chain PFAS, like PFOA and PFOS, these systems are less effective at absorbing shorter-chain chemicals like PFBS and PFBA.
Ion exchange treatments
Tiny resin beads made of porous material that can’t be broken down in water, “act like magnets that attract and hold the contaminated materials,” in ion exchange treatments. Similarly to GAC treatments, ion exchange treatments pump contaminated water through resin to remove contaminants.
The science behind these treatments relies on positively-charged anionic resins to remove negatively-charged PFAS. These anionic resins are effective at filtering out PFAS but tend to be more expensive than GAC treatments. According to the EPA, ion exchange treatments can also remove 100% of PFAS for a time, depending on factors like the type of resin, bed depth, flow rate and types of contaminants.
Reverse osmosis membrane treatments
When contaminated water is pushed through a thin barrier called a reverse osmosis membrane, the water is separated from contaminants. Of the water that’s filtered, about 80% is filtered clean, while the remaining 20% is retained as high-strength concentrated waste. This makes it a good solution for homeowners filtering smaller amounts of water, but less efficient for large-scale use that would create more waste.
Reverse osmosis membranes are, “extremely effective,” at removing both longer and shorter-chain PFAs, according to the EPA. However, these systems are pricey, ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars.
Effective filtering
Whatever filtration method you choose, it’s important to maintain. If a filter isn’t replaced promptly, it will be less effective and increase the risk of PFAS exposure.
To ensure the filter you use is effective, check that the product has NSF/ANSI 53 or NSF/ANSI 58 certification for PFAS. Consumers can check PFAS certifications directly online with the CSA Group, IAPMO R&T’s Product Listing Directory, the NSF, UL Product iQ and the Water Quality Association.
