Identifying some of the best approaches to dealing with the “forever” chemicals known as PFAS, as well as sources of funding for the treatment project, was the main focus for drinking water utility managers at the American Water Works Association’s ACE 26 meeting in Washington, DC, June 22-24.
Discussions among attendees took place during an active week as the US Environmental Protection Agency took legal and regulatory action to provide direction and funding related to emerging contaminants in drinking water systems.
Water utilities and their consulting services firms described an environment where already cash-strapped agencies are caving in to competing demands: modernizing existing infrastructure that is well past its due date; comply with the requirements of the 2021 Revised Lead and Copper Rule; and PFAS monitoring, as well as planning capital programs to expand or build new facilities to reduce perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) levels to the limits allowed under current drinking water standards.
In its annual State of the Industry report, AWWA said utilities need between $2.1 trillion and $2.4 trillion for new and improved infrastructure by 2050, a $56.6 billion gap between what is currently spent each year and what is needed.
Incoming association president Brent Tippey, eastern region drinking water manager for engineering consultant HDR, said funding is the number one concern cited by his utility members when surveyed. “Whether it’s PFAS as an emerging contaminant or whether it’s aging infrastructure that’s becoming more vulnerable, they need additional revenue,” he said in an interview with ENR. Utilities need long-term financing and subsidies to be able to pay what’s needed to keep rates from going beyond what customers can afford, he said.
Tippey began his tenure as president of the 50,000-member drinking water group on June 24.
Jess Kramer, the EPA’s assistant secretary for the Office of Water, told conference attendees that over the next few years, her office plans to “reduce red tape… [and] figure out how to streamline the flow of dollars that are so critical to addressing the aging infrastructure facing this country.” He said the agency will “work with our partners in the states to make sure that this [funding] is to get out the door, and then we’ll work with the communities and work with the systems to understand the challenges they’re facing.”
Looking for quick answers on construction and engineering topics?
Try Ask ENR, our new intelligent AI search tool.
Ask ENR →
Kramer said federal funds are not being spent in several states where he has been targeted. Within the state revolving fund (SRF) loan program alone, $14.8 billion remains “uncommitted,” he said, according to an internal analysis, according to the EPA. “Those are dollars that haven’t been committed to a project for over a year, that’s wasted money, that’s real, tangible work in a community, whether it’s building new infrastructure, capital investments or returning to compliance,” Kramer said.
In a June 6 blog post, the Maryland Center for Environmental Policy Innovation cautioned against using the level of uncommitted funds as a reason for the EPA to request fewer dollars in its annual budget requests, as the agency has done for the SRF program in 2026 and 2027.
The center’s own analysis suggests that some states with more resources consistently commit almost all available funds. But others “face administrative, staffing, technical assistance or demand-related challenges. This variation suggests that the problem is not the SRF model itself, but differences in implementation and capacity,” the report said. “States that use reserves and invest in technical assistance, have adequate staffing, promote streamlined application processes and provide proactive community outreach tend to move funding faster.”
The PFAS extension does not apply to all utilities
Many companies are unsure how to proceed after the EPA’s announcement on May 20 that it would extend the compliance deadline to meet maximum contaminant levels of 4 parts per trillion of PFOA and PFOS by two years, from 2029 to 2031.
“I think it left utilities and industry … with the impression that the extension will be a blanket extension, with all utilities eligible for the two-year extension.” Rosa Yu, national PFAS manager at Carollo Engineers, told ENR.
However, the extension does not apply to all public services, he said. “It’s conditional. It depends on state primacy status.” For the few states that have the authority to set and manage their own environmental regulations, utilities could still be required under state regulations to implement drinking water limits, Yu said.
Several sessions and speakers at the conference focused on both established and emerging technologies to reduce PFAS levels or destroy it altogether, including reverse-flow reverse osmosis, which reduces the amount of highly concentrated brine left over typically associated with conventional RO treatment, said Max Finder, director of U.S. sales for water technology supplier ROTEC.
But potential regulation of other emerging pollutants is on the horizon, particularly with microplastics. In a session on the state of research on microplastics, the consultants emphasized how much is unknown and needs to be better understood before components can be meaningfully regulated, including how to accurately sample and monitor microplastic levels in drinking and wastewater, as well as at what levels microplastics begin to adversely affect human health.
“For us in the water industry, and for people who are already connected to the microplastics discussion from a sampling and analysis standpoint, we know very well that there is a lot of debate, an open debate about microplastics … and for that debate to be present in the human health space as well,” said Hazen & Sawyer Associate Cayla Cook Carbone, who has served on the Water Federation Tairk Force.
Action at the EPA
On June 24, the EPA, along with the US Department of Justice and the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, announced a $450 million federal settlement with PFAS maker Chemours. The Dupont spin-off is alleged to have released PFAS into the Cape Fear River in North Carolina, the Delaware River in New Jersey and the Ohio River in West Virginia, in some cases without a permit and in others in violation of existing permits.
Under the settlement, Chemours will spend more than $337 million in injunctive relief, including an estimated $280 million to provide alternative drinking water, $60 million to ensure compliance at its West Virginia facility and additional funds to ensure compliance at other facilities. In addition, Chemours will carry out projects under a $90 million multi-year PFAS mitigation program overseen by the government.
Two days later, EPA released its proposal for the sixth Unregulated Pollutant Control Rule (UCMR 6). The contaminants on the list are not currently regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, but EPA has identified 30 that it believes should be monitored and made public by community water systems.
This data will help inform future regulatory decisions, according to the EPA. Microplastics were not on the list, but several types of PFAS were. The EPA will accept public comments until August 11.
