Regulating PFAS, or per and polyfluoroalkyl substances, is no easy task; there are almost 5,000 compounds in the PFAS family, and each compound impacts the environment and public health differently. But as new information about this class of chemicals comes to light, California is taking action. Last month, the state focused its attention on a particularly prevalent member of the PFAS universe—perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) and this month the Division of Drinking Water (DDW) established new PFBS notification and response levels. But a federal rule proposed by the EPA may also have a significant impact on current and future California PFAS policies, especially for chemicals of emerging prominence like PFBS.

Over the past few years, PFAS have been the subject of increased legislative and scientific scrutiny. First manufactured in the 1940s, PFAS are used in products that resist heat, water, oil, stains and grease. Many of these products are now integrated into everyday items; furniture, carpets, food packaging, water-proof clothes, and non-stick cookware can all contain PFAS. A significant potential source of PFAS exposure may also occur in certain sources of drinking water. PFAS may contaminate water from a variety of sources, but industrial sites, landfills, wastewater treatment plants, military bases, and airports are all suspected sources of PFAS pollution. Once PFAS enter the water system, usually via discharge or leachate, these “forever chemicals” spread and linger within watersheds and ecosystems. As PFAS accumulate in the environment, they can cause a variety of adverse health effects in humans such as liver and kidney damage, cancer, high cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, and reduced antibody response to vaccines. 

Originally, PFBS was manufactured to replace PFOS, which was a known environmental hazard and carcinogen. But because of it’s similar chemistry, PFBS does not break down in the environment; instead it can bio accumulate in animals and humans. California’s multi-phased PFAS investigation tested for a list of PFAS, including PFBS, in over 600 water systems over the course of 2019. The investigation found that PFBS is the 4th most frequently detected PFAS in California’s water. Perhaps more concerningly, PFBS concentrations are increasing over time. Many manufacturers are swapping out well documented PFAS like PFOS with the ostensibly less toxic but far less researched, “Gen-X” and PFBS. The result is an environmental and public health hazard concern of relatively unknown scale or proportion. 

Given the increasing prevalence of PFBS in our water, the DDW requested in February 2020 that the OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment) prepare recommendations for notification and response levels. These health-based advisory levels are established as a precautionary measure for unregulated contaminants. Most public water systems are not required to monitor PFBS or other unregulated chemicals, but many systems include them as part of their overall testing. Should PFBS levels exceed the notification or response limits, the DDW requires public water systems to inform their customers about the presence and effects of the contaminant or, in the latter case, take the impacted water source out of use.

The DDW relies on the OEHHA’s recommendations report to create notification and response levels. In the agency’s most recent report on PFBS, published in January of this year, the OEHHA conducted a comprehensive literature review of studies that evaluated PFBS toxicity in humans and lab animals. The review then identified the main health effects associated with PFBS and calculated advisory levels based on safe or negligible amounts of PFBS exposure. Like many chemicals, PFBS can affect multiple areas in the body, but the study concluded that it mainly impacted the thyroid. Although health experts remain unsure why, higher concentrations of PFBS can cause decreased thyroid hormone production. Even small decreases in hormone production are related to significant health problems like impaired cognitive development in children and increased cardiovascular risk in adults. Based on these findings, the OEHHA recommended setting notification and response levels for PFBS at 0.5 ppb (parts per billion) and 5 ppb respectively. The DDW officially adopted the OEHHA’s notification and response levels for PFBS on March 5th. 

But PFBS may face significantly stricter regulations in the future. The EPA issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) that proposes to designate PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances” under the CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) “superfund” law. The proposal also includes PFBS in a list of PFAS of potential interest to the superfund program. The EPA is currently seeking more information, but should PFOA, PFOS, or PFBS be regulated under the superfund program, it would dramatically impact PFAS regulations in California. The superfund law grants the EPA broad powers to clean up contamination sites and levy fines from polluters. Regulating any PFAS as “hazardous substances,” even somewhat phased-out PFAS like PFOS, will impact many processors, products, downstream manufacturers, and waste management and wastewater facilities. 

The ANPR is currently frozen and pending review from the Biden Administration. Once it is published on the federal register, the public will have 60 days to provide comments.

For now, California only monitors PFBS under the new notification and response levels. Babcock Labs currently reports PFBS at a reporting limit of 2ppt (parts per trillion), which is considerably lower than the new advisory levels. Clients receiving EPA Method 537.1 analyses already have information regarding the detection of PFBS in their water. 

Babcock Labs stays ahead of rapidly changing PFAS regulation. Babcock continuously invests in the professional development of staff and in our state-of-the-art facilities to provide clients with the best data available. For more information about our PFAS testing services, contact Babcock Labs.