Photo by Carollo Engineers

Dana Gonzalez, Carollo
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are pervasive contaminants detectable in all wastewater effluents, even in the absence of direct industrial sources. Water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) act as passive receivers of these substances. While PFAS precursor compounds often transform into terminal forms detectable in effluent using methods like EPA Method 1633, WRRFs typically lack the processes to destroy PFAS altogether.
In 2022, the EPA released a memo outlining strategies to address PFAS discharges leveraging National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, emphasizing the importance of monitoring and source control. Key recommendations include:
Addressing PFAS at the SourceControlling PFAS at the source is the most cost-effective strategy. However, even in the absence of industrial sources, residential sources contribute PFAS to WRRFs. This results in the challenge of treating higher flows of wastewater with more dilute contaminants. Established separation technologies like granular activated carbon (GAC), ion exchange (IX), and reverse osmosis (RO) are viable for water and reuse applications, but their feasibility for secondary effluent is doubtful without intermediary steps for further organic matter and particulate removal. Our sector’s experience with potable reuse gives insight into the high costs of installing similar processes for PFAS.1
PFAS in Solids ManagementA significant portion of PFAS in wastewater influent ends up in the solids stream, particularly higher molecular weight, long-chain PFAS. The EPA is conducting a risk assessment of PFAS in biosolids, which will inform future regulatory actions. With over 40% of biosolids in the U.S. being beneficially used through land application, new PFAS limits may necessitate diversified biosolids management strategies. These could include landfilling (where allowed), incineration, or advanced solids processing technologies currently under research.
Given the regulatory uncertainty and complexity of PFAS management, the following recommendations can guide utility managers, engineers, and treatment plant operators:
Addressing the challenges of PFAS in wastewater requires a multifaceted approach, combining monitoring, source control, strategic planning, and proactive communication. By staying informed and prepared, the water and wastewater industry can navigate the complexities of PFAS and protect public health and the environment.
Dana Gonzalez is a principal technologist at Carollo Engineers, where she serves as the California PFAS lead and as a leader in wastewater innovation. Before joining Carollo, she was a treatment process engineer at HRSD in southeast Virginia. Dana has led various projects focusing on nutrient removal, resource recovery, water reuse, solids handling, PFAS fate and transport, system and equipment optimization, process control design and tuning, and process modeling. She holds a bachelor’s degree from UCLA, a master’s degree from Virginia Tech, and a PhD from the University of Virginia.
1 Sim, Alison, and Meagan S. Mauter. “Cost and energy intensity of US potable water reuse systems.” Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology 7, no. 4 (2021): 748-761.