Skip to main content

< Return to previous page

Kyle Thompson unpacks the EPA’s new biosolids draft risk assessment | Global Water Intelligence

The EPA’s recent Draft PFAS Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment has sent ripples through the water industry. A recent article from Global Water Intelligence, titled “EPA sharpens focus on PFAS contaminated biosolids,” explores the implications of the EPA’s findings and features insights from Kyle Thompson, Carollo’s national PFAS lead, who provides expert commentary on the challenges utilities face in managing PFAS in biosolids.

Potential Risks for PFAS in Sewage Sludge

According to the article, the EPA’s draft risk assessment found that as little as 1 part-per-billion (ppb) of PFOA and PFOS in biosolids could pose significant health risks, particularly in agricultural settings. Contaminated biosolids used as fertilizers may introduce PFAS into the food chain through dairy products, meat, and eggs from livestock raised on treated pastures. In some scenarios, the associated cancer risks exceeded 1 in 1,000.

These findings could pave the way for federal restrictions on biosolids land application, a method currently used for over 50% of biosolids in the U.S. As Thompson explained in the article, “While the draft risk assessment itself is not a regulation, this will inform any future regulatory guidance under the Clean Water Act.”

Limited Disposal Alternatives for Biosolids

Even without formal regulations, utilities are already facing challenges with limited disposal options, the article goes on to say. “Landfill options can be restricted […] due to facilities’ own PFAS concerns, […] capacity constraints, or organic waste diversion goals. Incineration facilities face permitting hurdles, and expanding capacity could take five-plus years,” Thompson noted.

Emerging technologies like supercritical water oxidation and pyrolysis are being explored, but Thompson cautioned that these methods remain largely unproven. “We lack long-term operational data for treating biosolids with these systems, leaving questions about true capital costs, energy requirements […] and complete PFAS destruction efficiency,” he said.

The Draft Risk Assessments’ Market and Regulatory Impacts

The EPA’s findings could also lead to market-driven changes even before formal rules are enacted. Farmers may voluntarily limit or refuse biosolids application due to perceived risks, creating further operational challenges. As Thompson observed, “Such market-driven reductions in available sites could create similar operational challenges for utilities as regulatory bans.”

This pivotal moment in PFAS regulation underscores the urgency of developing innovative and feasible solutions for biosolids management.

To delve deeper into the EPA’s findings and their potential impact on utilities, read the full article in Global Water Intelligence (subscription required).