SC water bills could rise under ‘long overdue’ federal regulations for ‘forever chemicals’

COLUMBIA — About half of South Carolina’s drinking water systems will likely be on the hook for expensive solutions to filter out “forever chemicals” under a new federal regulation that environmental advocates called a win for clean water.

Last week’s announcement from the Environmental Protection Agency marks the first time the federal government has put a cap on the amount of potentially cancer-causing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, allowed in drinking water. The agency first proposed the regulations in March 2023 as a set of informal guidelines. It formalized the rule last Wednesday, starting a ticking clock for utilities to comply.

The state’s water systems will have three years to figure out how prevalent the chemicals are in their supply. If the chemicals exist in higher quantities than allowed under the new requirements, the utilities will have five years to get to the allowed rate or risk being sued.

“Understanding and protecting the environment from PFAS contaminants continues to be one of the most complex, challenging issues that states across the country are tackling today,” Jennifer Hughes, chief of the state environmental agency’s Bureau of Water, told reporters Wednesday.

Environmental advocates praised the regulations for addressing a longstanding health and environmental issue. But local water utilities warned it will likely lead to people paying more for their water.

What are PFAS?

PFAS, often called “forever chemicals” because they remain in the environment for centuries, come from a variety of different sources, including certain makeup, non-stick pots and pans, and fast food wrappers.

In some cases, manufacturing plants making those items release PFAS into creeks and rivers, causing them to end up in drinking water. In other cases, the chemicals come from sewage sludge farmers use as fertilizer or firefighting foam common on military bases.

Only about 20% of people’s exposure to PFAS comes from drinking water, according to the state’s environmental agency. Drinking water was the first target for the federal government, though, because ingesting the chemicals is more harmful than other uses, Hughes said.

Exposure to PFAS in large concentrations or over long periods of time — for instance, drinking 2 and a half liters of water every day for 70 years — can cause health issues, such as kidney cancer, testicular cancer and high cholesterol.

All of South Carolina’s water contains some trace of the chemicals, according to a statewide report. Of the 56 utilities in the state that draw water from above ground, 24 had more than the allowed amount of the types of PFAS considered potentially hazardous to heath, according to a statewide sampling in 2020.

Those utilities serve around 2 million people, said Doug Kinard, state director of drinking water protection for the Department of Health and Environmental Control.

That was only one test, so the number of utilities that actually need to update their filtration systems could change, Kinard said. The amount of PFAS in water is known to fluctuate over time.

In order to decide whether a drinking water system is complying with federal regulations, the state will use an average of tests over the course of the year, with the details varying based on the number of customers served.

Expected rate increases

Customers will likely shoulder much of the cost of cleaning their drinking water.

Regular filtration systems don’t remove enough of the chemicals to meet the new regulations of 4 parts per trillion for the most prevalent substances. Regional drinking water plants will need to install special methods, such as granular activated carbon, ion exchange resins or reverse osmosis membranes.

Because the rules are so new, state officials do not yet have an estimate as to how much they will cost to implement statewide.

Some cities have done the math.

Columbia officials have estimated bringing the city’s drinking water into compliance for its roughly 375,000 customers will cost up to $200 million, plus another $20 million or so each year for maintenance and upkeep.

Charleston officials expect to pay $130 million initially and between $12 million to 24 million annually for its 123,000 customers, according to a Monday news release.

“We will continue pursuit of the most economical means to assure compliance with this new mandate. However, we project the cost will be extremely expensive for our customers,” Charleston Water System CEO Mark Cline said in a statement.

How that will translate to residents’ bills remains unclear. At least part of the funding could come from $1 billion in federal money available for utilities trying to get in line with the new regulations. Low-interest loans available through the state for water projects could also help out.

The federal money will likely cover only a fraction of the cost nationwide. A report by the nonprofit American Water Works Association estimated it would cost utilities $50 billion to come into compliance.

The EPA estimated the regulation will cost utilities about $1.5 billion annually after that. The American Water Works Association estimated that cost to be much higher, at around $3.8 billion each year.

The funding is “probably not as much as will be needed to address this issue,” Kinard said.

The federal and state government should be willing to help utilities address the problem so residents aren’t the ones burdened, said Congaree Riverkeeper Bill Stangler. At the same time, cost shouldn’t be a reason to break the law, he said.

“We can’t say we’re going to ignore public health and clean water because it’s too expensive,” Stangler said.

Next steps

Riverkeepers lauded the move as a way of limiting risks to people’s health and the environment.

“It’s incredibly important that we have regulations,” said Savannah Riverkeeper Tonya Bonitatibus. “This is long, long overdue.”

Now that the EPA has regulations in place for drinking water, it’s time for the government to turn its attention to the manufacturers producing PFAS in the first place, said several riverkeepers across the state.

Until that happens, those companies can keep dumping chemicals into rivers, forcing utilities to bear the brunt of the work, said Catawba Riverkeeper Brandon Jones.

“Unfortunately, this is currently only being put on drinking water facilities,” Jones said. “I really want to see the same standard apply to manufacturers.”

Federal officials are working on guidance to that effect, Hughes said.

In the meantime, riverkeepers and utilities alike will watch how the implementation of the new regulations plays out. Of particular interest will be how the state enforces failures to comply, Stangler and Bonitatibus said.

If a utility does not follow the new regulations, the state’s environmental protection agency will create an enforcement agreement, including a schedule to fix the problem, Kinard said. Failing that, the state could sue.

How strictly the courts will enforce the regulations, how often utilities will appeal decisions and whether civil lawsuits can deter noncompliance remain up in the air.

“How we figure out how to deal with that problem is going to be really sticky for the next couple years,” Bonitatibus said.