Abstract
Several jurisdictions are currently evaluating regulatory standards for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in municipal water resource recovery facility (WRRF) effluent. Effective and responsible implementation of PFAS effluent limits should consider the costs and capabilities of currently available technologies, because the costs of meeting WRRF PFAS limits could disproportionally fall to ratepayers. Cost curves were developed for currently available PFAS separation and destruction options, assuming effluent treatment targets near current analytical detection limits. Removing and destroying PFAS from municipal WRRF effluent is estimated to increase costs per household by a factor of between 2 and 210, using Minnesota-specific data as an example. Estimated costs per household would increase more for residents of smaller communities, averaging 33% of median household income (MHHI) in communities smaller than 1000 people. This exceeds the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-developed affordability index of 2% of MHHI by a factor of 16. Estimated costs per household to remove and destroy PFAS varied among locations, primarily based on WRRF and community size, median income, rural versus urban, and type of wastewater treatment processes currently used. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Required tertiary treatment before WRRF effluent PFAS separation, using currently available technologies, is a significant portion (~40-80%) of estimated costs. Adding PFAS separation, destruction, and pre-treatment would make Minnesota wastewater rates unaffordable (defined by EPA affordability guidance) without external funding. The estimated cost per household is higher for smaller communities and would require substantial external funding to maintain rate affordability. Design and operating uncertainties remain for full-scale WRRF retrofits to consistently remove and destroy effluent PFAS with limited full-scale applications.