PFAS in municipal landfill leachate: Occurrence, transformation, and sources.

To understand sources and processes affecting per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), 32 PFAS were measured in landfill leachate from 17 landfills across Washington State in both pre-and post-total oxidizable precursor (TOP) assay samples, using an analytical method that was the precursor to EPA Draft Method 1633. As in other studies, 5:3FTCA was the dominant PFAS in the leachate, suggesting that carpets, textiles, and food packaging were the main sources of PFAS. Total PFAS concentrations (Σ32PFAS) ranged from 61 to 172,976 ng/L and 580-36,122 ng/L in pre-TOP and post-TOP samples, respectively, suggesting that little or no uncharacterized precursors remained in landfill leachate. Furthermore, due to chain-shortening reactions, the TOP assay often resulted in a loss of overall PFAS mass. Positive matrix factorization (PMF) analysis of the combined pre- and post-TOP samples produced five factors that represent sources and processes. Factor 1 consisted primarily of 5:3FTCA (intermediate of 6:2 fluorotelomer degradation and characteristic of landfill leachate), while factor 2 was dominated by PFBS (degradant of C-4 sulfonamide chemistry) and, to a lesser extent, by several PFCAs and 5:3FTCA. Factor 3 consisted primarily of both short-chain PFCAs (end-products of 6:2 fluorotelomer degradation) and PFHxS (derived from C-6 sulfonamide chemistry), while the main component of factor 4 was PFOS (dominant in many environmental media but minor in landfill leachate, perhaps reflecting a production shift from longer to shorter chain PFAS). Factor 5, highly loaded with PFCAs, was dominant in post-TOP samples and therefore represented the oxidation of precursors. Overall, PMF analysis suggests that the TOP assay approximates some redox processes which occur in landfills, including chain-shortening reactions which yield biodegradable products.

Regulation of Persistent Chemicals in Hazardous Waste: A Case Study of Washington State, USA.

Despite ongoing controversy, several strategic frameworks for defining chemicals of concern (e.g., persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic [PBT]; persistent, mobile, toxic [PMT]; persistent organic pollutant [POP]) share persistence as a key criterion. Persistence should be considered over the entire chemical life cycle from production to disposal, including hazardous waste management. As a case study, we evaluate persistence criteria in hazardous waste regulations in Washington state, USA, illustrate impacts on reported waste, and propose refinements in these criteria. Although Washington state defines persistence based on half-life (>1 y) and specific chemical groups that exceed summed concentration thresholds in waste (i.e., >0.01% halogenated organic compounds [HOCs] and >1.0% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]), persistence is typically addressed with HOC and PAH evaluation but seldom with half-life estimation. Notably, persistence is considered (with no specific criteria) in corresponding federal regulations in the United States (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act). Consequently, businesses in Washington state report annual amounts of state hazardous waste (including persistent waste) separately from federal hazardous waste. Total state-only waste, and total state and federal waste combined, nearly doubled (by weight) from 2008 to 2018. For the period 2016 to 2018, persistence criteria captured 17% of state-only waste and 2% of total state and federal waste combined. Two recommendations are proposed to improve persistence criteria in hazardous waste regulations. First, Washington state should consider aligning its half-life criterion with federal and European Union PBT definitions (e.g., 60-120 d) for consistency and provide specific methods for half-life estimation. Second, the state should consider expanding its list of persistent chemical groups (e.g., siloxanes, organometallics) with protective concentration thresholds. Ultimately, to the extent possible, Washington state should strive toward harmonizing persistence in hazardous waste regulations with corresponding criteria in global PBT, PMT, and POP frameworks. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:455-464. © 2020 SETAC.