Ambient levels of PFOS and PFOA in multiple environmental media |
| |
| Authors: | Usha K Vedagiri Richard H Anderson Heather M Loso Catherine M Schwach |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Principal Risk Assessor, AECOM;2. Environmental Scientist, U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC), San Antonio, Texas;3. Senior Risk Assessor, AECOM |
| |
| Abstract: | Making remediation and risk management decisions for widely‐distributed chemicals is a challenging aspect of contaminated site management. The objective of this study is to present an initial evaluation of the ubiquitous, ambient environmental distribution of poly‐ and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) within the context of environmental decision‐making at contaminated sites. PFAS are anthropogenic contaminants of emerging concern with a wide variety of consumer and industrial sources and uses that result in multiple exposure routes for humans. The combination of widespread prevalence and low screening levels introduces considerable uncertainty and potential costs in the environmental management of PFAS. PFAS are not naturally‐occurring, but are frequently detected in environmental media independent of site‐specific (i.e., point source) contamination. Information was collected on background and ambient levels of two predominant PFAS, perfluorooctane sulfonate and perfluorooctanoate, in North America in both abiotic media (soil, sediment, surface water, and public drinking water supplies) and selected biotic media (human tissues, fish, and shellfish). The background or ambient information was compiled from multiple published sources, organized by medium and concentration ranges, and evaluated for geographical trends and, when available, also compared to health‐based screening levels. Data coverage and quality varied from wide‐ranging and well‐documented for soil, surface water, and serum data to more localized and less well‐documented for sediment and fish and shellfish tissues and some uncertainties in the data were noted. Widespread ambient soil and sediment concentrations were noted but were well below human health‐protective thresholds for direct contact exposures. Surface water, drinking water supply waters (representing a combination of groundwater and surface water), fish and shellfish tissue, and human serum levels ranged from less than to greater than available health‐based threshold values. This evaluation highlights the need for incorporating literature‐based or site‐specific background into PFAS site evaluation and decision‐making, so that source identification, risk management, and remediation goals are properly focused and to also inform general policy development for PFAS management. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
