In partnership with ECT2, SCS Engineers’ participation in the design and construction of the PFAS treatment facility at Champ Landfill, a Waste Connections Company in St. Louis, MO, marked a significant milestone for our client. This project presented us with the challenge of addressing environmental concerns and regulatory requirements related to PFAS contamination in the landfill’s wastewater.
We approached this challenge with careful planning, coordination with government agencies for permits, and effective construction management to ensure the successful completion of the project. Our team worked diligently to design and construct a treatment facility that met all regulatory requirements and used advanced proprietary equipment to effectively remove PFAS from the leachate.
The ECT2 leachate – wastewater treatment process involves intercepting wastewater at an average flow rate of 73 gallons per minute, with peak flow rates of up to 81 gallons per minute. After removal of the PFAS, the wastewater discharges back to the original sanitary sewer system, where it continues to a wastewater treatment facility for final treatment. The process removes the PFAS from the leachate – wastewater, which is critical since landfills are passive receivers of PFAS ladened products by consumers and industry.
SCS’s contributions to the design and construction of this facility highlight our part in the application of advanced technology and newly developed processes implemented in the PFAS treatment facility at Champ Landfill, showcasing our commitment to utilizing the best available tools and technology for environmental protection and regulatory compliance.
The outcomes of this project were highly successful. The new wastewater treatment facility was completed within the specified timeframe and budget, providing Waste Connections with a full-service solution to manage PFAS contamination at Champ Landfill. This solution contributed to environmental protection, ensured current and future regulatory compliance, and improved waste management practices at the site. We’ll step you through the ECT2 system below.
Overall, our participation in this project demonstrates SCS Engineers’ role in applying advanced technology and efficient processes to handle complex construction projects and deliver comprehensive solutions to our clients. The successful collaboration between SCS and ECT2 showcased the expertise and capabilities of both parties, further solidifying our reputation as a trusted partner in environmental construction projects. For detailed information please contact SCS Engineers at .
Additional Landfill Leachate and Wastewater PFAS Treatment Resources:
On May 21, 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced $25 million for states and territories to invest in clean and safe drinking water. This grant funding will benefit underserved, small, and disadvantaged communities by upgrading infrastructure to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act, reducing exposure to Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), removing lead sources, and addressing additional local drinking water challenges.
Purpose of the EPA Safe Drinking Water Grants
EPA’s grant funding can support various projects to help communities address drinking water concerns, from household water quality testing to monitoring for drinking water contaminants, including PFAS, and identifying and replacing lead service lines. Funds may also support efforts to build the technical, financial, and managerial abilities of a water system’s operations and staff. Infrastructure projects—from transmission, distribution, and storage—that support drinking water quality improvements are also eligible for grant funding.
The FY 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act updated the eligible uses of the funds to include “one or more owners of drinking water wells that are not public water systems or connected to a public water system” as eligible beneficiaries of the FY 2024 SUDC grant funds awarded to states and territories.
The update allows FY 2024 SUDC funds to benefit owners of private drinking water wells for appropriate projects under the SUDC program. Because this is a new eligibility for the grant program, the EPA anticipates releasing updates with additional details to the grant Implementation Document later this year. The private well eligibility is authorized for the FY 2024 funding for states and territories only. Future Congressional action will determine eligibility for future funding.
Funding by State and Territory
The Small, Underserved, and Disadvantaged Community Grant Program, established under the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act, awards funding to states and territories non-competitively. EPA awards funding to states based on an allocation formula that includes factors for populations below the poverty level, small water systems, and underserved communities.
Small, Underserved, and Disadvantaged Communities (SUDC) Grant Allotments for States and Territories Based on FY 2024 Appropriations of $25 Million are in the Table Below
| State/Territory | 2024 Allotment | State/Territory | 2024 Allotment | |
| Alabama | $369,000 | Montana | $326,000 | |
| Alaska | $571,000 | Nebraska | $284,000 | |
| American Samoa | $141,000 | Nevada | $293,000 | |
| Arizona | $490,000 | New Hampshire | $259,000 | |
| Arkansas | $342,000 | New Jersey | $406,000 | |
| California | $1,624,000 | New Mexico | $393,000 | |
| Colorado | $462,000 | New York | $1,047,000 | |
| Connecticut | $273,000 | North Carolina | $679,000 | |
| Delaware | $195,000 | North Dakota | $210,000 | |
| D.C. | $151,000 | North Mariana Islands | $142,000 | |
| Florida | $961,000 | Ohio | $609,000 | |
| Georgia | $664,000 | Oklahoma | $492,000 | |
| Guam | $135,000 | Oregon | $425,000 | |
| Hawaii | $170,000 | Pennsylvania | $799,000 | |
| Idaho | $316,000 | Puerto Rico | $478,000 | |
| Illinois | $702,000 | Rhode Island | $168,000 | |
| Indiana | $422,000 | South Carolina | $375,000 | |
| Iowa | $348,000 | South Dakota | $240,000 | |
| Kansas | $381,000 | Tennessee | $403,000 | |
| Kentucky | $340,000 | Texas | $1,821,000 | |
| Louisiana | $641,000 | Utah | $291,000 | |
| Maine | $238,000 | U.S. Virgin Islands | $138,000 | |
| Maryland | $305,000 | Vermont | $210,000 | |
| Massachusetts | $348,000 | Virginia | $469,000 | |
| Michigan | $650,000 | Washington | $566,000 | |
| Minnesota | $382,000 | West Virginia | $315,000 | |
| Mississippi | $420,000 | Wisconsin | $439,000 | |
| Missouri | $524,000 | Wyoming | $238,000 |
Additional Resources for Safe Drinking Water Related to PFAS:
To a wastewater treatment engineer, at least during workdays, it seems like everyone is talking about forever chemicals, all of the time. There’s a good reason for that, because the huge group of man-made chemicals has climbed in priority to be at the top of most wastewater treatment regulatory considerations. Forever chemicals are also known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and have rapidly become the latest of the emerging contaminants in drinking water to be treated. So, while there is still a lot of toxicology research to do, PFAS destruction and even which PFAS actually needs to be addressed, there is very little doubt regarding the future need to treat PFAS in landfill leachate and other wastewaters. Everyone is in agreement, the environment needs to be protected from forever chemicals.
PFAS chemicals can withstand high heat without becoming unstable as well as repelling oil and water, making them ideal for inclusion in fire-fighting foam, lining non-stick pans, or water resistant clothing. But unfortunately, PFAS can persist in the environment – water, fish, humans, etc. – for a long time. So, having efficient and cost-effective methods of treating wastewater, drinking water, bio-solids, etc., to reduce/remove PFAS is becoming increasingly important. Luckily, some traditional and very available treatment methods are effective at treating PFAS as well as some newer, non-traditional treatment methods that appear to be promising.
One effective management technology is using deep injection wells to store the PFAS contaminated wastewater deep, far below drinking water sources and within high total dissolved solids groundwater. Deep injection wells are only allowed where the deep geology and subsurface conditions can allow for the PFAS wastewater to be contained where it is injected.
Additional management options are granular activated carbon (GAC) or ion exchange (IX), which are adsorption treatment methods that use a media, through which the PFAS contaminated wastewater can pass, and the charged PFAS molecules become bound up in the opposite charged GAC or IX media.
Reverse osmosis (RO) and foam fractionation (FF) treatment methods use separation, either through very small pores in a membrane (RO) or applying aeration to create a PFAS concentrated foam (FF), to allow the treated, cleaner water to discharge the treatment process and the concentrate (RO) or foamate (FF) is left and can be dealt with more efficiently, because after treatment the concentrate/foamate is a much smaller volume than the original wastewater flow.
These PFAS management methods simply move the PFAS chemicals out of the way and don’t actually destroy the PFAS. PFAS destruction generally requires more effort and cost because high pressure and/or high heat are required to break the carbon – fluorine (C-F) bonds. A regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO) or supercritical water oxidation (SCWO) are PFAS destruction methods that can be employed. An RTO typically operates at high temperature (e.g., 1,800 F) and SCWO utilizes both high temperature (>705 F) and high pressure (>3,210 psi) within a process to, again, break the C-F bonds. Electrocoagulation, advanced oxidation processes and plasma are also treatment methods that could be employed to destroy PFAS.
These are just a few of the many PFAS management and destruction options. It can be hard to decide what’s right for your project. That’s where SCS can help. We’re technology agnostic – so you can trust our recommendations are appropriate for your project and goals. Contact us today to learn more about what’s possible.
About the Author: Sam Cooke, PE, CEM, MBA, is a Vice President and our expert on Industrial Wastewater Pretreatment. He has nearly three decades of professional and project management experience in engineering with a concentration in environmental and energy engineering. Mr. Cooke works within SCS’s Liquids Management initiative to provide services to our clients nationwide.
Additional PFAS Management and Treatment Resources:
In this Waste Today article, Sam Cooke discusses the factors, treatment options, analytical methods, and identifying PFAS sources to most effectively reduce the concentrations of ammonia and PFAS in landfill leachate.
Reducing these concentrations help meet discharge permit requirements for direct discharge of treated leachate to surface waters and to meet publicly owned treatment works (POTW) discharge permit standards.
Sam points out that accomplishing ammonia and PFAS reduction with established wastewater treatment technologies works, but the right treatment depends on each site’s specific parameters. He suggests conducting bench-scale and pilot-scale testing for any feasible nitrogen removal or treatment system. Testing the wastewater helps to identify any changes in the concentration of nitrogen compounds. Thus, necessary changes to the treatment processes, such as additional aeration or chemical additions are easier to identify and less costly to implement.
Best practices for treating ammonia in landfill leachate, Waste Today
About the Author: Mr. Cooke, PE, CEM, MBA, is a Vice President and our expert on Industrial Waste Pretreatment. He has nearly three decades of professional and project management experience in engineering with a concentration in environmental and energy engineering. Mr. Cooke works within SCS’s Liquids Management initiative to provide services to our clients nationwide.
Learn more about liquids management at landfills.
Corporate Headquarters
3900 Kilroy Airport Way Suite 300
Long Beach, CA 90806
Telephone
1 (800) 767-4727
1 (562) 427-0805 | FAX
Contact Us
