PFAS takes center stage at IEC Expo Theater

CLEVELAND—It's certainly clear that PFAS has been the story of the year in terms of looking at what's going to happen with regard to potential regulations and bans.

And the ACS Rubber Division's programming clearly reflected the importance of the "hot topic," dedicating a full technical session to the "forever chemicals" along with three presentations and a panel at its Expo Theater.

With all playing to solid crowds, here's some of the highlights from the theater events.

PFAS materials are everywhere.

Agreement on their continued use, disposal methods and toxicity to the human body, however, is not as common—and neither is the consistency of the regulations governing them, according to Ozan Devlen, who spoke at the Expo Theater on the show floor Oct. 17.

Devlen works for Kastas Sealing Technologies, a specialty Turkish seal manufacturer in the aerospace segment, and represented the European Sealing Association in his 30-minute presentation.

Devlen leads the technology department at Kastas.

"This is the start, but not the end, of the PFAS conversation," Devlen said. "The driving question of the day is, if water is the driving force in nature … then what if that cleanliness is compromised?"

Devlen stipulated that the science on testicular, thyroid, breast, liver and other cancers is valid—but that the toxicity of some fluoropolymers remains in question.

In addition, he said, PFAS may be the lesser of two evils. The fluoropolymers are used in many containment systems for other, more toxic, chemicals.

The materials are found in medical equipment, Teflon pans, rain wear and cosmetics, among many other uses.

And they are used extensively in military applications.

According to Devlen, the end-of-life procedure for PFAS is the problem child—not the fluoropolymer manufacturing or the production and use of the devices.

"There is controversy, that is for sure," he said. "What we are trying to find out is this controversy reality or not? Most problems we are seeing are coming from end-of-life procedures."

Devlen championed a voluntary commitment to reducing PFAS emissions; a platform for the latest technologies in PFAS production; and a commitment to informing downstream users of PFAS about their emissions.

"Banning PFAS is not the way to solve this," Devlen said.

He said there are no current alternatives to 85 percent of PFAS applications.

When it comes to PFAS, a lot of people say the European REACH proposal that conceivably could ban all uses of the "forever chemicals" is the regulatory issue to watch.

Still others point to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which earlier in October issued its final rule mandating reporting tied to the manufacture and usage of PFAS chemicals.

But Jay West, senior director of chemical products and technology at the American Chemistry Council, was on hand at the IEC's Expo Theater to tell attendees there is another place to keep an eye on.

"I really want you to listen to me today because there are a lot of us, particularly of my members, who believe the states are actually more of a threat to the continued use of fluoropolymers and fluoroelastomers," he told attendees. "Both their manufacturing and the ability to use them in the future."

When watching the states, it's important, West said, to see and understand the different models of state rules that are coming out, not to mention the sheer volume.

Thus far in 2023, U.S. states have introduced 270 PFAS-related bills, not that he and the ACC are counting.

And those largely can be grouped by types. Some restriction bills apply to very specific end categories, while others are quite large. There also are proposals that require the notification of the use of intentionally added PFAS. And still others focus on maximum contaminant levels for discharges to such things as water bodies.

"One of the things that the states consistently do—because the states get together and talk about legislating together—is a definition of PFAS that's extremely broad," West said.

Any fluorinated organic chemicals containing one fully fluorinated carbon atom, he added, can be enough to get that substance labeled as PFAS.

"So if you take one of the top 300 globally prescribed pharmaceuticals, you will soon have state agencies that will be deciding whether you are able to take that drug," West warned IEC attendees. "Because this definition brings all of those out. It's not just the industrial chemicals that we're all kind of used to dealing with everyday.

"This is a huge explosion of definition of the PFAS."

There is lot of worry around potential PFAS regulations and how they will impact industry, including the rubber sector.

But while it may be years before these rules and legislation may go into effect, it's best to be prepared now, according to Michael Blumenthal, an attorney with the McGlinchey Stafford law firm, which has 17 offices in 12 states and the District of Columbia.

And the best way to do that, he told attendees of a session at the IEC, is to follow a manufacturing compliance strategy that is a combination of risk assessment and compliance management. He laid out the areas that should be covered in such a plan:

• The first thing Blumenthal advised for manufacturers in the PFAS supply chain to do is identify the chemicals used in the company's production or the company's process.
• Assess the potential risks associated with the use of these chemicals, including exposure pathways.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of current risk management practices, and identify areas for improvement.
• Develop a plan to mitigate risk associated with PFAS use, including strategies for reducing exposure and minimizing environmental impact.

"The government right now is big on wanting industry to find alternative substances that could be used in lieu of PFAS," Blumenthal said. "... It could be something that, knowing that these regulations are coming down the pike, may be something you want to look at.

• Monitor the effectiveness of risk management practices. "Over a course of time look at the management plan you have in place," the attorney said. "Where is it flawed? Where does it work? Where could it stand some improvement?"
• Plan for responding to the supply chain if there is a release.

"You need to be part of any kind of management plan. I'm telling my clients to not rely on supplier declarations," he said. "Ask for them to provide testing documentation to support the declaration. If PFAS is designated as a hazardous substance under CRCLA, the supplier declaration is going to be insufficient defense if you get named in a lawsuit. You are much better equipped to deal with any claims that come down the pike if you get the actual documentation from you supplier."

• Institute in-house training and education classes to enable employees to deal with PFAS. He advised there be some sort of proof, such as an affidavit, that the company is meeting baseline requirements.
• Institute regular reviews and update of compliance program, along with improving monitoring and reporting processes.

"You may want to do dry runs," Blumenthal advised. "This is gong to be something that is going to be heavily enforced, so you want to have procedures in place."

• Use outside legal counsel to conduct privileged investigations. An attorney, he said, could have an environmental consultant do an in-house investigation of all of the different processes. "The attorney can communicate to the company what needs to be done when you implement these procedures. And you can do it all under this umbrella of privilege," according to Blumenthal.
• Use voluntary state and federal voluntary programs to report should you have a PFAS release.

"You can voluntarily report the violation, go ahead and perform an assessment, complete a remediation, and 99 percent of the time, if you follow the protocol that's' laid out in either the state or federal voluntary action programs, penalties will be waived," he said.

One of the most difficult things about the regulatory activity focusing on PFAS manufacture and usage is trying to figure out which of the thousands of PFAS chemicals should be the subject of the potential restrictions and bans.

A panel of industry experts took to the stage to make the case that fluoroelastomers and fluoropolymers are safe to use and aren't causing the harm to humans and the environment that have brought attention on the "forever chemicals."

Tim Bremner, materials technology director, for Advanced Sealing Technologies, a Michelin company, said the PFAS to worry about are the ones that have caused issues in the past, such as PFOA and PFOS, which are small molecule surfactants that are sometimes used in polymerization processes.

"If you look at what the U.S. Environmental Agency is focusing on today, they're focusing on water-borne PFAS, and rightfully so," he said. "... The concern from a public perspective is ingesting or coming into contact with some of these PFAS chemicals that are known to be bad actors.

"They can't all be treated the same. They need to differentiate on the basis of potential harm to humans on this planet."

One issue, according to Bremner, is that only a small subset—about 100 or fewer—of the chemicals have undergone stringent, toxicological studies. But then he claimed that non-governmental organizations and other public interest research groups want to take that information and extrapolate that to the whole range of PFAS.

"They say just because these ones are known to (be) bad, we're going to call them all bad, which is the furthest from the truth," he said. "We don't have good scientific evidence, and we haven't done good toxicological studies on the many different families or groups of these PFAS chemicals."

Bremner said the U.S. EPA is being a bit more methodical with it's process, going about it in a very pragmatic basis. That's not something that he said is happening in the European Union, with its proposed restriction that's clumping all PFAS together.

"We have no idea what the end life or the fate of these PFAS trails are, the end of life," Bremner said. "So they're simply going to ban them first and perhaps figure out whether they're bad for you later."

Andrew Schunk, Rubber News Staff, contributed to this report