The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disclosed plans on Wednesday to revise existing restrictions on certain “forever chemicals” found in drinking water—originally set last year—while retaining regulations for two widely recognized varieties. Last year’s federal drinking water limits introduced by the Biden administration target PFAS (perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances), which are linked to heightened risks of cardiovascular conditions, some cancers, and low birth weight in infants. These restrictions aimed to protect millions by decreasing PFAS levels, which are synthetic and notoriously persistent in natural environments.
The agency aims to retract and reassess limitations on three specific PFAS variants, including the GenX substances prevalent in North Carolina, along with restrictions on combinations of various PFAS types. Nonetheless, the rule will continue to enforce limits for two prevalent PFAS forms—PFOA and PFOS—at 4 parts per trillion, the minimum detectable level. The EPA plans to uphold these guidelines while granting utilities a two-year extension, pushing compliance to 2031.
“We are committed to preserving the nationwide standards that protect Americans from PFOA and PFOS in their drinking water. Simultaneously, additional compliance time will provide necessary flexibility,” stated EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.
The adjustment primarily affects newer PFAS types and leaves the majority of utilities, which primarily face issues with PFOA and PFOS, largely impacted by the rescinded limits. Current data indicates that close to 12% of U.S. water utilities exceed the thresholds outlined by the Biden administration. Health advocates have supported the administration’s stance on PFAS restrictions. Conversely, water utilities criticized the measures due to the financial burdens of treatment systems, leading to potential increased costs for consumers. Subsequently, utilities have taken legal action against the EPA.
The EPA’s current stance heeds arguments from the utilities’ legal challenge, which questioned the agency’s jurisdiction over PFAS mixtures. They highlighted inadequacies in the agency’s support for imposing limits on several recent PFAS variants. Utilities also welcomed the extension for compliance. Erik Olson, a strategist at the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council, contested the agency’s move as unlawful, citing the Safe Water Drinking Act’s mandate against loosening existing regulations.
Manufactured by companies like Chemours and 3M, PFAS are known for their utility in various products, including water-resistant clothing and effective firefighting foam. Yet, their tendency to persist in the body has become a growing health concern as scientific research uncovers harmful effects at lower concentration levels. The Biden-era EPA estimated that enforcing the rule would cost around $1.5 billion annually. Water utility associations argue that these costs, alongside the mandate to replace lead pipes, could sharply increase utility bills, especially in smaller, resource-limited communities.
To address financial concerns, the Biden administration facilitated funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allocating $9 billion for chemicals like PFAS. Additionally, utilities have secured significant settlements from PFAS producers.
Some utilities have discovered unexpectedly high PFAS levels, with smaller outfits facing challenges regarding compliance expenses and technical expertise. Mike McGill, president of WaterPIO, a communications firm for the water industry, commented, “This allows water professionals more time to address confirmed issues, which is crucial given that some utilities are just becoming aware of their standing.”
Suggestions have been made by some, like Mark White of the engineering firm CDM Smith, regarding a preference among utilities for higher PFOA and PFOS limits. This could potentially lead to further litigation from the utility industry, while environmental organizations might also consider legal action. Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, suggested that utilities might not need as extensive treatments if restrictions center on only two older PFAS variants.
The Biden administration once celebrated the establishment of federal standards, receiving commendation from activists like Emily Donovan in North Carolina. She had advocated against GenX pollutants in a local river. The recent EPA decision to revoke GenX standards marks a step back, according to Donovan, who criticized the administration for not fulfilling its promise of improved public health outcomes.