The Environmental Protection Agency proposes first federal limits on “forever chemicals” in drinking water

Washington – The Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday proposed the first federal limits on “forever harmful chemicals” in drinking water, a long-awaited protection that the agency said would save thousands of lives and stave off serious diseases, including cancer.

The plan would limit toxic PFAS chemicals to the lowest level that tests can detect. PFAS, or perfluorinated and polyfluorinated substances, are a group of compounds that are widely dispersed, dangerous, and expensive to remove from water. They do not degrade in the environment and are linked to a wide range of health problems, including low birth weight and kidney cancer.

“The science is clear that long-term exposure to PFAS is associated with significant health risks,” Radhika Fox, EPA Assistant Administrator for Water, said in an interview.

Fox called the federal proposal a “transformational change” to improve the safety of drinking water in the United States. The agency estimates that the rule could reduce exposure to PFAS for nearly 100 million Americans, lowering rates of cancer, heart attack and childbirth complications.

See also: Erin Brockovich: The True Story of the City Three Decades Later

The chemical has been used since the 1940s, including in non-stick pans, food packaging, and firefighting foam. Their use is now mostly phased out in the United States, but some still exist.

The proposal would set strict limits of 4 parts per trillion, the lowest level that can be measured reliably, for two common types of PFAS compounds called PFOA and PFOS. In addition, the EPA wants to regulate the combined amount of four other types of PFAS. Water providers will have to monitor PFAS.

The public will have an opportunity to comment, and the agency can make changes before issuing a final rule, expected by the end of the year.

The Association of State Drinking Water Officials called the proposal a “step in the right direction” but said compliance would be difficult. Despite the available federal funds, “substantial price increases will be required for most systems” that must remove PFAS, the group said Tuesday.

Environmental and public health advocates have called for federal regulation of PFAS chemicals for years. Over the past decade, the EPA has repeatedly raised preventive and voluntary health thresholds for chemicals but has not imposed mandatory restrictions on water providers.

Public concern has increased in recent years as tests have uncovered PFAS chemicals in a growing list of communities often near manufacturing plants or Air Force bases.

To date, only a handful of states have issued PFAS regulations, and none have set as stringent restrictions as what the EPA proposes. By regulating PFOA and PFOS at the minimum amounts that the tests can detect, the EPA is proposing the narrowest possible standards technically possible, the experts said.

“This is truly a historic moment,” said Melanie Benisch, vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group. “There are many communities that have had PFAS in their waters for decades who have been waiting a long time for this announcement to be made.”

The agency said its proposal would protect everyone, including vulnerable communities, and curb disease on a large scale. The EPA wants water providers to run tests, notify the public when PFAS is found, and remove compounds when levels are too high.

Facilities with high levels of pollutants are usually given time to fix the problems, but could face fines or the loss of federal grants if problems persist.

The American Chemistry Council, which represents major chemical companies, criticized the EPA’s “misguided approach” and said, “These low limits are likely to result in billions of dollars in compliance costs.”

In a statement released Tuesday, the group said it had “serious concerns about the underlying science used in developing” the proposed rule, adding, “It is critical that the EPA get the flag right.”

The proposal would also regulate other types of PFAS such as GenX Chemicals, which manufacturers used as a replacement when PFOA and PFOS were phased out from consumer products. The proposal would regulate the cumulative health threat of those compounds and mandate treatment if that threat was too high.

Michael Regan, Administrator of the EPA, said, “Communities across this country have suffered for far too long from the constant threat of PFAS contamination. The EPA proposal could prevent tens of thousands of PFAS-related diseases, he said, and stands as a major step.” Towards protecting all our societies from these dangerous pollutants.

It’s important to make those who have released the compounds into the environment pay for the cleanup, said Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear, which advocates for cleaning up an area contaminated with PFAS.

The EPA recently made $2 billion available to states to dispose of pollutants like PFAS and will release billions more in the coming years. The agency also provides technical support to smaller communities that will soon have to install treatment systems, and there is funding in the Infrastructure Act of 2021 to upgrade the water system.

However, it would be costly for utilities to install new equipment, and the burden would be particularly difficult for small towns with fewer resources.

“This is an issue that has been handed over to the utilities through no fault of their own,” said Sri Vedachalam, director of water equity and climate resilience at the environmental consultancy firm. & Technology Inc.

Vedachalam said many communities will need to balance new PFAS requirements with removing toxic lead pipes and replacing old water pipes that are prone to rupture.

Fox said there is “no single answer” for how communities should prioritize their needs, but he said billions of dollars in federal resources are available to improve water.

said Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that works to get toxic chemicals out of food, water, clothing and other things.

Several states have already imposed PFAS drinking water limits. Officials in Michigan, which has the most stringent standards of any state, said the costs of removing PFAS in the communities where it was found were reasonable.

Eric Olson of the Natural Resources Defense Council called the EPA’s proposal crucial to protecting public health. “Establishing strong standards will help ensure every household’s basic right to safe water flowing from the kitchen tap,” he said.

___

Phyllis reported from St. Louis.