As EPA weakens rules on ‘forever chemicals,' states are moving forward

Washington Post

6 days ago

State water officials are worried about how to protect residents from drinking water contaminated with 'forever chemicals' — and how shifting federal regulations will affect their responsibilities.
During a meeting this week with the Environmental Protection Agency on its plan to rescind and reconsider President Joe Biden's landmark drinking water standard on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), state officials and industry representatives complained that regulatory uncertainty was placing communities in a bind.
Despite the lack of clarity on what the EPA will do with the standard, states are still on the hook for implementing it.
That creates difficulties if the rule is weakened, said Steven Elmore, chair of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council.
'Certain states have state laws that say their drinking water standard can't be more stringent than the federal law,' Elmore said.
More state laws are probably on the way. At least 250 bills have been introduced in about 36 states this year to address PFAS by banning the chemicals in products, setting maximum levels in drinking water and allocating funding to clean up contamination. Dozens of states have passed regulatory standards for at least one forever chemical in drinking water.
The legislative push at the state level comes on the heels of the Trump administration's mixed messaging on regulations and research for PFAS. In May, the EPA announced plans to rescind and reconsider limits on four of the chemicals and to delay the rules for two others. In July, the administration slashed nearly $15 million in grant funding for research to reduce the effects of PFAS in sewage sludge and related contamination on farmlands.
The agency said it has outlined ways to address water contamination, including the new PFAS OUT initiative in which it will share tools, funding, resources and technical assistance with public water utilities to limit at the source the contamination by PFAS. In March, the White House released the 'National Strategy to End the Use of Paper Straws,' detailing the dangers of PFAS, which some paper straws contain.
'Building on the historic actions to address PFAS during the first Trump Administration, EPA is tackling PFAS from all of our program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and more,' EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch said in a statement.
But some officials said state legislation would serve as the last line of defense in protecting residents from contamination.
In Maine, state Rep. Dan Shagoury (D) said he introduced the bill establishing a new maximum level for PFAS as a bookkeeping measure to ensure state law mirrored the federal standard. He now sees the measure as an important safeguard in the face of potential federal rollbacks.
'The thought after the election was, 'We really better make sure we do this because the feds may roll it back and those standards may not be there a year from now,'' Shagoury said.
The law, which passed in June, requires local water utilities to reduce levels of PFOA, a known human carcinogen, and PFOS, a likely carcinogen, to four parts per trillion (ppt). The legislation sets a limit of 10 ppt for three other compounds — PFHxS, PFNA and GenX — and additional limits for mixtures of the compounds. Current federal regulation allows states to have stricter rules.
'It's going to be up to the states to set limits in the absence of federal standards,' Shagoury said. 'For the past few decades, we looked to the feds for our guidance on safe levels of things, and if they aren't going to do it, we will.'
Lawmakers in Delaware started working on legislation on PFAS about a year ago in anticipation of rollbacks at the federal level, state Sen. Darius Brown (D) said. The state's new law, which goes into effect next year, will create a monitoring and reporting dashboard so residents can find out the concentrations of PFAS in their drinking water. The dashboard will be funded primarily by settlement money from litigation against chemical companies.
The federal rule gives water utilities until 2027 to report the presence of the regulated chemicals but doesn't require compliance with maximum levels until 2029.
'We'll do the work here locally to protect residents in our state to make sure that we have the proper reporting and that residents are informed around forever chemicals,' Brown said. 'If that's something that is rolled back at the federal level, we will not be the only state, but we're happy to join other states in being leaders around this effort.'
State regulatory actions could result in legal challenges down the line, Elmore said. States passing legislation to match the standard could expose themselves to litigation if the EPA changes it next year. And states that wait for a new standard could run into delays and compliance issues.
States have historically moved faster on legislation on PFAS due to local contamination issues and have generally served as the 'testing ground and incubators for trying out policy,' said Jen Hensley, a state lobbying and advocacy director with the Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group.
States began passing such legislation before President Donald Trump's current term, and if the EPA rolls back the federal drinking water standard, additional states are likely to establish stricter rules, she said.
'We'll use this time under a hostile administration to regulate and move the ball wherever we can,' Hensley said.
Water utilities and ratepayers will bear the brunt of the regulatory ambiguity, according to the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, a trade group that sued the EPA over the Biden rule.
'AMWA continues to advocate for sound federal regulation of contaminants that pose nationwide threats, but otherwise we believe states are well positioned to regulate contaminants that are of regional concern,' AMWA CEO Tom Dobbins said.
The chemical industry warns against the creation of a patchwork system that will sow confusion about which standards to uphold.
The American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, said the group believes in a one-size-fits-all approach to regulating the class of chemicals. Without it, state regulations could conflict with each other, EPA policies and international standards.
'The consequences could be skyrocketing prices, products no longer available in certain states and business opportunities moving from one state to another or overseas,' said Erich Shea, ACC's director of product communications.
Shagoury said a patchwork system is 'almost inevitable' in the absence of federal regulations.
New Mexico state Rep. Christine Chandler (D) said there wouldn't be a patchwork system if the federal government created a national standard that states could rely on.
'Unfortunately, we're seeing a trend where the federal government is stepping away from that responsibility,' she said.
'Those of us who care about the environment and our residents are going to have to step up and do what we can to mitigate against these environmental threats,' Chandler added.
New Mexico is embroiled in a lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force after firefighting foam from an air base caused a four-mile PFAS plume near Clovis, contaminating drinking water and crops and poisoning farm animals. Chandler said the state's new law classifying PFAS as hazardous waste will ensure that the state can seek remediation and protect the health of residents.
'It's really unfortunate and it's really sad that we have to pass laws to clarify that the federal government really needs to step up here and take responsibility,' Chandler said.