EPA to Take Actions Against ‘Forever Chemical' Pollution
The federal government is taking several actions to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), according to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin.
Also known as 'forever chemicals' because they take so long to break down, PFAS substances have been found in water, air, and soil, and have been detected in humans and animals.
'There are thousands of PFAS chemicals, and they are found in many different consumer, commercial, and industrial products,' the EPA states on
The new actions announced on April 29 are centered around three principles: 'strengthening the science, fulfilling statutory obligations and enhancing communication, and building partnerships.'
These include, but are not limited to, designating a PFAS agency lead, implementing a testing strategy under the Toxic Substances Control Act, addressing information gaps where not all of the substances can be controlled and measured, and providing more updates to the EPA's PFAS destruction and disposal guidance.
The actions also include developing limitation guidelines for PFAS manufacturers and meta finishers, enforcing the Clean Water Act on the use of PFAS chemicals, and establishing a clear liability framework.
Related Stories
4/29/2025
3/21/2025
The EPA will also develop partnerships at the state level to assess PFAS contamination risks, advance cleanup efforts where PFAS contamination is impacting the drinking water, and review and evaluate pending air emission petitions.
'I have long been concerned about PFAS and the efforts to help states and communities dealing with legacy contamination in their backyards,' Zeldin said
'With today's announcement, we are tackling PFAS from all of EPA's program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and providing certainty for passive receivers.
'This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water.'
Zeldin's efforts follow the EPA's PFAS-focused work during the first Trump administration, which included the launch of the PFAS Action Plan in 2019. That worked to identify short-term solutions as well as long-term strategies to empower states, tribes, and local communities to address PFAS at the source to ensure safe drinking water.
They also follow actions undertaken by the Biden administration, which sought to protect drinking water and land from PFAS contamination and updated the agency's national PFAS testing strategy.
The EPA notes that the latest efforts are in line with Zeldin's 'Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative' by advancing 'Pillar 1: Clean Air, Land, and Water for Every American, and Pillar 3: Permitting Reform, Cooperative Federalism, and Cross-Agency Partnership.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How many abomination-supporting Arizona congressmen will Elon pay to defeat?
Donald Trump and Republicans loved it when Elon Musk pumped what analysists say was at least $288 million into the 2024 election campaigns of Trump and others. I wonder if Arizona Republican U.S. Reps. David Schweikert, Eli Crane, Paul Gosar, Abe Hamadeh and Juan Ciscomani are worried that he might spend something close to that amount going after them and others in 2026. Because if Elon is a guy who still puts his money where his mouth is, he will. Musk got bamboozled into believing the Republicans he bankrolled actually wanted to cut federal spending and reduce the deficit. HA! Instead, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reports that Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' will hand out trillions in tax cuts (to people like Elon) while raising the federal deficit by $2.4 trillion over the decade and leaving nearly 11 million more Americans without health insurance. The 215 House Republicans who voted to advance the bill thought a billionaire like Elon would love the idea that he'll be getting to keep even more of his billions. Instead, Elon came out on social media and said, 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' He kept going, saying the bill would saddle Americans with 'crushingly unsustainable debt.' House Speaker Mike Johnson said Musk's criticism was 'very disappointing.' It must have really spooked him when Musk also said, 'In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people.' Yes! The big bill passed the House with Republican support only. In our case, it was supported by all of Arizona's GOP congressmen. Although, Rep. David Schweikert actually said that, while he supported the bill, he was so tired he 'slept' through the vote. (Not sure which is worse. Supporting the bill or sleeping through a monumental vote.) Opinion: Biggs' coronation rally wasn't really about him One of only three Republicans who didn't support the bill, Rep. Thomas Massie from Kentucky, is encouraging Musk to spend money defeating the bill's supporters. He said, 'I just think he made one mistake — he said take them out in November. I would take them out in primaries if I were Elon Musk.' Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs need not worry. He is getting out of Dodge by running for governor. But his GOP cohorts in Congress — Schweikert, Crane, Gosar, Hamadeh and Ciscomani — are still there, still giving tax breaks to billionaires, raising the debt and tossing people off insurance rolls. They loved Musk when he was shoveling mounds of cash into Trump's campaign. How will they feel, I wonder, if he starts shoveling cash onto their political graves? Reach Montini at Like this column? Get more opinions in your email inbox by signing up for our free opinions newsletter, which publishes Monday through Friday. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Elon Musk's new 'kill the bill' target: Arizona congressmen | Opinion
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Congress can deal a blow to government union bosses
Congress can use the budget reconciliation bill to save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by refusing to pay the salaries of government employees who, instead of doing their jobs, are doing business for their unions. Through a practice known as 'official time,' union agents can draw a government salary even when they are off lobbying Congress, or spending 100 percent of their time working for a labor union. In 2019, the year before President Joe Biden ordered the Office of Personnel Management to stop tracking and reporting official time, employees across the federal government were paid $135 million to do 2.6 million hours of union work while 'on the clock' at their government jobs. These are the last people who deserve taxpayer money. Despite being paid with tax dollars, these government union bosses are blatantly partisan. They're so used to being above the law that they see no reason to represent the views of most Americans. That's why their contributions to candidates favor Democrats 20 to 1. And of course, government employee unions have staged massive protests in Washington to combat the Trump administration's efforts to reform the federal bureaucracy. Even though unions are third-party, nongovernmental organizations with strong political biases, federal officials are required by law to negotiate with them over their agencies' staffing policies. Public policy should be made by representatives elected by the American people. It is undemocratic for those policies to instead be made through forced 'negotiations' between elected officials and unelected union bosses. Union officials should never have been given control over the government workforce. So it's good that President Trump signed an executive order ending union bargaining at several federal agencies. If Congress won't ban federal unions altogether, it can deal a significant blow to these groups by taking away the massive taxpayer subsidies that help fund their operations. The Protecting Taxpayers' Wallets Act, sponsored by Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), forces unions to pay back the official time they consume, plus the value of other perks they receive, such as free government office space. If union bosses want to set up shop in government buildings, and use government employees as union organizers and lobbyists, they should do it on their own dime. Reversing the flow of taxpayer money into union coffers is a revenue decision, making Ernst and Perry's language eligible for the budget reconciliation bill, which, unlike most legislation, can pass the Senate with just 51 votes. The language should be included in the reconciliation bill, but union bosses have allies in government, so its inclusion is in jeopardy. It suffered an early defeat after Rep. Perry introduced an amendment in the House Oversight Committee that would have placed his language in the budget. A majority of the committee's members joined with Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), who said that she opposed Perry's amendment because she believes that campaigning for candidates like herself is an appropriate activity for government workers. 'Making sure that you are going to get somebody who is going to serve in a seat that is going to make sure that you can be protected … as far as I'm concerned, that is agency business,' she explained. Crockett is wrong. Government employees should not be in the business of deciding who should serve in a congressional seat and campaigning to elect that person. House and Senate leaders should insist that the language in the Protecting Taxpayer Wallets Act be added to the budget reconciliation bill, so that the public no longer has to fund the political activity of union bosses. Jace White is the director of federal affairs at the National Right to Work Committee. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House Oversight GOP shoots down Democratic attempt to subpoena Musk
Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee shot down an attempt by the panel's Democrats to subpoena Elon Musk, seeking answers about his short stint in the Trump administration. The surprise move from Democrats to compel Musk to testify before the panel sought to examine government service that, while brief, was impactful and marred by controversy. Rep. Stephen Lynch (Mass.), the acting top Democrat on the panel, shifted the tune of a hearing on artificial intelligence by bashing the former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) head, saying President Trump created 'disaster and danger … by turning our government over to his biggest campaign donor.' 'We cannot sit here, however, and have the traditional bipartisan conversation about federal IT modernization without acknowledging the fact that the Trump administration, Elon Musk and DOGE are leading technology initiatives that threaten the privacy and security of all Americans and undermine our government and the vital services it provides to red states and blue states,' he said. 'Musk may say he has stepped away from his role in the federal government, but his recklessness will continue to have devastating consequences for America for years, possibly decades to come,' Lynch continued. Republicans, very few of whom were in the room when the hearing began, suspended the hearing to give GOP colleagues more time to arrive and vote down the measure, delaying the hearing for more than 20 minutes. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who was overseeing the hearing, mocked Democrats, telling them they 'looked good' for social media clips as her Democratic colleagues sat before blown up photos of Musk. Lynch and other Democrats pressed Mace to move forward with a vote as the wait stretched on. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) criticized the delay, noting that 'it has historically never taken this long for the clerk to call roll.' The Thursday push was the second time the panel's Democrats have pushed to subpoena Musk, though the first since the DOGE leader has left government following the end of his term as a special government employee. His departure also came amid reports about Musk's alleged drug use, which he has denied. Lynch said Musk was given 'free rein to terrorize our civil servants and drive more than 275,000 federal employees from their jobs serving the American people' and said he was among those in the Trump administration who are 'more interested in self enrichment than public service.' Musk officially announced his departure from the Trump administration last week, bringing to a close a tumultuous four months in government for the Tesla CEO. The tech billionaire's role leading DOGE has been highly controversial, prompting numerous lawsuits challenging Musk and his staffers' authority and creating headaches for his business empire. The move comes amid a four-way race to determine the next top Democrat on the panel, replacing the late Rep. Gerry Connolly (Va.). Lynch has thrown his hat in the ring, as have Crockett and Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.). Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
