The Health Risks of PFAS in Drinking Water and Regulatory Challenges Ahead

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were widely used over the last several decades especially around military complex areas. Over time, they have become more and more of a public health concern due to their widespread presence and persistence in the environment (and the fact that modern laboratory techniques can now detect the chemicals at very low levels).

You’ve probably heard them referred to as “forever chemicals, because they’re so resistant to degradation (e.g. microbes can’t eat the chemicals so there’s no biodegradation in the environment).

One of the most significant sources of PFAS water contamination in the US is around military bases from the use of firefighting foam in training exercises. Factories that manufacture or use PFAS in products like non-stick cookware, water-repellent fabrics, and stain-resistant carpets have also contaminated groundwater with PFAS’. Landfills that receive PFAS-containing waste also contribute to water contamination.

Exposure to PFAS in contaminated drinking water includes increased risks of cancer, liver damage, immune system dysfunction, and developmental issues in children. Of course, the extent of the risk depends on the level of exposure.

In response to several years of advocacy (especially around former military facilities) the EPA went through a year’s long process of developing a new maximum contaminant level (MCL) for PFAS in drinking water.

Note: MCL’s are contaminant limits for allowable concentrations of chemicals in regulated public and semipublic water systems (systems serving more than 25 people or having 15 service connections).

The new MCL of 4 parts per trillion is scheduled to become effective in December 2024 and enforceable in June 2025. Once the rule kicks in, regulated water systems will be required to test for PFAS’ and prove that they aren’t delivering water that has more than 4ppt of PFAS in it. Water systems regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act will have to test for PFAS’s quarterly. Unregulated private well owners oof course don’t need to test or comply with EPA’s testing requirements.

Sadly, regulation of PFAS in drinking water is now at risk despite EPA’s new rules because of last week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo (aka the ‘Chevron’ case… a decision that potentially undermines EPA’s ability to enforce the new standard.

The ruling means that any ambiguity in the EPA’s regulations could be subject to stricter judicial scrutiny, making it harder for the agency to implement and uphold the new MCL for PFAS.

This is just one example of the hundreds of ways the Chevron ruling may pose a long-term risk to public health – as federal agencies as diverse as the FDA, Department of Labor and Transportation face the very real prospect of legions of lawyers descending on federal agencies and challenging long established as well as new important federal regulations.

The only intervention I can think of is to make sure you pay attention to who you vote for in the race for President and the Senate – as we are seeing more and more in very real terms what the power is of an activist Supreme Court that is hostile to public health protections.