The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently released its much-anticipated steps to fight contamination by forever chemicals, but the scant information it provided raised more questions than answers among scientists and environment experts.
The 21-bullet-point steps to combat per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, include creating guidelines to limit liquid waste discharge that could enter drinking water systems, advancing research and testing, and improving cleanup of PFAS near drinking water supplies. The agency also suggested that Congress and industry establish a clear way to ensure that polluters pay. PFAS are man-made chemicals that are water and grease resistant, but they are difficult to break down and have been linked to some cancers and other health problems.
The federal government did not provide timeframes or budgets for its proposals, which it announced April 28. They probably will not make an immediate difference in dealing with PFAS in Maine, which already has taken steps to curtail PFAS products in the state and to supply filtration systems for polluted private wells, scientists said.
“I don’t think any of these actions are necessarily moving the needle on PFAS for Maine,” said Sarah Woodbury, vice president of policy and advocacy for the nonprofit Defend Our Health in Portland. “If we’re looking for leadership, it’s not coming from the EPA. It’s coming from the state.”
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the actions aim to strengthen the science behind PFAS, fulfill statutory obligations and enhance communication.
“I have long been concerned about PFAS and the efforts to help states and communities dealing with legacy contamination in their backyards,” said Zeldin, who was a founding member of the PFAS Congressional Taskforce when he served in Congress. “This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land and water.”
Credit: Joshua A. Bickel / AP
Notably absent from the actions was information about whether the agency intends to go forward with the stricter maximum safe limits of forever chemicals that it announced last April. Those limits — the first national, enforceable drinking water standard on forever chemicals — are on hold by the Trump administration until at least May 20. That’s when a lawsuit will resume by water utilities against the EPA stating that the new limits are too expensive to put into place. The way the EPA responds to the lawsuit could shed light on its future plans for the new limits.
The stricter limits would require Maine to cut its current maximum allowable level of 20 parts per trillion for certain forever chemicals in drinking water fivefold to meet the new standards.
Some scientists remain skeptical that the EPA will keep its own stricter limits for PFAS in public water supplies. They cited the federal government’s language, particularly its description of wanting industry to work with Congress to establish a liability framework for polluters to pay.
“It’s highly unlikely,” said Gail Carlson, associate professor of environmental studies at Colby College. “The language hints at that. If they do move forward with regulations, they are very likely to be weaker than what was proposed or finalized under the Biden administration.”
Anticipating that could happen, the Maine Legislature already is considering a bill that would have Maine adopt the federal level of 4 parts per trillion regardless of what the EPA decides.
“This bill is super important since drinking water is a major source of PFAS exposure,” Carlson said. “Any rollbacks or weakening of standards will affect people in Maine and across the country.”
Another of the EPA’ proposals would collect information about PFAS in products, but it recommends doing so without overburdening small businesses and product importers. This work is already underway in Maine. In January 2024, Maine became the first state in the nation to require reporting of PFAS in products. Maine’s sweeping law would also effectively ban PFAS in most products sold in the state by 2030.
Jean MacRae, associate professor for civil and environmental engineering at the University of Maine, said she is worried that Maine’s reporting regulation focused on identifying and banning products that include PFAS in non-essential uses will be in trouble if the federal government relaxes requirements on small businesses and importers.
“I think this is the only way to prevent more exposure until we have effective/proven and usable destruction technologies,” MacRae said. “I am a bit concerned that not overburdening small businesses and article importers will mean things manufactured abroad will continue to contaminate our materials system even if domestic manufacturing stops using them.”
The actions still are broad and preliminary, said James Ferraro, who handles environmental and other litigation at The Ferraro Law Firm in Florida.
“They say they’re going to do all these things, but it’s yet to be determined,” Ferrari said. “The actions say a lot without necessarily doing a lot.”
Lori Valigra reports on the environment for the BDN’s Maine Focus investigative team. Reach her at [email protected]. Support for this reporting is provided by the Unity Foundation, a fund at the Maine Community Foundation and donations by BDN readers.
