The EPA says it still cares about forever chemicals, but health advocates are wary

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a new plan to address “forever chemicals” once widely used in non-stick and water-proof products that have since been linked to cancer, reproductive health issues, and liver damage. The vague details the EPA has shared so far, however, have health and environmental advocates wondering whether the EPA’s plan helps or delays action to keep the chemicals out of drinking water.

The agency says it’ll launch new efforts to study the chemicals and will develop new guidelines to limit pollution from manufacturers. But the announcement on Monday comes as the EPA under Donald Trump attempts to roll back dozens of other environmental protections. And, notably, the agency hasn’t decided whether it plans to enforce existing limits on the amount of forever chemicals in drinking water. Nor will the agency say whether it plans to defend a Biden-era rule to classify the two most common forms of PFAS as hazardous chemicals prioritized for cleanup under the federal Superfund law.

“It just feels like it offered a lot of words without saying anything,” says Mary Grant, a campaign director at the nonprofit Food & Water Watch. “It reminds me so much of the previous Trump administration, where they had PFAs roadmap after PFAs roadmap without actually taking any steps to really move the needle.”

“A lot of words without saying anything.”

The chemicals fall under the umbrella of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and earned the “forever” label because of how long they can persist in the environment and accumulate in the human body. They were used for decades in items such as nonstick pans, food packaging, fire-fighting foams, fabric protector, dental floss, and menstrual products. After facing a slew of lawsuits, some major companies have already pledged to stop using PFAS. But the chemicals have already made their way into at least 45 percent of the nation’s tap water and into most Americans’ blood streams.  

“I have long been concerned about PFAS and the efforts to help states and communities dealing with legacy contamination in their backyards,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a press release yesterday. “This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water.”

The EPA said it would develop new water pollution regulations for PFAS manufacturers and metal finishers. Forever chemicals can be used in the electroplating process of applying an anticorrosive “chrome” finish to metal. The EPA also says it’ll “designate an agency lead” on PFAS initiatives, including new efforts to gather information on how to detect and destroy the chemicals. 

Last year the Biden administration finalized the nation’s first legally enforceable federal limits on the most common types of PFAS in drinking water. It was the culmination of years of research and advocacy stretching back to Trump’s first term in office, when advocates and Democratic lawmakers accused the Trump administration of dragging its feet on the issue.

Industry groups filed suit over the national drinking water standards, claiming the EPA overstepped its authority in crafting them. Trade groups similarly filed suit against the Biden administration over the hazardous waste designation for PFAS, arguing the EPA misinterpreted the Superfund law.

The EPA’s announcement yesterday didn’t mention either suit, only saying that it will “address the most significant compliance challenges” related to national drinking water regulations for forever chemicals. When asked by The Verge whether it planned to defend those PFAS rules in court, EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou said in an email that “New EPA leadership is in the process of reviewing the PFAS drinking water rule, and the issues presented in the litigation in the current case around it, and developing its position on how to proceed.” The agency faces May deadlines to decide whether to defend the drinking water and hazardous waste rules after asking for extensions in both cases.