EPA plans to weaken limits on forever chemicals in drinking water
- The Environmental Protection Agency plans to weaken existing limits on certain types of PFAS in drinking water.
- The proposed changes extend compliance deadlines for PFOA and PFOS while revoking limits for less-known PFAS types.
- This decision has faced backlash from environmental groups but support from some water utilities, indicating divided opinions on the matter.
In May 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its intention to roll back limits on certain harmful chemicals, commonly referred to as 'forever chemicals,' in drinking water. The announcement comes roughly a year after the Biden administration had finalized the first-ever national standards for these substances, which are chemically known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Under the original regulations, limits were set for two primary types of PFAS, PFOA and PFOS, at a stringent level of 4 parts per trillion. These limits aimed to reduce the risk of serious health conditions linked to PFAS exposure, which include cancer, cardiovascular issues, and adverse developmental effects in infants. The proposed rollback includes the revocation of limits on three lesser-known types of PFAS as well as on a mixture of various PFAS substances. While the Biden administration had asserted that limiting PFAS would potentially benefit millions of Americans by decreasing exposure, the new proposal has drawn ire from environmental activists and health advocates who argue that such measures undermine efforts to protect public health. The EPA plans to maintain the current thresholds for PFOA and PFOS but will extend the compliance deadline for water utilities by two additional years, pushing it to 2031. This extension is aimed at providing utilities with more time to fulfill their obligations regarding treatment for these hazardous chemicals. The reactions to the EPA's announcement have been mixed. Leaders from utility organizations expressed support for the easing of regulations, arguing that it would offer them the flexibility needed to manage water quality more effectively. On the other hand, environmental groups criticized the decision, claiming it signified a retreat from the commitment to ensuring safe drinking water. For instance, Erik Olson, a senior director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, condemned the move, expressing that the rollback could harm ongoing efforts to ensure clean water for Americans. In recent years, awareness of the adverse health effects and environmental impacts of PFAS has been steadily increasing, resulting in heightened scrutiny on these substances from the public and lawmakers alike. The Biden administration’s previous limits on PFAS were considered a significant step forward in federal intervention concerning water safety. However, the rollback hints at a regulatory trend that could complicate or delay advancements in public health protections regarding water quality and environmental safety, particularly as evidence of PFAS’s health risks becomes more pronounced.