Biden administration establishes first national drinking water regulation to limit ‘forever chemicals’

In the United States, approximately half of the drinking water is contaminated with potentially hazardous “forever chemicals,” and the administration of Vice President Joe Biden has finalized the first national standard to limit these chemicals. According to the statements of a few environmentalists, the new regulation is a “huge breakthrough” and a “historic” shift that has the potential to protect human health.

In addition to being legally enforceable, the new standard has the objective of lowering the amount of people who are exposed to per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds, which are also referred to as “forever chemicals.” PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA, sometimes referred to as GenX chemicals, are the five types of specific and permanent chemicals that water utilities will now be required to filter out. There are more than 12,000 other types of chemicals. An additional limitation is imposed by the regulations on mixtures of any two or more of the compounds PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and GenX combinations. For the purpose of making items more resistant to water and oil, this class of synthetic compounds is widely utilized; nonetheless, these chemicals remain in the environment and in the human body. They have been connected to a wide range of health difficulties, including cancer, thyroid disease, reproductive troubles, as well as harm to the heart and liver, amongst other problems. In accordance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States of America, the substances are discovered in the blood of roughly 97 percent of all Americans.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published health recommendations in 2022 stating that the chemicals are significantly more hazardous to human health than scientists had initially anticipated, and that they are potentially even more toxic at levels that are thousands of times lower than what was previously believed.

But up until this point, there was no federal norm regarding the contaminants that were present in drinking water. A small number of states have enacted legislation that mandates water utilities to conduct tests to identify and remove contaminants from their water supply.

Approximately one hundred million people in the United States will have their exposure to PFAS reduced as a result of the revised drinking water regulation, according to the administration.

Dr. Anna Reade, director of PFAS advocacy, environmental health at the environmental group NRDC, said, “I will tell you, five years ago, I was working really hard in states across the country that were interested in setting their own drinking water standards because we all believed that there was no way we were going to get a federal drinking water standard.” Reade was referring to the fact that the states were interested in establishing their own drinking water standards. “I believe that it is a significant step forward in terms of taking action on PFAS.”

New benchmarks, new financial investments
In accordance with the new laws, certain substances will be subject to varying requirements.

For both PFOA and PFOS, the maximum contamination levels (MCLs) that are legally enforceable will be set at 4.0 parts per trillion for each of these substances. According to the administration, through the adoption of this standard, the exposure to these PFAS in drinking water would be reduced to the lowest levels that are feasible for effective implementation.

It has been decided that the new maximum contamination level objective for PFOA and PFOS would be zero. This is a health-based aim that is not enforceable. Senior administration officials stated on Tuesday that the zero standard is a reflection of the most recent science that demonstrates that there is no amount of exposure that does not involve some level of danger. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the contamination level set at 10 parts per trillion for PFNA, PFHxS, and GenX chemicals.

According to estimates provided by the government, between six percent to ten percent of the sixty-six thousand water systems in the United States will be required to enhance their filtering systems in order to conform to this new criteria.

The water treatment facilities will have three years to conduct tests for the chemicals, and they will have two years to purchase, install, and operate the technologies that can filter out contaminants permanently if they are found to be a higher concentration than the standard. People are required to be informed about the amount of PFAS that is present in the drinking water by public water systems.

According to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the administration of Vice President Joe Biden is also providing what it refers to as a “unprecedented” one billion dollars in newly accessible financing. This funding is intended to assist states and territories in increasing the testing and treatment of these chemicals at public water systems as well as for owners of private wells. A $9 billion investment is being made to assist towns in managing water that is contaminated with PFAS and other toxins. This money is a portion of that investment.

A Water Technical Assistance program is also available through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assist small, disadvantaged, and rural towns in gaining access to government finance and in developing a plan for moving forward.

The environmental movement praises the ‘historic’ change.
According to Dr. David Andrews, a senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group, an environmental organization that has been fighting for the government to clean up these chemicals for decades, it is not entirely apparent how much the federal threshold will reduce people’s total exposure to PFAS. This is the opinion of Dr. Andrews. Andrews referred to the newly established national norm as “historic.”

“This is the first time since the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments were passed in 1996 that a drinking water contaminant made it through the regulatory process all the way to the end,” Andrews said. “This is a first.”

Drinking water is likely responsible for at least twenty percent of the toxins that people are exposed to for the rest of their lives, according to Andrews; however, the percentage may be more depending on the water utility.
In addition, people are exposed to these chemicals for an indefinite period of time through a variety of sources, including dust, food, clothing, and household goods.

According to Andrews, the new protocol will result in an overall improvement in the quality of drinking water. This is because the filters that are used to remove PFAS will most likely also remove other contaminants, such as disinfection byproducts.

Nevertheless, the action will not have the effect of totally removing exposure from drinking water. The majority of environmentalists are of the opinion that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ought to establish a standard for the entire category of chemicals. However, this regulation is only applicable to a select few.

“This problem is so large,” Reade, who works for the NRDC, said. “Once more, we must not lose sight of the fact that this is a truly monumental step forward,” the speaker said. The success of the guideline will also be dependent on enforcement, according to Erik Olson, who is a senior strategic director for health at the National Resources Defense Council. In the majority of the country, the primary responsibility for enforcement will be assigned to the states.

It is highly difficult to keep track of violations, report those breaches, and enforce against violations in the majority of states, according to Olson, who stated that the vast majority of people who violate laws are never punished for their actions.

Olson has stated that the rule will increase the likelihood of water providers investing in contemporary technology. According to him, there are still some systems that use technology that was developed during World War I.

Olson expressed his hope that the individuals in question would acknowledge the necessity of making these investments. In all honesty, we are surviving off of the investments made by our great-grandparents, who were responsible for the construction of many of these systems.

The expense of water systems is questioned by critics.
Dr. Chad Seidel, an engineer located in Colorado who works with drinking water utilities and is the president of Corona Environmental Consulting, believes that transitioning to a new system will be prohibitively expensive for many utilities.

Seidel, who is vocal in his criticism of the standards, stated that some establishments had previously been exerting significant effort to lessen the presence of PFAS in drinking water for “quite some time before a national regulation.” Seidel is of the opinion that the utilities that have high concentrations of PFAS should take immediate action to solve the issue; however, the health benefits may not be as significant for facilities that have lower quantities. It was stated by him that the regulation comes at a “really, really high cost for potentially low public health benefit.”

“We want to make sure that those limited resources we have in our communities are really used to address public health concerns and drinking water, and I wish the list was really, really short ahead of PFAS, but unfortunately, there are a lot of really pressing things that we want to keep addressing,” Seidel said. “We want to make them as effective as possible.”

When it comes to the underlying science that was utilized to produce the new criteria, the American Chemistry Council, which is a group that represents the chemical, plastics, and chlorine sectors in the United States, has some reservations.

The protection of the health, well-being, and safety of Americans all around the country is a goal that we all find ourselves working toward. This involves providing everyone with access to drinking water that is both safe and reliable. “Given the limited resources and other water priorities, it is imperative that we adhere to sound scientific principles with careful consideration,” the American Chemistry Council stated in a press release.

It contended that the rule will cost three to four times more than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) predicts, with the weight of cost falling on municipalities with smaller water systems as well as taxpayers. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claims that it has carried out a comprehensive financial analysis of the rule and that it has determined that the benefits and costs of the standard would amount to around $1.5 billion. The actual benefits of the rule include a reduction in the number of malignancies, a decrease in the number of heart attacks, and a reduction in the number of birth problems.

“You are going to hear people talk about the cost, and it is not possible to do this, and we should not do this,” the speaker said. Just so you know, it is possible to accomplish this. Michael Regan, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, told a crowd in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Wednesday that it is possible to accomplish this goal by utilizing a variety of technologies and methods that current water systems are employing. During the time when Regan served as the secretary of the Department of Environmental Quality in North Carolina, the state was successful in reaching a landmark settlement that resulted in Chemours, a multinational chemical company, being hit with a punishment of twelve million dollars for dumping PFAS into the Cape Fear River. Additionally, it mandated that the company contain and clean up any contaminated groundwater that was present.

The water that people drink and give their children should be safe, according to Regan, who stated that everyone should be able to turn on their tap and have faith that it is safe. “We are capable of completing the task at hand.”