The EPA says that it will react to Pfas “Forever Chemicals”. Proponents increase red flags

While the Environmental Protection Agency is working to regain several protective measures for public health, she announced on Monday that it should take measures to combat poison tiger forever.

Proponents are skeptical and say that the language of the announcement raises red flags.

The EPA announcement consists of a list of the proposed measures to aim for contamination by pro- and polyfluoralkyl substances known as PFAs. The list contains plans to advance the renovation and cleanup for PFAs in drinking water, to improve research and tests and to describe an agency that leads to everything is supervised. The announcement does not name the person who monitors this work, not, a timeline for measures or a number of other details.

In the announcement, it is also not mentioned that the pioneering EPA standard for PFAs in drinking water, which is being sued by the chemical industry and the water supply companies. Until May 12th, the Trump administration has time to decide whether it will continue to defend the rule of the bidea era die from an investment of $ 1 billion in water tests and treatment at the state level. The EPA did not answer any questions from Inside Climate News about the rule, the legal dispute or the announcement on Monday.

“We deal with PFAs from all the EPA program offices, promote research and tests, prevent Pfas from entering into drinking water systems, draw dirt to account and offer passive recipients,” said the EPA administrator Lee Zeldin in a statement. “This is only the beginning of the work that we will do with PFAs to ensure that the Americans have the cleanest air, country and water.”

This happens after President Donald Trump’s administration has already started to reduce environmental protection in several agencies, including clean air, public areas, waterways and waste water. The administration has also remedied future funds for climate and health research and reduced grants for research on environmental health, including millions of dollars in research on the PFAS accumulation in the food chain.

“Based on the Prior Trump administration and based on the current exercise of environmental protection through the Trump administration, I am skeptical,” said Dana Sargent, managing director of Cape Fear River Watch in North Carolina, a group that is advocated for clean water in a region that was heavily contaminated with PFAS and which sued the EPA about these effects.

Sargent and other supporters also found that the announcement seems to be missing teeth.

“There are many words here that don’t really mean much,” said Sargent. “The proof of their commitment would result in any implementable regulation and responsibility of pollution.”

Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and long-time lawyer for PFAS awareness, repeated this feeling.

“It is encouraging to see the support of the Trump EPA to express their concerns about Pfas,” said Birnbaum. “The question is always, what are the devils in the details.”

PFAS are poisonous, long -lasting chemicals that are contained in drinking water, soil, food, household products and more and can come from everyday objects such as food packaging, clothing or cookware. They are referred to as “chemicals forever” because they can take over a thousand years to collapse.

Almost all Americans have PfAs in their blood, and almost half of the country drinks Pfas-contamed water. PFAS exposure was associated with serious health damage such as cancer, reproductive problems, low birth weight, high cholesterol, development problems, reduced immunity and thyroid problems.

The proponents marked some of the words in the announcement of the EPA and pointed out potential openings for industry players who have taught themselves hard against the PFAS regulations.

Melanie Benesh, Vice President of Government Matters in the non -profit environmental work group, said that the announcement indicates that the EPA will delay compliance with compliance with compliance and give exemptions for dirt.

Benesh referred to a promise in the announcement to tackle “compliance challenges” for PFAs in drinking water.

“An opportunity to say that the EPA could say that they deal with compliance problems, quotation prices is due to delays by giving these supply companies additional time,” said Benesh.

“If you say that you need more research on PFAS while removing research into Pfas, you are dangerous.”

– Dana Sargent, Cape Fear River Watch

Birnbaum expressed similar concerns regarding the mention of compliance issues and the information from the EPA on the report rules according to the poisonous substance control law. In the announcement, it was emphasized that small companies and companies that import chemical substances into the USA not to “overlap”, which in their opinion could signal further exceptions and delays.

Sargent said that the focus of the announcement on research in a game book with delay tactics fits: The supervisory authorities say that they will examine the matter in order to signal productivity and at the same time take tangible measures to reduce environmental pollution.

“If you say that you need more research on PFAS while you remove research into Pfas, you are dangerous,” said Sargent.

During the first Trump administration, EPA employees were prevented from alerting legislators in the National Defense Authorization Act 2020 on a gap that made it possible to avoid disclosure of some PFAS discharges, reported The Hill.

Epa closed this gap During the Biden Administration, however, the announcement on Monday expressly mentioned the NDAA 2020, which Sargent said that it had found in relation to the NDAA.

“This is an improper definition of PFAS,” said Sargent.

Some supporters also caused concerns about the emphasis on the announcement on the protection of “passive recipients” – such as water suppliers – that do not produce PFAs, but receive them through contaminated water. The relaxation of standards for passive recipients such as municipal wastewater treatment plants could be serious health risks, said Emily Donovan, co-founder of the grass root group Clean Cape Fear and another lawyer from Anti-Pfas.

“This is just a non -starter for us,” said Donovan. “There is no carveout (for passive recipients) – that’s a slippery slope.”

Donovan added that supporters and others pay close attention to this.

“The voters I spoke to … they want the drinking water standard,” said Donovan. “This is a bit that it is not about government efficiency if the Americans were taken away and it is not about the protection of health. It would be absolutely about enabling billionaire companies to make more profit at our expense.”