Much like the chemicals themselves, PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) continue to be a never-ending regulatory nightmare for agencies and states that wish to ban or limit the use of these substances. Known as “forever chemicals” due to their persistent nature in the environment, PFAS pose serious health risks, including cancer, liver disease, and fetal complications. These substances are found in a wide range of consumer products, from food packaging to firefighting foams, making their regulation a critical concern for water treatment professionals and public health advocates alike.
A notable case involved the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) attempt to ban plastic containers manufactured by Houston-based Inhance, which were found to be contaminated with PFOA, a toxic PFAS compound. Despite the EPA’s December prohibition, the conservative fifth circuit court of appeals overturned the ban, citing that the EPA could not regulate the containers under the statute it used. The court’s decision highlighted the challenges in regulating existing industrial processes as “new” when they’ve been in use for decades. This ruling underscores the complexities of implementing PFAS regulations and the legal interpretations that can stall protective measures.
In Colorado, efforts to strengthen PFAS legislation by 2028 have been met with enthusiasm from environmental litigators and concern for public health. Senate Bill 24-081 aims to extend the ban on class B firefighting foam to other PFAS-containing products, reflecting the growing awareness of PFAS as a major public health threat. Environmental Litigation Group associate attorney Yahn Olson highlighted the difficulty of filtering PFAS from groundwater, emphasizing the chemicals’ association with severe health conditions. This legislative push in Colorado is part of a broader move towards stringent PFAS limits, with the EPA considering setting the threshold at 4 parts per trillion, signaling a shift towards recognizing any PFAS exposure as potentially harmful.
On a positive note, 3M, a Minnesota-based chemical manufacturer, has agreed to begin payments this summer to many U.S. public drinking water systems as part of a multi-billion-dollar settlement over PFAS contamination. This settlement, approved by the U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina, signifies a significant step towards addressing PFAS contamination in drinking water. The payouts, ranging from $10.5 billion to $12.5 billion through 2036, reflect the company’s commitment to exit all PFAS manufacturing by the end of 2025. This move by 3M could serve as a precedent for other manufacturers, encouraging more comprehensive solutions to the PFAS challenge.
These developments illustrate the multifaceted approach states are taking to regulate PFAS, from legal battles to legislative reforms and settlements. Despite the challenges, the persistence of regulators, litigators, and lawmakers in addressing PFAS contamination highlights a collective effort to mitigate the environmental and health impacts of these hazardous chemicals. For water treatment professionals, these cases provide valuable insights into the evolving regulatory landscape and the ongoing efforts to ensure the safety of public water supplies from PFAS contamination.
Resources:
The Guardian
Longmont Leader
CBS News
