EPA Lacks a PFAS Containment Strategy

Every day there is a new headline about discoveries of dangerous amounts of toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS in groundwater, municipal wastewater systems, in soil outside military bases and on farms, in freshwater fish, in human blood, and even in mothers’ milk. It seems like the PFAS pollution crisis is out of control.

This April, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally set a maximum drinking water contamination limit for two of the oldest and most widespread PFAS. That limit was set at 4 parts per trillion, but EPA also acknowledged that there is no safe amount of PFAS for human consumption.

While this was an important regulatory step, EPA does not appear to have grasped the implications of its own action. Removing PFAS from our water will be very, very expensive, and it will not stop the endless cycle of contamination. To stop this crisis, EPA must interrupt the flow of PFAS reaching our water, soil, and food chain every day.

Although it is far less expensive and far more feasible to prevent PFAS from reaching the environment in the first place than removing these aptly named “forever chemicals,” EPA does not yet have a PFAS containment strategy.

In fact, it seems that EPA is spending more time impeding PFAS containment than implementing it. Consider these examples:

Plastic Containers. Inhance Technologies fluorinates an estimated 200 million containers a year for a wide array of products, such as chemicals, pesticides, personal care products, and fuels, as well as edible oils and flavorings. The fluorinated linings create PFAS which leach into the containers’ contents. This means PFAS contaminates a huge portion of all U.S. commerce.

Yet, EPA moved to block a citizen suit against Inhance on the grounds that EPA was handling the issue. After EPA’s enforcement effort was invalidated by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, EPA declined to appeal or take any other action. As a result, the citizen groups are gearing up again to seek a ban on these PFAS-laden containers in favor of available alternative barrier technologies that do not create PFAS.

Biosolid Fertilizers. Biosolid fertilizers are made from sewage sludge. PFAS are not removed at wastewater treatment plants, and EPA does not limit the amount of PFAS they can contain. Yet under the Clean Water Act, EPA has long been required to identify toxic pollutants in biosolids and adopt regulations to prevent harm to human health or the environment. Unfortunately, it is a responsibility the agency has neglected for decades.

Meanwhile, farms, ranches, and dairies ranging from New Mexico to Maine have been devastated by PFAS contamination from biosolids. Unfortunately, EPA has ignored their pleas for assistance. Now some of these victimized farmers are suing EPA for its failure to prevent set standards for PFAS in biosolids.

Pesticides. PFAS have been found in many insecticides at incredibly high levels. These PFAS are being taken up into the roots and shoots of plants, which means that they are entering our food supply through contaminated soils, water, and the pesticides themselves. Since these are “forever chemicals,” this contamination will last long after the pesticide application.

Ignoring a growing trove of evidence, EPA contends there are no PFAS in pesticides and is discouraging states from testing. The agency has even gone so far as to publish faulty test results in attempt to conceal that scientists had confirmed widespread presence of PFAS in pesticides.

Landfills. Disposal, transportation, and importation of PFAS remains largely unregulated. For example, huge amounts of PFAS are leaching out of U.S. landfills, burned in incinerators, and injected underground with no regulations. Meanwhile, the agency has resisted efforts to designate hundreds of dangerous PFAS chemicals as “hazardous waste,” and regulate them stringently from cradle to grave.

Artificial Turf. Currently, there are an estimated 18,000 synthetic turf sports fields in the U.S., with more than a thousand new installations each year. All brands of artificial turf tested contain PFAS in carpet grass fibers. Besides the direct human exposure, PFAS is leaching off these fields into nearby surface and groundwater, some of which are sources of drinking water,

In addition, there is growing evidence that the PFAS on these surfaces is rubbing off on players’ skin with worrisome consequences. Yet, EPA has yet to even look at this exposure vector.

The environmental and public health challenges posed by PFAS are immense. EPA needs to do much more than it is doing. If the agency will not help abate exposures, it should at least get out of the way and allow states and NGOs to stop this contamination crisis.