America’s Environmental Protection Agency is proposing the US’ first drinking-water standards for a group of human-made carcinogenic chemicals, which are common in consumer items and pose a greater danger to human health than scientists once thought.
The proposal could force water utilities to spend billions of dollars to comply with the planned limits on polyfluoroalkyl and perfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, even though those limits are less stringent than advisory levels for safe consumption the agency set last year.
The aim is for water utilities to detect and reduce PFAS contamination at four parts per trillion. The agency had warned in June that the compounds pose a greater danger to human health than regulators previously thought, compromising people’s immune and cardiovascular systems at a lifetime exposure of between just 0.004 to 0.02 parts per trillion, depending on the type of compound.
However, reports The Washington Post, agency leaders say that four parts per trillion is the lowest level at which they can be accurately measured and detected, making it the most stringent rule the agency could enforce. Its proposed limits would be as strong or stronger than limits from any of about a dozen states that have set their own standards in recent years, they added.
PFAS are human-made chemicals found in common consumer products like cosmetics and food packaging, used by millions of people. Linked to infertility, thyroid problems and several types of cancer, these “forever chemicals” can persist in the environment for years without breaking down.
The threat of long-term PFAS exposure is not fully known, but animal studies show that these chemicals can damage the liver and the immune system, said the Agency for Toxics Substances and Disease Registry. It also says PFAS have “caused low birth weight, birth defects, delayed development and newborn deaths in lab animals”.
Its presence in water is now so ubiquitous that it will take billions of dollars to remove, said Robert Powelson, president of the National Association of Water Companies, a trade group representing investor-owned utilities. He wants Congress to require chemical manufacturers and PFAS consumers to pay for clean-up and water treatment.
“Establishing a national standard for addressing these harmful ingredients from the nation’s water supply provides clarity to all utilities, their customers and states while placing all water and wastewater systems in the same boat to navigate these uncharted waters,” he added. “Instead of coming from the pockets of water and wastewater customers and utilities, the polluters should be held directly responsible for the clean-up costs.”
Previously, the chemicals were not regulated, but the EPA is considering a move to classify them as hazardous, separate from new PFAS limits for drinking water. Health advocates have called on the government to act more quickly to address what officials from both parties describe as a countrywide contamination crisis.
Drinking-water standards have to take into account cost and technological feasibility, limiting what the EPA could require, said Melanie Benesh, vice-president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, a non-profit organisation. Considering that, the four-parts-per-trillion limit has been widely expected.
“It’s about as low as the EPA could possibly go,” she added.
Agency officials say they expect to complete a final rule by year’s end.
Since the 1940s, chemical makers have used these highly durable compounds to make non-stick cookware, moisture-repellent fabrics and flame-retardant equipment. But that same toughness against water and fire that made the chemicals profitable has allowed them to accumulate in nature and build up in the body, with long-term health effects.
Before the update in June, previous health advisories set the limit much higher, at 70 parts per trillion in 2016. Some of the most recent peer-reviewed science has made it clear these compounds are carcinogens, leading the EPA to push for a standard tougher than what several states put in place before that science was known.
Industry has said the agency has acted hastily before that science was fully reviewed, including by experts on the agency’s Science Advisory Board. The American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s main trade group, said that while it supports nationwide standards, it has “serious concerns” about those that the EPA is developing.
“The EPA’s misguided approach … is important, as these low limits may result in billions of dollars in compliance costs,” the organisation said. “The proposals have important implications for broader drinking water policy priorities and resources, so it’s critical that EPA gets the science right.”
US manufacturers have largely replaced two of the most common compounds – PFOA and PFOS – with other fluorinated compounds. The EPA determined that two of those alternatives – dubbed GenX and PFBS – also are dangerous to ingest even at relatively low levels.
Under the proposal, PFOA and PFOS will be regulated at the four-parts-per-trillion limit. GenX and PFBS, along with two other compounds, PFNA and PFHxS, would be regulated on a different standard, a variable calculation to judge how much of a mix of these compounds poses a risk, the agency said. Once finalised, water utilities will have to monitor for these chemicals and alert customers when they exceed the limits.
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
US states crack down on toxic ‘forever chemicals’
‘Forever chemicals’ detected in all umbilical cord blood in 40 studies
Du Pont loses appeal over cancer toxic chemical ruling