The Trump administration is poised to decide whether to maintain strict national limits on certain forever chemicals in drinking water while also announcing new steps to regulate their discharge.
The Environmental Protection Agency under Administrator Lee Zeldin faces an impending deadline to inform a federal court whether it intends to stand by rules for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, set by the prior administration. Those rules set standards for two common PFAS types at 4 parts per trillion, aiming to curb exposure linked to health problems.
Water utilities across the United States face costs associated with meeting the established limits, prompting a legal challenge from an industry group. EPA estimated the rule could cost about $1.5 billion annually. Utilities serving millions must assess their water sources and potentially install filtration systems by a 2029 deadline. Sampling found nearly 12% of U.S. water utilities are above the recently set EPA limits.
For communities like Avondale, Arizona, reducing PFAS contamination could mean expenses exceeding $120 million. Kirk Beaty, the city’s public utility director, noted such funds are not readily available and the cost falls on residents. He said it is difficult to justify spending beyond requirements, though he would defer to federal experts on acceptable levels.
Complying with the rule may pose a particular cost burden on small utilities that already struggle to maintain infrastructure. These providers also face new requirements to replace lead pipes. The American Water Works Association, the industry group challenging the rule, argues the standards go too far and underestimate costs.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has a history with PFAS; during his time as a New York congressman, he supported legislation to regulate the chemicals in drinking water. He has also championed fossil fuels and deregulation in other areas.
On Monday, the EPA announced additional actions on PFAS, including plans to establish discharge limits for manufacturers of the substances and metal finishers. The agency also said it would designate an agency lead for PFAS, develop a testing strategy to learn more about potential hazards, investigate sources of immediate danger to drinking water, and move forward with reviewing the use of PFAS-laced sludge as fertilizer.
The new actions follow steps taken by the previous administration, which had proposed discharge limits but did not finalize them, though it did establish the first federal drinking water limits for PFAS. It also designated two specific PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances, which makes it easier for the agency to compel polluters to clean up sites or pay for remediation.
Financial assistance is available to help utilities. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allocated $9 billion for addressing chemicals like PFAS, and utilities have won multibillion-dollar settlements against PFAS manufacturers that can help offset costs.
Regarding the existing drinking water rule, Zeldin said recently that communities slightly above the standard might be handled differently than wealthy places with high contamination levels. “What we are going to have to be is extremely thoughtful in figuring this out,” he said.
