One month into the tenure of new EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, EPA’s initiatives regarding PFAS remain unclear.
Aaron MapesA read of the tea leaves from Zeldin’s confirmation hearing and the Trump administration’s early actions suggest general support for existing PFAS regulations and funding initiatives. However, it is unclear how this will fit in with the Administration’s broader deregulatory agenda.
As noted in a previous post, as a member of the House of Representatives, Zeldin voted for two bills that supported PFAS regulation. His support of those bills may have been related to the occurrence of PFAS in drinking water supplies in his former Congressional district in Long Island. Zeldin also served on the House’s PFAS Task Force, a bipartisan group that “promotes legislation to address PFAS contamination” and “fights for funding . . . to research the harmful effects of [PFAS] and to remediate PFAS contamination.”
At his confirmation hearing last month, Zeldin stated that he is committed to addressing PFAS issues at EPA on several occasions:
- Zeldin noted that he voted for the PFAS Action Act, a bill passed by the House which would have required EPA to regulate PFAS in several ways, including by designating certain PFAS as hazardous substances under CERCLA and by establishing drinking water MCLs for certain PFAS. Although the bill stalled in the Senate, its key requirements were voluntarily implemented by EPA during the Biden Administration.
- After saying he supported the PFAS Action Act, Zeldin stated, “EPA has an important obligation to make sure that our obligations are implemented correctly,” and “we have to ensure that we are moving the needle all across this entire country.” He then referred to cleanup projects that have been ongoing for decades and said, “working with all of you to deal with these issues in your home state is something that will be a top priority of mine.”
- Zeldin was asked whether he supported liability protection for so-called “passive receivers” of PFAS wastes, such as municipal water systems and airports. In response, he stated it will “be a big issue for me,” but he also indicated that if such entities were granted liability protection, “it could get passed down to the consumer where they end up paying for the cleanup costs in a way that we need to be cognizant of at the EPA.”
- Zeldin was asked by a democratic senator if they could work together in “addressing the PFAS concerns that you’re very familiar with.” He responded by saying, “having clean drinking water is something that I want” and that he believes every American “should be able to access clean drinking water.” Zeldin was later asked by another democratic senator if EPA will work to address PFAS contamination in the aquifers of City of Tucson, to which he responded, “Yes, Senator.”
- Zeldin was asked how he will help rural communities who are struggling with water quality issues. He referred to the PFAS issues he encountered in his Congressional District in Long Island and stated, “it could be an aspect of congressionally directed spending . . . [going] to a particular community.” He then stated, “The first step is to be able to get access to drinking water, even if that’s providing bottled water,” and later, “What’s important is long-term mitigation. . .”
Consistent with his statements about funding, PENNVEST, the organization primarily responsible for disbursing federal funding for PFAS drinking water infrastructure in Pennsylvania, recently confirmed to us that it continues to receive funding for PFAS projects through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, despite the federal funding freeze applicable to other funding authorized by the Act.
While Zeldin seems to support several of the PFAS regulations and funding programs implemented during the Biden administration, it remains unclear whether Zeldin will modify EPA’s ongoing initiatives to further study and regulate PFAS. For example, a few months before President Trump took office, EPA indicated that it was “[building] the technical foundation to address PFAS in air emissions” and “evaluating less-studied PFAS exposure pathways like inhalation or through skin.” See EPA’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap: Three Years of Progress.
At least one action taken by the Trump Administration – the decision to withdraw a proposed rule setting forth Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for certain PFAS Manufacturers – suggests that the administration will be skeptical of these ongoing initiatives. A White House spokesperson also recently stated that Administrator Zeldin “is committed to eliminating 65% of the EPA’s wasteful spending.” If spending cuts occur, it may limit the availability of resources and staff dedicated to developing and implementing EPA’s PFAS initiatives.
Aaron Mapes is an attorney and Partner at Fox Rothschild in the Environmental Practice Group. Visit www.foxrothschild.com.
