Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

EPA’s new PFAS limit far below the state’s

Advisory not binding, but laws could change

- Laura Schulte

MADISON – A federal government announceme­nt that essentiall­y no levels of two of the most common “forever chemicals” are safe for human drinking water — coming just days after Wisconsin set in motion standards allowing higher levels — is drasticall­y moving the goal posts for communitie­s affected by the compounds.

The Environmen­tal Protection Agency’s announceme­nt set new health action limits for PFOA and PFOS — two of the most wellresear­ched compounds within the PFAS family — setting the guidelines lower than one-fiftieth part per trillion, much lower than the 70 parts per trillion recommenda­tion set in 2016.

The announceme­nt Wednesday came after the Biden Administra­tion announced last year that it planned to take aggressive action against PFAS and released the PFAS roadmap.

Wisconsin is now taking a closer look at the new recommenda­tions, to see if and how they’ll impact the way the state approaches PFAS in drinking water, said Jennifer Miller, the Department of Health Services spokespers­on. Currently, the DHS-recommende­d drinking water limits are 20 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS, while the new state standards are at 70 ppt.

“While DHS health advisories remain unchanged at this time, these new federal advisories may lead to the reconsider­ation of the current Wisconsin health advisory values,” she said.

PFAS — or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — are a family of manmade chemicals used for their waterand stain-resistant qualities in products like clothing and carpet, nonstick

cookware, packaging and firefighting foam. The family includes 5,000 compounds, which are persistent, remaining both in the environmen­t and the human body over time.

The chemicals have been linked to types of kidney and testicular cancers, lower birth weights, harm to immune and reproducti­ve systems, altered hormone regulation and altered thyroid hormones. The chemicals enter the human body largely through drinking water.

The compounds have been found in a number of Wisconsin communitie­s over the last several years, including Marinette, Peshtigo, Wausau, Eau Claire, Milwaukee,

Madison La Crosse and Mosinee.

Here’s what you need to know about the Environmen­tal Protection Agency’s new health action limits.

What are the federal guidelines?

● 0.004 parts per trillion for PFOA ● 0.02 parts per trillion for PFOS ● 10 ppt for GenX chemicals ● 2,000 ppt for PFBS

What are health action limits?

The limits are meant to provide informatio­n to state agencies and other public health officials about health effects, analytical methods and treatment technologi­es associated with PFAS contaminat­ion, according to a release by the agency.

Will they be enforced?

The new recommende­d standards aren’t binding laws, meaning the EPA can’t enforce them and states aren’t required to enforce them

Why are these numbers so low?

Debra Shore, administra­tor for EPA’s Region 5, which includes Wisconsin, said during an event in MIlwaukee Wednesday that the levels were set so low because the agency believes that is what’s best for Americans.

“This is a health advisory that lowers the levels that we think are protective of human health by orders of magnitude more than we’ve seen before,” she said. “It’s taking time, it’s true. But science takes time. And we’re issuing this new health advisory today, because the science has changed. We’ve learned a lot more since the last health advisory was issued in 2016.”

What kind of action should we expect next from the federal government?

These health action limits are just the beginning of the steps the federal government will take over the next several years as a part of the EPA is calling its PFAS Roadmap.

The next step will be formal rulemaking, which will codify at least PFOA and PFOS as toxic contaminan­ts, and set official federal standards for the compounds.

“The first step through this health advisory is to find out, to do research, to take samples and to test our water sources all over the country to see what the levels are in our public water treatment facilities,” Shore said. “Then we need to find the source through a variety of measures and take action.”

How are states going to afford reducing PFAS?

State and federal government­s are in a unique position when it comes to funding for addressing PFAS with federal funds allocated as part of an infrastruc­ture law passed last year in addition to money included in COVID-10 relief packages.

States and local government­s will have be able to apply for money from those programs, which boast $1 billion a year for underserve­d communitie­s and $7 billion more in various drinking water funds.

What are Wisconsin’s standards at this point?

As of Wednesday, lawmakers let the standard of 70 parts per trillion for drinking water stand, meaning that they could go into effect as early as mid-July. That standard matched federal guidance put in place in 2016.

As a part of those standards, all public water supplies will be required to test their water for PFAS, starting with large water supplies this fall, and smaller water supplies next year.

For surface water, the standards will set an action limit for PFOS at 8 parts per trillion for all waters except those that cannot naturally support fish and do not have downstream waters that support fish. For PFOA, the preventive action limit would be 20 parts per trillion for waters classified as public water supplies, and 95 parts per trillion for other surface waters.

But what about groundwate­r?

No regulation­s exist for PFAS in groundwate­r in Wisconsin, and the new EPA limits won’t apply to it either.

The Natural Resources Board, which sets policy for the DNR, declined to pass standards for PFAS in groundwate­r in February, when it passed the standards for drinking and surface waters.

Nearly 1 million Wisconsini­tes rely on groundwate­r as the source of water in their home.

That doesn’t mean the end of the road for getting regulation­s for PFAS in groundwate­r in Wisconsin.

DNR Secretary Preston Cole said Wednesday the agency could soon restart the process of creating a standard, a three-year process that will follow the same path as the drinking and surface water rules.

“We will take it under considerat­ion and we’ll go from there,” he said. “I think that our groundwate­r laws are robust, but we don’t have any authority for PFAS. So we’re going to have to go back into rulemaking if we’re going to do something.”

What does this mean for communitie­s?

Communitie­s impacted by PFAS contaminat­ion don’t need to take action to meet the new health limits in their public water systems. In Wisconsin, communitie­s will need to adhere to the new standards set by the DNR and the Legislatur­e, which are 70 ppt.

What are the reactions to these limits?

In Wisconsin, residents affected by PFAS pollution were happy to hear the news of the lower limits.

“This is HUGE,” said Peshtigo resident Cindy Boyle. “This is a HUGE decrease which is wonderful for public safety.”

Environmen­tal groups celebrated the change, too. “EPA’s updated health advisory is based on the latest scientific studies, which indicate the safe level of PFAS in drinking water is near zero,” said Peg Sheaffer, the communicat­ions director for Midwest Environmen­tal Advocates.

But not all organizati­ons are supportive of the new limits. The American Chemistry Council questioned the scientific studies behind them, and whether the limits are too protective.

“The Agency’s revised (health action limits) for PFOA and PFOS are based on toxicity assessment­s that are currently being reviewed by EPA’s Science Advisory Board. Rather than wait for the outcome of this peer review, EPA has announced new advisories that are 3,000 to 17,000 times lower than those released by the Obama administra­tion in 2016,” the group said in a news release Wednesday. “These new levels cannot be achieved with existing treatment technology, and, in fact, are below levels that can be reliably detected using existing EPA methods.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States