Environmental groups say a proposal to cut $4 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency budget would gut the regulations designed to clean up toxic chemicals from public water systems in Illinois and across the country.

A group of House Republicans is demanding the cuts in exchange for their votes to keep the government from shutting down later his month, but they would jeopardize federal plans to eliminate "forever chemicals" known as PFAS found in U.S. water supplies.

Betsy Sutherland, who had directed EPA's Office of Science and Technology and worked on water issues, said this isn't the time to play politics with cleaning up the environment.

"Budget cuts will have real consequences for EPA's ability to protect human health and the environment," she said, "not just from PFAS, but from every environmental threat our country is facing."

These chemicals are among the most persistent toxic compounds in existence, contaminating everything from drinking water to food, packaging and personal-care products -- and they never break down in the environment. Illinois ranks in the middle of the pack for the level of PFAS in the state. Neighboring Michigan has among the highest rates in the country.

A bill in the House Appropriations Committee, which funds the EPA, proposes cutting the agency's budget by more than one-third in fiscal year 2024. If the measure is approved, Sutherland said, EPA funding would plummet to levels unseen in three decades.

"The cuts are incredibly short-sighted," she said. "Two weeks ago, EPA released PFAS monitoring data for 2,000 drinking water systems that show multiple PFAS chemicals are in the drinking water of over 26 million people."

John Reeder, vice president for federal affairs at the Environmental Working Group, said most PFAS emanate from the air emissions of industrial plants. He said the group's Federal PFAS Report Card found these chemicals in all 50 states, but industrial regions such as the Upper Midwest had the most sites.

"We hope that Congress is listening," he said. "Budget cuts for EPA, as well as DoD's cleanup program, have real consequences and would likely delay protection for millions of people exposed to PFAS, including many environmental-justice communities."


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups and concerned citizens scored a victory in New Mexico on Thursday that could lead to better regulation of PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals."

Following a meeting of the state's Oil Conservation Commission, board members agreed to hold a hearing next February to consider new rules governing the oil and gas industry and its use of PFAS.

Liliana Castillo, who serves on the Amigos Bravos board of directors, noted the toxic chemicals do not break down in the environment.

"Our water is our most important resource and we need all the protections we can get," she said. "This is especially pressing as drought and heat, fueled by climate change, impact our water supplies."

The commission's decision came after the group WildEarth Guardians filed a petition to ban PFAS in fossil-fuel activities and require that the industry fully disclose the hazardous chemicals it uses.

The petition was filed after the group Physicians for Social Responsibility released a report that showed massive use of PFAS in New Mexico. Report author Dusty Horwitt, a senior consultant for the group, testified that oil and gas companies acknowledged injecting PFAS into more than 200 wells in six counties in the Permian and San Juan basins between 2013 and 2022. However, industry records also show fracking chemicals were injected into 8,200 other wells.

"These chemicals could be PFASs or other toxics, but their identities are kept secret from the public and regulators, as allowed by New Mexico law," he said. "The public has a right to know these chemical identities - and a right to be free from 'forever chemical' pollution."

Speaking on behalf of the Sierra Club's Rio Grande Chapter, Antoinette Reyes, the chapter's Southern New Mexico organizer, said her group supports the proposal to make oil and gas companies reveal just what they use for fracking - despite industry concerns that it would expose their methods to competitors.

"There is a way to require the disclosure of chemicals," she said, "similar to the food industry - where you list the ingredients, but don't give away the 'recipe' - which is a way that some states have gotten around the trade-secret issue."

PFAS are associated with cancer, birth defects and developmental damage to infants, as well as impaired functioning of the liver, kidneys and immune system.

A new government study estimates nearly half of the nation's tap water has at least one type of Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), also known as "forever chemicals," which may cause serious health issues.

That's leading to renewed calls to eliminate these substances.

The findings, issued this week by the U.S. Geological Survey, gathered samples from nearly 700 locations across the country.

The North Dakota samples didn't detect these chemicals, but the agency warns current testing methods can't capture all types of PFAS. State-level efforts have found low levels in some drinking water systems.

No matter the amount, John Rumpler - clean water program director for the group Environment America - said all Americans should take these results seriously.

"It's highly alarming, because these chemicals are toxic to humans at very low levels," said Rumpler. "And it's time to turn off the toxic tap and stop using these chemicals."

There's been growing research on the topic, but the USGS says its study is the first to carry out
large-scale testing of private and government-regulated public water supplies.

While the Environmental Protection Agency is proposing some actions to limit the presence of PFAS in everyday products and water systems, some health and environmental groups say industries need to face more pressure to phase them out.

One of the EPA's recent responses is a proposed nationwide drinking water standard for selected forms of PFAS. Rumpler said this would help, but only scratches the surface.

"There are literally thousands of these PFAS forever chemicals," said Rumpler, "and EPA is only proposing drinking water limits for a handful of them."

These chemicals have captured more attention because of emerging research on the health effects. The EPA notes that exposure could lead to increased cancer risks.

Beyond detection in water systems, PFAS chemicals have been found in a range of products - including the linings of fast-food boxes and fire-fighting foam.




get more stories like this via email

As more research emerges about the chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, government agencies are faced with the task of figuring out how to keep the public safe.

A new Minnesota study said removing the so-called "forever chemicals" from wastewater will be very expensive. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency estimates it would cost $14 billion to $28 billion to remove PFAS from the water and biosolids leaving regional wastewater treatment facilities, over a 20-year period to implement the technology, along with operating expenses.

Scott Kyser, wastewater effluent engineer for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, led the research project and said trying to add the equipment would be a big adjustment.

"Those treatment systems are new, they're complicated, and they just take a lot of money to operate," Kyser pointed out.

The study added new types of PFAS are more difficult and up to 70% more expensive to remove and destroy, compared to older substances. Forever chemicals are found in a range of products and create serious health risks for consumers. They also can contaminate surface water, groundwater, drinking water, fish and other wildlife.

Sophie Greene, PFAS coordinator for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, said given the magnitude of the cost, they hope the findings compel policymakers and manufacturers to focus on preventing the chemicals from reaching wastewater facilities in the first place.

"I think this is telling us source reduction is the most important thing right now," Greene asserted. "Installing these expensive and complicated treatment systems at all of our wastewater treatment plants is just probably not feasible."

She acknowledged it is still a major challenge in swapping out PFAS for less-harmful materials, since their use in manufacturing has been so widespread.

There has been pushback from some business groups when proposed regulations surface. Still, Greene noted there is hope in Minnesota, with the Legislature this year adopting bans on the chemicals for nonessential items.


get more stories like this via email