In 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set Maximum Contaminant Levels for six types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). EPA has now proposed to rescind its standards for four of those compounds and to effectively delay compliance with the standards for the other two.
Policy Integrity submitted a comment letter regarding EPA’s proposal (Proposed Rule) to allow certain public water systems to request an additional two years to meet the standards for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS). The comment letter makes the following five arguments:
- Because EPA relied on a benefit-cost analysis to support its Proposed Rule, the analysis must not arbitrarily ignore forgone benefits.
- EPA arbitrarily ignored key forgone benefits, despite evidence that additional health effects can be monetized and are significant. EPA’s failure to examine a broader range of literature violates the SDWA’s requirement to use the best available data.
- EPA failed to justify its reliance on outdated discount rates, violating the SDWA’s focus on using the best available data and protecting the health of future generations.
- EPA’s analysis of the pitcher filter program is internally inconsistent.
- EPA failed to consider reasonable alternatives, such as a shorter exemption or one focused on a subset of smaller systems facing unique compliance cost issues.