EPA Moves to Repeal and Delay New PFAS Drinking Water Limits
The Trump administration has announced plans to repeal drinking water limits on four PFAS compounds set by the Biden administration in 2024, and to delay implementation of standards for two other compounds.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes two separate rules to rescind and delay the limits. The regulatory process is expected to take several years and will likely face legal challenges.
"The EPA is committed to addressing PFAS the right way, across the full life cycle and built to last." — EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin
The 2024 Rules
The Biden-era rules, finalized in 2024, established the first new legally enforceable drinking water limits in 27 years. They set maximum levels for six PFAS compounds:
- PFOA and PFOS at 4 parts per trillion (ppt)
- Combinations of PFNA, PFHxS, and GenX at 10 ppt
- A variable limit for combinations including PFBS
The EPA had projected these limits would reduce PFAS exposure for approximately 100 million people and prevent thousands of illnesses and deaths.
Administration's Justification
At a press conference, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the new plan.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued the administration is not rolling back protections but implementing a "clean water mandate." He stated that the Biden EPA "moved too quickly and did not follow correct legal process," and that redoing the process will avoid litigation.
Health Advocates Respond
Dr. Anna Reade of the Natural Resources Defense Council criticized the plan, saying the administration "is not following through on promises to ensure safe drinking water."
Background on PFAS
PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a class of thousands of compounds used for water-, stain-, and grease-resistant properties.
PFAS do not break down in the environment and are linked to cancer, birth defects, immune effects, and other serious health issues.
The Trump administration alleges the Biden EPA did not follow proper procedures and that the limits "would not survive a court challenge."