The Trump administration delayed a study intended to help regulators identify industries discharging harmful PFAS chemicals into wastewater, according to two former EPA officials. The survey, which aims to provide the first nationwide data on PFAS contamination sources in industrial wastewater, has been awaiting approval from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for nearly two years.
Robert Wood, former director of the engineering and analysis division in the EPA’s Office of Water, stated that identifying the primary industrial sources of PFAS is crucial for developing effective regulations. "If we can determine the top one, the top two, the top three" industries that dump PFAS, Wood said, "then we start work on the detailed studies and the regulation to get after nationwide limits on PFAS for the predominant industrial dischargers."
PFAS, a group of man-made chemicals commonly used in products like nonstick pans and waterproof clothing, have been linked to various health problems, including increased cancer risk and developmental issues. These chemicals are persistent in the environment and difficult to remove, often passing through wastewater treatment plants and entering waterways and soil.
The survey was submitted to the OMB in October 2024. Stuart Shapiro, a former OMB staffer and dean at Rutgers University, called the two-year review period "sufficiently unusual" and "a very long period of time," noting that such reviews typically take around 60 days.
While the Trump administration has stated commitments to addressing PFAS, including maintaining drinking water limits and supporting remediation efforts, critics have pointed to delays and reversals of Biden-era regulations. Environmental groups and advocates have expressed concern that the administration's approach may be too industry-friendly. For example, Trump officials delayed significant drinking water limits and restarted the regulatory process for reducing PFAS in wastewater from certain chemical manufacturers, a move that had been initiated under the Biden administration.
Betsy Southerland, who led the EPA’s Office of Water until 2017, suggested that if the survey had proceeded promptly, some results would already be available. The survey also intended to collect data on PFAS in biosolids, the treated solid byproduct of wastewater treatment, which are often used as fertilizer on farmland. This information was sought to understand the prevalence of PFAS in agricultural settings.
The Environmental Working Group noted a contradiction: the administration criticized a biosolids risk assessment for lacking a national occurrence study, yet the very survey needed for that study has been pending at the OMB for almost two years.
Some industry groups, like the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, have questioned the necessity of the survey, arguing that sufficient data already exists to begin regulating industries. Cynthia Finley, director of regulatory affairs for the association, stated, "We would rather EPA look at what data is available already because there is a wealth of PFAS discharge information out there now."
However, states like Michigan have successfully used similar data collection to implement regulations. Anne Tavalire, who works on reducing PFAS at Michigan's wastewater treatment plants, explained that by collecting data on industrial waste, treatment plants could instruct industries to reduce or halt PFAS discharges to avoid violating state limits on PFAS in rivers and lakes. This approach led to significant reductions in environmental PFAS release and in biosolids.
Advocates emphasize the urgent need for such data. Kelly Ryerson, an activist focused on agriculture and health, stated the survey is "urgently needed data to help decrease toxic exposures and ultimately the chronic disease epidemic. We have no more time to waste in addressing these harmful exposures, especially on behalf of bureaucratic interests."