Lawmakers press EPA on PFAS drinking‑water rule, litigation and terminated grants
Loading...
Summary
Members questioned Administrator Zeldin about the agency’s PFAS drinking‑water standard, a recent agency announcement affecting several PFAS chemicals, and the termination or reorganization of certain PFAS research grants affecting Maine and tribal partners.
Members of the appropriations panel pressed EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin on steps the agency has taken on per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, including litigation over a recent drinking‑water standard and the status of several grants to Maine institutions and tribal nations.
Why it matters: PFAS contamination has been a priority for members on both sides of the aisle because of public‑health and local‑infrastructure costs. Questions centered on whether EPA will defend the whole set of PFAS rules in court, how compliance timelines and exemptions might affect small water systems, and why certain grants were terminated.
Representative Chellie Pingree told the administrator that “the science is sound, and there's no question that PFAS is harmful to human health,” and she asked why EPA was not defending “all PFAS rules.” Administrator Zeldin replied that the drinking‑water standard for PFOA and PFOS set at “4 parts per trillion is staying,” but he described procedural issues in the way EPA had combined steps in the rulemaking for four other PFAS chemicals. He said the process may result in a different numeric limit after correction and that litigation had revealed a procedural error.
Members raised three specific grants tied to Maine: awards to the University of Virginia (with a Maine subaward), the University of Maine, and a grant to the Passamaquoddy Tribe; two of those awards were reported as terminated. Zeldin said the grants are part of a congressionally appropriated program that the agency is reorganizing and that “the way that the program and these grants are gonna get administered are going to be different going forward.” He offered to work with members’ offices on the transitions.
On compliance and cost concerns, Zeldin said EPA had heard from local water systems about the potential cost of compliance and was considering technical assistance and timing options that might reduce near‑term costs as cleaner technologies mature. He also said EPA was receiving new cleanup technologies that could lower remediation costs over time.
Members asked for a status update on the Passamaquoddy grant and whether terminated grants might be restored under the reorganized program; Zeldin said program administration changes would be different but that the agency looked forward to working with congressional offices to continue the work.
The exchange left key items unresolved: litigation over PFAS standards continues, some grant awards were terminated as the agency restructures grant administration, and members requested follow‑up details about specific grant decisions and compliance support for small water systems.
