Monday at midnight marked the deadline for California lawmakers to pass bills out of the Legislature. But in a session replete with the COVID-19 pandemic, racial justice and wildfires, numerous bills were left to die on the cutting room floor.
Among them was the majority of the environmental agenda in what some legislators, environmentalists and public health advocates labeled a disappointment.
Environmental watch groups, legislators, the media, and litigators have all squarely focused on PFAS contamination in one primary source – water. More specifically, drinking water. Environmental groups test local water supplies and report PFAS counts, politicians introduce bills at the state and federal levels to regulate the amount of PFAS permitted in drinking water, the media gives citizens daily news updates on PFAS in drinking water, and lawsuits are increasingly filed for both personal injury and remediation costs.
California lawmakers voted Sunday to phase out the sale and use of firefighting foam containing toxic chemicals that have been linked to cancer and have contaminated drinking water throughout the state. The measure, put forward by state Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), requires municipal fire departments, chemical plants and oil refineries to gradually stop using the foam, replacing it with alternatives that don’t contain perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, a class of chemicals commonly known as PFAS.
Every year, nearly 40% of California’s water used for drinking, agriculture, and irrigation comes from groundwater sources located in Northern California. During droughts, as much as 60% of water in California is sourced from groundwater. In addition, large quantities of California’s surface water (water found in lakes, rivers, stream, and reservoirs) provides a resource to citizens and farms in the state. However, since the 1922 Colorado River Compact, California is also able to draw up to 4.4 million acre feet per year from the Colorado River.
A pair of water associations are teaming up to urge the EPA to use all its regulatory tools to safeguard drinking water as it decides whether to allow new chemicals into U.S. commerce.
The Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA), which represents state, tribal, and territorial water agency officials, recently joined the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, which represents publicly owned metropolitan drinking water suppliers, to routinely flag their concerns about new chemicals to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Each of the differing $740-billion defense authorization bills that the House and Senate passed during the week of July 20 includes several provisions that would address pollution caused by per- and polyfluoralkyl substances at Dept.of Defense facilities. But neither would classify the chemicals as hazardous materials eligible for Superfund cleanup.
This year’s National Defense Authorization Act will almost certainly not carry broad chemical cleanup and drinking water mandates. Now lawmakers focused on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are looking for alternative vehicles as the election nears and the congressional calendar shrinks. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) and her allies did not convince the Rules Committee this month to allow a vote on the “PFAS Action Act,” H.R. 535 as an amendment to the House NDAA.
The National Toxicology Program for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recently released a Technical Report that found evidence of carcinogenic activity in laboratory rats exposed to perfluorooctanoic acid. The NTP Technical Report may result in the listing of PFOA under California’s Proposition 65 as a carcinogen. Private toxic tort plaintiffs may also attempt to rely on the Technical Report in PFAS contamination lawsuits.
It didn’t grab headlines, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision last month to back away from regulating a rocket fuel ingredient in drinking water points to a dramatic shift in federal oversight. The decision was followed by a proposal to slow the process for reviewing chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and delayed action on hazardous perfluorochemicals, PFAS and PFOA, that have been found in various water systems.
Colorado has its first policy to regulate so-called “forever chemicals.”
The state’s Water Quality Control Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to enact a policy to put new limits on per-and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, better known as PFAS. The class of chemicals is a common ingredient in everything from nonstick pans to foam used to smother flames from jet fuel.
A growing body of scientific evidence has linked the chemicals to a range of health problems, including cancer and pregnancy issues. Meanwhile, federal efforts to regulate the chemicals have lagged, leaving states to take action on their own.
