A safe and healthy environment has been a top priority since President Richard Nixon created the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over 50 years ago. Today, the United States leads the world on a number of environmental fronts including clean air and access to clean drinking water. Even with these important environmental achievements, the EPA continues to face an array of modern challenges, notably from man-made chemicals that can be found in the air, water, and soil.
These chemicals, referred to as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, have been around since the 1940s. The development of these chemicals has produced incredibly valuable innovations such as nonstick and stain-resistant coatings and, perhaps most importantly, certain firefighting technologies.
But the chemical characteristics that make the chemicals effective and widely used is also why they have become problematic. Simply put, PFAS chemicals do not break down easily. Once released into the environment, they last for a very long time and can end up in drinking water systems. This is why the primary focus of addressing them has been through the lens of improving clean drinking water standards.
There is broad, bipartisan consensus that the presence of these chemicals in the environment is a serious problem that warrants meaningful solutions. The EPA began monitoring PFAS in 2012. In 2019, the first comprehensive plan to address them was released. Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed elements of the 2019 Action Plan into law that codified EPA’s actions. It also phased out the use of certain firefighting foams by the Department of Defense by 2024.
The Biden administration released its “Strategic Roadmap” in October 2021, which builds on that comprehensive approach. To date, the progress on PFAS chemicals has been through constructive and transparent engagement across Congress, the EPA, the business community, scientific experts, and community leaders affected by these decisions.
Unfortunately, this progress could be upended by a recent shift in approach playing out at the agency’s Scientific Advisory Board. The issue is not the board itself but rather how the Biden administration’s political team is using the board as cover to push a predetermined, politically motivated agenda aimed at regulating PFAS chemicals out of existence entirely.
In mid-December, the board presented new data, gathered without adherence to the standard process and scientific procedures. Key parties were cut out of the loop and unable to offer input.
The latest science does not justify the extreme outcomes that a few well-connected groups are pushing for. In fact, the latest science is better described as largely incomplete. Filling this void with skewed information on an expedited timeline lends itself to perverse outcomes that can cause more harm than good.
In a post-COVID-19 world where shutdowns, forever-mandates, and perpetual school closures persist, most understand why it is important for public policy to be shaped with a complete scientific picture in hand. This is especially the case at the EPA and why the work at the Scientific Advisory Board must assess the full picture of relevant science, even if it means taking more time to gather the right data.
The Biden administration’s political team is taking a rushed approach that cuts out critical information and limits the public’s ability to engage. Stakeholder input is key to cross-checking scientific work and informing the agency of broader impacts.
There is no doubt that the Biden administration is under intense pressure to fast-track the setting of hard-line regulatory standards for PFAS chemicals. Instead of succumbing to political pressures, the Biden political team should use agency resources to build its knowledge base and include opportunities for the public to engage. The approach may not be politically expedient, but it will provide evidence-based solutions to a modern environmental challenge.
Mandy M. Gunasekara is former chief of staff at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
