The march toward regulation of PFAS in Pennsylvania continues (see our recent post on statewide public water system sampling results), with the release of final data from sampling conducted in September 2019 of surface waters throughout the Commonwealth. The study, a collaboration among the U.S. Geological Service (“USGS”), the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, and
California Expands Review of PFOS, PFOA to Include Cancer Risk
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is expanding its review of potential substances to add to its Proposition 65 list of chemicals that cause cancer.
Earlier this year, the state announced it intended to add perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) to the list. After the public comment periods ended for
PFAS Federal and State Litigation 2019 to Q1 2021 Infographic
EPA Takes Two More Steps Down the Long and Winding Road to National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for PFAS
In the March 3, 2021 Federal Register, EPA issued its final regulatory determinations for substances on the fourth Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (“CCL 4”). Under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA is required to publish a list every five years of chemicals that are known or suspected to be found in public drinking
Impact of “Hazardous Substance” CERCLA Designation on State Superfund Laws
We’ve discussed in our previous posts the process that EPA will likely use to designate PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances,” how that designation will impact responsible parties, and what effects it may have on current EPA-lead investigations and remediations. In this article we discuss how the process may impact states that are
Potential Impact PFOA and PFOS Designation as “Hazardous Substance” on Ongoing EPA-lead Investigations and Remediations
In two of our previous posts, we discussed the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Hazardous Substance” Designation Process and the Implications of a Designation on Responsible Parties. Here, in this post, we discuss what a designation of PFOA and PFOS might mean for ongoing investigations and remediations lead by EPA.
Current EPA Interim
EPA Nominee Confirms Focus on PFAS; Advances to Full Senate Confirmation Vote
As previously reported, the Biden administrative is expected to make PFAS regulation and enforcement a priority by, among other things: designating PFAS as hazardous substances, setting enforceable limits under the Safe Drinking Water Act, prioritizing substitutes through procurement policies, and accelerating toxicity studies and research. Plan to Secure Environmental Justice and Economic Opportunity.
On
Implications of EPA Designation of PFOA and PFOS as “Hazardous Substances”
The Biden Administration has pledged to designate certain PFAS as hazardous substances under federal law. What effect would the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) designation of PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) have on the legal landscape? As you may recall, in a previous
EPA’s PFOA and PFOS “Hazardous Substance” Designation Process
For the past several years, much attention has been focused on the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) legal authority to respond to PFAS contamination. When EPA published its PFAS Action Plan in February 2019, it discussed, among other things, designating PFOS and PFOA as “hazardous substances” through one of the available statutory mechanisms under
State PFAS Enforcement Against the Federal Government – Irresistible Force Meets Immovable Object?
In September 2020, the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) finalized the settlement of an enforcement action against Cannon Air Force Base (CAFB), a federal facility, relating to the facility’s discharge of PFAS-containing wastewater to groundwater without a permit. According to the allegations of an administrative compliance order (ACO) issued in January 2020, CAFB had an