Industry groups such as the American Chemistry Council have been staunch critics of EPA’s proposed rule. ACC said in an email that the group is “skeptical that a credible case can be made to list these seven chemistries under CERCLA.”
“PFAS are a diverse universe of chemistries with different physical, chemical, and toxicological properties that can come in solid, liquid, or gaseous forms,” ACC said. “With these vastly different physical properties, it should be easy to see why there is a scientific consensus emerging that it’s inaccurate, or even impossible, to group all PFAS together for regulatory purposes.”
Tim Whitehouse, executive director for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, welcomed the agency’s action but noted that “it will do little to stem the tide of future Superfund sites caused by toxic PFAS contamination.”
“CERCLA addresses a problem that already exists,” Whitehouse said, pointing to the agency’s reluctance to regulate the waste from being created in the first place. “EPA’s failure to regulate the disposal of wastes laden with PFAS makes containing contamination almost impossible.”
