November 12, 2019

November 12, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

November 11, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

FDA Findings on PFAS Chemicals in U.S. Food and Drinking Water Supply

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed it had conducted a study finding that certain types of per- and poly-fluoralkyl substances (PFAS) have entered American food and drinking water supplies – in at least one case, PFOS, one of the most common PFAS compounds, was found in drinking water at concentrations 35 times greater than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) health advisory level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt). The FDA’s efforts are ongoing and the study has not been released publicly. According to CNN, the FDA will release the study and launch a new FDA website about PFAS this week.

PFAS are a group of chemicals, widely used in commercial and industrial applications for their heat resistance and ability to repel oil and water, that may pose health risks to humans. The health effects (if any), exposure levels, and duration of exposure are the subjects of numerous ongoing state, federal, and independent studies. The EPA has pledged to establish a “maximum contaminant level” (MCL) for PFAS chemicals, but environmental groups, public health advocates, and certain states have argued that the federal environmental agency is moving too slowly and have urged Congress and state legislatures to set statutory and regulatory limits for the chemicals. Others argue additional data and human health studies are necessary before establishing a federal MCL.

According to an FDA slide presentation recently obtained by environmental groups, the 2017 FDA study involved analyzing samples of produce, meat, dairy, and grain products in the Mid-Atlantic region; a significant number of samples contained no detectable concentrations of PFAS.

But at least one sample taken from a dairy farm showed PFAS contamination at levels in groundwater that prompted FDA to advise the farm to discard the milk. The FDA ultimately concluded that a “robust sampling plan will provide a better understanding of potential dietary exposure to consumers. . . .” We anticipate learning more about the scope and limitations of the FDA’s study once it is released in its entirety.

As we have previously reported, certain states (like New Jersey) have already set standards for PFAS, and multiple bills are currently wending their way through Congress. Senate and House committees held hearings in May to consider 20 bills (14 in the House Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change; 6 in the full Senate Environment and Public Works Committee). The bills with the best shot at passage are those with bipartisan support. They include bills to establish federal enforceable drinking water standards (MCLs) for total PFAS (S. 1473 and H.R. 2377), and bills requiring EPA to list PFAS as CERCLA/Clean Water Act hazardous substances (S. 638 and H.R. 535). Other measures would require EPA:

  • to list PFAS as toxic chemicals, making them subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting program (H.R. 2577);

  • to list PFAS as hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act (H.R. 2605);

  • to require EPA to regulate PFAS comprehensively under Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (H.R. 2600).

At the Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on May 22, Chairman John Barrasso identified PFAS as a priority for the Committee in this Congress, but expressed caution about the breadth of some legislative proposals, and the potentially broad new liabilities they could create. He also expressed opposition to bills that would take away or limit EPA’s ability to assess risks and develop standards based on the agency’s substantive expertise. Congress’ actions so far suggest a high level of interest, on both sides of the Capitol and on both sides of the aisle, but also point to legislation likely to grant EPA authority and set ambitious deadlines, rather than interfering with or overruling EPA’s regulatory processes.

©2019 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.


About this Author

Steven Barringer Environment & Govt Law Attorney

Steven Barringer is a member of GT’s Environmental and Government Law and Policy practice groups. Steve has a unique practice that combines substantive environmental law knowledge with deep government law and policy experience. He began his career as an attorney-adviser and Special Assistant to the Solicitor at the Department of Interior. In private practice, Steve has represented industry clients in numerous EPA rulemakings, and defended clients in enforcement actions brought by EPA and states. He has advised companies regarding compliance with federal and state environmental laws. Steve...

Bernadette Rappold, Greenberg Traurig Law Firm, Washington DC, Environmental and Energy Law Attorney

Bernadette M. Rappold focuses her practice on federal and state regulatory issues related to energy and the environment. Bernadette has substantial litigation experience and advises clients on regulatory compliance as well as the environmental, safety and health aspects of numerous business and real estate transactions, including water, air and chemical hazards. Bernadette offers clients perspective gained through years of service at the Environmental Protection Agency. While serving as a director of the Special Litigation and Projects Division in the Office of Civil Enforcement at the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Bernadette led complex enforcement actions in response to violations of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and other environmental statutes. Her work at the EPA covered a variety of economic and industrial sectors including the oil and gas, chemical, pharmaceutical, telecommunications and agriculture industries.

Kaitlyn Maxwell, Greenberg Traurig Law Firm, Philadelphia, Environmental Law Attorney

Kaitlyn R. Maxwell focuses her practice on environmental litigation. She advises clients on regulatory compliance issues and represents clients in litigation in state and federal courts. Her work includes litigation of major contamination cases under the hazardous waste and Superfund laws. Kaitlyn also advises clients in transactions involving the sale of contaminated real property.


  • Air, water and waste regulation

  • Superfund and contamination...