The EPA and Delaware are setting an example by prioritizing scientific evidence in their approach to PFAS regulation. Their approach is focusing on specific substances linked to harm to ensure effective and targeted restrictions.
In contrast, Policymakers in Maine and Minnesota are pursuing broad bans on PFAS that would combine all substances into a single class without carefully considering their hazard properties or risks. A similar proposal in California was vetoed based on concerns that using a broad PFAS definition did not sufficiently account for the unintended consequences of such a broad ban approach.
As other jurisdictions consider PFAS regulations, it is critical that policymakers understand the unintended consequences of a one-size-fits-all classification.
For more information, read globalFACT’s latest opinion piece, The Case Against Rushing To Restrict PFAS, live now in Route Fifty.