PFAS is the greatest public health threat of our time. These “forever chemicals” have seemingly infected every aspect of our lives, from water and soil to kitchen products, safety equipment and even our children’s toys. We as a country need real urgency to address this risk quickly and in the right way.
Despite the rollback and stagnation of PFAS regulations federally, we’re seeing impressive bipartisan support at the state level to address the chemical forever. This is an important step in the right direction. But as states introduce legislation to regulate PFAS, it is imperative that they proceed with responsible legislation that has been proven to be effective.
There are two policy paths moving through state legislatures, which I call the “Michigan Model” and the “Maine Model.”
Both Maine and Michigan lead the charge in state-level PFAS regulation, but there are two key differences in their approach that make the Maine model the gold standard for states to follow.
First, Maine’s model takes a proactive approach, banning PFAS before they are manufactured into consumer products.
Second, Maine was the first state in the nation to enact comprehensive bans on land application of sewage sludge, also known as biosolids, and the sale and distribution of sludge-derived compost. It stops PFAS before they have a chance to contaminate our state’s drinking water, farmland, and local communities.
As a Maine policy leader who helped pass this law in my home state, I have seen the benefits of having a proactive strategy against PFAS. Currently, every state except Maine and Connecticut is adding to its PFAS contamination by spreading additional sludge, which only deepens the crisis, increasing future remediation and health costs.
Although Michigan was an early leader in setting drinking-water standards (maximum contaminant levels, or MCLs) for certain PFAS chemicals, the Great Lakes state has now lagged behind. Michigan’s PFAS strategy relies on reducing PFAS through detection and cleanup initiatives — a strategy that is well-intentioned but leaves room for harm to reach the public.
Adding to this, States are finding they need more money to pay for PFAS cleanupsSince settlements from polluters are not covering costs
Maine’s policies are different because they broadly anticipate the impact of PFAS prevention measures and create safety nets for businesses and communities most at risk. This can be seen in many ways, but a prime example is our partnership with farmers who have been affected by toxic sludge that threatens their land and livelihoods.
About six years ago, we began working with farmers who were unable to safely grow and sell their produce due to PFAS contamination from fertilizers and sewage sludge on their land. We created a PFAS Emergency Relief Fund, which gives farmers the resources they need to navigate safe transitions for their farms. The fund can help farmers pay for basic PFAS testing, access wellness and mental-health services, and sometimes get short-term income replacement and invest in infrastructure adaptations—all essential if you lose your livelihood.
Since building the infrastructure for farms to safely transition from the threat of PFAS contamination, we’ve supported more than 100 farms. Only farms early in the discovery of contamination – before a safety net was put in place – faced closure
This safety net for our agricultural leaders has been so successful because it prioritizes public health, financial stability and long-term sustainability. Our food system, public health and economic vitality all depend on our policies that turn off the tap on PFAS chemicals that end up in waste streams and create safety nets throughout the transition to clean infrastructure so that small businesses are protected.
Besides being proactive, states need to set smart thresholds for sludge. Michigan has set incredibly high contamination thresholds for PFAS concentrations in biosolids, meaning that large amounts of the contaminant will still be applied to land. If thresholds don’t make sense, they’re not protecting anyone.
Legislation with smart thresholds for sludge has quickly proven itself important, as states across the country attempt to water down anti-sludge policies. These efforts demonstrate high thresholds for PFAS contamination in sludge and liability slopes for corporations. To prevent this policy trend from escalating, it is imperative that anti-sludge and anti-PFAS laws address such corporate malpractices.
Maine’s policies opt for a more comprehensive approach, regulating PFAS as an entire category rather than individual chemical regulations. Furthermore, we were the first state to impose a near-total ban on PFAS in products.
Our state has passed legislation that forces accountability from manufacturers who are unable to rid their products of PFAS, giving them a currently unavoidable use (CUU) determination. Our Department of Environmental Protection will only issue a CUU to a business if the Department determines that a product is essential to the health, safety, or functioning of society and for which alternatives are not reasonably available.
Soon it will be a choice not whether states take action against PFAS, but how they do it. And Maine’s policy is the blueprint for how the rest of America should address this problem to prevent it from being the source of this toxic public health threat.
–
This post was Previously published on THEREVELATOR.ORG and republished in Medium.
If you believe in the work we’re doing at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today.
All premium members can watch The Good Men Project without any ads.
Need more information? A full list of benefits is here.
–
Photo credit: iStock.com
