Empire State Adopts MCL for 1, 4-Dioxane, PFOA, and PFOS

On July 30, 2020, New York’s Public Health and Health Planning Council voted in support of maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for PFOA and PFOS—the two most well-known per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The Council voted to set the MCLs for both chemicals at 10 parts per trillion—among the lowest levels adopted by any state, and significantly lower than the U.S. EPA’s current guidance levels of 70 ppt.

Another chemical—1, 4-Dioxane—also has an MCL of 1 part per billion now. New York announced that this regulation …

Continue Reading

Principles of Interpretation and Separation of Powers: Federal Court’s PFAS Ruling a Short Study in Both

Our readers are well aware of the ongoing debate on whether perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) (commonly known, together, as PFAS) should be designated as hazardous substances. Despite the constant attention these compounds receive, they are yet to be designated. There is a recent case out of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that highlights the legal significance while employing some basic principles. 

In Giovanni, et al. v. United States Dep’t of the Navy, individual plaintiffs discovered that PFAS chemicals from nearby Navy facilities had infiltrated …

Continue Reading

Legislators Assemble! North Carolina and Illinois Move to Enact PFAS Regulations

So far in 2020, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) proposed a maximum concentration level in groundwater for two PFAS compounds, while the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency released proposed draft amendments to its groundwater standards, including standards for a wide range of PFAS compounds. North Carolina’s and Illinois’ actions join prior efforts at legislation in other states, including Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont.

The NC DEQ is proposing a maximum concentration of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for PFOS and …

Continue Reading

New Investigation Reveals Many Potentially Problematic PFAS Chemicals Still In Circulation – And Some Good News Too

PFOA and PFOS, the most notorious compounds in the PFAS family, still contaminate many areas of the country despite being phased out of production (PFOS was phased out in 2002, and PFOA by 2015/2016.) Although human studies have shown these chemicals to be of little toxicity, there are many animal studies that reveal these chemicals to be highly toxic. It’s not surprising then that there is a growing groundswell of advocacy behind federal regulation of these chemicals. And if the scientific uncertainty surrounding PFAS wasn’t …

Continue Reading

PFAS Companies Take Heat From Congress

Last week, the House Environmental Oversight Committee held a third and final hearing on PFAS issues in the United States. The September 10 2019, hearing, which focused on PFAS contamination by industrial producers, served as a follow-up to the subcommittee’s July 24, 2019 hearing on the human impact of PFAS contamination and state-level efforts to regulate the chemicals. DuPont, its spinoff company Chemours, and 3M all sent representatives to Washington D.C. to attend.

In anticipation of the hearing, DuPont issued a press release defining their …

Continue Reading

New Mexico Joins the PFAS Fight with Major Enforcement Action

We recently reported that the lately-inaugurated governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, has taken a strong stance on environmental issues, including oil and gas development. Now, the state has taken further steps to enforce its contamination laws and improve the state’s environmental profile. Last week, the State of New Mexico filed suit against the United States based on PFOS and PFOA contamination originating at two Air Force bases — Cannon Air Force Base in eastern New Mexico and Holloman Air Force Base in southern …

Continue Reading

ATSDR PFAS Update: No Final Report Yet, But Further Guidance on Minimal Risk Levels and Drinking Water Concentrations

As most of our readers know, our firm has written extensively on PFAS, and we recently gave a 30 minute, free webinar on the important findings of the ATSDR’s toxicological profile on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The webinar discussed the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s role in setting minimal risk levels (MRLs) for toxic substances, including comprehensive analyses of selected contaminants that are deemed most harmful to human health. Because the PFAS profile is perhaps the most thorough evaluation of the …

Continue Reading

Feed It Once And Now It Stays: Another National PFAS Class Action Seeking A Study Rather Than Money

It’s been written about exhaustively in PFAS circles: the C8 Science Panel and its “probable link” findings between PFOA and various diseases. This was a groundbreaking study that was part of a settlement agreement in watershed litigation that ultimately led to a whopping $671 million payout for over 3,000 individual plaintiffs. The defendant, DuPont, had not only agreed to the creation of an independent panel of experts to evaluate any link between exposure to PFOA and human disease, but it also agreed — by extension …

Continue Reading

And Then There Were Five: One State Expands Its Concern To Other PFAS Chemicals And Other Major (Breaking) News On PFAS

Every week there’s more news surrounding the mystifying nature of PFAS chemicals. Our firm recently published a well-received article that explored the state of PFAS and what the horizon holds for regulation and litigation. And this week we have more news on the PFAS front. We should buckle-up because it’s only going to heat-up from here.

In November 2017, we reported on the New Jersey scientists that were urging the state to impose a strict limit of 13 ppt for perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) as the …

Continue Reading

Bystanders Beware – No Strict Products Liability Claims for Bystanders in AFFF / PFAS Actions in Pennsylvania

Lawsuits involving water contamination have been trending over the past couple years throughout the United States. We’ve seen a shift in the plaintiff’s bar’s focus from pursuing point sources to utilizing traditional product liability theories to support allegations of contamination against manufacturer defendants when the opportunity presents itself. The blue print’s simple – pursue deep pocketed manufacturers where insurance is often available.

The product liability lawsuits against manufacturers of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) – a firefighting foam utilized at airports and military bases throughout …

Continue Reading