This was a v-e-r-y long commentary, written, of course, by a lawyer, but I, also a lawyer, slogged through it, and it was worth it. It challenges what I call the Pixie Dust idea of government: just toss some pixie dust on a problem and if your heart is in the right place, the problem will go away - Greta Thunberg meets Peter Pan. As such, the commentary is applicable to a myriad of problems the current administration is taking on (sometimes itself using the Pixie Dust approach, but that's another problem). It implicitly acknowledges two qualities of two different types of humans. On one hand, there are the process people, who respect the establishment of rules and regulations, fair procecedures equally applied to reach a goal, and the education of the citizenry to help obtain the desired results. On the other hand, there are the action people, who recognize insufficiencies, devise solutions, and press those in charge to make changes. We have glorified the action people for so long, and for so many reasons, that we tend to forget that action without process is chaos; it is literally what God did away with when creating the universe. Progressive Democrats have marched behind the banner of Action for so long that they struggle to make policy sense at all, and have for the most part, in their focus on appearing to be "doing something," have left a field of rubble everywhere they've been: social welfare, civil rights, foreign affairs, feminism and gender, technology, finance. It would be a worthwhile endeavor for everyone full of passion to take a deep breath and wait for rational compromises and sensible procedures to be instituted and operated upon. And that's my long comment to a long commentary.
This is classic regulatory capture rhetoric - bureaucratic sanitization. It is Kafkaesque legalism - procedural or “technical” reasoning detached from ordinary reality.
The 2024 EPA rule created the first nationwide enforceable drinking-water standards for six PFAS compounds, PFOA, PFNA, PFOS, PFBS, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (“GenX”).
The newly proposed rule rescinds or reconsiders limits for PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS and HFPO-DA and delays compliance deadlines for PFOA and PFOS from 2029 to 2031. And mentions a technical-assistance program called “PFAS OUT," without specifics.
What about Arizona using their sewage water and cleaning it up to drink. I can’t imagine how many chemicals it takes to get sewage water clean enough to drink.
After slogging thru this political word salad, I find these proposed changes do not eliminate risk; they create more uncertainty and do nothing except allow PFAS to continue. Much like the kick the can down the road policies of previous administrations since the EPA was created.
I realize it is politically / economically difficult, but simple logic screams the solution to a problem is its source.. put an end to FOREVER chemicals, find a better, sustainable way, THEN think about remediation
The Biden EPA did conduct a formal notice-and-comment process before issuing the 2024 final rule - complete with proposed-rule publications, public hearings, and comment submissions from utilities, environmental groups, industry, and states - For the PFAS drinking-water standards, under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Disingenuous Zeldin and Hypocrite Bobby now claim the Biden administration rushed the process - so roll 'em back. Sort of the inverse of Rubio's, "We launched war on Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran, which then would have attacked us."
Our town has had to clean up forever chemicals due to our fire training academy that used fire fighting foam with forever chemicals and at our airport where they trained for emergency fires. And it is not that I am unhappy we instituted procedures to eliminate forever chemicals well below the standard (at that time, and it keeps changing), but it has not been cheap. And we were part of lawsuits, but the outlay of resources to build facilities to house mutupatep filtration was done well ahead of funding for lawsuits. Our water companies are funded by rate payers and those in affected areas have had to pay dearly. And again, their health is positively impacted going forward. There is no way to treat forever chemical exposure (except blood letting via blood donation). Once you have been exposed for years, you have forever chemicals, well for a long long time. And since they have been known to cause cancer, well you too would be happy if monies, policies and procedures could come to your polluted water supply! I wish the government would reimburse our town. I highly doubt that will happen. We have been way ahead of the curve. And one last thought. I am not confident we have the systems and processes in place to deliver carbon for filtration nationwide. Last I knew, there were only 2 companies doing this. Probably a good market to break into or invest in.
This was a v-e-r-y long commentary, written, of course, by a lawyer, but I, also a lawyer, slogged through it, and it was worth it. It challenges what I call the Pixie Dust idea of government: just toss some pixie dust on a problem and if your heart is in the right place, the problem will go away - Greta Thunberg meets Peter Pan. As such, the commentary is applicable to a myriad of problems the current administration is taking on (sometimes itself using the Pixie Dust approach, but that's another problem). It implicitly acknowledges two qualities of two different types of humans. On one hand, there are the process people, who respect the establishment of rules and regulations, fair procecedures equally applied to reach a goal, and the education of the citizenry to help obtain the desired results. On the other hand, there are the action people, who recognize insufficiencies, devise solutions, and press those in charge to make changes. We have glorified the action people for so long, and for so many reasons, that we tend to forget that action without process is chaos; it is literally what God did away with when creating the universe. Progressive Democrats have marched behind the banner of Action for so long that they struggle to make policy sense at all, and have for the most part, in their focus on appearing to be "doing something," have left a field of rubble everywhere they've been: social welfare, civil rights, foreign affairs, feminism and gender, technology, finance. It would be a worthwhile endeavor for everyone full of passion to take a deep breath and wait for rational compromises and sensible procedures to be instituted and operated upon. And that's my long comment to a long commentary.
This is classic regulatory capture rhetoric - bureaucratic sanitization. It is Kafkaesque legalism - procedural or “technical” reasoning detached from ordinary reality.
https://environmentamerica.org/articles/epa-moves-to-allow-more-pfas-in-drinking-water/
Kennedy's spin doesn't cut it - https://natlawreview.com/article/epa-proposes-changes-pfas-drinking-water-rules
The 2024 EPA rule created the first nationwide enforceable drinking-water standards for six PFAS compounds, PFOA, PFNA, PFOS, PFBS, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (“GenX”).
The newly proposed rule rescinds or reconsiders limits for PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS and HFPO-DA and delays compliance deadlines for PFOA and PFOS from 2029 to 2031. And mentions a technical-assistance program called “PFAS OUT," without specifics.
What about Arizona using their sewage water and cleaning it up to drink. I can’t imagine how many chemicals it takes to get sewage water clean enough to drink.
After slogging thru this political word salad, I find these proposed changes do not eliminate risk; they create more uncertainty and do nothing except allow PFAS to continue. Much like the kick the can down the road policies of previous administrations since the EPA was created.
I realize it is politically / economically difficult, but simple logic screams the solution to a problem is its source.. put an end to FOREVER chemicals, find a better, sustainable way, THEN think about remediation
The Biden EPA did conduct a formal notice-and-comment process before issuing the 2024 final rule - complete with proposed-rule publications, public hearings, and comment submissions from utilities, environmental groups, industry, and states - For the PFAS drinking-water standards, under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Disingenuous Zeldin and Hypocrite Bobby now claim the Biden administration rushed the process - so roll 'em back. Sort of the inverse of Rubio's, "We launched war on Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran, which then would have attacked us."
Our town has had to clean up forever chemicals due to our fire training academy that used fire fighting foam with forever chemicals and at our airport where they trained for emergency fires. And it is not that I am unhappy we instituted procedures to eliminate forever chemicals well below the standard (at that time, and it keeps changing), but it has not been cheap. And we were part of lawsuits, but the outlay of resources to build facilities to house mutupatep filtration was done well ahead of funding for lawsuits. Our water companies are funded by rate payers and those in affected areas have had to pay dearly. And again, their health is positively impacted going forward. There is no way to treat forever chemical exposure (except blood letting via blood donation). Once you have been exposed for years, you have forever chemicals, well for a long long time. And since they have been known to cause cancer, well you too would be happy if monies, policies and procedures could come to your polluted water supply! I wish the government would reimburse our town. I highly doubt that will happen. We have been way ahead of the curve. And one last thought. I am not confident we have the systems and processes in place to deliver carbon for filtration nationwide. Last I knew, there were only 2 companies doing this. Probably a good market to break into or invest in.