EPA Takes Deregulatory Action on PFAS
The EPA is advancing a series of deregulatory actions affecting PFAS across multiple statutory frameworks, including the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These developments are worth tracking closely, as they collectively signal a meaningful shift in the federal PFAS regulatory posture.
EPA Moves to Rescind Biden-Era PFAS Drinking Water Standards
On May 18, the EPA announced a proposed rulemaking to rescind drinking water regulations for four PFAS — perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), GenX chemicals (HFPO-DA), and Hazard Index mixtures of those three plus perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) — on the grounds that the Biden administration failed to follow the clear procedural requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act when putting those standards in place.
The agency is accepting written comments for 60 days following Federal Register publication at regulations.gov under Docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2025-0654. A virtual public hearing will be held on July 7; pre-registration to provide verbal comment is required by July 1.
Separately, the EPA is also proposing to extend compliance deadlines for the PFOA and PFOS maximum contaminant levels that were retained. A combined registration process is available for members wishing to participate in both hearings.
EPA Withdraws Proposed Hazardous Waste Definition Rule
Effective May 8, the EPA withdrew its proposed rule that would have amended the regulatory definition of hazardous waste at RCRA-permitted treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs). The proposed rule, originally published in February 2024, would have aligned the regulatory definition of hazardous waste with the broader RCRA statutory definition — a change EPA had framed as necessary to address emerging contaminants, including PFAS, through the corrective action process.
The agency concluded that the proposed rule was both unnecessary and potentially counterproductive, citing the availability of existing regulatory tools to address releases at permitted facilities when necessary, and acknowledging that the rule would have created confusion and inconsistency in corrective action implementation.
Potential Impact on ILMA Members
The RCRA withdrawal is a meaningful development for ILMA members in their capacity as waste generators. While the corrective action framework under RCRA directly regulates TSDFs, the proposed rule’s broad interpretation — which could have subjected a wide range of PFAS to corrective action — risked setting off a significant chain reaction throughout the waste management supply chain.
Under that framework, TSDFs would likely have moved to protect themselves contractually or by declining to accept certain waste streams altogether, scrutinizing incoming waste more carefully and seeking to allocate liability upstream to generators and transporters. In turn, ILMA members generating waste could have faced heightened due diligence obligations, increased disposal costs, and exposure to cost recovery claims and liability-shifting mechanisms. Environmental insurance would have become an increasingly critical and costly financial consideration across the supply chain.
With the withdrawal, the EPA seeks to effectively narrow the corrective action framework to nine specific PFAS applicable to TSDFs — a significantly more limited scope than what had been proposed, and one that substantially reduces the near-term compliance and liability exposure for waste generators in our industry.
Policy Bottom Line
Taken together, these actions reflect a broader EPA posture of pulling back from the expansive PFAS regulatory framework built during the prior administration. However, state-level regulation — e.g. Minnesota, New Mexico — continues to advance independently and remain the more immediate compliance concern for lubricant manufacturers. ILMA will continue to monitor these developments and engage where member interests are at stake.
