EPA Delays PFNA Toxicity Report, Citizens Concerned

In a development drawing growing scrutiny, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has delayed the release of a finalized report assessing the health risks of perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), a member of the chemical group widely known as PFAS. Representative Chellie Pingree, a Democrat from Maine, has raised sharp questions about the delay, pressing for answers on the agency’s handling of scientific assessments that impact public health and drinking water safety.

Although the EPA completed its toxicity assessment on PFNA in April, the report remains inaccessible to the public. More than six months later, Pingree says the silence is not only troubling—it could point to deeper issues of political interference and regulatory stalling.

Understanding PFNA: One of Thousands of “Forever Chemicals”

PFNA belongs to the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) family, a group of over 4,000 human-made chemicals used in everything from non-stick cookware to firefighting foams and waterproof clothing. These chemicals resist breaking down in the environment, earning them the nickname “forever chemicals.”

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, PFAS now taint tap water in nearly half of U.S. homes. PFAS leach into groundwater, rivers, and soil, often through waste disposal or product degradation. PFNA is among the chemicals thought to pose significant health risks. The EPA’s unreleased report reportedly concludes that PFNA can harm development, liver function, and reproductive health—including lower birth weights and reduced testosterone and sperm levels.

Pingree Demands Transparency and Answers

On October 16, Rep. Pingree sent a formal letter to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin demanding answers about the status of the PFNA risk report. She asked who ordered the delay, why it occurred, and when the public can expect the document.

“We have received the letter and will respond through the proper channels,” the EPA Press Office told Newsweek, confirming receipt but offering no further details.

Pingree, meanwhile, voiced her frustration: “Unfortunately, we don’t have a good line of communication with this EPA, which is very unusual.”

She accused the agency of undermining its scientific integrity, suggesting that the delay may align with a broader rollback of drinking water regulations. Her letter also draws attention to the weakening of the EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), a program tasked with producing independent chemical risk assessments.

“This seems to be more than coincidence given that there has been strong industry pushback on regulating PFAS,” Pingree wrote. She emphasized that the IRIS program has long faced pressure from industry lobbyists and certain political actors, particularly during the Trump administration.

Political Tensions and a History of Pushback

At the center of Pingree’s concern lies the perception that regulatory decisions may be increasingly influenced by political or corporate interests. The PFNA assessment, she noted, was ready for final briefings and public release as of April—yet no action followed. She expressed alarm over what she sees as a “growing pattern of interference” in EPA scientific work.

“In this instance, the agency’s inaction contradicts your repeated public statements about both transparency and the need for strong, science-based PFAS policies,” Pingree wrote to Zeldin.

She pointed to the agency’s decision to scale back Safe Drinking Water Act protections—specifically those concerning PFNA—as particularly troubling.

What the EPA Has Said So Far

Despite the delay, the EPA has not withdrawn its public commitment to PFAS regulation. In April, Zeldin announced several actions designed to address PFAS contamination, including stricter discharge limits, enhanced industry engagement, and efforts to ensure polluters—not consumers or water utilities—bear the financial burden.

“With today’s announcement, we are tackling PFAS from all of EPA’s program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and providing certainty for passive receivers,” Zeldin said.

Still, critics like Pingree argue that the EPA’s actions have not matched its words.

Industry Pressure and Regulatory Paralysis

PFAS regulation has long sparked fierce debate. While environmental groups call for aggressive limits, some industries warn of costly compliance and legal liabilities. The EPA, caught between these pressures, has faced accusations of inconsistency and delay.

Pingree’s letter hints at fears that industry influence has grown too strong, stalling progress and silencing scientific findings. In this case, she warns, the stakes are high—not only for the credibility of environmental oversight but for public health nationwide.

“We’re not going to back down from a fight here,” Pingree told Newsweek. She added that if the EPA does not respond soon, she will explore other avenues to raise public awareness, including working with the Make America Healthy Again movement.

Looking Ahead: What’s at Stake?

The fate of the PFNA report carries broader implications. If released, it could shape state and federal rules on PFAS contamination, set exposure limits, and guide enforcement against polluters. It may also influence compensation mechanisms for communities already facing water contamination.

Until then, many communities remain in the dark about the risks PFNA poses to their health.

Pingree has urged the EPA to commit not only to releasing the PFNA report but also to safeguarding future IRIS assessments from political meddling. Whether the agency responds remains uncertain.

The Role of Reverse Osmosis and Whole-Home Water Conditioners

Given the prevalence of PFAS in drinking water, including PFNA, families looking to reduce exposure can consider reverse osmosis filtration systems. These systems remove a wide range of contaminants, including many PFAS chemicals. Whole-home water conditioners can further help by preventing these substances from reaching household taps, offering added protection for bathing and cleaning.

Such solutions offer immediate steps individuals can take, especially as they await stronger federal regulations and greater transparency from agencies tasked with protecting the public.

Source: Newsweek