- within Tax, Government, Public Sector and Finance and Banking topic(s)
This article presents an overview of the comments on EPA's first risk assessment regarding PFAS in biosolids, including a summary of over 100 major comments, and a link to EPA's full comment docket.
What Happened?
Since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its Draft Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment for Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid (PFOS) in Biosolids (Draft Risk Assessment) in January 2025, interested stakeholders have been busy providing feedback to EPA, in many instances, on ways to improve the document. As Beveridge & Diamond reported previously, the Draft Risk Assessment aims to characterize the potential human health and environmental risks associated with the land application of sewage sludge as a fertilizer (biosolids) that contains PFOA and PFOS. Recycling biosolids for use on farmland is one of the largest recycling practices in the world and has been widely practiced across the United States for over 50 years, pursuant to federal regulations under the Clean Water Act, including a landmark risk assessment finalized in 1993. 40 C.F.R. Pt. 503 (Part 503).
The Deep Dive.
A diverse group of over 25,000 individuals and organizations submitted comments on the Draft Risk Assessment. Among the commenters were trade associations, municipalities, land application contractors, and private sector actors not directly involved in land application. Many commenters took issue with the Draft Risk Assessment's conclusion that biosolids containing PFOA and PFOS at a low concentration of one ppb of PFOA or PFOS may exceed EPA's conservative criteria for possible health risks under long-term exposure scenarios, which are largely inapplicable to most of the population. For instance, the U.S. Composting Council described the one ppb baseline as "exceptionally low", and "lower than background levels found in soil, human blood, and everyday household products."
This table summarizes the comments available on EPA's online docket for the Draft Risk Assessment by many significant stakeholders, including wastewater agencies, biosolids management companies, trade associations in the wastewater, government, agricultural, and private sector actors. (We have excluded individual commenters due to length.) The detailed comments discuss peer reviewed literature on PFAS, biosolids and the environment and are a valuable resource for all interested in these issues. Similar detailed comments have been the basis of published scientific analyses on other technical PFAS proposals.
What Comes Next?
Publication of the Draft Risk Assessment represents the first step in EPA's process in determining whether or not to amend the federal regulations governing the beneficial use of biosolids to include requirements for PFOA and PFOS. After considering all the comments submitted, EPA will ultimately publish a revised, final risk assessment that informs its subsequent decision as to whether or not to regulate PFOA and PFOS in biosolids.
In the meantime, the many states with biosolids regulatory programs that complement Part 503 have taken or are considering regulatory steps regarding PFAS. These measures have largely reflected state and local experience and knowledge that biosolids recycling through land application is valuable, environmentally beneficial, and very low risk. States and stakeholders frequently look to Michigan's interim strategy, which establishes different management requirements depending on the concentration of PFOA or PFOS in the biosolids. Under the widely discussed "Michigan Model," biosolids containing PFOA or PFOS at or above 100 ppb may not be land applied, biosolids containing between 20 and 99 ppb may be land applied with several additional requirements, and biosolids containing concentrations below 20 ppb may be land applied with no additional requirements.
Thanks to Associates Lia Crutchfield, Leticia Duarte, and Lexie Mulkey, and Summer Associate Dorje Wu for their contributions in developing this research.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
