U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito, chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, led a hearing focused on policies for cleaning up and disposing of PFAS chemicals. In her opening statement, Capito addressed the lack of federal guidelines for managing PFAS contamination, which she said complicates infrastructure projects across the country.
Capito noted that project managers often encounter PFAS when working on projects like airport expansions or water system replacements. The absence of clear standards for soil disposal and liability makes remediation difficult after contamination is found. She pointed out that landfills frequently refuse to accept soil unless it has been tested for PFAS, but there are no established federal benchmarks for these tests. Insurance companies may deny coverage even if detected PFAS levels are below state limits.
She stated: “This Congress, the Environment and Public Works Committee has examined many issues associated with PFAS contamination and remediation, including potential impacts on public health, liability issues and the EPA’s regulatory responses.
“I have seen first-hand the impact of PFAS contamination in my home state of West Virginia, and I am going to continue leading this Committee’s efforts to protect the health of my constituents, clean up legacy pollution and ensure the folks responsible for the contamination fund their share of the clean-up costs.
“Today, we will discuss another part of the PFAS problem: how PFAS cleanup and disposal directly affects billions of dollars in infrastructure investment. Project managers, including federal contractors, encounter PFAS contamination when expanding airports, rebuilding roads, bridges and replacing water systems.
“Since there is not a clear framework guiding where contaminated soil should go, what standards apply or who is liable, it becomes extremely difficult to clean up and remediate these sites once contamination has been identified.
“To address the liability concerns after the EPA’s designation of P-F-O-A and P-F-O-S as hazardous substances under CERCLA, the agency issued an enforcement discretion policy to protect some passive receivers, including landfills, airports and farms. But that guidance does not answer the practical questions that are halting projects right now.
“First, the system between contractors and disposal facilities is breaking down. Today’s projects face a major, impossible situation: landfills often will not accept soil unless the soil is tested for PFAS because insurance companies won’t provide coverage to the landfill operator. When contractors do test the soil, there is no established federal standard to measure against. Insurers often deny coverage if any PFAS is detected, even if PFAS is below varying state standards.
“Second, because project managers cannot price this liability risk, potential bids for infrastructure projects just come in with huge contingencies or no bids at all. This leads to a cost premium that directly affects how critical projects are built and maintained, and those costs are passed through to taxpayers and ratepayers.
“The EPA can take steps now to improve how these problems are managed throughout the full lifecycle of a construction project. The Agency should issue clear disposal guidance to restore predictability so contractors and landfills know where to dispose of contaminated soil.
“Projects need federal soil screening levels that are practical and implementable. Communities need guidance on managing PFAS in groundwater, stormwater and treatment systems.
“We also need to address the root cause of the contamination. PFAS hotspots such as military sites and airports are a major source of the problem. Without limiting contamination in these areas,” she continued,“PFAS will keep seeping into water supplies leaving communities with a ‘forever’ drinking water problem.”
Capito cited new technology validated by EPA showing high rates—above 99.99 percent—for destroying certain types of PFAS but acknowledged its high cost means more specific management guidelines from EPA would be helpful.
She emphasized resolving liability issues using approaches modeled after brownfield cleanup processes that shield good-faith actors from third-party claims while ensuring polluters pay cleanup costs.“Liability issues must be addressed,” she said.“The EPA should provide predictable pathways for good-faith actors using proven bipartisan models established under brownfield cleanup processes.”
The senator concluded by calling on Congress to work together on legislation aimed at reducing future contamination risks while establishing clearer rules around destruction methods.“Congress must come together,” she said,“to enact a bipartisan solution to minimize future PFAS contamination develop a clear path to destroy PFASand protect passive receivers.I am committedto workingwith memberson both sidesofth eaisle,andIlookforwardto hearingfromourwitnesses.”
