Post alleges probe into wastewater dumping stalled

The social post that spread on Sept. 7 points to a real underlying federal delay, but the record is narrower than the online framing. Associated Press reporting published Sept. 3 said the Trump administration had stalled a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study meant to show which industries were sending PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” into wastewater systems, citing two former EPA officials involved in the effort. Public EPA and White House review records show the study’s information request was submitted in October 2024 and had not yet been approved as of early September 2026. ### What exactly was delayed? The delayed item was not a finished regulation but an EPA data-gathering package for a nationwide survey of publicly owned treatment works, or municipal wastewater plants. EPA says the “POTW Influent PFAS Study” would collect national data on industrial wastewater discharges of PFAS and use that information to identify industrial categories that may warrant further study or regulation. (abcnews.com) The EPA page says the information collection request also covered a National Sewage Sludge Survey. Supporting documents say the collection was designed to gather data needed to identify and quantify PFAS discharges, prioritize industrial categories for possible regulation, and establish a current national data set on sewage sludge characteristics. ### Why does White House approval matter here? (epa.gov) October 17, 2024 is the key date in the paper trail. RegInfo, the federal tracking system for paperwork reviews, shows EPA’s request was received in OIRA, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, on that date. The request covered 800 responses, 25,640 burden hours and nearly $3.9 million in cost burden, according to the public filing. (epa.gov) The EPA’s own study page says the agency submitted the request to the Office of Management and Budget in October 2024 to obtain approval for the study and questionnaire. Without that approval, EPA could not compel the selected wastewater plants to complete the questionnaire and sampling laid out in the study design. That is the procedural bottleneck at the center of the story. (omb.report) ### What did former officials say the survey was for? Robert Wood, former director of the engineering and analysis division in EPA’s Office of Water, told AP that a nationwide survey of hundreds of plants would help identify the source of PFAS and could inform new limits. He said identifying the top industrial sources would allow regulators to begin the detailed studies needed for nationwide limits on predominant dischargers. (epa.gov) AP also reported that Biden-era EPA officials viewed existing data on PFAS in industrial wastewater as inaccessible, incomplete or inconsistent. That is why the proposed survey asked wastewater plants about practices and sought sampling tied to the industrial waste they treated. ### Does the delay prove the administration killed the effort? (pbs.org) The public record does not show a formal cancellation. EPA’s study page still describes the project, links to the October 2024 materials and says the request was submitted to OMB; RegInfo still showed the filing as received in OIRA rather than approved in the public summaries surfaced this week. What is verified is that the review has lasted far longer than the standard timeline usually associated with paperwork review. (abcnews.com) AP reported former EPA officials described the wait as unusually long, and public records show the request remained pending nearly two years after submission. ### How does this fit with EPA’s broader PFAS agenda? (epa.gov) July 2026 shows EPA was still taking other PFAS-related actions even as this survey remained pending. EPA’s PFAS actions page says the agency released draft guidance in July for reducing risk from PFOA and PFOS in biosolids, and in June announced drinking-water contaminant monitoring work and a settlement with Chemours over PFAS pollution claims. (pbs.org) The next concrete place to watch is the same one researchers and policy staff are already checking: EPA’s PFAS study page and the RegInfo docket for ICR 202410-2040-006. Any approval, withdrawal or notice of action would appear there first in the public record. (epa.gov 1) (epa.gov 2)