The Trump administration has announced what it is calling ‘a major step forward’ in the fight against a class of toxic chemicals called PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Extended exposure to PFAS, often referred to as ‘forever chemicals’ because they can persist indefinitely in the environment, has been linked to various cancers, autoimmune diseases, and other harms. On Monday, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lauded Trump as the first president who is ‘completely committed’ to removing forever chemicals, which are found at unsafe levels in tap water in some 80 percent of congressional districts and lurk in the blood of 97 percent of Americans. But what Kennedy considers a step forward looks like a big step back to most of those who have long kept an eye on the issue. That’s because the Trump administration is unraveling key parts of the PFAS limits approved by the Biden administration in 2024, which are the first and only regulations to put limits on PFAS in drinking water in the nation’s history. Restrictions on four substances in the PFAS class would be rescinded entirely, while water utilities would be given two additional years to comply with limits for two other substances. The Environmental Protection Agency first signaled its intention to make these changes last year, just a few months after Trump took office. The changes will be finalized after a 60-day public comment period expires. Secretary Kennedy, who is known for his pledge to ‘Make America Healthy Again,’ turned attention instead to the EPA’s recent announcement of $1 billion in grant funding for small and disadvantaged communities to detect and eliminate PFAS. ‘We have a president who has made a greater financial commitment than any president in U.S. history,’ Secretary Kennedy said. But the commitment was not exactly Trump’s to make: The $1 billion comes from an appropriation made by Congress in 2021, when Joe Biden was president. PFAS has been used in a wide variety of products, including industrial firefighting foams, for decades. As evidence of health harms linked to these substances has mounted, many manufacturers have developed new types of PFAS that have comparatively shorter lifespans. But this new generation of chemicals, of which there are thousands of members, may also cause adverse health impacts. ‘The Biden administration had at least set health protective limits for six of these chemicals out of the literally thousands that have been registered for use in the marketplace,’ said John Rumpler, clean water director for the environmental advocacy nonprofit Environment America. ‘Now the EPA is walking back from even that small step toward protecting our drinking water.’ On Monday, the administration tried to rationalize the proposed rollbacks by saying that Biden-era PFAS limits were approved in a rush that would have made them vulnerable to ongoing legal challenges. Water utilities and chemical companies have sued the EPA over its PFAS rules, arguing that the regulations are procedurally flawed, financially onerous, and require compliance on timelines that are too tight. But the Trump administration’s EPA has itself sought to undermine the limits since Trump took office last year, asking a federal appeals court to summarily vacate Biden-era restrictions on four types of PFAS last fall. The EPA has since stopped defending the standards in court. ‘This is about being realistic,’ Zeldin said at an event alongside Kennedy on Monday. ‘A deadline you cannot physically meet is not a public health protection.’ He pointed to the fact that technology capable of removing the chemicals is improving, and may eventually bring costs down for utilities burdened by the price of removing PFAS from tap water. In a statement provided to Grist, the EPA said that ‘the previous administration’s rule set deadlines many water systems simply could not meet — risking costly violations that punish communities without removing a single part per trillion from anyone’s tap.’ So far, the EPA has offered little in the way of a regulatory substitute for the limits it is removing. ‘I don’t think there’s anything new here,’ said Jared Thompson, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental protection group that is one of several groups defending the Biden-era limits in ongoing litigation brought by chemical companies. ‘It seems like they have largely adopted the positions of the chemical industry challengers and the water industry challengers who are saying that these standards are not appropriate,’ he added. Zeldin asserted that the EPA is going to ‘do it right’ this time, and the EPA’s statement to Grist said that ‘it is entirely possible the result will be more stringent requirements’ once the four PFAS substances whose limits are being rescinded are reviewed a second time. But some outside experts think Zeldin is already doing it wrong. The Safe Drinking Water Act, which Congress passed in 1974, has a provision that states that the EPA can’t weaken drinking water standards once they’ve been set. ‘There are going to be legal challenges,’ said Richard L. Revesz, dean emeritus at the New York University School of Law and former administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs under Biden. ‘They’ll have to give reasons and those reasons are very likely to be inadequate.’ Editor’s note: The Natural Resources Defense Council is an advertiser with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Trump’s EPA vows to fight ‘forever chemicals’ by loosening regulations on May 20, 2026.