The UK government has issued a formal response to a letter from Professor Ian Cousins, Department of Environmental Science, and a coalition of international scientists, who urged stronger regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
The UK government has issued a formal response to a letter from Professor Ian Cousins, Department of Environmental Science, and a coalition of international scientists, who urged stronger regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
The response, signed by Emma Hardy MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), outlined the government’s initiatives to address the risks posed by these persistent chemicals.
Highlights of the UK government’s response
In the letter, Defra recognized PFAS as a global challenge and reaffirmed its commitment to protecting public health and the environment. Key points from the response include:
• Grouping approach: Defra emphasized its use of a grouping strategy in its Regulatory Management Options Analysis (RMOA). This approach is based on structural similarities between PFAS, allowing for targeted regulation to address risks while avoiding regrettable substitutions.
• Regulatory progress: Work is ongoing under UK REACH to investigate potential restrictions on PFAS, including their use in firefighting foams. The government is also monitoring the EU’s progress on PFAS regulations, although the scope of EU restrictions is not yet final.
• Action on specific substances: Defra announced plans to classify EEA-NH4, a fluoropolymer associated with reproductive toxicity, under the GB Mandatory Classification and Labelling (MCL) system.
• Monitoring and research: Projects led by the Environment Agency (EA) and the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) aim to assess PFAS contamination levels, sources, and risks to guide policy development. The EA’s Risk Screening Project is one such initiative.
• Industry collaboration: A PFAS Working Group has been established to explore policy ideas for transitioning industries away from PFAS, accelerating leadership in adopting safer alternatives.
Appreciation and concern over the UK government’s response
Professor Ian Cousins , who co-authored the original letter to UK ministers, expressed both appreciation for the progress noted in the response and concern over what he views as gaps in the government’s approach.
“Defra has implied time and again (and in their response to me) that ‘not all PFAS are harmful,’ which is incorrect in my opinion,” said Cousins. “I agree that PFAS have a diversity of properties and toxicities, but their extremely high environmental persistence makes all PFAS problematic. I have pointed this out in my publications many times.”
Nevertheless, Cousins welcomed the inclusion of EEA-NH4 in Defra’s plans, stating, “This will mean more risk management measures-from increased requirements for manufacturing in relation to worker safety, to promoting more action in relation to monitoring and enforcement of discharges.”
The coalition of international scientists who submitted the letter to Defra will likely respond formally to Defra in another letter. “Representatives of our coalition would be delighted to have a dialogue with Defra on this important issue. But, disappointingly, there was no invitation for a dialogue in the letter,” said Cousins.
Background on the call for stronger action
In October 2024, Professor Cousins and a coalition of international scientists sent a letter to UK ministers urging stronger action on PFAS. The letter highlighted the extreme persistence of PFAS in the environment and their links to health issues such as cancer, immune system suppression, and developmental disorders. It called for the phase-out of non-essential PFAS uses and stricter safety testing for new substances.
The coalition also warned of the financial risks of inaction, as cleaning up PFAS contamination is costly and complex. They pointed to regulatory advancements in the EU as a potential model for the UK to emulate.
Add new comment