As of May 15, 2025, we’ve updated this blog to reflect the latest developments in clean water policy and EPA regulations.

Clean water regulations introduced in recent years are now being reviewed, potentially changing how public water supplies are protected from harmful contaminants.

The effort involves several approaches, including the Congressional Review Act (CRA), executive orders, and regulatory freezes—allowing flexibility in determining whether to revise, replace, or remove existing policies.

The question is . . . what changes might be ahead?

Let’s take a deeper look at three of the key clean water proposals currently under consideration, and what they could mean for communities across the country.

In 2024, the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) were finalized, requiring the replacement of all lead service lines by 2037 to reduce lead contamination in drinking water. 

Lead, a known neurotoxin linked to cognitive impairment in children as well as cardiovascular issues in adults, typically enters drinking water through the corrosion of aging pipes and infrastructure. 

Thus, replacing those lead pipes would be a gamechanger for public health. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated that the impact of these changes would:

• Protect up to 900,000 infants from being born with low birth weight each year

• Prevent up to 200,000 IQ points lost in children annually

• Prevent Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in up to 2,600 children each year

• Reduce up to 1,500 cases of premature deaths from heart disease annually

While the measure aims to support public health, why are the recent efforts to strengthen water protections being reconsidered?

Primarily, cost.

When It Comes To Lead, Cost May Be The Key Concern

There are roughly 9 million lead water service lines in operation across the nation. In other words, lead pipes are virtually everywhere, making it quite challenging for cities to locate and replace these pipes without federal funding.

Estimates place the total cost of replacing the nation’s lead pipes at up to $90 billion, which some industry groups and politicians claim would overburden local utilities and taxpayers.

In the meantime, tens of millions of Americans could continue drinking water contaminated with lead.

If The CRA Is Enacted, Lead Pipes Might Never Be Replaced

Worse, if the Congressional Review Act (CRA) is enacted to repeal this plan, it will permanently prevent the federal government from reintroducing similar regulations. 

In other words, lead pipes service line replacements could be delayed or derailed indefinitely.

Critics, including Betsy Southerland, a former EPA official, have called this rollback attempt “mind-boggling,” emphasizing the severe public health consequences.

Erik Olson, senior adviser to the NRDC Action Fund, bluntly criticized the move, saying, “It’s a bad look to support lead poisoning children.”

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often called “forever chemicals”, have been linked to cancer, liver damage, and immune system disruption. 

These synthetic chemicals, found in everyday products, persist in the environment and water supplies for decades, hence their nickname.

In a landmark move, utilities were previously ordered to remove six types of PFAS from tap water. To be clear, that hasn’t changed.  

So, what did change?

Until Further Notice, Manufacturers Can Legally Pollute Waterways With PFAS

A proposed rule aimed to set limits on PFAS discharges specifically from industrial sources, targeting manufacturers responsible for releasing these chemicals into waterways. The intent was to address contamination at its origin point within the manufacturing process.

An executive order rolled back that proposed rule. 

Why?

Supporters of the rollback argue it reduces regulatory burdens on manufacturers, while critics worry it delays urgent public health protections.

While the drinking water limits for PFAS have not been overturned, the withdrawal of industrial wastewater regulations means manufacturers can continue dumping PFAS into waterways without restrictions.

Now here’s the good news: 

The CRA To Repeal PFAS Wastewater Regulations is Currently Not Being Used

This allows for the possibility of introducing a new revision of the rule at a later date.

Given its toxicity, critics argue that letting polluters continue to release PFAS into our waterways, even if only temporary, limits the goal to have the “cleanest air and water on the planet.”

Update – May 14, 2025: A recent EPA announcement shared plans to scale back some of the PFAS protections finalized last year. These regulations set enforceable limits for five individual PFAS and introduced a “hazard index” to address the risks of chemical mixtures.

Under the proposed changes, only two MCLs for the most common PFAS compounds—PFOA and PFOS—would remain in place. Limits for other PFAS compounds, including GenX and PFHxS, are now up for reconsideration, and the compliance deadline could be pushed from 2029 to 2031.

Trichloroethylene (TCE) is a toxic solvent used in industrial processes linked to cancer, neurological damage, and reproductive harm, particularly affecting military bases where it has contaminated water supplies due in part to extensive use cleaning and maintaining equipment.

Shortly after taking office, a regulatory freeze was issued on the EPA’s December 2024 TCE ban, delaying its implementation.

If the rule were to be permanently repealed:

• Industries would no longer be required to phase out TCE use.

• The chemical could remain in the environment and lead to ongoing health concerns.

• Military bases and communities near industrial sites would face prolonged exposure to TCE.

Along With PFAS, The CRA is Not Being Used To Repeal TCE Protections

Public health experts warn that reversing the ban is a significant setback, given TCE’s well-documented risks.

The ability to change these clean water protections relies on a combination of legislative and executive tools:​

• Congressional Review Act (CRA): Allows Congress and the administration to overturn federal regulations enacted in the final months of the previous administration. The key thing to remember is that once a rule is overturned using the CRA, no substantially similar rule can be enacted in the future without congressional approval.​

• Executive Orders: Used to withdraw pending regulations, such as the industrial PFAS wastewater discharge limits.​ Executive orders are a direct action by the president and can be reversed by a future administration, unlike CRA actions, which impose long-term restrictions.

• Regulatory Freezes & Reviews: Used to delay the TCE ban, keeping open the possibility of rewriting it rather than eliminating it outright. The key difference is that this approach doesn't immediately revoke a rule but stalls its implementation, allowing time for revision or eventual repeal without needing congressional approval.

While there are promises of cleaner air and water, it’s still unclear what actions will be taken to fulfill them.

The United States may face a future where:

• Lead pipes continue to contaminate millions of Americans.

• PFAS pollution remains unregulated at the industrial level.

• TCE continues to threaten public health and military communities.

Remember, by not using the CRA in some cases, an administration retains flexibility to rewrite and reintroduce rules under its own terms. Hopefully, that means these regulations are reinstituted or revised—instead of being reversed.

Given ongoing changes in federal regulations, investing in a filtration system can offer consistent protection for your household- regardless of policy shifts.

Powered by advanced Affinity Filtration Technology, our best-selling filtered water pitcher, universal inline fridge filter, and 3-stage under-the-sink filtration systems are proven to protect you from lead, PFAS, TCE, and hundreds of other dangers ordinary water filters overlook.