For decades, U.S. farmers have been encouraged by government agencies to use treated sewage sludge—known as biosolids—as a cheap and nutrient-rich fertilizer for their crops. But a growing body of evidence has linked the widespread practice to contamination from toxic “forever chemicals,” or PFAS, that can persist in soil and food for generations. Now, a new provision backed by House Republicans threatens to halt the Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to respond to this public health risk.
The provision, tucked into a government spending bill released Monday, would prohibit the EPA from finalizing or enforcing a risk assessment published in January that warned of the dangers associated with biosolids. The agency’s report found that these fertilizers contain “dangerous amounts” of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which can accumulate in the human body, increase cancer risks, and disrupt fertility and child development.
The GOP-backed language would bar the agency from using federal funds to “finalize, implement, administer, or enforce” the findings, effectively freezing the EPA’s ability to act on the assessment’s conclusions.
According to the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), the result could be devastating for farmers, consumers, and the environment. “Preventing EPA from protecting public health and our food supply from toxic contamination epitomizes special interest politics at their worst,” said Kyla Bennett, a scientist, attorney, and PEER’s science policy director who previously worked for the EPA. “If finalized, this ban will leave ill-equipped state agricultural agencies to deal with a rapidly spreading chemical disaster.”
PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are synthetic chemicals used in a wide range of consumer products including nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, and firefighting foam. They are known for their resistance to heat, water, and oil—but also for their persistence in the environment and human body. Even at extremely low levels, PFAS have been linked to increased cancer rates, immune system suppression, liver damage, and developmental delays in children.
The EPA’s January 2025 draft risk assessment marked the first time the agency formally recognized that PFAS in biosolids pose serious health threats when applied to farmland. The report found that the use of these sludge-based fertilizers leads to “human health risks exceeding the agency’s acceptable thresholds for cancer and non-cancer effects,” sometimes “by several orders of magnitude.” PFAS, the agency warned, are absorbed by crops and livestock, eventually reaching consumers through contaminated food.
Estimates suggest nearly 20 percent of U.S. agricultural land has used sewage sludge, and as many as 70 million acres could now be contaminated.
While biosolids were once seen as a sustainable alternative to landfilling sewage waste, scientific findings over the past decade have raised concerns about their long-term safety. Farmers and rural communities are increasingly facing the consequences. “Across the country, farms have had to be condemned and livestock slaughtered due to PFAS pollution from fertilizers,” said PEER staff counsel Laura Dumais, who last year filed a lawsuit against the EPA for its delay in regulating PFAS. “Further delay in preventing more of these needless tragedies would be unconscionable.”
But instead of advancing protections, the House appropriations bill seeks to block the EPA from acting. The provision is part of a broader Republican effort to roll back environmental regulations and shrink the agency’s power. The bill proposes slashing EPA funding by over $2 billion—nearly 25 percent.
The move also follows sustained lobbying from the chemical industry to resist regulation of PFAS. According to a 2023 report from the advocacy group Food & Water Watch, eight major chemical companies—including Dow and DuPont—spent $55.7 million lobbying against PFAS regulations between 2019 and 2022. During the same period, the American Chemistry Council, the industry’s primary lobbying arm, spent more than $58.7 million.
The influence of industry over federal policy has not gone unnoticed. In May, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin—appointed under the Trump administration—rolled back limits on certain PFAS in drinking water and canceled a collection of research projects that were part of a $15 million initiative to study PFAS contamination on farms and in food. Zeldin’s actions have sparked criticism from environmental and public health groups who say the agency is abandoning its mandate to protect Americans from chemical exposure.
The spending bill’s reach extends beyond PFAS. It includes language barring the EPA from updating pesticide labels in ways that “conflict with the agency’s human health assessments,” a move environmental advocates say could undercut state efforts to impose stronger warnings or restrictions. Though the practical implications are still unclear, the provision aligns with industry lobbying to limit state-level pesticide litigation and maintain uniform national labeling.
The bill is now headed to the Senate, where appropriators could strike or revise the PFAS language and other controversial provisions. The Senate has previously removed similar GOP-backed riders. In June, for example, lawmakers reversed a House attempt to halt rules designed to protect farmers from meatpacker abuses. The Senate also restored funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the Food for Peace program, and the McGovern-Dole Food for Education initiative—programs the Trump administration had proposed eliminating.
Congress has until October to finalize the federal budget and pass appropriations bills. Environmental groups and public health advocates are urging the Senate to block the PFAS provision before it becomes law.
“Preventing EPA from protecting public health and our food supply from toxic contamination epitomizes special interest politics at their worst,” Bennett said in a press release. “If finalized, this ban will leave ill-equipped state agricultural agencies to deal with a rapidly spreading chemical disaster.”
COMMENTS