Last April, Jessica Kramer of the Environmental Protection Agency told water utility lobbyists gathered in Washington that clean-water issues remained a top agency priority — despite a chaotic start to President Donald Trump’s second term that included budget and job cuts.
Speaking at a “Water Week” event on April 8, Kramer emphasized the EPA’s desire to work with water utilities to clean up “forever chemicals,” the virtually indestructible microscopic substances infiltrating Americans’ drinking water, and making “polluters pay” to cover the costs.
But industries that have historically produced those “forever chemicals” had significant concerns.
The day after Kramer’s speech, she joined other EPA officials on a previously unreported Microsoft Teams call with the American Forest and Paper Association, according to internal emails obtained by NOTUS through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Giffe Johnson, an official at a forest products industry group, the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, emailed Kramer the day after the meeting to say he “really appreciated the time you spent at the paper industry meeting.”
“I wanted to follow up on our discussion on critiquing the science behind the PFAS [maximum contaminant levels],” Johnson wrote in an April 10 email to Kramer, using an acronym for a group of thousands of “forever chemicals.” “Hopefully, this can be the beginning of continued dialogue about the use of science for policy decision making.”
Johnson’s entreaty was one of many urging the EPA to reconsider Biden-era regulations targeting maximum contamination levels for six of 10,000 “forever chemicals,” which the agency would go on to partially axe on May 14, 2025, and extend the timeline to meet those targets by an additional two years.
More than 500 pages of internal emails, presentations, talking points and other documents NOTUS obtained through a FOIA request detail how powerful corporate interests sought to capitalize on the nascent Trump administration’s goal of boosting industry fortunes and slashing regulations, particularly environmental guardrails.
In communications with the EPA, “forever chemical” producers repeatedly downplayed the science linking these chemicals to increased risk of cancer, reproductive complications and other negative health outcomes.
Paper mills have been linked to increased levels of “forever chemicals” in tap water and private wells in places such as Wisconsin. In his message to Kramer, Johnson attached letters the trade group had previously sent the EPA critiquing the designation of one compound known as “PFOS” — which manufacturers have historically used to make paper oil- and grease-resistant — as a carcinogen.
3M and Chemours, which have both settled lawsuits related to their disposal of “forever chemicals” used to manufacture products in water systems, also contacted Kramer to make their case.
Kevin Dowling, head of U.S. government affairs at 3M, emailed Kramer four times from April 10 to May 13 asking for a meeting. Dowling’s emails — it’s unclear whether the EPA answered them — included studies and comments from 3M arguing PFOS and another “forever chemical” known as “PFOA” had been incorrectly categorized as carcinogens.
As Dowling emailed Kramer materials arguing against the compound’s carcinogenic designation, 3M was actively phasing its use out of the manufacturing process. (The company said in January that it had met its deadline to stop producing “forever chemicals” by the end of 2025.)
Mary Cordes, director and head of federal affairs at Chemours, also emailed Kramer on May 12, two days before the EPA’s May 14 regulation rollback, with a “study that shows PFOA is non-carcinogenic.”
Cordes forwarded an email from a Chemours toxicologist, Shawn Gannon, who described the study as “one example of a PFOA study that shows a lack of kidney cancer or any other mortality cause.”
Chemours’ political influence efforts are decidedly muscular, with the company having spent more than $1.9 million on federal lobbying last year, more than its spent in any single year since 2015, when it spun off from DuPont, according to federal lobbying data analyzed by OpenSecrets. (Chemours later sued DuPont, accusing the chemical giant of loading its environmental liabilities into the new company.)
3M spent nearly $1.2 million in 2025, a large sum that’s still significantly smaller than its spending in the 2010s, when litigation and lawsuits related to “forever chemical” contamination surged.
The EPA appeared unswayed by attacks on the science underpinning the regulation of PFOS and PFOA, specifically, which internal talking points describe as “robust and interconnected.”
“We have found that it’s not based on one study or one factor that if changed, would change the outcome. Rather, if you pull one string, the web of scientific underpinning remains substantial and compelling,” state the internal talking points prepared for a speech Kramer was scheduled to deliver in May before the National Association of Manufacturers.
Environmental organizations urged the EPA to maintain its course toward new “forever chemical” regulations.
“It is our hope that EPA will vigorously defend, and not delay, these important public protections designed to help families protect themselves from lead and PFAS forever chemicals in our drinking water and environment,” Julian Gonzalez, senior legislative counsel at Earthjustice, wrote in an email on May 9 to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin that included a letter signed by more than 50 organizations.
On May 14, 2025, the EPA announced it would maintain Biden-era regulations on PFOA and PFOS.
But “forever chemical” producers also received a welcome surprise, and water utilities received a welcome reprieve.
Against the wishes of public-health, community and environmental advocates, the EPA announced its intent to rescind and “reconsider” the regulations for four “forever chemicals” and give water utilities an extra two years to meet targets for both PFOS and PFOA “forever chemicals.” The EPA also announced it would rescind and “reconsider” the other regulations for four other compounds.
Talking points prepared for Kramer’s June 3 appearance at the White House State Leadership Conference reveal that the EPA softened its more aggressive stance against “forever chemicals” because “the Administrator gave direction that will provide significant relief to drinking water systems, ensure that water systems can stay in business and protect American families from water rate hikes while reducing exposure to these substances in drinking water.”
“Water systems, associations, elected officials, and others have shared with us that the compliance schedule is one of the biggest challenges for implementation,” the talking points add.
Water utility giants such as the American Water Works Association and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies argue that it’s neither logistically nor financially feasible to comply with Biden-era contamination targets, especially for smaller systems. (The associations sued the Biden administration in June 2024, citing “serious questions about EPA’s process for developing the final rule.”)
Water utilities also maintain that companies that dumped “forever chemicals” into their water in the first place are the ones that should be held accountable.
The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies spent $370,000 lobbying on a variety of issues last year, more than it’s spent in a single previous year, according to OpenSecrets data. The American Water Works Association spent $260,000.
Kramer herself is an industry veteran. From August 2022 to February 2023, Kramer worked as a registered lobbyist for multiple water utility groups, including the American Water Works Association on issues related to the impact of “forever chemicals” on food and water industries.
When NOTUS asked the EPA if it was appropriate for Kramer to be discussing PFAS policy with a former client for whom she previously lobbied on PFAS issues, the EPA accused NOTUS of “trying to create a correlation of misconduct that does not exist.”
“Jess Kramer fulfilled her ethical obligations to the letter of the law, which you would know if you bothered to read the documents you reference,” the EPA said in an email to NOTUS.
The EPA estimates that cleanup of “forever chemicals” under the Biden-era rule would cost around $1.5 billion per year, although water utilities argue the agency underestimated the cost and number of systems affected. But internal EPA emails reveal that some water utilities did not feel the EPA should backtrack — even though they were hearing from entities that thought they should.
In a letter dated Feb. 17, 2025, James Vance, manager of the Muscle Shoals Utilities Board in Alabama, wrote that the company had “heard from some groups that we should be seeking the suspension or elimination of PFOS and PFOA contamination limits.”
“This shortsighted approach comes primarily from the chemical manufacturing sector and from water treatment operators that are not interested in coming into compliance in order to filter the forever chemical toxins from the water supply,” Vance wrote.
Jeremy Robison, a county engineer with Alabama’s Colbert County Rural Water System, also warned in an April 1 letter that reversing or relaxing maximum contaminant levels for PFOS and PFOA “forever chemicals” could mean chemical manufacturers “will no longer feel pressure to address threats or mitigate the damage to public health and harm to the environment that they caused.”
“Any attempt to relax the EPA’s standards will benefit the polluters and cause harm to our citizens,” Robison wrote.
Water utilities are not the ones who put the “forever chemicals” in their communities’ drinking water, as internal EPA talking points make clear.
But water utilities play a key role in getting those chemicals out of the water, which takes time and money.
A few days after the EPA announced it would extend the compliance deadline from 2029 to 2031, Tracy Mehan, executive director of government affairs at the American Water Works Association, emailed Kramer to thank her “for your positive response to my letter requesting the two-year extension on PFAS compliance.”
“Notwithstanding the remaining issues on PFOA and PFAS, these are very positive developments for which AWWA and the [Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies] are most grateful,” Mehan wrote.
When asked how the American Water Works Association squared its lobbying against the Biden-era regulations with its stated shared goal of “protecting people from potentially harmful levels of PFAS in drinking water,” Mehan told NOTUS that the trade association “publicly supported EPA’s decision to undertake the development of national PFAS standards.”
“However, we are concerned that the agency did not follow the required Safe Drinking Water Act process and use the best science and data in finalizing the rule,” Mehan wrote.
The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies declined to comment. Johnson of NCASI, the American Forest and Paper Association, 3M, Chemours, Vance and Robison did not respond to requests for comment.
Earthjustice directed NOTUS to a press release issued on Sept. 12, 2025, regarding its decision to intervene after the EPA moved to vacate parts of the Biden-era regulation, which it called “unlawful” and “invalid.”
The fight at EPA over “forever chemicals” continues to rage.
A federal judge last month denied the EPA’s request to immediately strike part of the Biden-era regulations. The case continues, however, and the judges ordered the EPA to file a notice outlining the portions of the rule it no longer wishes to enforce. The EPA continues to press forward with a broader agenda of rolling back climate-related regulations, such as this week when it repealed its landmark conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public welfare.
The extensive back-and-forth has caused confusions for some water utilities, which are effectively operating as if nothing has changed so they’re not caught off guard.
“The biggest challenge right now is the uncertainty. While litigation continues and new EPA actions are announced, water utilities must plan based on what’s currently in place, and that means working toward the 2029 compliance date,” one water utility source — granted anonymity to speak candidly — told NOTUS.
“EPA’s message rightly emphasizes the importance of removing PFAS from drinking water to protect public health. What’s often missing, however, is clear communication that compliance takes time and significant resources. This is a difficult situation for water utilities to be in and can hinder efforts to build trust with the communities we serve.”
Don’t miss the stories shaping Washington.
Sign in
Log into your free account with your email. Don’t have one?
Check your email for a one-time code.
We sent a 4-digit code to . Enter the pin to confirm your account.
New code will be available in 1:00
Let’s try this again.
We encountered an error with the passcode sent to . Please reenter your email.