News Recap 6-25-21
Bloomberg Law: Changes Coming for PFAS Due Diligence in M&A, Real Estate Deals — ASTM International will soon amend its Phase I environmental site assessment language—considered the “gold standard” for due diligence—to include reference to PFAS. This means that buyers and sellers are exposed to significant risks for future PFAS issues stemming from real estate transactions, which in turn has insurers and investors concerned.
Wisconsin State Journal: Report: Madison Drinking Water Meets Federal Standards — The Madison Water Utility released its annual water quality report showing concentrations of 18 pollutants, including PFAS, were all below maximum levels set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Some PFAS were found in every well, though all were at levels below proposed state standards.
The Hill: EPA to Review Part of Cancer-Linked Chemical Regulation After Industry Request — The agency told stakeholders in a letter it would reconsider its risk information for ethylene oxide. The move is a response to a rule set under the Trump administration regulating emissions and leaks of ethylene oxide from industry.
American Council on Science and Health: Glyphosate Doesn’t Cause Cancer: New EU Report Confirms What We Already Knew — The European Union’s Assessment Group on glyphosate has just released a report showing that the popular herbicide is safe when used as directed. The reviewers considered glyphosate’s potential germ cell mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, specific target organ toxicity (STOT), endocrine-disrupting effects, and environmental impact.
The National Law Review: PFAS Medical Monitoring Costs – The New Litigation Trend? — Very few states allow for medical monitoring costs to be pled as a cause of action unto itself, requiring either an underlying harm to be proven before the courts will consider awarding medical monitoring costs or outright rejecting the medical monitoring theory of damages altogether. The PFAS Accountability Act of 2021, however, seeks to end the divide among courts by explicitly allowing medical monitoring costs for litigants.