EPA’s Hidden PFAS Approval for Fracking

EPA’s 2011 Approval of PFAS in Fracking: A Decade of ‘Forever Chemicals’ Unveiled

In 2011, an under-the-radar decision by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tragically altered the environmental landscape of hydraulic fracturing (fracking). The agency approved the use of chemicals that break down into per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—a family infamously known as “forever chemicals” due to their extraordinary environmental persistence. Recent revelations, triggered by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and the investigative work of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), have shed light on the EPA’s internal concerns, the scale of PFAS deployment, and the far-reaching consequences for public health and transparency.

Understanding PFAS: Forever Chemicals Uncovered

PFAS refers to a group of over 9,000 synthetic chemicals characterized by their durable carbon-fluorine bonds, making them resistant to heat, water, and oil. These characteristics underpin their extensive use in various industries—including fracking, firefighting foams, non-stick cookware, waterproof apparel, and food packaging—but also make them nearly impossible to break down in the environment or the human body.

• PFAS are linked to significant health risks, including cancer, immune system disruption, birth defects, liver and kidney disease, and hormone disruption.
• Their extreme persistence and tendency to accumulate in living organisms have earned them the nickname, “forever chemicals.”
• PFOA and PFOS—particular types of PFAS—have been largely phased out in the U.S. due to their toxicity, but the broader group is still deployed.

Fracking and PFAS: The 2011 EPA Approval

Internal EPA records obtained by PSR reveal a disturbing truth: in October 2011, the EPA under the Obama Administration approved three proprietary chemicals for use in fracking operations, fully aware they could break down into PFAS. EPA scientists at the time expressed serious reservations, noting these substances could persist in the environment, bioaccumulate in wildlife and people, and cause toxic effects.

• These chemicals were designed to enhance the flow of oil and gas by reducing friction within the wellbore—an essential step in hydraulic fracturing.
• EPA’s own documentation highlighted that some degradation products would have properties similar to PFOA, a universally recognized toxic PFAS.
• The EPA recommended further toxicity testing and monitoring, but these measures were not mandated and, reportedly, never carried out.
• The EPA’s 2011 approval of these PFAS chemicals was never disclosed to the public until the release of redacted documents via FOIA a decade later.

The Scale of Use: PFAS in Fracking Operations Nationwide

After receiving EPA approval, energy giants including ExxonMobil and Chevron utilized PFAS or related precursors in fracking operations across the United States. According to PSR’s investigation, at least 1,200 wells in six states—Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming—used these chemicals between 2012 and 2020.

• Companies often used the trade secret provision to redact chemical names and even their own company identities, obscuring the true scope of PFAS deployment.
• The American Petroleum Institute stated that PFAS use in fracking is limited and occurs at extremely low levels, but scrutiny remains high due to the chemicals’ persistence and toxicity.
• Inconsistencies in state fracking disclosure laws—such as those in Pennsylvania—result in significant gaps in public knowledge, because trade secret exemptions allow companies to avoid revealing full chemical inventories.

Health and Environmental Impacts of PFAS in Fracking

While the fracking industry insists that PFAS use is minimal and the chemicals are safely handled, public health advocates and scientific studies point to unresolved dangers. Once PFAS enter groundwater or the wider environment, they are virtually impossible to remove and accumulate up the food chain.

• Contamination is of particular concern near fracking sites, military bases (where PFAS-laden foam is used), and communities reliant on groundwater.
• Many PFAS compounds are unregulated and cannot be filtered by conventional water treatment systems.

Redactions, Secrecy, and the Role of Trade Secrets

An extraordinary degree of secrecy continues to cloud the EPA’s 2011 PFAS approval and subsequent fracking operations. The Freedom of Information Act request by PSR returned thousands of pages of documents, many heavily redacted. Company names and entire chemical identities were often withheld, invoking provisions that protect proprietary business information (trade secrets).

• This blanket use of trade secret claims prevents independent scientists, regulators, and the public from knowing what chemicals are injected into underground formations.
• EPA spokespersons have confirmed that these redactions are legally required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), unless companies voluntarily disclose.
• As a consequence, locations and quantities of PFAS released by fracking operations remain largely unknown.
• This lack of disclosure hinders water monitoring, risk assessment, and remediation efforts.

Regulatory Context and EPA’s Current Stance

The 2011 approval occurred amidst a regulatory environment that placed the burden of proof for chemical safety on limited initial studies and manufacturer assurances. Since then, regulatory frameworks have shifted:

• Under the 2016 amendments to the TSCA, the EPA must now make an affirmative finding that new chemicals are safe before approval.
• The current EPA has acknowledged the prior approval and has publicly stated its intention to review chemical risks more rigorously. However, many scientists and advocates argue this doesn’t address legacy exposures from chemicals released over the past decade.
• Some PFAS, such as PFOA and PFOS, have since been banned or phased out, but newer analogues continue to be synthesized and deployed.
• There is no national requirement for public disclosure of chemicals used in fracking, only a patchwork of inconsistent state laws.

Physicians for Social Responsibility and Report Findings

The report by Physicians for Social Responsibility, titled Fracking with “Forever Chemicals”, led by Dusty Horwitt, represents one of the first comprehensive efforts to document the use of PFAS in U.S. energy extraction.

• The report documents more than 1,200 wells where PFAS or their precursors were used, across six states, from 2012 to 2020.
• It highlights internal EPA documents expressing environmental and health concerns, and the agency’s decision to proceed if companies included toxicity warnings in Material Safety Data Sheets.
• Physicians for Social Responsibility call for urgent public disclosure by both EPA and state regulators to enable communities to understand potential exposures.

Industry Response and Ongoing Risks

The fossil fuel industry disputes the scale and risk associated with PFAS use in fracking. The American Petroleum Institute asserts that:

• PFAS use remains limited and at extremely low concentrations in fracking fluids, which are mostly water and sand.
• Strict industry procedures for chemical transport, containment, and well-bore integrity are in place to mitigate risks.
• The industry pledges continued review and “science-based hazard assessments.”

However, multiple studies underline that even extremely low concentrations of certain PFAS can be harmful due to their tendency to bioaccumulate and persist through water systems and food chains.

Calls for Action and Policy Recommendations

• Full public disclosure of fracking chemicals is essential to environmental monitoring, health protection, and accountability.
• PFAS risk assessment and remediation must become a priority for regulators, with transparent data on where and when these chemicals were used.
• State and local water utilities need support to install treatment systems capable of removing PFAS from water supplies.
• Future chemical approvals should mandate comprehensive, independent toxicity testing, not rely primarily on company claims or voluntary testing.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What are PFAS and why are they called “forever chemicals”?

PFAS are a family of more than 9,000 synthetic compounds with strong carbon-fluorine bonds that do not break down in the environment or living organisms, leading to persistence and bioaccumulation—hence the nickname “forever chemicals.”

Why did the EPA approve PFAS chemicals for fracking?

The EPA approved several chemicals for fracking in 2011, relying on company data and limited initial studies, despite concerns among agency scientists about the chemicals’ breakdown products and their toxicity. Additional testing was recommended, but never mandated.

Where have PFAS chemicals from fracking been used?

According to investigative reports, at least 1,200 wells in six states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming) used PFAS or related chemicals between 2012 and 2020. The true scale may be higher due to redacted records and trade secret exemptions.

How can communities find out if PFAS was used near their water supply?

Unfortunately, due to trade secret exemptions and limited disclosure requirements, many communities lack access to complete information. Advocacy groups continue to pressure EPA and state regulators for full transparency.

What health problems are linked to PFAS exposure?

PFAS exposure is associated with an increased risk for cancer, reproductive and developmental harms, immune system dysfunction, liver and kidney disease, thyroid disruption, and elevated cholesterol.

Can PFAS be removed from drinking water?

Conventional treatment methods do not filter out PFAS. Advanced technologies such as activated carbon, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange can reduce levels, but these solutions are costly and not universally available.

Conclusion: A Watershed Moment for Fracking Transparency and Environmental Health

The unveiling of the EPA’s 2011 decision marks a turning point in the national conversation about environmental risk, corporate secrecy, and regulatory responsibility. As the nation grapples with the consequences of a decade of hidden deployments of “forever chemicals” in fracking, the calls for full transparency, public health protections, and robust independent oversight grow ever more urgent.