Comment submitted by Laura Georgi

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2025-1742 I disagree with the blanket extension. Just because SOME public water systems need more time to comply, and the EPA has hollowed out its staffing to the point that it doesn’t think it can handle the many expected requests for extensions from individual PWS, these are not adequate reasons for granting a nation-wide extension of time to remove what are acknowledged to be dangerous chemicals from our drinking water. The PWS that are able to comply with the current (already extended) deadline should have to do so, for their customers’ sakes. I recognize the preposterousness of our present system of rendering water fit to drink and then using significant quantities of that water to flush toilets, and I approve of more targeted means of selectively cleaning the water that people actually need to be fit to drink. I expect that such an approach would make the proposed blanket extension less necessary. The efforts enumerated in the proposed rule aimed at preventing these pollutants from entering the water supply in the first place are also laudable. Once again, this administration is asserting without justification that EO 13045 doesn’t apply. The 2024 final rule found the opposite: that PFOA/PFOS do indeed pose a disproportionate risk to the health of children. But this administration also here again refuses to incorporate costs associated with illnesses and deaths into its cost-benefit analysis.