Looking back at Ohio water pollution policies

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — State Representative Tristan Rader (D-Lakewood) remembers the coal-fired power plant in his hometown of Lorain. 

“When it was fired up, there would be like a little bit of dust layer laying on all of our cars in the mornings, usually in the wintertime when we needed the power for heat, or the summertime when it got really hot,” Raders said. “We’d have this thin film of coal ash. That coal ash contains chromium-6, which is a known, very toxic carcinogen.” 

  Earlier in April, Rader and Representative Allison Russo (D-Upper Arlington) introduced legislation to address the presence of chromium-6 and other polyfluoroalkyl substances—commonly called PFAS or “forever chemicals”— in Ohio’s lakes, waterways and drinking supply. According to Director John Logue of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, it’s a tricky problem to solve. 

“They have the name ‘forever.’ They don’t easily break down, so they stay in the environment,” Logue said. “It stays with us. As we’re drinking it over time, it’s kind of a cumulative exposure type of situation. There’s certainly been links to cancers and other kinds of health impacts.” 

Logue says there are a number of sites in Ohio potentially contaminated by forever chemicals. Since 2019, the Ohio EPA has tested water systems all over the state, hunting for “hotspots” and then backtracking to try and find the source of the contamination. 

 Sometimes contaminants can be traced back to a single point of origin, like in the case of the Washington Works facility in Parkersburg, West Virginia, owned by the chemical company DuPont. In 2018, then-Attorney General Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) sued DuPont for releasing forever chemicals from that facility into the Ohio River, contaminating the drinking water in some of the riverside communities. 

 But Rader notes that forever chemicals can also come from household items, “like nonstick cookware, plastics, things we use on an everyday basis that end up getting into our water supply” through rainwater runoff. 

If passed, House Bill 815 would require the state EPA to adopt strict rules for how much forever chemical contamination can be allowed in drinking water. Water utility companies would be responsible for keeping those chemicals out of the drinking supply, or removing them through filtration. 

“Evidence has shown that PFAS and other known chemicals increase the risk of cancer, reduce fertility in women, interfere with hormones, and negatively affect the immune system and development of infants and children,” Russo said in a statement. “These are preventable outcomes with commonsense standards, and it is the state’s responsibility to protect the health and well-being of Ohioans.”

 Rader is concerned the federal government is “going backwards” on forever chemical regulations. Last year, the US EPA announced that it would delay enforcement of its own restrictions for drinking water contaminants. 

“This is a fundamental right, that people have clean, safe drinking water,” Rader said. “And it’s under threat right now because the feds are trying to roll back some really important regulations that keep our water safe and keep these forever chemicals out of our water supply.” 

When announcing their proposal, Rader and Russo referenced Ohio’s “long and unfortunate history” with forever chemical contamination—specifically citing the DuPont lawsuit, and the company’s $110 million settlement with the state in 2023.

In early April, Gov. DeWine celebrated the Ohio Controlling Board’s decision to release $65 million out of that settlement, which will go towards remediating contaminated drinking supplies in six counties along the Ohio River. 

 “Access to safe drinking water is essential for every Ohio community,” DeWine said in a statement. “These funding awards will be used to make critical improvements to local water systems that will protect public health and strengthen drinking water infrastructure for years to come.”

Logue said the EPA has been preparing for years to begin mitigation projects in the communities impacted by the DuPont contaminants. The agency plans to address pollutants at the source of the drinking water systems, provide treatment at water plants, and connect individuals and communities with uncontaminated public waterworks. 

Hilliard-area officials seek safety plan for proposed data center energy system
Controlling Board members of both parties were supportive of the EPA’s plans, but stressed the state needs to take forever chemicals seriously. 

“As a lead poison survivor, I want to make sure that these forever chemicals are actually addressed to mitigate it as soon as possible,” Rep. Dontavius Jarrells (D-Columbus) said. “Is this enough money that we’re going to need to actually get the job done?” 

 Sen. Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland) said he expects $65 million will ultimately not be enough to fully remediate the DuPont pollutants, and that the state will have to continuously monitor the level of contamination. 

“You can’t do remediation and know how you’re doing unless you’re continually testing,” Cirino said. “I suspect that the testing will continue until the job is done and probably should go on even periodically after that to make sure that the remediation was appropriate.” 

Other state efforts to address water pollution have faced legislative resistance. Last month, DeWine brought up the possibility of putting a bond issue on the November ballot, allowing Ohioans to vote on funding his H2Ohio program. Established in 2019 as a response to toxic algae blooms in Lake Erie, the program has expanded in recent years to combat pollution in the Ohio River and remove lead pipes from community water systems around the state. 

But House Speaker Rep. Matt Huffman (R-Lima) immediately rejected DeWine’s bond issue proposal, and Russo and Rader acknowledge their bill is a do-over of legislation introduced in a previous General Assembly which “died in committee after receiving only one hearing.” 

 “We’ve known this for many years. These forever chemicals that we have, through industry, through different ways and means,  gotten into our water supply,” Rader said. “And yet there doesn’t seem to be a lot of action or a lot of haste.” 

H.B. 815 is still awaiting a committee assignment and first hearing.