The Environmental Audit Committee's Inquiry into Addressing the risks from Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) opened a Call for Evidence in May 2025. The IES National Contaminated Land Officers Group (NCLOG) and Land Condition Community (LCC) have submitted a response, based on the views of their members.
Read the full response on the IES website.
What does the call for evidence cover?
The Committee announced an inquiry into the risks of PFAS in April 2025, following increasing media interest in the impacts of these 'forever chemicals'.
The Call for Evidence asks 14 questions, including on understanding the threats and benefits from using PFAS, the current status of measures to address PFAS, the current regulatory regime for PFAS, and other countries' approach to monitoring and treating PFAS.
The joint NCLOG & LCC submission follows close working by the two communities on this issue; a joint roundtable on best practice for PFAS management was held in February, followed by a joint submission to a POSTnote on regulation and remediation of forever chemicals. The IES has also published articles on PFAS contamination of groundwater in 2024, and a multi-disciplinary response to PFAS in 2023.
What are the key messages from the response?
The key message of the NCLOG & LCC response highlights that the existing regulatory regime for PFAS is not fit-for-purpose:
"(It) is not clear who is responsible for managing PFAS contamination when it is found, what action should be taken, and who pays for the treatment."
It also sets out the impacts of the current lack of clarity:
"NCLOG stresses that local authorities are hesitant to investigate or monitor PFAS because they do not have a clear or funded plan to address it if it is found. Practitioners working as consultants within the IES Land Condition Community have seen a clear trend that clients are hesitant to move forward with projects where they do not know what they are monitoring or what the outcomes of that monitoring could be if there is not a consistent approach from regulators. This lack of clarity is stopping developments where PFAS is a factor, including critical projects such as new towns."
As well as suggesting a way forward:
"Clear and consistent regulation needs to be developed across permitting, drinking water standards, contaminated land, waste and planning. Regulation needs to be pragmatic and balance the need for action against the reality of the significant existing legacy contamination. To support this, statutory guidance is required to ensure consistency and certainty of what is being required. Local authorities and the Environment Agency need to be sufficiently trained and resourced to implement this in an effective way."
The response also elaborates on several key points, which are borne out in more detail across the response:
For more information, read the full response.
Getting more involved in IES policy positions
The IES puts members at the heart of our approach to environmental policy engagement. Our response to the Call for Evidence was based on input from a joint NCLOG & LCC working group with perspectives from local government, industry and consultancy. The best way to find out about future opportunities to get involved is to join our member communities.
