AAAS EPI Center and GLLC Roundtables

PFAS Risk Communications | AAAS EPI Center

Ultimately, members of the public may not support and adopt proposed solutions to manage risk. For instance, there may be demands from the public to take action that is not technically or financially feasible, or uncertainty of human health impacts may lead people to oppose proposed action until a federal or state drinking water standard can be established. If people do not perceive a risk, they may not see a need to participate in necessary solutions 3 . Risk communication can prepare the public to change their behavior or support solutions such as water treatment or remediation projects that are effective but also expensive.

Different levels of risk may require different response strategies. Table 1 provides examples of theoretical PFAS situations with proposed government official or utility responses. These examples are provided as reference only and should be customized or expanded for each situation based on the stakeholders, health impacts, and risk level.

32

Made with FlippingBook Online document