Millions of Americans rely on drinking water systems that have recently exceeded new limits for toxic “forever chemicals” that the Environmental Protection Agency announced on Wednesday.
USA TODAY found 608 systems across the country that have measured PFAS, or per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances, at or above the newly established limits since last year. Together, they serve nearly 35 million people.
Another 13 million people drink water from hundreds of other systems that have recently detected the chemicals at levels that require reporting to the EPA, but not quite enough to surpass the new limits, according to USA TODAY’s analysis.
These results represent one-time samples, and the EPA wouldn’t require water systems to make changes unless their running annual average passes the new limits.
The chemicals are nearly indestructible and have been used widely for decades in food packaging, firefighting foam, and other nonstick and water-repellent items. PFAS can eventually build up in the environment and human bodies, increasing the risk of cancer and other serious health problems.
Last year, the EPA began requiring thousands of water systems to test for more than two dozen types of PFAS, in the most widescale effort ever to track their spread across the United States.
However, USA TODAY’s analysis shows more than 200 large cities’ systems aren’t yet available in the EPA data set, including Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Baltimore and Philadelphia. The number of affected Americans will surely grow as the EPA publishes quarterly updates to its data.
The EPA estimates the new limits could affect up to 100 million people.
Map: Where water systems reported PFAS levels above new EPA limits
This map shows water systems that tested at or above newly established PFAS limits since last year. It’s based on boundaries developed by SimpleLab, a water-testing company. Click on a system to see which pollutants surpassed the limits and how much the most concentrated pollutant exceeded those levels. Don’t see a map? Click here.
Among the places where data is available, USA TODAY’s analysis shows large cities have exceeded PFAS limits at higher rates than smaller places. About a third of water systems serving over 100,000 people have surpassed the new limits. For the smallest systems, it’s 1 in 10.
Again, these results represent single points in time – in some cases just one result that passed over the new limits among several tests. For example, the EPA data shows Louisville, Kentucky, measured PFOA at about double its limit one time in the half-dozen samples reported last year.
“The rule is a running annual average, and one sample doesn’t dictate public health,” said Kelley Dearing Smith, vice president of communications and marketing at Louisville Water Co. “It’s an indicator.”
She pointed out that Louisville’s running average for PFOA has been 1.9 parts per trillion, below the new limit of 4.
It’s the long-term trend that matters, according to David Trueba, a chemist and president of Revive Environmental, which has patented new technology to destroy PFAS.
“If I go to my doctor, and he tells me I have high blood pressure, OK. Is that because he tested once? Or is it because of a monthly average over many data points?” Trueba said. “If (PFAS) is consistent, pervasive and concentrated, above a certain level, that’s what makes the difference.”
Hundreds of systems within the EPA data show the same water sampling sites exceeded the new limits across more than one test date last year. For example, the Suffolk County Water Authority on Long Island, New York, reported one sample tested almost double the limit for the chemical PFOS in March 2023. The same well’s result increased to more than four times the limit in November. Authority officials did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.
Across the country, in Fresno, California, the water utility found PFOS in one well seven times over the limit in March 2023 and again at 3.5 times over last September. In total, Fresno had 11 wells report multiple measurements over the new limits in the last year.
Chad Colby, water system supervisor at Fresno’s department of public utilities, declined to comment.
Other water systems have told USA TODAY they suspect their recent sample results to be false positives. That can happen, Trueba said. He estimates error rates may be as high as one in every five tests. However, with the new PFAS standards, he said cities will need to plan ahead.
“(Faulty tests) as an excuse is no longer going to be valid with the maximum contaminant loads,” Trueba said, noting it’s a best practice for cities to take multiple samples in case something goes wrong with the first test. “Instead of pulling one bottle, I should pull three.”
“You can’t explain your way out of compliance,” he added.
How much will it cost to meet PFAS rules?
There are thousands of forever chemicals, but the EPA has now put standards on six of the most common and most studied. Nearly 7,000 water systems may have to eventually take action to remove these PFAS from their water, according to EPA estimates.
Doing so isn’t cheap.
Installing new equipment to get in line with the new standards could cost $3 million for a medium-sized city, Trueba estimates.
Collectively, the EPA estimates it will cost $1.5 billion per year for America’s 66,000 public drinking water systems to monitor their water for PFAS, inform customers of the results and find new sources of water or install equipment to treat their water.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included $9 billion to help places struggling with contamination from PFAS and other “emerging contaminants.” The law also includes $12 billion for general drinking water fixes, but Trueba said all that investment likely won’t solve every community’s PFAS problem.
“There is zero funding for the ongoing operations and maintenance costs associated with keeping up on this,” Trueba said, noting some cities will have to raise customers’ rates to afford it.
But many more utilities likely would have needed to raise rates had limits been set at levels the EPA suggested a year ago. Three of the PFAS chemicals that are harder to remove now have limits higher than originally proposed – at 10 parts per trillion, according to Shalene Thomas, a PFAS industry expert and emerging contaminants program manager at Battelle, a nonprofit research institute.
“These higher numbers should reduce the total number of impacted utilities,” Thomas said. “It will be a small moment of relief for the water utilities to see a double-digit” limit.
How long until the EPA can issue fines for PFAS?
The PFAS limits are now official, but the EPA is rolling them out in phases over the next several years to reduce the burden on cities, many of which have limited budgets and personnel.
“We’re not going to be able to react to this overnight,” said Rory Jones, director of the water department in Tampa, Florida, which measured PFOS and PFOA over the new limits multiple times last year.
In 2020, the utility began piloting a water treatment technology called suspended ion exchange, the first project of its kind in the U.S.
The pilot program showed promising results, Jones said, but expanding to a full-scale system will require time and money.
“I’m cautiously optimistic,” Jones said, referring to the initiative.
In terms of timing, water systems must complete their initial monitoring for PFAS within the next three years. Then, from 2027 to 2029, systems will continue monitoring their levels at least once annually and inform customers of the results and any violations. The EPA said they should begin looking for solutions if their levels consistently violate the new limits.
The limits can be enforced starting five years from now, but Trueba said the potential penalties for violating the limits are “uncharted territory.”
“You have seen penalties in the past of multimillion-dollar settlements to EPA for infractions against lead – Flint, Michigan, and other places, right?” Trueba said. “I don’t think monetary penalties are going to be at five years plus one day.”
Austin Fast is a data reporter on the USA TODAY investigations team and Cecilia Garzella is a data fellow. Contact Austin at afast@usatoday.com or @a_fast on X and Cecilia at cgarzella@gannett.com or @ceciliagarzella on X.
