PFAS in US tap water
EPA's final UCMR 5 results: 9,934 community water systems tested for 29 PFAS from 2023 to 2025. 1,099 systems serving 54.2 million people had at least one entry-point average above a 2024 federal limit.
National report: what EPA's final UCMR 5 data shows →
State-by-state results, the largest systems above a limit, and how our counts compare with EPA's. Dated, with data and a suggested citation.
The limits
| PFAS | Limit | Systems over |
|---|---|---|
| PFOA | 4 ppt | 755 |
| PFOS | 4 ppt | 849 |
| PFHxS · proposed for rescission | 10 ppt | 63 |
| PFNA · proposed for rescission | 10 ppt | 9 |
| HFPO-DA (GenX) · proposed for rescission | 10 ppt | 8 |
| PFAS Hazard Index · proposed for rescission | 1 | 77 |
Largest systems above a PFAS limit
- MDWASA – Main System2.4 million people · Groundwater · FloridaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected · PFNA detected
- Philadelphia Water Department1.6 million people · Surface water · PennsylvaniaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFNA detected
- Fairfax County Water Authority1.1 million people · Surface water · VirginiaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS detected
- Suffolk County Water Authority1.1 million people · Groundwater · New YorkPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected · PFNA detected · 1 health-based violation since 2016
- PRASA Metropolitano1.1 million people · Surface water · Puerto RicoPFOS above limitAlso: Total trihalomethanes (TTHM) violations · Haloacetic acids (HAA5) violations · Coliform bacteria violations
- City of Fort Worth955,900 people · Surface water · TexasPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS above limit · PFAS Hazard Index above limit · 1 health-based violation since 2016
- Aqua Pennsylvania Main System822,600 people · Surface water · PennsylvaniaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · Coliform bacteria violation · PFHxS detected
- Cincinnati Public Water System800,000 people · Surface water · OhioPFOS above limit
- Veolia Water New Jersey Hackensack792,713 people · Surface water · New JerseyPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected · 1 health-based violation since 2016
- El Paso Water Utilities747,168 people · Surface water · TexasPFOS above limitAlso: PFHxS detected · Lithium above screening level
- City of Tampa Water Department733,886 people · Surface water · FloridaPFOS above limitAlso: PFOA detected · PFHxS detected
- Palm Beach County Water Utilities671,114 people · Groundwater · FloridaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · Coliform bacteria violation · PFHxS detected
- New Jersey American Water – Raritan615,430 people · Surface water · New JerseyPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected · Lithium above screening level
- City of Fresno545,970 people · Surface water · CaliforniaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS above limit · PFAS Hazard Index above limit
- City of Sacramento Main527,979 people · Surface water · CaliforniaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS above limit · PFAS Hazard Index above limit
- Hillsborough County Water Resources – South-Central515,012 people · Purchased surface water · FloridaPFOS above limit
- Truckee Meadows Water Authority442,000 people · Surface water · NevadaPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected · Lithium above screening level
- Regional Water Authority418,900 people · Surface water · ConnecticutPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit
- New Jersey American Water – Coastal North377,613 people · Surface water · New JerseyPFOA above limitAlso: 1 health-based violation since 2016
- City of Vancouver373,047 people · Groundwater · WashingtonPFOA above limitAlso: PFOS above limit · PFHxS detected
By state
Each state links to its dated PFAS report: chart, rankings, downloadable data and a citation. National report →
| State | Tested | Above limit | People served |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | 394 | 124 | 9.7 million |
| California | 691 | 129 | 8.9 million |
| New Jersey | 245 | 110 | 5.1 million |
| Pennsylvania | 360 | 85 | 4.2 million |
| Texas | 1130 | 28 | 2.8 million |
| North Carolina | 285 | 66 | 2.5 million |
| South Carolina | 163 | 53 | 2 million |
| New York | 322 | 31 | 1.9 million |
| Virginia | 164 | 12 | 1.8 million |
| Ohio | 331 | 35 | 1.5 million |
| Puerto Rico | 96 | 15 | 1.5 million |
| Alabama | 307 | 56 | 1.4 million |
| Massachusetts | 261 | 75 | 1.3 million |
| Georgia | 252 | 27 | 1.3 million |
| Connecticut | 62 | 29 | 1.2 million |
| Washington | 245 | 20 | 1.2 million |
| Arizona | 159 | 21 | 845,012 |
| Delaware | 34 | 11 | 637,113 |
| Nevada | 37 | 3 | 488,064 |
| Illinois | 479 | 13 | 353,817 |
| Tennessee | 275 | 17 | 344,152 |
| Minnesota | 197 | 10 | 270,387 |
| Oklahoma | 167 | 8 | 250,611 |
| Alaska | 28 | 2 | 226,251 |
| Oregon | 123 | 9 | 226,133 |
| New Hampshire | 49 | 9 | 222,708 |
| Michigan | 311 | 5 | 219,330 |
| Rhode Island | 26 | 7 | 207,864 |
| Kentucky | 230 | 9 | 199,762 |
| Wisconsin | 196 | 18 | 184,985 |
| Indiana | 219 | 6 | 166,389 |
| Maryland | 76 | 13 | 162,211 |
| Guam | 5 | 1 | 139,207 |
| Colorado | 158 | 4 | 101,207 |
| West Virginia | 99 | 10 | 99,088 |
| Iowa | 151 | 1 | 85,791 |
| Mississippi | 235 | 5 | 84,633 |
| Nebraska | 51 | 3 | 83,158 |
| Kansas | 102 | 3 | 77,468 |
| Missouri | 227 | 6 | 73,399 |
| Northern Mariana Islands | 1 | 1 | 48,524 |
| Maine | 39 | 2 | 22,328 |
| Idaho | 61 | 2 | 21,500 |
| Utah | 127 | 2 | 14,975 |
| Wyoming | 32 | 1 | 10,330 |
| Louisiana | 263 | 1 | 6,354 |
| New Mexico | 77 | 1 | 2,286 |
| American Samoa | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Arkansas | 172 | 0 | 0 |
| District of Columbia | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Hawaii | 44 | 0 | 0 |
| Montana | 40 | 0 | 0 |
| North Dakota | 41 | 0 | 0 |
| South Dakota | 55 | 0 | 0 |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Vermont | 34 | 0 | 0 |
Questions
What are the PFAS limits for drinking water?
The April 2024 federal rule set limits of 4 ppt each for PFOA and PFOS, 10 ppt each for PFHxS, PFNA and HFPO-DA (GenX), and a Hazard Index of 1 for mixtures of PFHxS, PFNA, GenX and PFBS. In May 2026 EPA proposed keeping the PFOA and PFOS limits with a compliance date of 2031, and rescinding the other four. That proposal is not final.
Does a result above the limit mean my water is in violation?
No. Systems don't have to meet the PFAS limits until 2029 (or 2031 if EPA finalizes its proposal), and compliance will be based on four quarters of compliance monitoring. EPA says UCMR 5 results do not indicate compliance. They do show which systems have work to do.
How were these results calculated?
We average each entry point's UCMR 5 results (non-detects as zero, only full sets of 2 or 4 samples) and compare them to the limits with EPA's rounding, the same method EPA uses in its July 2026 data summary. Our counts match EPA's published table. Method.
What if my system was not tested?
EPA tested every community system serving more than 3,300 people and a sample of smaller ones. If yours was not tested there is no federal result: not tested is not the same as not detected. Ask your utility or state, or test your own tap with a certified lab.
Source: U.S. EPA drinking water records and PFAS testing (UCMR 5). How we read the data.