New EPA data show millions more exposed to 'forever chemicals' in drinking water
New Data released by the Environmental Protection Agency shows more than 11 million additional people have the toxic “forever chemicals” known as PFAS in their drinking water.?
The findings come from tests of the nation’s drinking water supply conducted as part of the EPA’s?Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, or UCMR 5, which requires water utilities across the U.S. to test drinking water for 29 different PFAS compounds.?
This round of data confirms the presence of one or more PFAS compounds at?2,394 locations. Added to previously collected UCMR and state data, the results show that over 143 million Americans are at risk from drinking water tainted by toxic PFAS. More results are expected in the coming months.?
Revoking or weakening?new drinking water standards for six PFAS?– as many supporters of President-elect Donald Trump have proposed – could leave nearly 46 million with no protection, according to EWG’s analysis of results reported so far.?
UCMR 5 test results show that a staggering 45.7 millon people in?states with no PFAS drinking water regulations?are now exposed to levels of toxic PFAS above the EPA’s maximum contaminant level. With no state-level safeguards, these millions must rely solely on the federal standard as protection from the health risks of PFAS-contaminated drinking water.
And the new data contributes to information showing 8,865?locations?with PFAS detected in their water – across all 50 states, the District of Columbia and four U.S. territories.?
“The EPA’s latest report confirms what scientists have feared: PFAS contamination is a public health disaster,” said?David Andrews, Ph.D., deputy director of investigations and a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group. “Drinking water is a major source of PFAS exposure. The sheer number of contaminated sites shows that these chemicals are likely present in most of the U.S. water supply.”
Due to the public health risk and national concern, the?EPA labeled?two of the most harmful PFAS as?hazardous substances, which triggered?$9 billion in funding?for water treatment. The need for stronger, faster action has never been more urgent.
“President Trump’s election puts our PFAS protections in jeopardy,” said?Scott Faber, EWG’s senior vice president for government affairs. “Rolling back the PFAS drinking water standard?would mean letting Americans continue to drink water contaminated with chemicals linked to cancer, immune suppression and developmental issues.”?
A?2020 study?by EWG scientists estimated that more than?200 million Americans?are
exposed to PFAS levels of 1 part per trillion, or ppt, or higher in their drinking water, underscoring the scale of this public health crisis. The latest UCMR 5 data and the recent?U.S. Geographical Survey study?showing widespread groundwater contamination further support EWG’s ongoing efforts?to map PFAS?contamination in water supplies across the country.
“Almost everywhere we look, we find more PFAS,” said Andrews.
The EPA plans to release additional data on PFAS in drinking water between now and 2025 as more systems conduct tests. As of October only about 70 percent of systems had reported any results, and just 40 percent had reported a?full set of test results.
Widespread PFAS pollution?
With a new Trump administration poised to dismantle environmental protections, weakened oversight could grant polluters unchecked freedom to release these toxic forever chemicals into U.S. waterways, endangering millions of Americans.
EWG estimates?nearly 30,000 industrial polluters?could be releasing PFAS into the environment, including into sources of drinking water. Restrictions on industrial discharges would lower the amount of PFAS drinking water utilities must treat.
The Trump administration’s track record suggests that regulations may be weakened or eliminated entirely, allowing industries to discharge PFAS and other hazardous chemicals with little to no accountability.
In August, EWG?proposed a comprehensive plan?for steps the next administration should take to address toxic PFAS. Building on the Biden-Harris administration’s strides in regulating these harmful substances, EWG’s report outlines a bold agenda, with key roles for agencies, including the EPA, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Department of Defense, to ramp up their efforts to confront PFAS contamination. It also calls for Congress to boost funding for these efforts and outlines urgent actions for tackling the growing PFAS environmental and public health crisis.
Health risks of PFAS exposure
PFAS are toxic at extremely low levels. They are known as forever chemicals because once released into the environment, they do not break down, and they can build up in the body. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?has detected PFAS in the blood?of 99 percent of Americans,?including newborn babies.?
Very low doses of PFAS have been linked to?suppression of the immune system. Studies show exposure to PFAS can also?increase the risk of cancer,?harm fetal development?and?reduce vaccine effectiveness.?
For over 30 years, EWG has been dedicated to safeguarding families from harmful environmental exposures, holding polluters accountable, and advocating for clean, safe water.
“Everyone deserves access to clean water, and it shouldn’t fall to consumers alone to filter PFAS from their tap water,” said Andrews.?
“There are home water filters designed to reduce PFAS levels. They also help remove other contaminants, providing a broader benefit. But regular filter replacement is key. An old filter can make PFAS levels worse than untreated tap water,” he said.?
For people who know of or suspect the presence of PFAS in their tap water,?a home filtration system?is the most efficient way to reduce exposure. EWG researchers tested the performance of?10 popular water filters?to evaluate how well each reduced PFAS levels detected in home tap water. EWG’s?Tap Water Database?is another helpful resource consumers can use to find out whether PFAS and other toxic chemicals contaminate their water.?