Map Shows Drinking Water ‘Forever Chemicals' as EPA Plans to Scrap Limits

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is looking to scrap regulations for four types of ‘forever chemicals’ in drinking water systems, as well as giving systems more time to comply with other measures, sparking concern from public health experts.

On Monday, the EPA announced two new proposals that seek to revoke Biden-era regulations on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in America’s drinking water systems.

The first would rescind regulations of four different types of PFAS chemicals, which the agency said had been implemented via an “unlawful procedure”. The second would allow eligible drinking water systems to apply for up to two additional years-shifting deadlines from 2029 to 2031-to comply with limits the agency set in 2024 for two PFAS chemicals: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS).

Outcry Among Experts

“This is a terrible situation,” Phil Brown, a professor of sociology and health science at Northeastern University, told Newsweek. “Many scientists and affected communities have worked for years to get the standards.”

Courtney Carignan, an exposure scientist and environmental epidemiologist at Michigan State University, told Newsweek that the harmful effects of the PFAS chemicals with regulatory limits are “well documented”.

She added that one these chemicals can stay in the body for over a decade, which is “especially harmful for babies since those with higher PFAS exposures have lower birth weights and higher rates of fever and infection.”

Just a Correction of Biden’s ‘Unlawful Actions’

However, the EPA has told Newsweek that the first proposal–rescinding regulations for four PFAS chemicals–is “solely meant to correct the Biden EPA's unlawful actions,” and that once that has been done, the agency said it would “take steps to follow through on its commitment to evaluate additional PFAS in drinking water for future regulation.”

“While the EPA cannot pre-determine the outcome, it is possible that the result could be more stringent requirements,” the agency said.

The EPA added that, in regard to the second proposal, the Biden EPA's PFAS regulations for PFOA and PFOS “mandated totally unrealistic and unworkable timelines,” and that “many water systems simply need more time to comply with drinking water limits on PFOA and PFOS.”

“The logic here is simple–no one is helped by unworkable regulations that raise costs while delivering zero benefits,” the agency said.

What Are PFAS Chemicals?

PFAS chemicals are a group of thousands of different substances that are widely used across various industries and consumer products, and have been used for many years. They are found in things such as nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, stain-resistant furniture, and many others, in fact, even smartwatch wristbands.

However, more research has revealed the potential harm the substances pose to public health, and the chemicals are now classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Since the classification, research has continued to unravel their potential health risks, such as thyroid disease, liver disease, weakened immunity and many other health problems.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit, non-partisan environmental advocacy group, also previously shared a study showing that more than 50,000 lifetime cancer cases in the U.S. could be prevented if drinking water treatment were developed to be able to handle a “multi-contaminant approach, tackling several pollutants at once.”

How Do PFAS Chemicals Get Into Drinking Water?

Given their popular use, these chemicals are being increasingly found in America’s water supply (and in the human body) which has amplified concerns around enhancing regulation of the chemicals to reduce the potential public health impact. The EWG estimates that around 200 million Americans could have PFAS in their tap water.

PFAS chemicals do not break down naturally in the environment, meaning they can find their way into drinking water sources and wastewater. They can also pass through many traditional water filtering systems, as only advanced, and more expensive, measures can effectively remove them from water.

Which States Have High Levels Of PFAS Chemicals In Water Systems?

According to the EWG’s PFAS contamination map, Northeastern states, some Southern states and those along the West Coast have particularly high levels of PFAS concentrations in drinking water systems, many with levels above the EPA’s proposed limit.

For North Carolina, this update could be particularly worrying. The Chemours’ plant in Fayetteville has a documented history of releasing harmful PFAS chemicals into the Cape Fear River and surrounding environment, and North Carolinians are deeply concerned about the issue.

North Carolina currently has no enforceable state-level drinking water limits for PFAS, while having some of the highest levels of PFAS in public water per multiple nationwide studies, according to the grassroots community movement Clean Cape Fear.

Recent polling commissioned by the University of North Carolina Wilmington in partnership with Clean Cape Fear, found that over 70 percent of North Carolinians are concerned about the EPA delaying or canceling PFAS limits, with over 40 percent reporting major concerns. More than 80 percent of North Carolinians also said they believe the safety of tap water should be prioritized even if it raises costs.

Experts Voice Concern About The EPA’s Proposals

As contaminants in water systems can pose risks to public health, particularly at levels higher than legally enforced by the EPA-and some even argue that these levels should be lowered-advocacy groups and experts have in the past called for advancing the treatment of drinking water to maximize public safety.

In light of this update, experts have said they are concerned. Brown said that allowing water systems to be granted additional time for compliance means that “people will be contaminated for those additional years,” and that dropping regulation for the other four PFAS chemicals “is especially bad because a very large portion of North Carolina is contaminated with high levels of it from the Chemours facility.”

He added that PFAS chemicals are a “major contaminant” and that the “science is so strong about the health effects,” meaning the EPA’s proposals are a “terrible blow to public health.”

Carignan also told Newsweek the measures “concern” her. “A lot of time, energy and government funding went into the development of the evidence-based PFAS [Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)] that the EPA is rescinding.” Though some states have their own enforceable MCLs for PFAS, many others do not, she added.

“That means if you live in one of those states, your water system isn’t required to test for PFAS and they also aren’t required to reduce high levels.”

Estimates by the National Resources Defense Council have indicated that over 70 million Americans are served by water systems with at least one PFAS above EPA health-based thresholds, while 30 million people are served by water systems exceeding limits for one of the four PFAS chemicals the EPA is trying to roll back.

“The immune system is especially sensitive to these chemicals,” she added. “This has been demonstrated by many studies, including our recent study that found fewer protective antibodies produced among people with higher exposures to PFHxS” – one of the chemicals the EPA is looking to rescind regulations for.

Elsie Sunderland, a professor of environmental chemistry at Harvard University told Newsweek that she was “very concerned about the rollback of drinking water standards for four PFAS,” as they are “present in the drinking water of tens of millions of people across the country and are still being actively used in commerce, unlike the two legacy PFAS that are being regulated (PFOS and PFOA).”

She also said that allowing water systems more time to comply in the second proposal is “basically the same as agreeing to continue to expose populations to these toxic chemicals for a longer period.”

Progress Has Still Been Made On PFAS

David Savitz, a professor of epidemiology, obstetrics, gynecology and pediatrics at Brown University, told Newsweek that it was also important to remember that levels of PFOA and PFOS in the U.S. have “declined substantially as manufacturing ceased and a variety of other measures were taken, mainly identifying and reducing exposure in locations where water levels have been elevated in the past.”

He added that the focus should be on “hot spots,” where “water providers that continue to have markedly elevated levels of persistent forms of PFAS.”

In relation to the EPA’s second proposal on giving water systems more time to comply with regulations, Savitz also said that it’s worth noting that mitigating exposure to PFAS chemicals in drinking water is “extremely challenging and can be very expensive,” so that there may well be some water systems among the tens of thousands of individual water systems that “will find it difficult to respond quickly.”

That said, he added it would be a concern if water systems with “extremely high levels choose to ignore that and use the delay to buy time since this would not just result in short-term exposure but given the persistence of these chemicals, delay the long process of reducing blood levels in the population.”

2026 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

This story was originally published May 19, 2026 at 11:58 AM.