Texas PFAS contamination has been documented at more than two dozen sites statewide, concentrated around military bases where firefighting foam was used for decades, petrochemical facilities along the Houston Ship Channel, and farmland treated with sewage-derived biosolids. These per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are called “forever chemicals” because their carbon-fluorine bonds resist heat, water, oil, and nearly every natural breakdown process, so they persist in soil and groundwater indefinitely. In April 2024 the EPA set the first enforceable national limits in drinking water, capping PFOA and PFOS at 4.0 parts per trillion, with Texas public water systems originally facing monitoring by 2027 and treatment by 2029.1Environmental Protection Agency. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) What you can do about it depends on where your water comes from and whether you live near a known source.
Why Exposure Matters
PFAS accumulate in blood over time. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry links specific compounds to higher cholesterol (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFDA), kidney and testicular cancer (PFOA), weaker antibody response to vaccines in children (PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFDA), pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia (PFOA, PFOS), small decreases in infant birth weight (PFOA, PFOS), and altered liver enzyme markers (PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS).2Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. How PFAS Impacts Your Health Animal studies add liver damage, immune suppression, birth defects, and delayed development.3Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Health Effects – PFAS Information for Clinicians Thyroid disease and breast cancer have shown suggestive but inconsistent evidence.
Where Contamination Has Been Documented
Military Bases
Firefighting foam used in training and emergencies for half a century is the largest known source. A 2022 Department of Defense report identified more than two dozen Texas installations with preliminary assessments or remedial investigations underway or planned for PFAS.4Department of Defense. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Cleanup – Schedule, Status, and Cost Estimates The list spans Joint Base San Antonio (Lackland, Randolph, Fort Sam Houston, Camp Bullis), Ellington Field, the former Bergstrom Air Force Base (now Austin-Bergstrom International Airport), Kelly, Dyess, Goodfellow, Sheppard, Laughlin, and Reese Air Force Bases, Fort Bliss, Fort Hood, Red River Army Depot, Lone Star and Longhorn Army Ammunition Plants, and the Naval Air Stations at Corpus Christi, Dallas, Fort Worth JRB, and Kingsville.
Levels at some locations are extreme. Groundwater sampling at Ellington Field’s old fire station found PFOS at 47 micrograms per liter and PFOA at 14 micrograms per liter, orders of magnitude above drinking water thresholds.5Air National Guard. Ellington Field Air National Guard Base Relative Risk Site Evaluation Most sites remain in early investigation stages, and actual cleanup at many is likely years away. The San Antonio remedial investigation alone is estimated to run through 2028.
The Houston Ship Channel
The 2019 Intercontinental Terminals Company fire in Deer Park released nearly 5 million liters of firefighting foam, and a breach in the containment dike sent foam into Buffalo Bayou and the ship channel. Researchers measured PFOS and 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate spiking for roughly three months before declining.6ScienceDirect. Temporal and Spatial Analysis of Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Surface Waters of Houston Ship Channel Following a Large-Scale Industrial Fire Incident Beyond that acute event, chronic low-level discharges from the corridor’s refineries, manufacturing plants, and industrial firefighting training grounds contribute to persistent sediment and surface water contamination that is difficult to pin to any single source.
Farmland Treated With Biosolids
Biosolids are the nutrient-rich solids left after wastewater treatment, often spread on farmland as fertilizer. Treatment plants are not designed to remove PFAS, so the chemicals concentrate in the resulting sludge. Johnson County, south of Fort Worth, became the Texas flashpoint. Synagro Technologies contracted with Fort Worth in 2019 to produce about 26,500 tons of biosolid fertilizer annually and distribute it to landowners across twelve counties. After a 2022 application near Grandview, TCEQ investigators found PFAS in neighboring surface water at tens of thousands of parts per trillion. Ranchers reported losing cattle and sued in early 2024, alleging the product was defective and that risks were not disclosed.
An EPA draft risk assessment released in January 2025 found that PFOA and PFOS in land-applied biosolids at concentrations as low as 1 part per billion can exceed acceptable human health risk thresholds for certain farming and pasture scenarios.7Environmental Protection Agency. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Sewage Sludge Even so, no federal rule requires testing sewage sludge for PFAS before land application. Texas has not passed such a requirement either; HB 1674, which would have set strict concentration limits and criminal penalties for selling contaminated fertilizer, died in committee in 2024.
If You’re on a Public Water System
The EPA’s 2024 rule covers six compounds. The individual maximum contaminant levels are 4.0 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS, and 10 parts per trillion each for PFHxS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA (GenX).8Federal Register. PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation Mixtures of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS are governed by a Hazard Index: the system divides each detected level by its reference concentration and adds the results, and a score of 1.5 or higher before rounding exceeds the limit. Systems that find violations must notify consumers.
The deadlines are moving. In May 2025 the EPA announced it would keep the PFOA and PFOS MCLs but intends to extend compliance deadlines and establish a federal exemption framework.1Environmental Protection Agency. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Monitoring is still expected by 2027, but the window for installing treatment or finding alternative sources, originally 2029, could shift further out. Watch for your utility’s consumer confidence report and any public notice of exceedance.
If You Draw From a Private Well
The federal rule does not reach private wells. No Texas agency is required to test your well for PFAS or to warn you if contamination has been found nearby. Testing and treatment are on you.
Testing through an EPA-certified laboratory generally costs between $150 and $500 depending on how many compounds are analyzed. It makes the most sense if you live near a military base, an industrial facility that used firefighting foam, or farmland where biosolids have been applied. The Texas Water Development Board maintains a list of certified drinking water labs; confirm that the specific lab offers PFAS analysis using EPA Method 533 or 537.1.
If results come back above the MCLs, home treatment can bring levels down, but filter selection matters. Products certified under NSF/ANSI Standard 53 (activated carbon) or NSF/ANSI Standard 58 (reverse osmosis) can reduce PFAS below 20 parts per trillion when properly maintained. Look for the NSF certification mark along with a specific PFAS reduction claim, because not every carbon or reverse osmosis filter has been tested for these compounds. Whole-house systems that handle PFAS typically run $2,700 to $8,000 or more installed; under-sink reverse osmosis is cheaper but treats only one tap.9NSF. PFAS in Drinking Water
Lawsuits and Settlement Money
The Texas Attorney General has filed two actions. One targets manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam over harm to Texas lands and waterways.10Office of the Attorney General. Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues Manufacturers of Toxic PFAS Forever Chemicals for Falsely Advertising Household Products as Safe for Families The other names 3M, DuPont, Corteva, and related entities over consumer products sold under brands including Teflon, Stainmaster, and Scotchgard, alleging violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices–Consumer Protection Act and seeking civil penalties of $1 million or more plus attorney’s fees and injunctive relief.11Office of the Attorney General of Texas. State of Texas v. 3M Company, et al. – Plaintiffs Original Petition
Two national settlements offer direct funding to public water systems that detect PFAS. 3M agreed to pay up to $10.3 billion over 13 years.123M. 3M Resolves Claims by Public Water Suppliers, Supports Drinking Water Phase Two deadlines for Texas systems include a testing claims form due January 1, 2026, baseline testing completion by July 1, 2026, and action fund claims by July 31, 2026. Supplemental fund claims remain open through December 31, 2030.13Public Water Systems Settlement Program. Public Water Systems Settlement Program (3M) A separate $1.185 billion fund from Chemours (about $592 million), DuPont (about $400 million), and Corteva (about $193 million) is open to any public water system that has detected PFAS at any level or that is required to monitor under EPA rules; state- and federally-owned systems are excluded.14Corteva. Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Settlement Any Texas utility that has not yet engaged with these programs should act quickly; the January 2026 3M deadline is close.
Private well owners whose contamination traces to a specific industrial or military source may have claims of their own, but those run through separate litigation rather than the water system settlements. The Johnson County biosolids suit is one example of landowners pursuing manufacturers directly.