The nationwide cost to treat or replace contaminated drinking water could reach billions of dollars a year. The ubiquitous chemicals, linked to cancer and other diseases, build up in people and the environment. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters
In summary
The nationwide cost to treat or replace contaminated drinking water is estimated at $1.5 billion a year. The ubiquitous chemicals, linked to cancer and other diseases, build up in people and the environment.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today unveiled the first nationwide limits on dangerous “forever chemicals” in drinking water, setting standards that will have sweeping, costly effects throughout California.
Several thousand water systems around the country are expected to exceed the new limits for the chemicals, which have been linked to an array of diseases — including cancer and heart disease — and have contaminated people and animals worldwide, including newborns.
In California alone, traces of the compounds have been detected in water systems serving more than 25 million people, nearly a third in disadvantaged communities, according to an analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Known as “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances have contaminated everything from Arctic ice to household dustto food. Previously used to make Teflon and found in some firefighting foam, stain-resistant coatings and other products, the chemicalsleach into soil and water from industrial facilities, military bases, airports and landfills. Nearly everyone in the United States has been exposed.
A CalMatters analysis of 2023 state data found 214 water systems in California with 796 public wells that exceed the new federal drinking water standards. That’s more than half of the California systems that tested their water and reported their findings to the state.
California has state guidelines for the chemicals that are far less stringent. Now, under the new federal standards, the number of California wells that contain unacceptable levels will grow by 255% — an additional 572 wells, according to CalMatters’ analysis. The agencies with the contaminated wells provide water to millions of Californians, although not all of them drink the affected well water. Some suppliers may already have begun treatment or rely more heavily on other supplies.
Drinking water wells likely to violate the new limits are found throughout California, including in parts of Orange County, Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside County, the Santa Clarita Valley, San Jose, Fremont, Visalia, Fresno and some military facilities, including Camp Pendleton.
Water agencies nationwide must now test water for the chemicals and will have five years to complywith the new federal limits.
Utilities and cities warned that the cost of water will rise for many consumers. Those with elevated levels will have to install treatment systems, shut down wells and replace them with more expensive imported water, or blend contaminated water with other supplies.
The EPA estimates that the costs could reach $1.5 billion per year. But a water industry report last year estimated that the cost could reach between $2.5 and $3.2 billion, based on a previousEPA proposal.
Cindy Tuck of the Association of California Water Agencies said the high cost raises questions about whether the new standards are feasible. But, she added, “at the end of the day, our members are going to comply, and they need financial assistance.”
“Some money will come in from the polluters, some money will come in from low interest loans or loans in general. And then some money will have to come from the customer,” said Mike Alvord, director of operations and maintenance for the Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency, which serves more than a quarter million people.
Brenda Mallory, chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, announced $1 billion through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help fund testing and treatment for public water suppliers and private well owners, part of a $9 billion package to tackle emerging contaminants.
“The only level that is truly protective would be zero,” said Jamie DeWitt, an Oregon State University professor of toxicology and member of an EPA science advisory board. But given the costs and the technology available, Dewitt said, “This is the best we’re going to get right now.”
Dewitt added, “Maybe the costs today seem really high, but if you spread those costs out over a lifetime, then it’s lower than the anticipated health care costs we may experience from higher exposure levels of those particular (chemicals).”
‘Forever chemicals’ have an array of health effects
The EPA estimates that the rule will prevent 30,000 illnesses and 9,600 deaths, and save $1.5 billion from reduced cancers, heart disease, strokes and birth complications.
The health effects of the chemicals came to light with the high-profile case of a DuPont factory in West Virginia that contaminated drinking water in the Ohio River Valley. Long-term studies in the communities have reported a “probable link” between drinking the water and heart disease, colitis, thyroid disease, testicular and kidney cancer and pregnancy disorders. In 2017, DuPont paid $671 million to settle a class action lawsuit representing about 3,000 people in a case dramatized by the film Dark Waters.
Now cities and utilities must meet new federal standards called maximum contaminant levels for five “forever chemicals.” A sixth chemical is limited when it’s found in mixtures.
Perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid, known as PFOA and PFOS, each cannot exceed the new standard of 4 parts per trillion in drinking water — equivalent to four cups of the chemical in a trillion cups of water. (California’s guidelines limited PFOA to 10 parts per trillion and PFOS to 40 parts per trillion.) In addition, three other chemicals, including some used as replacements for PFOA, will be limited to 10 parts per trillion, and there’s a cap for certain mixtures, too.
Many California water agencies have already started to reckon with “forever chemicals” under the state’s guidelines. But they say that their costs will now climb steeply. In January, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed cutting more than $100 million from the budget of a state program aimed at cleaning up the contaminants.
A water fountain at Rio Hondo Park in Pico Rivera. Some wells in the city violated limits on “forever chemicals,” forcing the city to treat the water. Photo by Tash Kimmell for CalMatters
Jason Dadakis of the Orange County Water District said 62 out of roughly 200 large municipal wells in the basin, which serves northern and central parts of the county, were taken offline to comply with the California guidelines.
Of those, 38 now undergo treatment and have come back online. Treatment facilities for the remaining wells are expected to be completed by early 2025 at an upfront cost of roughly $300 million, Dadakis said. He estimates that operations and maintenance are likely to climb to $700 million over the next 30 years.
Now, under the new federal limits, Dadakis estimates that another 40 wells in the basin could be affected — almost doubling construction costs and increasing yearly treatment costs to roughly $1.2 billion over 30 years.
The water district is weighing a 10% rate increase to the cities and water providers to help cover the costs.
“It’s pretty unprecedented to have an enforceable standard at that level — that very single-digit, parts-per-trillion level,” said Jason Dadakis, executive director of water quality and technical resources for the Orange County Water District. “So a lot of people are kind of grappling with that, and doing testing right now to understand what the impacts to their systems could be.”
The Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency took out of service more than half of its 45 wells after detecting the chemicals above the state guidelines, though five are now back online with treatment. Alvord said treating the water could cost $200 million, plus yearly operation and maintenance costs — and that was before considering the new, more stringent federal guidelines.
Alvord said the agency was able to shut off the wells while installing treatment because it had other sources, unlike water suppliers with fewer resources. He expects smaller utilities to struggle even more now.
“Once you exceed a (federal standard) there’s no way out. There’s no ifs, ands or buts… You’re done.”
The Pico Water District, which serves part of Pico Rivera in Los Angeles County, has already raised customers’ rates to help cover the costs of treating wells, which are the city’s only source of drinking water, said General Manager Joe Basulto.
Though much of the $5.5 million project was covered by a grant, the district still has to come up with the remainder, plus yearly operation costs of at least $650,000.
“It’s really hitting our reserves pretty hard right now to come up with the rest. And on top of that too, we’ve got to plan to keep the treatment facilities online,” Basulto said. “It’s a tough road.”
Data journalist Jeremia Kimelman contributed to this report.
Rachel Becker is a journalist reporting on California’s complex water challenges and water policy issues for CalMatters. Rachel has a background in biology, with master's degrees in both immunology and... More by Rachel Becker
John Osborn D'Agostino is the Data and Interactives Editor at CalMatters. He's passionate about experimenting with different ways to tell digital stories. In particular, John enjoys telling stories with... More by John Osborn D'Agostino
Republish
‘Forever chemicals’: Water supplies throughout California will exceed new national limits
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
Do not edit the article, including the headline,except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Gift this article
Water nationwide will exceed new ‘forever chemicals’ limits - CalMatters
The ubiquitous chemicals, linked to cancer and other diseases, build up in people and the environment. The cost is estimated at $1.5 billion a year.
CalMatters
California, explained
Rachel Becker
Rachel Becker is a journalist reporting on California’s complex water challenges and water policy issues for CalMatters. Rachel has a background in biology, with master's degrees in both immunology and science journalism. She previously reported on climate change and air pollution for CalMatters, and contributed to early coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well. Before joining CalMatters, Rachel was a staff reporter at The Verge, and her byline has also appeared in outlets including National Geographic News, Smithsonian, Slate, Nature and the YouTube series MinuteEarth.
John Osborn D'Agostino
John Osborn D'Agostino is the Data and Interactives Editor at CalMatters. He's passionate about experimenting with different ways to tell digital stories. In particular, John enjoys telling stories with game mechanics: he spearheaded "Gimme Props", an interactive that allows users to explore how they may want to vote on certain ballot measures, designed and developed a game that allows prospective students to explore the complexities of financing college, and allowed users to explore how they would spend California's record surplus in 2022. Previously, John worked with The Hechinger Report, EdSource, the East Bay Express, Berkeleyside, and the North Coast Journal. He graduated from Cal Poly Humboldt and UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism.