25 Cities With the Highest PFAS Levels in Drinking Water (2026)

By Echo Water Research Team 8 min read
25 Cities With the Highest PFAS Levels in Drinking Water (2026)
25
Cities Analyzed
288
Total Contaminants Above Guidelines
331,766
People Affected

We analyzed tap water quality data for hundreds of cities across the United States to identify those with the highest levels of pfas. This ranking is based on 2026 data from the EPA and EWG databases.

Pfas is a contaminant of growing concern in drinking water. The cities below have the highest detected levels based on the most recent testing data available.

Methodology: Cities are ranked by the detected level of pfas (descending), showing those with the highest concentrations first. Data sourced from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) Tap Water Database. Only cities with available EWG testing data are included.
1

Oakdale, Minnesota

Oakdale • 28,303 people served
17Above EWG Guidelines
32Total Detected
3Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformChromium (hexavalent)DibromochloromethaneDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)

Oakdale has pfas detected at 1,067.30 ppt. 32 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

2

Little Hocking, Ohio

Little Hocking Water/sewer Association • 9,892 people served
9Above EWG Guidelines
19Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneDibromochloromethaneHaloacetic acids (HAA9)Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA)NitrateNitrate and nitrite

Little Hocking has pfas detected at 833.30 ppt. 19 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

3

St. Paul Park, Minnesota

Saint Paul Park • 5,427 people served
6Above EWG Guidelines
12Total Detected
1Above Legal Limit
DibromochloromethaneNitratePerfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Radium, combined (-226 and -228)Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs)Bromoform

St. Paul Park has pfas detected at 788.20 ppt. 12 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

4

Cottage Grove, Minnesota

Cottage Grove • 39,712 people served
14Above EWG Guidelines
29Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneDibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethaneHaloacetic acids (HAA9)NitratePerfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)

Cottage Grove has pfas detected at 672.50 ppt. 29 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

5

Newport, Minnesota

Newport • 4,000 people served
8Above EWG Guidelines
19Total Detected
0Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneBromoformCadmiumChloroformDibromochloromethanePerfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)

Newport has pfas detected at 313.90 ppt. 19 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

Is your city on this list?

Get a free personalized water quality report for your address.

Check Your Water
6

Woodbury, Minnesota

Woodbury • 82,643 people served
15Above EWG Guidelines
27Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformChromium (hexavalent)Dibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethaneHaloacetic acids (HAA5)

Woodbury has pfas detected at 264.80 ppt. 27 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

7

Hastings, Minnesota

Hastings • 23,222 people served
15Above EWG Guidelines
31Total Detected
1Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneBromoformChloroformChromium (hexavalent)Dibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethane

Hastings has pfas detected at 253.60 ppt. 31 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

8

Cayuga, New York

Springport Water District #1 - South • 500 people served
14Above EWG Guidelines
28Total Detected
1Above Legal Limit
1,2,3-Trichloropropane*BromodichloromethaneBromoformChloroformDibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethane

Cayuga has pfas detected at 250.30 ppt. 28 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

9

Union Springs, New York

Union Springs Village • 0 people served
14Above EWG Guidelines
28Total Detected
1Above Legal Limit
1,2,3-TrichloropropaneBromodichloromethaneBromoformChloroformDibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethane

Union Springs has pfas detected at 250.30 ppt. 28 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

10

Rome, Georgia

Rome • 45,586 people served
13Above EWG Guidelines
22Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformChromium (hexavalent)Dibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethaneDichloroacetic acid

Rome has pfas detected at 210 ppt. 22 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

11

Sebattus, Maine

Sunrise Serenity Tp • 25 people served
9Above EWG Guidelines
15Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
ArsenicNitrateNitrate and nitritePerfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Radon

Sebattus has pfas detected at 204.40 ppt. 15 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

12

Hoosick Falls, New York

Hoosick Falls • 4,925 people served
19Above EWG Guidelines
38Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
ArsenicBromodichloromethaneChloroformDibromochloromethaneHaloacetic acids (HAA5)Perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA)

Hoosick Falls has pfas detected at 195.60 ppt. 38 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

13

Little Canada, Minnesota

Terrace Heights Mobile Home Park Llc • 266 people served
4Above EWG Guidelines
12Total Detected
0Above Legal Limit
ArsenicPerfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Radium, combined (-226 and -228)

Little Canada has pfas detected at 193.30 ppt. 12 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

14

Pittsford, New Jersey

Delilah Terrace Mobile Home Park • 210 people served
6Above EWG Guidelines
15Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
NitratePerfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Radium, combined (-226 and -228)Chloroform

Pittsford has pfas detected at 184.50 ppt. 15 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

15

Emmaus, Pennsylvania

Emmaus Borough Public Water • 14,000 people served
18Above EWG Guidelines
33Total Detected
4Above Legal Limit
6:2 Fluorotelomer Sulfonic Acid (6:2 FTSA)8:2 Fluorotelomer Sulfonic Acid (8:2 FTSA)BromodichloromethaneChromium (hexavalent)Dibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethane

Emmaus has pfas detected at 182.90 ppt. 33 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

16

Belpre, Ohio

Belpre City Public Water System • 6,441 people served
12Above EWG Guidelines
20Total Detected
1Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDibromochloromethaneDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)Nitrate

Belpre has pfas detected at 180 ppt. 20 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

17

Stuart, Florida

City of Stuart - Water Plant • 16,841 people served
10Above EWG Guidelines
21Total Detected
3Above Legal Limit
Chromium (hexavalent)Haloacetic acids (HAA5)Haloacetic acids (HAA9)Perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)

Stuart has pfas detected at 160 ppt. 21 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

18

Eielson Afb, Alaska

Eielson - Air Force Base • 0 people served
8Above EWG Guidelines
12Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

Eielson Afb has pfas detected at 142.70 ppt. 12 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

19

Fayetteville, Pennsylvania

The Village of Laurel Run • 250 people served
9Above EWG Guidelines
11Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)NitratePerfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)

Fayetteville has pfas detected at 140 ppt. 11 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

20

Lincoln, Illinois

Lincoln Correctional Center • 1,036 people served
12Above EWG Guidelines
20Total Detected
0Above Legal Limit
Bromodichloromethane*Chloroform*Dibromoacetic acid*Dibromochloromethane*Dichloroacetic acid*Haloacetic acids (HAA5)*

Lincoln has pfas detected at 127.40 ppt. 20 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

21

Lake Elmo, Minnesota

Cimarron Park • 2,400 people served
11Above EWG Guidelines
18Total Detected
0Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDibromochloromethaneHaloacetic acids (HAA5)NitratePerfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)

Lake Elmo has pfas detected at 125.70 ppt. 18 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

22

Canton, Missouri

Canton PWS • 0 people served
12Above EWG Guidelines
19Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethaneDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)

Canton has pfas detected at 125 ppt. 19 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

23

Newton Falls, Ohio

Newton Falls City • 6,109 people served
10Above EWG Guidelines
16Total Detected
0Above Legal Limit
BromodichloromethaneChloroformDibromoacetic acidDibromochloromethaneDichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)

Newton Falls has pfas detected at 119.60 ppt. 16 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

24

Hales Corners, Wisconsin

Hales Happiness Subdivision • 400 people served
7Above EWG Guidelines
12Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
Perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHXS)Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)Radium, combined (-226 and -228)Total PFOS and PFOANitrate

Hales Corners has pfas detected at 112 ppt. 12 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

25

Issaquah, Washington

Issaquah Water System • 39,578 people served
16Above EWG Guidelines
30Total Detected
2Above Legal Limit
ArsenicBromodichloromethaneChloroformChromium (hexavalent)Dichloroacetic acidHaloacetic acids (HAA5)

Issaquah has pfas detected at 101.90 ppt. 30 total contaminants were found in the water supply.

What We Found: Key Patterns

The most frequently detected contaminants exceeding health guidelines across these cities are Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), Bromodichloromethane. These appear repeatedly across different water systems and regions.

Geographically, the states most represented in this ranking are Minnesota (8), Ohio (3), New York (3). Regional water sources, industrial activity, and agricultural runoff all contribute to local water quality variation.

Across all ranked cities, 288 contaminant readings exceed EWG health guidelines, but only 39 exceed EPA legal limits. This gap of 249 highlights how legal standards may not fully protect public health — EPA limits haven't been updated for many contaminants in decades.

Full Rankings Table

Rank City State Detected Above Guidelines Above Legal People Served
1 Oakdale MN 32 17 3 28,303
2 Little Hocking OH 19 9 2 9,892
3 St. Paul Park MN 12 6 1 5,427
4 Cottage Grove MN 29 14 2 39,712
5 Newport MN 19 8 0 4,000
6 Woodbury MN 27 15 2 82,643
7 Hastings MN 31 15 1 23,222
8 Cayuga NY 28 14 1 500
9 Union Springs NY 28 14 1 0
10 Rome GA 22 13 2 45,586
11 Sebattus ME 15 9 2 25
12 Hoosick Falls NY 38 19 2 4,925
13 Little Canada MN 12 4 0 266
14 Pittsford NJ 15 6 2 210
15 Emmaus PA 33 18 4 14,000
16 Belpre OH 20 12 1 6,441
17 Stuart FL 21 10 3 16,841
18 Eielson Afb AK 12 8 2 0
19 Fayetteville PA 11 9 2 250
20 Lincoln IL 20 12 0 1,036
21 Lake Elmo MN 18 11 0 2,400
22 Canton MO 19 12 2 0
23 Newton Falls OH 16 10 0 6,109
24 Hales Corners WI 12 7 2 400
25 Issaquah WA 30 16 2 39,578

Don't see your city?

Check your water quality now with a free personalized report.

Check Your Water

Frequently Asked Questions

What cities have the highest levels of pfas?

Our analysis of 2026 data identified the cities with the highest detected levels of pfas. See the full ranking above.

Is pfas dangerous in drinking water?

Pfas has known health risks at elevated levels. The EWG sets health guidelines that are often stricter than EPA legal limits to account for the latest research on long-term exposure.

How do I remove pfas from my water?

Reverse osmosis (RO) systems are the most effective at removing a wide range of contaminants. Check the specific contaminant details for recommended filtration technology.

What is the EPA legal limit for pfas?

EPA legal limits vary by contaminant and may differ from EWG health guidelines. See individual city reports for specific legal limit comparisons.

Data sources: Environmental Working Group (EWG) Tap Water Database, U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS)

Last updated: September 2026

Methodology: Contaminant levels are compared against both EPA legal limits (Maximum Contaminant Levels) and EWG health guidelines, which are often stricter and based on the latest scientific research.

Share
Leave a comment

This site is protected by hCaptcha and the hCaptcha Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.