98 water systems on state PFAS funding lists aren't in EPA's survey data
On October 21, Pennsylvania's water infrastructure authority, PENNVEST, approved $190.3 million for 24 projects. Five of them name PFAS. Two of those five are at systems that don't appear in EPA's UCMR 5 data, the national survey most people use to see which water systems have a PFAS problem. At one of them, PENNVEST says PFOA and PFOS at the entry point currently exceed EPA's limit.
So we checked whether that was a Pennsylvania quirk. It isn't. Across the 11 states we track, state documents tie 416 named water systems to PFAS funding, and 98 of them aren't in EPA's survey at all. 73 of those already have an award.
The five Pennsylvania projects
| Applicant | Grant | Approach | In EPA's survey? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Buckingham Township (Cold Spring) Bucks County | $3,120,000 | Anion exchange | Yes, over the limit |
| Plumstead Township Bucks County | $3,891,000 | Connects two systems, no treatment plant | No, neither |
| Aqua Pennsylvania (Culbertson Run) Chester County | $2,546,000 | Ion exchange, 75 gpm | No match |
| Lakeland School District Lackawanna County | $352,000 | Ion exchange plus carbon, 25 gpm | No |
| Aqua Pennsylvania (Turnbury Well 11) Montgomery County | $1,720,000 | Granular activated carbon | No match |
The release says “grant” may mean a principal forgiveness loan, which doesn't have to be repaid. Approved doesn't mean paid. The release describes PFOA and PFOS above EPA's limit at Buckingham, Culbertson Run, Lakeland and Turnbury, and “measurable PFAS contamination” in some Plumstead wells. It names the two Aqua projects by well, not by water system, so we couldn't match them to a current EPA record.
Why the survey misses them
UCMR 5 was built to sample every system serving 3,300 people or more, plus a representative sample of smaller ones. The Plumstead systems and Lakeland are all below that size in EPA's inventory. Small systems like these mostly weren't in the survey, which is the same gap behind the 56,000 systems due for initial monitoring by April 2027. Their results surface through state rules and utility testing, and then in a funding application.
The comparison, state by state
| State | Named systems | Over the limit in the survey | Sampled, not over | Not in the survey | Couldn't match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Massachusetts | 108 | 52 | 14 | 35 | 7 |
| New York | 70 | 15 | 15 | 16 | 24 |
| Pennsylvania | 31 | 15 | 0 | 12 | 4 |
| Ohio | 29 | 15 | 4 | 9 | 1 |
| North Carolina | 38 | 24 | 3 | 7 | 4 |
| New Jersey | 30 | 22 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| California | 37 | 24 | 8 | 5 | 0 |
| South Carolina | 34 | 25 | 5 | 4 | 0 |
| Alabama | 18 | 11 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| Florida | 14 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Illinois | 7 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Total | 416 | 219 | 57 | 98 | 42 |
What this does and doesn't show
- “Not in the survey” doesn't mean never tested. Massachusetts alone accounts for 35 of the 98, and it has its own PFAS rule that requires sampling. Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey have state limits too.
- Being on a list doesn't mean a result over the limit. Some records pay for studies or planning, and most state lists don't print results.
- It isn't a national count. We cover 11 states so far. Plumstead's one project connects two systems, so it counts as two.
- It isn't a finding of any violation. The federal PFOA and PFOS limits aren't enforceable until April 2029, and a state's own limits can differ.
What it means if you work on these projects
- Don't scope a market from the survey alone. If you design, build or supply treatment, EPA's data shows who tested over. A state funding list shows who has a named project and money behind it, and those aren't always the same systems. Named systems by state.
- Small systems do get funded. This round ran from a school's basement system to a township interconnection. The scopes are too different to compare on cost, but neither is a large-utility project.
- Treatment isn't the only answer. One round funded ion exchange, carbon and a consolidation with no treatment plant. To see how media would handle your own results, try the treatment bench.
- Pennsylvania's next cut-off is February 3, 2027, for the April 21 board meeting. It's a general PENNVEST cut-off, not a PFAS-only round. Other states are on the funding round tracker.
As of November 1, 2026. Funding records are copied from each state's documents and linked on the funded projects page. We matched named systems to EPA's final UCMR 5 data by PWSID where a state printed one or a single system carried that name, and count a system as unmatched if EPA's inventory shows that ID as no longer active. “Over the limit” here means at least one PFOA or PFOS result above 4 ppt, which is our reading of EPA's data, not the running annual average the rule uses. EPA has proposed extending the PFOA and PFOS compliance date to 2031 for systems that request it; that isn't final. This is general information, not a compliance determination.