In May 2026, the EPA proposed keeping its drinking-water limits for two PFAS chemicals and throwing out the rest. If that holds, the state you live in will decide how protected your tap water actually is.
Here is the short version. The 2024 federal rule set enforceable limits on five PFAS compounds plus a mixture formula. Two years later, the agency reversed most of it: it proposed upholding the 4 parts-per-trillion (ppt) limits for PFOA and PFOS, pushing the compliance deadline back to 2031, and rescinding the limits for PFHxS, PFNA, GenX, and the mixture rule entirely. That proposal is open for public comment through July 20, 2026, so nothing is final yet. But the direction is clear, and it puts the spotlight back on the states.
About a dozen states already regulate PFAS in drinking water on their own. Several are stricter than the federal number. Several cover chemicals the federal rule never touched. If you want to know how safe your water has to be, the state map matters more than it did a year ago.
You can check which contaminants have shown up in your own water system by ZIP code before you read another word. Then come back for the regulatory picture.
The 2024 PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation was the first federal limit on these chemicals, ever. It set 4 ppt each for PFOA and PFOS (the two most-studied compounds), 10 ppt each for PFHxS, PFNA, and GenX, and a "Hazard Index" formula for mixtures of PFHxS, PFNA, GenX, and PFBS.
The May 2026 proposals change that in two ways:
So the federal floor is shrinking from five regulated compounds plus a mixture rule down to two compounds. For PFHxS and GenX especially, both linked to health harm and both common near industrial and military sites, there would be no federal drinking-water limit at all.
That is the gap states are filling.
These are the states with enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as of mid-2026. Enforceable means a utility that exceeds the number has to fix it, not just tell you about it. Every value is in parts per trillion.
| State | PFAS limits (ppt) | Notes | |---|---|---| | Michigan | PFNA 6, PFOA 8, PFOS 16, PFHxS 51, GenX 370, PFBS 420, PFHxA 400,000 | Seven compounds, more than any other state | | New Jersey | PFOA 14, PFNA 13, PFOS 13 | First state in the nation to set a PFOA MCL | | New York | PFOA 10, PFOS 10 | Two compounds | | New Hampshire | PFOA 12, PFOS 15, PFNA 11, PFHxS 18 | Four compounds | | Massachusetts | 20 (sum of PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, PFHpA, PFDA) | Regulated as one combined number | | Vermont | 20 (sum of PFOA, PFOS, PFHpA, PFHxS, PFNA) | Combined limit like Massachusetts | | Pennsylvania | PFOA 14, PFOS 18 | Two compounds | | Wisconsin | 70 (PFOA and PFOS combined) | The weakest state MCL on this list |
A few states take a different route. California, for example, has not set enforceable MCLs but publishes notification levels (PFOA 4 ppt, PFOS 4 ppt, PFHxS 3 ppt, PFBS 500 ppt) and response levels that trigger action. Maine, Rhode Island, and Washington have their own standards or action levels as well. The wall between "enforceable MCL" and "advisory level" matters: an advisory level tells your utility to notify you, but it can keep serving the water.
Michigan wins on breadth. It regulates seven PFAS compounds, including GenX and PFHxS, the two the EPA now wants to drop. Its per-compound numbers are also low: 8 ppt for PFOA and 16 ppt for PFOS.
New Jersey and New York win on the headline compounds. New Jersey's 13 to 14 ppt limits and New York's flat 10 ppt for PFOA and PFOS are among the tightest single-compound numbers in the country, and New Jersey got there first, back in 2020.
Wisconsin is the outlier in the other direction. A combined 70 ppt limit for PFOA and PFOS is more than eight times looser than New York's, and it matches the EPA's old 2016 health advisory rather than any modern standard.
Here is the part that matters if the federal rollback goes through: in states with no PFAS MCL of their own, and there are still more than 30 of them, the only enforceable limits left would be 4 ppt for PFOA and PFOS. PFHxS and GenX would be unregulated in drinking water. Your protection would depend entirely on which side of a state line your house sits on.
Two people can drink from water systems 20 miles apart, one in New Jersey and one across the line, and face completely different legal protection for the same chemicals. That was already true. The federal rollback would widen the gap.
A few things you can do regardless of your state:
Find out what is actually in your water. State limits tell you what a utility is legally allowed to serve. They do not tell you what is coming out of your tap right now. EPA's UCMR5 testing has PFAS results for tens of thousands of public water systems, and you can look up your system's PFAS and lead results by ZIP code for free.
Know that "no limit" is not the same as "safe." If the rescission goes through and your state has no rule, a detection of PFHxS or GenX in your water would carry no legal requirement for the utility to remove it. That does not mean the chemical is harmless. It means the paperwork changed, not the toxicology.
Filter at the point of use if the numbers worry you. Reverse osmosis and high-quality activated carbon systems both remove the common PFAS compounds. If your water shows detectable PFAS above what you are comfortable with, a certified home filter is the fastest way to lower your own exposure while the regulations get sorted out. Our guide to PFAS water filters walks through what actually works and what does not.
Comment if you have an opinion. The rescission proposal is open for public comment through July 20, 2026, with a virtual hearing on July 7. This is the rare moment where a federal drinking-water standard is genuinely up for grabs.
### Which state has the strictest PFAS drinking water limits? Michigan regulates the most PFAS compounds (seven, including GenX and PFHxS) with low per-compound limits like 8 ppt for PFOA and 16 ppt for PFOS. New York's flat 10 ppt limits for PFOA and PFOS are among the tightest single-compound numbers. New Jersey was first in the nation and sits at 13 to 14 ppt.
### Is the EPA getting rid of PFAS limits? Not entirely. In May 2026 the EPA proposed keeping the 4 ppt limits for PFOA and PFOS (while extending the compliance deadline to 2031) but rescinding the limits for PFHxS, PFNA, GenX, and the mixture Hazard Index. The proposal is open for public comment through July 20, 2026, so it is not final.
### What is a safe level of PFAS in drinking water? There is no known fully safe level for the most-studied PFAS. The EPA's health-based goal (MCLG) for PFOA and PFOS is zero, meaning no exposure is considered risk-free. The enforceable limit of 4 ppt reflects what is feasible to measure and treat, not a threshold below which the chemicals are proven harmless.
### How do I find out if PFAS is in my tap water? Public water systems have PFAS testing data from the EPA's UCMR5 program. You can look up your system's results by ZIP code at KnowYourExposure. If you are on a private well, you would need to order a certified PFAS water test, since wells are not covered by public monitoring.
### Do water filters remove PFAS? Reverse osmosis systems and high-quality activated carbon filters both reduce the common PFAS compounds, and certified point-of-use units can bring detectable levels down substantially. Boiling does not remove PFAS and can slightly concentrate it. Standard pitcher filters vary widely, so check for NSF/ANSI 53 or P473 certification for PFAS reduction specifically.
Your ZIP code determines which PFAS rules apply to you and, increasingly, whether any apply at all. Check your water system's PFAS and lead data by ZIP code to see where you actually stand.
Sources: EPA Proposed PFAS Rescission Rule, EPA announcement on keeping PFOA/PFOS MCLs, and state agency drinking-water standards compiled by Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner and the Michigan PFAS Response team.