Report on PFAS Contamination in U.S. Drinking Water and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

This report analyzes recent data released by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) contamination in United States drinking water systems. The findings are examined through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a particular focus on SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation).

Key Findings on Water Contamination

Data Source and Scope

• Data originates from the EPA’s Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 5), which mandates nationwide testing of drinking water for 29 specific PFAS compounds.
• The Environmental Working Group (EWG) has compiled and visualized this data, revealing significant geographical disparities.
• Findings indicate a higher concentration of contaminated sites in the Eastern United States compared to the West.

Scale of Public Exposure

• An estimated 172 million Americans are consuming drinking water contaminated with PFAS chemicals.
• As of August 2025, a total of 3,309 sites have reported the presence of PFAS in drinking water supplies through the UCMR 5 data collection program.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

The widespread contamination directly challenges the achievement of SDG 6, which aims to ensure the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.

• Target 6.1: The presence of PFAS in drinking water undermines the goal of achieving universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water.
• Target 6.3: The data demonstrates a critical need to improve water quality by reducing pollution and minimizing the release of hazardous chemicals, as outlined in this target.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The health implications of PFAS exposure are a direct threat to SDG 3, which seeks to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.

• PFAS are classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
• Chronic exposure is linked to severe health outcomes that contravene Target 3.9, which aims to substantially reduce deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and pollution. Associated health risks include:

1. Thyroid disease
2. Liver toxicity
3. Weakened immunity
4. Certain cancers
5. Developmental effects

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

The prevalence of PFAS, known for their persistence in the environment, highlights unsustainable production patterns and challenges the objectives of SDG 12.

• The use of these “forever chemicals” in numerous consumer products points to a need for the environmentally sound management of chemicals as specified in Target 12.4.
• Expert calls to phase out non-essential PFAS uses align with the goal of promoting sustainable production and consumption.

Regulatory Framework and Institutional Response

EPA Mandates and Timelines

The EPA has established a framework to address the contamination, reflecting the role of strong institutions (SDG 16) in protecting public health and the environment.

1. Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs): The EPA has set MCLs for several PFAS chemicals, including PFOA (4 ppt), PFOS (4 ppt), PFHxS (10 ppt), and PFNA (10 ppt).
2. Monitoring Deadline: Water utilities are required to complete initial monitoring for PFAS chemicals by 2027.
3. Compliance Deadline: By 2029, all public water systems must implement solutions to reduce PFAS concentrations to below the established MCLs.

Expert Recommendations

• Jennifer Freeman, Professor of Toxicology at Purdue University, stressed the importance of continued testing to identify contamination sources and guide remediation efforts, which is essential for safeguarding public health under SDG 3.
• Vasilis Vasiliou, Chair of Environmental Health Sciences at Yale School of Public Health, defined the issue as a “public health imperative” and called for stronger regulation, expanded monitoring, and investment in water treatment to meet the clean water goals of SDG 6.

Conclusion and Path Forward

The ongoing data collection under UCMR 5, with final results expected in 2026, will continue to inform the national response to this environmental health crisis. Addressing PFAS contamination is fundamental to making progress on multiple Sustainable Development Goals. A comprehensive strategy is required, integrating regulatory enforcement, investment in water treatment infrastructure, and a transition toward responsible production and consumption patterns to protect both human health and environmental integrity.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article directly connects PFAS chemical contamination in drinking water to significant health risks. It states that PFAS are classified as a “Group 1 carcinogen” and are linked to “thyroid disease, liver disease, weakened immunity and many other health problems.” This focus on the health impacts of environmental pollution aligns with SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all.

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• The central theme of the article is the contamination of drinking water systems with PFAS chemicals. It discusses the EPA’s monitoring of water utilities and the finding that “172 million” Americans are drinking contaminated water. This directly relates to SDG 6, which focuses on ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation, particularly the provision of safe drinking water.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• The article identifies the source of the problem as the widespread industrial use of PFAS chemicals, noting they are “highly favored in many industries for their long-lasting nature, featuring in many consumer products.” The call by experts for a “rapid phase-out of non-essential PFAS uses” and the EPA’s efforts to regulate these chemicals connect to SDG 12, which promotes the environmentally sound management of chemicals and waste throughout their life cycle to minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Targets for SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
  • The article’s entire focus is on the health risks posed by hazardous PFAS chemicals in drinking water. The statement from Professor Vasilis Vasiliou that “Chronic exposure to PFAS…has been linked in multiple studies to serious health outcomes, including certain cancers, immune dysfunction, thyroid disease, liver toxicity, and developmental effects” directly supports the relevance of this target.

Targets for SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
  • The article demonstrates a lack of “safe” drinking water for a large portion of the U.S. population. The finding that water for 172 million Americans is “contaminated with PFAS chemicals” above accepted limits shows a direct challenge to achieving this target.
• Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
  • The EPA’s actions described in the article, such as setting “maximum contaminant levels” for specific PFAS and requiring that by 2029 “all public water systems must have implemented solutions to reduce the PFAS chemicals,” are direct efforts to improve water quality by reducing pollution from hazardous chemicals, aligning perfectly with this target.

Targets for SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle…and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
  • The article discusses the EPA’s suite of actions to address PFAS, including monitoring and setting contaminant levels. This represents a governmental effort to manage hazardous chemicals. The expert call for a “rapid phase-out of non-essential PFAS uses” also points to the need for better management of these chemicals throughout their life cycle, from production to disposal, to prevent their release into the environment.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for Water Quality and Health Impact (SDG 3 & 6)

1. Population exposed to contaminated water: The article explicitly states that the number of Americans drinking PFAS-contaminated water has reached “172 million.” This figure serves as a direct indicator of the scale of the problem and can be tracked over time to measure progress in providing safe water.
2. Concentration of contaminants in drinking water: The article specifies the EPA’s maximum contaminant levels for several PFAS chemicals, such as “4 parts per trillion (ppt)” for PFOA and PFOS. The data collected under the EPA’s UCMR 5, which measures these concentrations, is a key indicator of water quality.
3. Number of contaminated sites: The article mentions there are “3,309 sites that have reported having PFAS in drinking water supplies.” Tracking this number helps measure the geographic extent of contamination and the progress of remediation efforts.

Indicators for Chemical Management and Regulation (SDG 6 & 12)

1. Number of regulated chemicals: The article notes the EPA is testing for “29 individual PFAS compounds” and has set maximum levels for four of them. The number of chemicals with established safety limits is an indicator of regulatory progress.
2. Proportion of water systems in compliance (Implied): The article states a deadline that “by 2029, all public water systems must have implemented solutions to reduce the PFAS chemicals to below maximum contaminant levels.” The percentage of water systems meeting this requirement will be a critical indicator of the effectiveness of the regulatory action.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: newsweek.com