PFAS FAQ

A combination of stricter regulations, increased public awareness, and challenges with existing infrastructure make PFAS a critical issue right now.

In New York, drinking water standards for certain PFAS compounds are among the strictest in the country. This means municipalities and facility owners are under growing pressure to evaluate their systems and, in many cases, make upgrades. At the same time, regulations are expanding into other areas like wastewater, soil, and groundwater—even as the rules are still evolving.

Communities are also more aware of PFAS and its potential impacts, which raises expectations for action and transparency. However, most water and wastewater systems were not originally designed to remove these types of chemicals, making compliance more complex and often costly.

A significant challenge is that many existing water and wastewater systems were never designed to address PFAS. As regulations become more stringent, municipalities and facility owners are increasingly facing a gap between current treatment capabilities and emerging compliance expectations, creating both operational and financial challenges.

Together, these factors make PFAS more than just an environmental concern – it is also a financial, operational, and public trust issue that requires proactive planning.

A strong starting point is understanding your situation—specifically, whether PFAS is present and where it may be coming from.

In most cases, the most effective approach is to:

• Assess current conditions through sampling and lab analysis
• Understand applicable compliance requirements
• Identify potential sources of PFAS
• Develop a treatment plan, if needed

Starting with this foundation helps confirm that the right decisions are made early. Focusing only on treatment without addressing the source can lead to higher costs and ongoing challenges over time.

A phased approach helps dedicate resources strategically, providing long-term and sustainable solutions rather than reactive measures. Understanding potential sources, evaluating risks, and planning for future compliance typically produces better outcomes than responding only after a problem becomes urgent.

Several common misconceptions can make it harder for organizations to effectively address PFAS.

First, some believe the issue can wait until they are required to act. However, delaying action can lead to unintended outcomes, such as unknowingly passing PFAS into drinking water or other areas of the environment. Having a full understanding and taking steps early helps avoid bigger challenges later.

Second, there is a belief that PFAS can be solved with a single, simple solution. In reality, addressing PFAS often requires a combination of investigation, source identification and control, treatment, and long-term monitoring. Without addressing the source, contamination can persist and lead to higher costs over time.

Finally, many organizations underestimate how quickly regulations are evolving. Waiting for final requirements can leave municipalities and facility owners scrambling to respond, often at a higher cost and under tighter timelines.

The regulatory landscape for PFAS is changing quickly at both the state and federal levels.

Across New York and the U.S., standards are becoming stricter, covering more types of PFAS and lowering the allowable limits. We’re also seeing a shift from general guidance to enforceable requirements, along with increased expectations for monitoring and reporting.

One practical concern for municipalities and facility owners is that PFAS requirements may emerge through permit renewals, expanded sampling obligations, or new monitoring expectations. If an organization waits until those requirements are imposed, it may discover PFAS in an outfall, effluent stream, or other regulated discharge without having a plan in place. Proactive baseline sampling, source evaluation, and compliance planning can help minimize surprises and give organizations time to evaluate technical and financial solutions that are practical.

In addition, there is a growing focus on accountability, with more emphasis on identifying responsible parties and recovering costs where possible.

To stay ahead, municipalities and facility owners should begin planning now – by understanding their current conditions, tracking regulatory changes, and preparing for future compliance requirements.

A successful PFAS strategy is phased and built on a clear understanding of your system.

In the near term (0 – 12 months), the focus is on collecting reliable data through system-wide sampling, compliance and risk assessment, and source identification. This creates the foundation for informed decision-making and helps organizations prioritize future investments and compliance efforts.

In the mid-term (1 – 3 years), organizations begin evaluating and implementing targeted treatment solutions while incorporating PFAS planning into their overall capital programs.

Over the longer term (3 – 5 years), organizations should focus on system optimization, maintaining compliance, managing costs, identifying funding opportunities, and evaluating cost-recovery options where appropriate.

Throughout each phase, clear and regular communication with regulators, leadership, and the community should be a priority.

• Regulatory navigation: Interpreting changing requirements and aligning clients with future standards
• Integrated planning: Linking PFAS response to broader infrastructure, capital, and sustainability goals
• Technology evaluation: Identifying and piloting the most effective and cost-efficient treatment solutions
• Risk mitigation: Helping clients reduce legal, financial, and operational exposure
• Funding support: Assisting with grant applications and identifying funding opportunities
• Stakeholder engagement: Supporting communication with regulators and the public

Ultimately, the goal is not simply to achieve compliance today, but to help organizations build long-term resilience in the face of evolving regulations, operational challenges, and emerging PFAS concerns.