How the EPA’s $30.7 million grant supports rural PFAS response

Each day, millions of Americans turn on the tap expecting safe, clean drinking water. For small and rural communities that provide this water, meeting that expectation is more complex than ever.

PFAS, the “forever chemicals” linked to cancers, thyroid disease and developmental issues, are appearing in water systems nationwide. Unlike larger utilities, many rural systems lack the infrastructure, staff and funding to respond quickly. Now, with stricter PFAS limits on the horizon, the pressure is growing. Compliance demands early assessment, careful planning, and access to expertise that many small systems don’t have.

To help bridge that gap, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced a $30.7 million grant for small and rural communities across the country. While the funding won’t build treatment plants, it does support the crucial first steps: exposure assessment, operator training, and guidance on securing additional financing. For many rural systems, this support arrives at a pivotal moment.

Challenges for rural water systems in the PFAS era

In many rural communities, just a few people (sometimes even a single operator) are responsible for the local water system. Ageing infrastructure only adds to the strain. Facilities built decades ago weren’t designed to address contaminants like PFAS, and retrofitting them requires costly upgrades. Each water source also demands a tailored solution, and choosing between treatment options such as ion exchange or granular activated carbon calls for specialised expertise that most small systems simply don’t have.

Rather than focusing on hardware, the grant supports the kinds of early-stage efforts that many rural communities struggle to fund on their own

The regulatory landscape complicates matters further as future limits are likely to tighten, including for short-chain PFAS that are harder to remove. As a result, communities risk installing systems that may fall out of compliance before they recover their investment. And costs continue long after installation. Media replacement, pretreatment requirements, waste disposal, and ongoing maintenance and operating expenses can drain budgets for years.

Together, these challenges force small water systems to confront one of the nation’s most pressing environmental and public health threats with fewer resources, less time and greater uncertainty than larger counterparts.

How the EPA grant supports early action

The EPA grant is not designed to fund treatment infrastructure. Its value lies in the foundation for long-term compliance. Rather than focusing on hardware, the grant supports the kinds of early-stage efforts that many rural communities struggle to fund on their own: education, technical assistance, statistically valid sampling and exposure assessment.

With that support, rural communities can begin to understand the scope of their PFAS contamination, estimate mitigation costs and identify potential financing options such as state revolving funds or grants.

Technical guidance is crucial for systems facing multiple constraints. Many don’t realise the full scale of investment required until they’re already behind. The grant helps close that gap, equipping communities to make informed decisions, set realistic budgets and explore treatment options that align with both current and anticipated regulations. By prioritising awareness and planning, the EPA initiative enables rural water systems to take meaningful steps toward compliance.

A catalyst for broader change

The EPA grant is a small step in scale, but an important one in direction. It creates opportunities for rural systems to better understand their risks, strengthen their technical capacity, and ultimately, ensure the continued production of safe and reliable drinking water.

PFAS contamination will remain one of the most pressing challenges for drinking water providers. Acting early ensures that even the smallest communities can protect public health.