Is PFAS-Contaminated Fertilizer Still a Risk in 2026? What EPA's New Draft Guidance Means for You

The Environmental Protection Agency has released draft guidance on PFAS in biosolids — the treated sewage sludge that many farms use as fertilizer — and it's already drawing sharp criticism from scientists and advocacy groups. According to reporting from Chemical & Engineering News, critics say the agency's new approach downplays health risks from two of the most studied PFAS chemicals, PFOA and PFOS, while shifting more of the responsibility onto local wastewater utilities and farmers rather than addressing the problem at its source.

What Happened?

Per Chemical & Engineering News, EPA's draft guidance revises a risk analysis developed under the Biden administration that had flagged potentially serious health concerns tied to PFOA and PFOS in biosolids spread on agricultural land. The new draft reportedly softens those conclusions. Critics quoted in the story argue the revised analysis relies on assumptions that minimize exposure risks, even though the underlying science on PFOA and PFOS hasn't fundamentally changed.

Biosolids are a byproduct of municipal wastewater treatment. Because PFAS chemicals are used in thousands of consumer and industrial products, they routinely enter the sewage stream from household drains, industrial discharges, and stormwater runoff. Treatment plants aren't designed to remove PFAS, so the chemicals can concentrate in the leftover solids — solids that are often sold or given away as fertilizer for farms, golf courses, and even home gardens.

Who and What Is Affected?

This issue reaches further than most people realize. It potentially touches:

• Farmers who use biosolid fertilizer on cropland, pastures, or hay fields.
• Rural communities near farms where biosolids are applied, especially those relying on private wells.
• Consumers who eat crops, dairy, or meat produced on treated land.
• Wastewater utilities that manage biosolid disposal and now may face new compliance expectations under the draft guidance.

Some U.S. farms have already reported PFAS contamination in soil, water, and livestock traced back to biosolid fertilizer, prompting a handful of states to restrict or ban the practice. EPA's guidance could influence whether more states follow suit — or ease up.

Why Does This Matter?

PFOA and PFOS belong to a class of "forever chemicals" that don't break down naturally and can accumulate in soil, water, crops, and the human body over time. Scientific studies have linked exposure to these two compounds with a range of health associations, including changes in cholesterol levels, immune response, thyroid function, and certain cancers. It's important to be clear: these are statistical associations observed in populations, not proof that any individual exposure will cause a specific health outcome.

The concern raised by critics, as reported by Chemical & Engineering News, is that EPA's revised analysis may understate how much PFAS exposure people actually face from biosolid-fertilized land — including through crops grown in contaminated soil, groundwater near farms, and animal products. If the guidance leads to weaker oversight, some worry it could slow momentum toward testing, disclosure, or cleanup requirements that many public health advocates say are overdue.

At the same time, EPA and its supporters may argue the revised guidance better reflects real-world exposure levels and avoids placing unworkable burdens on utilities and farmers who have limited control over what enters the wastewater system in the first place. Both sides agree on one thing: the science and policy around PFAS in biosolids remains unsettled.

What Should You Do About It?

You don't have to wait for federal rules to reduce your own uncertainty. Consider these steps:

• If you farm or garden with biosolids: Ask your supplier or municipal utility whether the biosolids have been tested for PFAS, and request the results.
• If you live near farmland or drink well water: Consider having your water tested, particularly if you're in an area with known agricultural use of biosolids.
• If you buy local produce, dairy, or meat: You can ask growers about their fertilizer practices, though many small producers may not have PFAS data readily available.
• Check product and water filtration options: Use a resource like our PFAS product finder to identify filters and other tools that may reduce your household exposure.
• Understand how we vet information: See our methodology page for how we evaluate PFAS-related claims and data sources.

Bottom Line

EPA's draft guidance on PFAS in biosolids has reopened a heated debate about how much risk forever chemicals in fertilizer actually pose — and who should bear responsibility for managing it. Until the science and regulations settle, biosolid-fertilized land should be considered an area of ongoing uncertainty rather than one of lower concern, and consumers, farmers, and communities may want to seek more information rather than assume the issue is resolved.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is food grown with biosolid fertilizer unsafe to eat?

There's no simple yes-or-no answer. Studies have found that PFAS can move from contaminated soil into some crops and animal products, but actual exposure levels vary widely depending on the farm, soil type, and chemical concentration. Regulatory agencies have not classified typical biosolid-grown food as posing a defined level of risk, and EPA's draft guidance is part of an ongoing effort to clarify this.

How do I know if biosolids were used near me?

Biosolid application is often permitted at the state level, and some states maintain public records of where treated sludge is spread. Contacting your state's environmental or agricultural agency is typically the most direct way to find this information.

Will EPA's new guidance change the rules right away?

No. As reported by Chemical & Engineering News, this is currently draft guidance, meaning it's open to public comment and revision before any formal policy changes take effect. Advocacy groups are expected to push back during this process.