PFAS contamination map

PFAS in Alaska drinking water

Every Alaska public water system that reported a PFAS detection during EPA UCMR 5 monitoring, how many sit above the 2024 federal limits, and the standard Alaska applies. Concentrations are in nanograms per litre, the same unit as parts per trillion.

This is the United States view of the North American PFAS dataset. The complete dataset, including all 3,452 US systems and 97 Canadian sites, lives on the main PFAS contamination map.

Systems reporting a PFAS detection
9
Systems above a 2024 federal limit
4
Systems above the mixture Hazard Index
3
Large systems in the results
5

What Alaska requires

Federal EPA limit applies

Agency
Federal EPA (Safe Drinking Water Act)
Citation
40 CFR 141 Subpart Z (89 FR 32532)
Effective
2024-06-25
Compliance date
2029-04-26

DEC follows federal MCL; PFAS action levels for site cleanup under 18 AAC 75.

Compound

Limit (ng/L)

Note

PFOA

4

PFOS

4

PFHxS

10

PFNA

10

HFPO-DA (GenX)

10

Mixture

Not numeric

Hazard Index ≤ 1 (PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, PFBS)

Citations

US EPA, PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (2024)

US EPA PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (2024)

US EPA UCMR 5 occurrence data

Last reviewed 2026-08-13. Verify against the agency source before making a compliance or remediation decision.

Full Alaska regulatory brief

All US state limits

Alaska systems with the highest reported results

Ranked by how far the worst single compound sits above its 2024 federal limit. Values are the maximum each system reported during its UCMR 5 monitoring period.

Water system

PWSID

Worst compound

Max ng/L

Times the limit

Barrow Utilities & Elec. Coop., Inc. (Bu

AK2320078

PFOS

46.3

11.6x

Moa Municipality Of Anchorage

AK2210906

PFOA

9.1

2.3x

College Utilities Corporation

AK2310900

PFOA

6.4

1.6x

Golden Heart Utilities

AK2310730

PFOA

5.4

1.4x

University Of Alaska - Fairbanks

AK2310683

PFHxS

5.7

0.6x

Ft Wainwright - Main Post

AK2310918

PFHxS

4.3

0.4x

Wasilla Water System

AK2224646

PFHxS

4.2

0.4x

Cordova City Water

AK2293205

PFBA

37.1

Below limit

Eielson - Air Force Base

AK2370625

PFPeA

3

Below limit

Open the full map and filter Alaska pins

Where the numbers on this page come from

Every count above is read straight from a published government file. Nothing is modelled, averaged, or estimated. The rules below are the exact rules used to produce the figures for Alaska.

Dataset used for the system counts

Source
US EPA Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 5 (UCMR 5) public occurrence data, January 2026 release
File
UCMR5_All.txt, the full public results file released by EPA
Extracted
2026-08-13
Units
Nanograms per litre, equivalent to parts per trillion. EPA publishes micrograms per litre and those values are multiplied by 1,000.

Open the EPA source page

Coverage rules that decide what is counted for Alaska

Who is in UCMR 5. All public water systems serving more than 3,300 people, plus a national sample of 800 smaller systems. Private wells and most small systems are not monitored, so they cannot appear here.

Which systems are listed. Only systems whose state field is AK and that reported at least one measured PFAS detection. Systems that monitored and found nothing are not shown, and their absence is not evidence of contamination. That gives 9 systems in Alaska.

Systems that cannot be placed. 87 systems nationally reported a detection but have no serviced ZIP code published by EPA, so they carry no location and are excluded from these counts. National totals on the map page include them.

Which value is used. The highest result a system reported for each compound across its sampling events. Results flagged by EPA as non-detects are excluded, as are the lithium results carried in the same file.

The above a limit count. A system is counted when its maximum result for a compound exceeds the 2024 federal Maximum Contaminant Level: 4 ng/L for PFOA and PFOS, 10 ng/L for PFHxS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA. That is 4 systems in Alaska.

The Hazard Index count. Calculated with EPA's own mixture method for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS. A system is counted when the index is above 1. That is 3 systems in Alaska.

What monitoring data is not. Exceeding a 2024 limit in this dataset is not a compliance violation. The federal limits carry a 2029 compliance date, which EPA proposed on 18 May 2026 to move to 2031 for PFOA and PFOS in a rule that is not final, and treatment may have been installed since the sample was taken.

If any figure on this page does not match its source file, tell Nelson and it will be corrected or removed.

Other states and territories

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Contact

How can we help?

Project inquiries, technical consultation, or emergencies.

We respond to project inquiries within one business day.

Nelson Environmental Remediation

Head Office

30541 - 100 Avenue

Acheson (Edmonton), Alberta

Canada T7X 6L8

Phone

1.780.960.3660

Toll Free: 1.888.960.8222

Fax

1.780.962.6885

Email

Follow Us on LinkedIn →

More from Nelson

  • Mobile thermal technology: configured for the material, brought to site
  • How to use The Hub for contamination research
  • Navigator: a practical guide to remediation strategy
  • The Ground Truth: Warren Nelson's remediation newsletter
  • A new era of enlightenment
  • Value should be the final outcome
  • What’s next at Nelson
  • Why independent research matters more than anything
  • Over thirty years of permanent outcomes: a field review of Nelson’s project record
  • Petroleum-contaminated soil treatment in the US: build the plan around the fuel profile
  • Contaminated soil management in the US: from excavation to an accepted destination
  • US remediation project evidence: what Tioga and Honolulu tell a project owner

Site Navigation

  • All Articles & Research
  • Thermal Remediation Capabilities
  • Project Case Studies
  • Remediation Glossary
  • About Nelson Environmental Remediation
  • Contact Nelson