PFAS coverage in 2026 has been confusing, and the confusion has a specific shape: two different proposed rules keep getting reported as one. Only one of them is a rescission, and it does not cover the two compounds most people have heard of.
Here is the actual state of play, checked against the EPA's own rule pages and the Federal Register notices.
Two rules, not one
Rule one — PFOA and PFOS: limits upheld, deadline may move.
The 2024 National Primary Drinking Water Regulation set enforceable limits of 4.0 parts per trillion each for PFOA and PFOS. Those limits are not being withdrawn. What the EPA has proposed is a mechanism letting water systems that apply for it take two more years to comply — April 2029 moving to April 2031.
It is an extension available on request, not a blanket delay, and monitoring and reporting obligations are unchanged.
Rule two — four other PFAS: proposed rescission.
A separate proposed rule would rescind the limits for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA (commonly called GenX), and the hazard-index mixture of those three plus PFBS.
The stated reason is procedural rather than toxicological. The EPA says it set those limits without first completing a regulatory determination that the Safe Drinking Water Act requires as a prerequisite, and that the sequence it used was not authorised. Notably, the agency also says that once it corrects the process it will evaluate these compounds again, and that the result "could be more stringent requirements."
Both are proposals
Neither is final. The comment period closed on 20 July 2026 and final action is pending as of this writing.
That matters for how you read any headline on the subject. "EPA rescinds PFAS limits" is wrong twice over: the two headline compounds are intact, and nothing has taken effect.
What it means locally
The EWG contaminant profiles for systems in Mobile and Baldwin County show PFOA detected on 7 systems, PFHxS on 7, PFOS on 6 and PFNA on 4 — at parts-per-trillion concentrations, which is the scale these compounds operate at.
The compounds proposed for rescission and the compounds whose limits stand are both present here. Whichever way the rules land, the detection does not change; only what utilities are obliged to do about it does.
What actually removes them
PFAS are dissolved at parts per trillion, which puts them beyond taste, smell and ordinary filtration. Two technologies have the residential track record:
Reverse osmosis membranes, and carbon-block systems certified to NSF/ANSI 53 for PFOA and PFOS reduction.
The certification is the whole buying decision. A generic carbon pitcher is not a PFAS strategy, and the difference between marketing and reduction is verifiable on the certification listing rather than on the box.
Why this page carries a date
Because it will go out of date, and pages about moving regulations usually do so silently.
The status above was checked against the primary sources on 19 August 2026 and is scheduled for re-checking. If you are reading this long after that date, verify before acting on it — and be sceptical of any page discussing PFAS rules that does not tell you when it was written.
More on PFAS removal systems, which carries the same dated status notice, or see what is actually detected in your own system.
Sources: EPA, "Proposed PFAS Rescission Rule" and "Proposed PFOA and PFOS Compliance Extension Rule"; Federal Register vol. 91, 20 May 2026. Contaminant detections from the EWG Tap Water Database. Verified 19 August 2026.