PFAS in Colorado

Last updated: July 16, 2025
Contributor: nicky

PFAS contamination in Colorado has gained widespread attention over the past few years, largely due to emerging data about health risks and environmental impacts. I have monitored how per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) accumulate in water supplies, soil, and even household products. Public health agencies, including the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), have flagged PFAS as persistent chemicals that do not break down easily. This means they can linger in our bodies and ecosystems, raising concerns about potential illnesses such as certain cancers, thyroid disease, and damage to vital organs. In early 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established new Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for six specific PFAS compounds, requiring public water systems to reduce PFAS levels below these enforceable limits. Meanwhile, local communities are pursuing clean-up strategies and testing programs.

Officials, scientists, and community members are focused on solutions. In January 2024, the CDPHE launched a stakeholder process to refine its PFAS Action Plan. Participants from various sectors, including water utilities and nonprofit groups, contributed ideas on monitoring, data-sharing, and the need for ongoing public engagement. Federal funding is bringing relief, although questions remain about whether the available grants and loans will fully cover the costs of advanced water treatment technologies. Colorado’s rural and small-town residents, in particular, face challenges related to well testing and resource constraints.

I have created this resource to clarify what PFAS are, why they are dangerous, and what steps you can take to protect yourself. Throughout this article, I will also discuss how Coloradans can determine eligibility for a PFAS lawsuit and explore the role of Legal Claim Assistant in connecting individuals with experienced attorneys. The stakes are high: PFAS are linked to significant health issues, and contamination can burden water systems with expensive treatment methods. By understanding the nature and extent of PFAS contamination, we can better position ourselves for meaningful action, legal recourse, and long-term solutions.

What are PFAS and why are they dangerous?

PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These chemicals have been manufactured since the 1940s, primarily for their unique ability to repel heat, water, and oil. Because of these properties, PFAS show up in consumer products such as nonstick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, waterproof clothing, and some firefighting foams. Over decades, they have also entered the environment through industrial discharge, landfill leachate, and household waste.

The durability that makes PFAS so attractive for manufacturers is also what makes them potentially hazardous to people and wildlife. PFAS do not degrade rapidly in air, soils, or water supplies. Once in our bodies, they can persist for years, potentially causing health effects that research is still uncovering. The most well-studied PFAS compounds are PFOA and PFOS. Scientists have linked these specific chemicals to health issues ranging from high cholesterol to kidney and testicular cancer. Some evidence also points to disruptions in thyroid function and liver enzymes.

Exposure to PFAS can occur through multiple pathways. Drinking water contaminated with even low levels of PFAS is a known concern, but research suggests that diet can also be significant in areas not experiencing direct contamination. Contact with certain consumer goods containing PFAS, such as fast-food packaging or water-repellent coatings, can also contribute, though this route appears to pose a lesser relative risk. The problem is that individuals often encounter small amounts through more than one source, and the cumulative impact may grow over time.

Public health agencies worldwide, including the EPA, increasingly view PFAS as a priority pollutant group. In April 2024, the EPA established MCLs for PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and GenX Chemicals. These federal standards instruct public water utilities to keep PFAS below the set limits. However, water systems sometimes struggle with the cost of robust treatment technologies. The need for widespread, coordinated action is clear. This includes supportive legislation, more comprehensive testing, and public awareness initiatives—particularly in areas such as Colorado where contamination is widespread but unevenly distributed.

Where are PFAS found in Colorado?

PFAS have been detected in various Colorado locations, from densely populated urban corridors to rural regions. Industrial runoff and military-use firefighting foams are two major contributors, according to the CDPHE. Certain municipalities, such as those near former or active military sites, have discovered PFAS in groundwater wells at levels exceeding recommended limits. Additionally, some commercial and agricultural operations have unintentionally introduced PFAS to local water tables and farmland.

Colorado’s PFAS Action Plan, first created in 2019, identified areas of the state with elevated contamination. The plan prioritized systematic testing in public water supplies and encouraged data sharing among stakeholders. According to the plan’s draft updates in 2024, one objective is “to share information related to PFAS with the public,” the department noted, emphasizing newsletters and engagement opportunities. During stakeholder sessions, officials identified five major themes regarding the chemicals, including a call for greater transparency and clearer guidance for local authorities and water utilities.

Private wells, especially in small communities, remain under-sampled. Some residents receive free testing through grant programs, while others are unaware of contamination risks. The CDPHE’s outreach efforts aim to close this information gap. Large water systems in cities like Denver and Colorado Springs also face scrutiny. The South Adams County Water and Sanitation District is preparing an $80 million treatment plant to address PFAS in groundwater wells, partly funded by newly available state grants.

Although not every city has detected contaminated water, PFAS remain a concern across much of Colorado. If you live near manufacturing facilities, firefighting training areas, or agricultural sites using biosolids, it is important to stay informed about PFAS monitoring results. In some instances, local authorities have advised residents to use water filters designed to remove or reduce PFAS. The next section explores how PFAS enter and circulate in drinking water systems, potentially affecting a large number of Coloradans.

Find out if you're eligible and may be eligible for compensation.

Get your Free Case Review and Maximize You Payout With the Help From Legal Claim Assistant.

Get A Free Case Review

Free

PFAS in Colorado’s drinking water

Colorado’s drinking water sources—rivers, reservoirs, aquifers, and groundwater—can all become contaminated with PFAS over time. Once PFAS infiltrate these systems, they tend to persist. According to the EPA’s Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) from 2023 to 2025, large public water systems, along with selected smaller ones, must monitor for 29 types of PFAS. This data helps scientists and regulators evaluate exposure levels and consider new regulations.

In April 2024, the EPA set its first legally enforceable PFAS standards for public water systems. Utilities must actively lower PFAS levels to remain at or below the designated MCLs, which have been set as low as 4 parts per trillion for certain compounds. This represents a significant drop from the earlier health advisories of 70 parts per trillion. While the new limits aim to protect sensitive populations—particularly young children and pregnant or nursing people—meeting them necessitates advanced filtration technology such as granular activated carbon, ion exchange resin, or reverse osmosis.

A major focus of Colorado’s response has been identifying utilities that can benefit from federal and state assistance. Nearly $86 million in federal funding was announced to help small Colorado communities remove PFAS from their drinking water systems. However, stakeholders have expressed concerns that federal grants will not fully cover the long-term costs associated with implementing, maintaining, and upgrading the necessary treatment plants.

The CDPHE advises public water systems to inform consumers about PFAS levels, even when they are below detection thresholds, to foster transparency. If levels exceed the EPA’s MCLs, water providers must notify customers promptly and implement measures to reduce contamination. Such steps may include blending water sources, adding advanced filtration, or offering alternative water supplies. Many of these solutions come with hefty expenses, prompting additional conversations about cost-sharing among local governments, federal agencies, and potentially responsible polluters.

PFAS in Colorado’s soil and agriculture

PFAS contamination does not affect only water supplies. It can also migrate into soil, where it persists for long periods and sometimes accumulates in crops. Biosolids—byproducts of wastewater treatment—can be a significant source of soil contamination when used as fertilizer. According to recent risk analysis from the EPA, Colorado lands have repeatedly received biosolids containing PFOS levels that far exceed the agency’s risk threshold. Counties like Grand, San Miguel, El Paso, and Larimer have reported elevated contamination in these biosolid samples.

In areas where biosolids are applied, PFAS can transfer from soil to runoff water, eventually reaching streams or reservoirs downstream. Researchers caution that livestock grazing on PFAS-contaminated fields might ingest these substances, contributing to human exposure through milk or meat products. Although data on PFAS movement through the food chain are evolving, some evidence suggests that repeated, low-level exposure from multiple sources can gradually build up in our bodies.

Colorado farms impacted by PFAS often face a difficult choice. They can opt to switch to non-biosolid fertilizers, but these are sometimes more expensive or less readily available, placing an economic burden on farmers. Some states have imposed stricter regulations on biosolids, and Maine has implemented a ban on the application of PFAS-contaminated biosolids, supported by over $200 million in state funding. While Colorado has not gone to that extreme, the Water Quality Control Commission’s Policy 20-1 (PFAS Narrative Policy) outlines broad steps for monitoring PFAS in lakes, streams, and farmland.

For consumers, the presence of PFAS in agriculture mostly underscores the importance of broader environmental stewardship. Although typical exposure from consumer products is relatively lower, PFAS in produce, dairy, or meat can pose additional risks. By understanding how PFAS can reach our tables, we can make better-informed decisions about supporting policies that address both water and soil contamination, rather than focusing on water alone.

Health effects of PFAS exposure

Long-term exposure to PFAS can disrupt multiple body systems. Research consistently highlights concerns about kidney and liver functions, cholesterol levels, immune system responses, and hormone regulation. Scientists have the strongest evidence regarding PFOA and PFOS, which they link to reduced vaccine response, thyroid disorders, elevated cholesterol, and certain cancers.

Vulnerable populations include very young children, pregnant or nursing individuals, and those living in areas of high contamination. Occupational exposure, such as firefighters working with foam that contains PFAS, can also result in elevated blood levels. Blood tests can detect PFAS, but these tests do not indicate whether health issues will develop. Instead, they provide a snapshot of how much PFAS is currently in a person’s system.

Studies have shown that PFAS exposure might also correlate with fertility challenges, low birth weight in infants, and disruptions to liver enzymes. Some experts caution that the cumulative effect of even moderate exposure over many years requires further scrutiny, particularly in communities with PFAS levels in well water. The ongoing monitoring efforts in Colorado aim to fill critical data gaps and accelerate interventions that reduce or eliminate preventable exposures.

While the scientific community continues to gather data, the general consensus is that PFAS pose real risks that intensify with prolonged exposure. Mitigation measures, like using water filters certified to remove PFAS, can help. Reducing reliance on PFAS-containing consumer products is another step. However, large-scale changes—phasing out PFAS manufacturing, enforcing strict water regulations, and cleaning up polluted sites—are considered the most direct means of safeguarding public health.

PFAS-linked diseases in Colorado

PFAS do not target one single organ or process. Instead, people with elevated PFAS levels face several known risks, with ongoing research suggesting even more potential concerns. Here in Colorado, residents in areas of significant PFAS contamination have reported higher incidences of kidney and testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and liver damage. Moreover, community members often face heightened anxiety when local testing confirms contamination.

Below are some of the most documented PFAS-linked conditions reported in scientific literature. This information is provided for general awareness and should not replace a medical evaluation.

Kidney cancer

Kidney cancer is one of the diseases most commonly associated with PFAS exposure, particularly with PFOA and PFOS. A study of communities facing elevated PFAS levels found a statistically significant increase in kidney cancer rates among long-term residents. The mechanism isn’t fully understood, but researchers point to kidney cells’ sensitivity to chemical stresses. If you have a history of kidney issues or a family background of kidney disease, you might consider testing your local water for PFAS and consulting a healthcare provider about a blood test. While PFAS alone may not be the only factor, reducing exposure can play a role in lowering overall risk.

Testicular cancer

Testicular cancer has also shown an association with PFAS exposure. Some data suggest that the testicular tissue might be particularly vulnerable to certain PFAS compounds. Men exposed to PFAS for many years, whether through contaminated drinking water or direct occupational use of firefighting foam, have shown slightly higher rates of testicular tumors in certain research studies. Though the overall incidence of testicular cancer remains relatively low, any detected rise in these numbers demands closer scrutiny. For individuals in communities like South Adams County, home to some of Colorado’s most contaminated wells, awareness of this potential risk is crucial.

Thyroid disease

Thyroid dysfunction—ranging from hypothyroidism to hyperthyroidism—can occur after chronic PFAS exposure. Multiple human studies indicate that PFOA and PFOS may act as endocrine disruptors, interfering with thyroid hormone production and metabolism. For younger individuals, stable thyroid hormone levels are essential for growth and cognitive development. In adults, these hormones regulate energy balance and organ function. If you notice unexplained weight changes, fatigue, or temperature sensitivity, it might be worth discussing potential PFAS exposure with a medical professional. Although official guidelines do not recommend routine PFAS blood testing for everyone, those in suspected contamination hot spots could benefit from further evaluation.

Liver damage and cholesterol changes

Elevated cholesterol is another common marker linked to PFAS exposure. Researchers note that even moderate PFAS levels in the blood can coincide with higher total cholesterol, potentially contributing to heart disease risk. Liver enzyme abnormalities have been observed as well, suggesting that PFAS may disrupt liver function over time. While not everyone with PFAS exposure will develop liver issues, the potential harm underlines the importance of ongoing monitoring. Many of the individuals who develop these problems are also dealing with other risk factors. Still, reducing PFAS in drinking water can help limit at least one contributing element to chronic disease.

How Colorado is responding to the PFAS crisis

Colorado has taken multiple steps to address PFAS contamination, both through regulatory frameworks and financial assistance. The state’s aim is to identify hot-spot areas, enforce new standards, and secure funding for water treatment projects. The approach also includes public education, so residents understand the potential risks and how to minimize them.

Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (CDPHE) actions

The CDPHE launched its first PFAS Action Plan in 2019, with the goal of reducing new releases of PFAS and aiding affected communities. In January 2024, the department initiated a new engagement process to gather stakeholder input on the draft 2024 PFAS Action Plan. Feedback led to five primary themes, one of which was the need for ongoing communication about PFAS contamination and health concerns. The CDPHE now circulates a biannual PFAS newsletter that highlights emerging data, legislative proposals, and upcoming volunteer testing opportunities. It also coordinates statewide collaboration by partnering with local water systems.

Meanwhile, older pieces of legislation, including House Bill 19-1279 and House Bill 20-1119, placed restrictions on PFAS-containing firefighting foam. A Certification of Registration Program requires anyone storing or using such foam to register with the state. Beyond that, the Water Quality Control Commission guides PFAS monitoring in rivers, lakes, and streams under Policy 20-1, which was adopted in July 2020. These measures form the backbone of Colorado’s attempt to assess the scope of PFAS contamination and hold polluters accountable.

Proposed PFAS standards and testing programs

In April 2024, the EPA finalized the PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation. This move compels public water systems to test for six PFAS chemicals and reduce contaminant levels that exceed new MCLs. By April 26, 2027, each public water system statewide must have completed initial PFAS monitoring, though many expect to use data from samples taken after January 1, 2019, to fulfill this requirement sooner.

Colorado authorities are now evaluating how these federal rules will be adopted under the state’s own Regulation No. 11. The Water Quality Control Division plans to hold virtual meetings beginning in August 2024, inviting stakeholder feedback on specific compliance tools. These discussions will continue until a formal rulemaking hearing in August 2025. The CDPHE has indicated that they are open to using existing data from earlier voluntary sampling, which could help communities speed up their compliance timeline.

Federal funding and clean-up projects in Colorado

With PFAS recognized as a priority contaminant, Colorado is stepping up efforts to secure grants and low-interest loans from federal sources. Over $86 million in federal funding has been earmarked for small and disadvantaged communities to address local PFAS concerns. In some instances, such as the South Adams County Water and Sanitation District, officials are building a new $80 million treatment plant to meet stricter PFAS standards. Part of this funding is expected to come from a special loan provided by the Colorado Water and Power Development Authority.

However, the overall cost of achieving the EPA’s recommended PFAS levels could reach into the tens of billions of dollars nationwide. Some project that the cost burden for Colorado alone may exceed current estimates. As a result, certain stakeholders are urging lawmakers to consider additional legislation and alternative funding mechanisms. Senate Bill 20-218 has already collected fees from fuel transport to fund PFAS studies, while House Bill 22-1345 aims to limit consumer goods that contain PFAS. Still, many communities feel more robust financing is necessary to sustain long-term remediation work, especially in rural or economically challenged areas.

Can you test your water or soil for PFAS in Colorado?

Many Coloradans wonder if they can test their private wells or farmland for PFAS. The short answer is yes: you can hire a certified laboratory to conduct PFAS analysis on water or soil samples. Costs vary, depending on the extent of testing. Some local governments offer free or reduced-cost testing through the PFAS Grant Program, primarily for folks with private wells in areas of known contamination. Public water systems typically handle their own routine testing to comply with regulations.

When testing, it is crucial to follow proper sampling guidelines. PFAS can easily be introduced through contamination on sampling materials, so labs generally recommend using specially prepared containers and limiting contact with everyday objects like nonstick cookware or waterproof clothing during sample collection. If testing confirms elevated PFAS in well water, you may need to install a home filtration system that removes PFAS using activated carbon, ion exchange, or reverse osmosis. Filtering technology varies in cost and effectiveness, so evaluating different options is advisable.

When it comes to soil, farmers and landowners often seek PFAS testing if their land has previously received biosolid applications. The CDPHE recommends coordinating with local agricultural extension services to pinpoint the best testing strategy. Because PFAS are mobile in soil and water, addressing the source of contamination—like halting the use of biosolids that exceed risk thresholds—remains vital for meaningful remediation.

Do you qualify for a PFAS lawsuit in Colorado?

People who have experienced significant PFAS exposure and related illnesses may be eligible to file a legal claim. In Colorado, potential lawsuits often involve water utilities, manufacturers, or other entities responsible for pollution. In some cases, individuals join class-action lawsuits to seek compensation for medical bills, property value losses, and the costs of installing home filtration systems. To succeed with such claims, you generally need verifiable evidence of PFAS contamination, medical documentation that connects your health issues to PFAS, and an understanding of liability pathways.

I recommend consulting a legal professional well-versed in environmental law to assess eligibility. Depending on your situation, you could pursue claims against a company that released PFAS into local waters, or against a specific manufacturer of firefighting foam, such as DuPont, if evidence shows their product contributed to contamination. If you believe you have a case, you can start by reviewing more details about water contamination lawsuits at this dedicated resource and about lawsuits that have involved major PFAS producers at this page.

Why choose Legal Claim Assistant

I understand these legal processes can be daunting. I rely on resources like Legal Claim Assistant to connect people facing PFAS contamination with attorneys who specialize in this field. The organization manages an extensive network of law firms that handle environmental and toxic exposure claims. These lawyers understand the scientific underpinnings around PFAS, which can be pivotal in proving causation and damage in court.

For many people, the immediate concern is finances. Legal Claim Assistant works to ensure initial case reviews are free, and many firms offer contingency-based arrangements, meaning you pay only if you win. This model helps reduce the burden on families already dealing with medical bills or property devaluation linked to PFAS contamination. Often, attorneys will partner with experts in toxicology, medicine, and environmental science to build strong cases.

If you are unsure about eligibility or want more details on how PFAS lawsuits work, visit the main PFAS portal at Legal Claim Assistant to learn more. By leveraging legal action, you might recover damages for medical expenses and force greater accountability from those responsible for releasing PFAS into your environment.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

The following section addresses common questions I hear from people worried about PFAS in Colorado. These short answers provide basic guidance, but your unique situation may require speaking with local health officials, water providers, or a qualified lawyer.

Where have PFAS been found in Colorado?

PFAS have been confirmed in multiple regions of Colorado. Areas near industrial sites, airports, and military bases often exhibit higher levels, largely due to firefighting foam. Water sources, including groundwater and public utilities, can carry PFAS over long distances, so some rural towns have also detected contamination. The state’s PFAS Action Plan highlights several communities that monitor their water supplies and offer updated test results to residents.

If you live in another state, you might also find PFAS contamination in your area. For instance, you can see ongoing monitoring updates in Minnesota or New York, as PFAS contamination can cross state borders.

Can I test my well or municipal water for PFAS?

Yes, you can. Many local agencies run testing programs, and federal funding might cover the costs in certain cases. Homeowners with private wells can opt for certified laboratory tests. Many public water systems already perform regular PFAS sampling per state and federal guidelines. If concerned, contact your water provider to see if PFAS testing has been conducted recently, or request additional testing through the PFAS Grant Program if available in your area.

What are the health risks of PFAS exposure?

Potential risks include elevated cholesterol, disrupted thyroid hormone levels, and immunological effects that could reduce vaccine efficacy. More serious conditions, such as kidney and testicular cancer, have also been linked to PFAS, though not everyone exposed will develop these illnesses. Children, pregnant individuals, and certain occupational groups may be more vulnerable. If you suspect chronic exposure, speak with a healthcare provider about testing and possible preventive measures.

Is the state doing enough to clean up PFAS?

Colorado has made noteworthy progress: the CDPHE’s PFAS Action Plan, adoption of the EPA’s new MCLs, and statewide outreach efforts all signal official commitment. However, full remediation requires significant financial resources, and some critics argue that certain legislative measures do not go far enough. The development of new treatment facilities, increased testing, and PFAS-free product initiatives are ongoing. Ultimately, the pace of cleanup reflects regulatory priorities, budget constraints, and technological capabilities.

Are Colorado farms impacted by PFAS in the water or soil?

Yes. Farms that have historically used biosolids for fertilizer may have elevated levels of PFOS or other PFAS in their soil. Livestock grazing on contaminated fields could accumulate PFAS in their tissues, and crops might take up small amounts through irrigation water. Research is ongoing to pinpoint exactly how much of a threat this poses to consumers, but state authorities are monitoring identified hotspots and issuing guidelines to farmers.

How do I know if I’m eligible to file a PFAS lawsuit?

Eligibility typically hinges on significant PFAS exposure that can be traced to a clear source, such as a manufacturing plant or firefighting foam used at airports. You also need evidence of resulting health complications or property damage. If your medical records and local water data indicate PFAS contamination, you may have grounds for a claim. Contacting an experienced attorney is the most direct way to confirm your legal options. For additional help, consult Legal Claim Assistant or review the resources on filing water contamination claims at this link.