Also detected, no federal limit: 6:2 FTS, PFPeA, PFBA, PFHxA, PFBS, PFHpA, ADONA.
Is there PFAS in City of Sugar Land water?
Some. At least one sample reached an EPA limit, but the average at every sampling point stayed below it.
City of Sugar Land is a public water system drawing on surface water, based in Sugar Land, Texas, serving about 90,909 people. Under EPA's Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule it was tested for 29 PFAS and lithium 22 times across 7 sampling points between Feb 2023 and Nov 2023.
Every PFAS detected
| PFAS | Detected | Highest | Worst point avg | EPA limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6:2 FTS 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonic acid |
2 of 22 | 672 ppt | 168 ppt | none |
| PFPeA Perfluoropentanoic acid |
16 of 22 | 358 ppt | 138 ppt | none |
| PFBA Perfluorobutanoic acid |
5 of 22 | 74.8 ppt | 21.8 ppt | none |
| PFHxA Perfluorohexanoic acid |
6 of 22 | 12.9 ppt | 5.3 ppt | none |
| PFBS Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid |
5 of 22 | 5.8 ppt | 2.7 ppt | none |
| PFOA Perfluorooctanoic acid |
2 of 22 | 4.1 ppt | 1.0 ppt | 4 ppt |
| PFHpA Perfluoroheptanoic acid |
2 of 22 | 3.6 ppt | 0.9 ppt | none |
| ADONA ADONA |
2 of 22 | 3.4 ppt | 0.8 ppt | none |
Not detected: PFMBA, PFMPA, PFHpS, 8:2 FTS, 4:2 FTS, HFPO-DA, 9Cl-PF3ONS, 11Cl-PF3OUdS, NFDHA, PFDA, PFUnA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, PFEESA, NMeFOSAA, NEtFOSAA, PFTrDA, PFTA, PFPeS, PFDoA.
Lithium, tested in the same program: highest 32.2 ppb, detected in 18 of 22 samples. EPA's health-based screening level is 10 ppb.
What the EPA limits mean here
In April 2024 EPA set enforceable limits of 4 ppt for PFOA and PFOS, 10 ppt each for PFHxS, PFNA and GenX, and a hazard index of 1 for mixtures. Utilities were given until 2029 to comply. In May 2026 EPA proposed keeping only the PFOA and PFOS limits and moving that deadline to 2031. Until that proposal is final, the 2024 limits stand.
Compliance is judged on a running annual average at each entry point, so we show the average at this system's worst sampling point next to its single highest result. UCMR 5 results do not by themselves put a utility in or out of compliance.
What you can do at home
Two routes work for PFAS. For drinking and cooking water only, a reverse osmosis system certified to NSF/ANSI 58 with a PFOA/PFOS reduction claim is the cheapest proven option. To treat every tap and shower, a whole-house carbon system with enough contact time works, but check that the maker has PFAS test data, not just a marketing claim. See the best filters for PFAS and how PFAS removal works.
Other systems in Texas
- City of Bryan none detected
- Clear Lake City Water Authority above an EPA limit
- City of Mansfield 3 PFAS detected
- City of Cedar Park 1 PFAS detected
- City of Temple 6 PFAS detected
- Aqua WSC none detected
All 1154 tested systems in Texas
ZIP codes served
77478 77479 77487 77496 77498
As reported by the utility to EPA. Neighbouring ZIPs are often split between systems; your water bill names yours.
Cite this page
Well & Tap. "PFAS in City of Sugar Land water: EPA UCMR 5 results." Data: U.S. EPA Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, final release August 2026, PWSID TX0790005. https://wellandtap.com/pfas/texas/city-of-sugar-land/
About this data
Source: U.S. EPA, UCMR 5 occurrence data, final release August 2026 (PWSID TX0790005). Population: EPA SDWIS. Averages count results below the reporting level as zero, the same convention EPA uses for running annual averages. Full method.