Sewage Sludge on Farms: PFAS, EPA’s 2025-2026 Reversal, State Bans, and How to Avoid It

Every day, wastewater treatment plants separate solids from the water flowing out of homes, businesses, and factories. After treatment, much of this material, called sewage sludge or, when treated to meet federal standards, biosolids, is spread on farm fields as fertilizer. The practice recycles nutrients and organic matter and avoids landfilling or burning. The Environmental Protection Agency has long supported it.

But sewage sludge contains more than nutrients. It can carry traces of pharmaceuticals, personal care product chemicals, metals, microplastics, and, of greatest current concern, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the “forever chemicals” that resist breakdown. Farms in Maine, Michigan, and Texas have reported contaminated soil, water, crops, and livestock linked to past sludge applications. In 2025 and 2026, EPA’s position shifted twice. This article explains what is in sludge, what research shows about risks, where federal and state policy stands, and how consumers and farmers can reduce exposure.

What Is Sewage Sludge?

Wastewater treatment plants remove solids from incoming sewage and treat them to reduce pathogens, odors, and attraction of pests. Under federal rules known as Part 503, treated sludge that meets standards for pathogens, metals, and vector attraction can be applied to land as biosolids. Class A biosolids undergo treatment to reduce pathogens to below detectable levels and can be sold to the public as fertilizer or compost products, while Class B biosolids have reduced but detectable pathogens and come with site restrictions, such as waiting periods before harvesting crops or grazing animals. According to EPA, roughly 60 percent of U.S. sewage sludge is land applied, with the remainder landfilled or incinerated. Land application is used on farms, forests, reclamation sites, and lawns and gardens.

The Part 503 rules, adopted in 1993, set limits for nine metals and pathogen requirements but do not regulate most organic chemicals, including PFAS, pharmaceuticals, and flame retardants. EPA is required to review biosolids regulations periodically and has identified hundreds of chemicals in sludge, but setting limits requires risk assessments that have proceeded slowly.

PFAS: The Forever Chemicals in Sludge

PFAS are used in nonstick cookware, stain- and water-resistant fabrics, food packaging, firefighting foams, and many industrial processes. They wash into sewers from homes and especially from industries, and because conventional wastewater treatment does not destroy them, many accumulate in sludge. A 2013 study in the Journal of Hazardous Materials by Arjun Venkatesan and Rolf Halden analyzed archived samples from EPA’s 2001 National Sewage Sludge Survey representing 32 states and the District of Columbia. PFOS was the most abundant of 13 PFAS measured, averaging about 403 nanograms per gram dry weight, followed by PFOA at about 34 and PFDA at about 26. Levels in more recent sludge vary widely and depend heavily on industrial inputs to each treatment plant.

Once applied, PFAS persist in soil. A 2011 study in Environmental Science and Technology by Jennifer Sepulvado and colleagues measured PFAS in agricultural fields in Illinois that had received typical municipal biosolids. PFOS dominated in both biosolids and amended soils, soil concentrations rose linearly with cumulative biosolids loading, and the researchers’ analyses of desorption and transport indicated that some PFAS could move through soil, raising the potential for leaching toward groundwater.

When Sludge Contaminates Water: Decatur, Alabama

The clearest documented case of sludge-driven contamination comes from northern Alabama. A 2011 EPA study in Environmental Science and Technology by Andrew Lindstrom and colleagues examined fields near Decatur where biosolids from a municipal treatment plant that received waste from local fluorochemical manufacturers had been applied for as long as 12 years. Surface and well water near the fields had elevated PFAS concentrations, with 22 percent of samples exceeding EPA’s provisional health advisory for PFOA at the time, 400 nanograms per liter, a level far above EPA’s current standards. Shorter-chain PFAS moved most readily from soil into water. The case shows that sludge from plants receiving industrial PFAS can contaminate water supplies for years.

Contaminated Farms

Since 2016, farmers in several states have discovered high PFAS levels in soil, water, milk, crops, and animals on land where sludge was applied years earlier. In Maine, a dairy farm’s milk was found to contain PFOS far above state action levels, leading to the discovery that many farms had been treated with sludge containing industrial PFAS. Maine responded by testing hundreds of sites and, in 2022, became the first state to ban land application of sewage sludge. Michigan found contaminated beef cattle on a farm treated with sludge from a plant receiving industrial waste. In Texas, ranchers in Johnson County sued a biosolids company in 2024, alleging that fertilizer made from sludge contaminated their land, water, and livestock. Some affected farmers have lost their livelihoods, as contaminated land cannot be used for food production.

From Soil to Food

Plants can take up PFAS from soil, especially shorter-chain compounds that are more water-soluble. A 2019 review in Environmental Research by Rossella Ghisi and colleagues found a direct correlation between PFAS concentrations in soil and in plants, with uptake varying by crop and plant part. Leafy vegetables and forage crops tend to accumulate more than fruits and grains, and shorter-chain PFAS move more readily into edible parts. Animals grazing on contaminated pastures or eating contaminated feed accumulate longer-chain PFAS such as PFOS in meat and milk. These pathways explain why the Maine and Michigan contamination cases involved milk and beef.

Why PFAS Exposure Matters

A 2021 review in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry by Suzanne Fenton and colleagues summarized evidence that exposure to certain PFAS, particularly PFOA and PFOS, is associated with altered immune and thyroid function, liver disease, changes in lipid and insulin regulation, kidney disease, adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes, and cancer. Because these chemicals persist in the body for years, chronic low-level exposure from water, food, and consumer products adds up. Most people are exposed mainly through drinking water, food, and household products; sludge-treated land is a significant source mainly for people living or farming near heavily contaminated sites.

Other Contaminants in Sludge

PFAS are not the only concern. A 2006 U.S. Geological Survey study in Environmental Science and Technology by Chad Kinney and colleagues tested nine biosolid products from seven states for 87 organic wastewater contaminants and detected 55 of them in at least one product, with 30 to 45 in each, including pharmaceuticals, fragrances, detergent breakdown products, disinfectants, and flame retardants. Sludge can also contain microplastics and metals such as cadmium, lead, and mercury, though metal limits in Part 503 have reduced some risks. Pathogens are reduced by treatment but not always eliminated in Class B biosolids. A 2002 paper in BMC Public Health by David Lewis and colleagues documented complaints from 48 residents near ten land application sites in the United States and Canada, who reported symptoms such as respiratory and skin irritation, and proposed that irritant chemicals might increase susceptibility to infection. These self-reported findings were preliminary but highlighted the need for better study of nearby residents.

EPA’s Shifting Position, 2025–2026

On January 14, 2025, EPA released a draft risk assessment for PFOA and PFOS in sewage sludge. As summarized by EEC Environmental, the agency’s modeling found that human health risks could exceed EPA’s acceptable thresholds in some scenarios when land-applying sludge containing as little as 1 part per billion of PFOA or PFOS, for example for farm families consuming their own milk, meat, eggs, or crops, or drinking well water near treated fields. The assessment was described as a first step toward possible federal regulation.

The draft received more than 25,000 public comments. On June 29, 2026, EPA issued a draft guidance memorandum that changed course. According to Beveridge & Diamond, the guidance stated that the 2025 assessment had serious flaws that caused confusion and created a misconception that all biosolids use would harm the public, citing among other issues the lack of a national survey of PFOA and PFOS levels in sludge. The guidance reaffirmed EPA’s support for land application while recommending voluntary precautions, such as avoiding application near fishable waters and drinking water sources and on land where children are likely to contact soil. EPA accepted comments on the draft guidance through September 2026, and no federal limits on PFAS in biosolids have been set.

A Patchwork of State Rules

State	Approach
Maine	Banned all land application of sewage sludge in 2022
Connecticut	Banned land application and sale of biosolids containing PFAS
Michigan	Numeric PFOS thresholds that prohibit or restrict application
California, Washington, Vermont	Sampling and reporting requirements
Most other states	Federal Part 503 rules without PFAS limits

Banning land application has trade-offs. EPA’s 2026 guidance noted that Maine’s ban led to significant cost increases for utilities because landfill capacity is limited and the state has no sludge incinerators. Landfilling moves PFAS into landfill leachate, which often returns to treatment plants, and incineration may not fully destroy PFAS. The most effective long-term solution is reducing PFAS at their sources, especially industrial discharges into sewers, which several states now require through pretreatment programs.

How to Avoid Sludge-Grown Food and Products

Choose certified organic. USDA organic standards prohibit the use of sewage sludge on organic farms, making organic certification the most reliable label for avoiding food grown on sludge-treated land.

Ask local farmers. At farmers markets and community-supported agriculture programs, ask whether biosolids have ever been applied to the fields or pastures.

Read garden product labels. Some fertilizers and composts sold to home gardeners are made from biosolids. Labels may describe them as biosolids, sewage sludge, or simply as organic fertilizer from a municipal source. If you want to avoid them, look for products listed by the Organic Materials Review Institute or ask the manufacturer.

Test private wells near treated land. If you live near fields that received sludge, especially from plants serving industrial areas, consider testing well water for PFAS using a certified laboratory.

Reduce PFAS exposure overall. Use a water filter certified to reduce PFAS if your water contains them, limit grease-resistant food packaging, and choose cookware and products without PFAS where possible.

What Farmers Should Know

Farmers considering biosolids should ask suppliers for PFAS test results and the industrial sources feeding the treatment plant, understand that contamination could affect future land use and market access, and check state requirements. Farmers who have used biosolids in the past and are concerned about PFAS can contact state agriculture or environmental agencies, some of which offer testing and support programs. Maine created a fund to help affected farmers with testing, income replacement, and transitions.

The Case for Land Application

Supporters of land application note that biosolids return nitrogen, phosphorus, and organic matter to soil, reduce the need for synthetic fertilizers, and divert waste from landfills and incinerators. Many biosolids contain low levels of PFAS, especially from plants without significant industrial inputs, and EPA’s 2026 guidance pointed to FDA monitoring that very rarely finds PFOA or PFOS in foods available in U.S. markets. The challenge is distinguishing low-risk biosolids from those contaminated by industrial PFAS, which requires testing, source control, and transparent information for farmers and the public.

How Sludge Ended Up on Farms

For much of the twentieth century, many coastal cities dumped sewage sludge into the ocean. The Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988 ended that practice, and cities needed alternatives. Land application was promoted as beneficial recycling, and federal rules adopted in 1993 created a framework for it. Industry groups also encouraged the use of the term “biosolids” in the 1990s to improve public acceptance. Over the following decades, land application expanded, while scientific understanding of chemicals such as PFAS, which were not considered when the rules were written, grew substantially.

International Approaches

Countries handle sewage sludge differently. Switzerland banned the use of sewage sludge on farmland in 2006, requiring incineration, and has since moved toward recovering phosphorus from sludge ash. The Netherlands applies strict quality standards that keep most sludge off farms. The European Union’s Sewage Sludge Directive, adopted in 1986, regulates metals and is under review to address emerging contaminants. Some countries promote land application with more extensive contaminant testing. These differences show that policy choices involve weighing nutrient recycling against contaminant risks.

Microplastics in Sludge

Wastewater treatment removes much of the microplastic from water, but most of it ends up in sludge. Land-applied sludge is therefore a significant pathway for microplastics to reach agricultural soils, where they can persist and may carry other contaminants. Research on effects of microplastics on soil health and crops is growing but still limited, and microplastics are not regulated in biosolids. This adds to calls for more comprehensive monitoring of what sludge contains.

A Balanced View

Recycling nutrients from sewage to farmland has real benefits, and not all biosolids pose the same risk. But documented contamination of farms and water supplies, the persistence of PFAS, and regulatory gaps justify concern, particularly for sludge from plants receiving industrial waste. The shifts in EPA’s position between 2025 and 2026 leave states, farmers, and consumers navigating uncertainty. Testing, source control, transparency, and support for affected farmers are reasonable steps regardless of where one stands on land application.

Practical Takeaways

Choose certified organic foods if you want to avoid crops grown with sewage sludge. Ask local farmers about biosolids use. Check labels on garden fertilizers and composts. Test private wells near treated land for PFAS. Support source-control programs that keep PFAS out of sewers. Stay informed about your state’s biosolids rules.

PFAS Limits in Drinking Water

While biosolids lack federal PFAS limits, drinking water does not. In April 2024, EPA set enforceable limits of 4 parts per trillion each for PFOA and PFOS in public drinking water, among the strictest in the world, along with limits for several other PFAS. In 2025, the agency announced it would keep the PFOA and PFOS limits while extending compliance deadlines and reconsidering limits for some other PFAS. The contrast between parts-per-trillion drinking water limits and the absence of federal limits for sludge applied to farmland is one reason critics argue biosolids regulation lags behind the science. Water utilities that must remove PFAS from drinking water also generate PFAS-laden treatment residuals, adding to the disposal challenge.

Alternatives and Innovations

Researchers and utilities are exploring ways to keep nutrient recycling while reducing contaminant risks. Technologies such as pyrolysis and gasification heat sludge at high temperatures in low-oxygen conditions to produce biochar and may destroy or reduce some PFAS, though performance varies and emissions must be managed. Phosphorus can be recovered from wastewater as struvite, a clean fertilizer, or from incinerated sludge ash. Source control programs that require industries to pretreat PFAS-containing wastewater can lower PFAS in sludge substantially. Combining these approaches could allow safer recycling of nutrients in the future.

Questions to Ask

If you live in a farming area, ask your state environmental agency whether biosolids have been applied near your home and whether PFAS testing results are public. If you buy local food, ask farmers whether biosolids have been used on their fields. If you use garden products, ask manufacturers whether they contain biosolids and whether they test for PFAS. If you are a farmer offered free or low-cost biosolids, ask for recent PFAS test results and the treatment plant’s industrial sources before accepting them.

Looking Ahead

Federal policy on PFAS in biosolids remains unsettled after EPA’s 2026 draft guidance, and decisions may come from future rulemaking, litigation, or state action. More states are likely to adopt testing requirements and limits, and lawsuits by affected farmers continue. Advances in PFAS destruction technologies and source control could change the economics of sludge management. For consumers, the practical steps remain the same: choose organic when possible, ask questions, and support policies that keep forever chemicals out of the food supply.

Living Near Treated Fields

People living near fields where sludge is spread often report odors, and some report respiratory irritation, headaches, and other symptoms, particularly soon after application. Systematic health studies of nearby residents are limited, and self-reported symptoms are difficult to link to specific causes. A 2002 National Research Council review of federal biosolids rules concluded that there was no documented scientific evidence that the regulations had failed to protect public health, but also that there was persistent uncertainty about possible adverse health effects and recommended updated risk assessments and health investigations. Many of those recommendations, including better data on chemicals in sludge, remain relevant today.

Why Testing Matters

Because PFAS levels in sludge vary so widely, testing is the key to managing risk. Plants serving mostly residential areas often produce sludge with relatively low PFAS levels, while plants receiving waste from metal finishing, textile, paper, chemical manufacturing, airports, or landfills may produce sludge with much higher levels. Without testing, farmers and regulators cannot distinguish between them. States such as Michigan that require testing and set thresholds have been able to identify high-PFAS sources and reduce them through industrial pretreatment, lowering PFAS in sludge over time.

The Costs of Contamination

When farmland is contaminated with high PFAS levels, the consequences can be severe and long-lasting. Contaminated milk, meat, or crops may be withheld from sale, herds may be culled, and land may be unusable for food production for years because PFAS do not break down. Remediation of agricultural soil at scale is not currently practical. Families have lost businesses built over generations. These outcomes, borne by farmers who often used sludge in good faith on official advice, are why affected communities have pushed for testing, compensation funds, and liability for the industries whose PFAS entered the sewer system. Preventing contamination in the first place, through testing and source control, is far less costly than dealing with it afterward, both for farm families and for the communities that depend on safe local food and water.

Common Myths

“Treated sludge is free of contaminants.” Treatment reduces pathogens but does not remove PFAS and many other chemicals.

“All sludge is equally contaminated.” Levels vary widely, with industrial inputs driving the highest PFAS concentrations.

“Organic food may be grown with sludge.” USDA organic standards prohibit sewage sludge.

“Banning land application solves the problem.” PFAS still require disposal; reducing sources is essential.

“Federal rules limit PFAS in biosolids.” As of 2026, there are no federal PFAS limits for biosolids.

Key Terms

Biosolids: Treated sewage sludge meeting federal standards for land application.

PFAS: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, persistent synthetic chemicals sometimes called forever chemicals.

Part 503: Federal rules governing the use and disposal of sewage sludge.

Class A and Class B biosolids: Categories based on pathogen reduction, with different use restrictions.

Source control: Reducing pollutants before they enter the sewer system.

The Bottom Line

About 60 percent of U.S. sewage sludge is spread on land, mostly farms, recycling nutrients but also carrying PFAS, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and other contaminants that federal rules do not limit. Research has documented PFAS accumulation in sludge-treated soils, contamination of water near treated fields, and uptake into crops and livestock, and several farms have been severely affected. EPA’s January 2025 draft assessment found possible risks at very low PFAS levels, but its June 2026 draft guidance criticized that assessment and reaffirmed support for land application with voluntary precautions. States have taken widely varying approaches, from bans to testing. Consumers can avoid sludge-grown food by choosing certified organic products and asking farmers about their practices.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is sewage sludge used on farms in the United States?

Yes. About 60 percent of U.S. sewage sludge is land applied, mostly on agricultural land.

Does sewage sludge contain PFAS?

Yes. Conventional treatment does not remove PFAS, and many accumulate in sludge, especially from industrial sources.

Can organic farms use sewage sludge?

No. USDA organic standards prohibit sewage sludge.

Has EPA set limits for PFAS in biosolids?

Not as of 2026. A 2025 draft risk assessment was followed by 2026 draft guidance recommending voluntary precautions.

How can I tell if garden fertilizer contains biosolids?

Check labels for biosolids or sewage sludge, look for OMRI-listed products, or ask the manufacturer.

References

1. Venkatesan AK, Halden RU. National inventory of perfluoroalkyl substances in archived U.S. biosolids from the 2001 EPA National Sewage Sludge Survey. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2013;252–253:413–418. PMID 23562984
2. Sepulvado JG, Blaine AC, Hundal LS, Higgins CP. Occurrence and fate of perfluorochemicals in soil following the land application of municipal biosolids. Environmental Science and Technology. 2011;45(19):8106–8112. PMID 21446724
3. Lindstrom AB, Strynar MJ, Delinsky AD, et al. Application of WWTP biosolids and resulting perfluorinated compound contamination of surface and well water in Decatur, Alabama, USA. Environmental Science and Technology. 2011;45(19):8015–8021. PMID 21513287
4. Ghisi R, Vamerali T, Manzetti S. Accumulation of perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) in agricultural plants: A review. Environmental Research. 2019;169:326–341. PMID 30502744
5. Fenton SE, Ducatman A, Boobis A, et al. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Toxicity and Human Health Review: Current State of Knowledge and Strategies for Informing Future Research. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 2021;40(3):606–630. PMID 33017053
6. Kinney CA, Furlong ET, Zaugg SD, et al. Survey of organic wastewater contaminants in biosolids destined for land application. Environmental Science and Technology. 2006;40(23):7207–7215. PMID 17180968
7. Lewis DL, Gattie DK, Novak ME, et al. Interactions of pathogens and irritant chemicals in land-applied sewage sludges (biosolids). BMC Public Health. 2002;2:11. PMID 12097151
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Draft Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment for PFOA and PFOS. January 2025. epa.gov
9. Beveridge & Diamond. EPA Issues Draft PFAS in Biosolids Guidance. 2026. bdlaw.com

Last updated: October 6, 2026