Starting in April 2026, Connecticut Water Company customers started seeing a new line item on their water bills: the Water Quality and Treatment Adjustment, or WQTA. The surcharge, authorized by the General Assembly through Public Act 25-142 (HB 6777) and approved by PURA, adds 0.53% to every bill. It covers costs that Connecticut Water racked up in 2024 and 2025 treating PFAS, the "forever chemicals" that have contaminated drinking water across the state.
Connecticut Water serves about 110,000 customers in 60 towns. All of them are now paying for PFAS cleanup.
They are not alone. Aquarion Water Company, which serves most of Fairfield County, has committed roughly $150 million to its own PFAS program, a problem that won't be fully resolved until 2031. Some portion of that cost will land on customer bills too. And nationally, 176 million Americans are drinking water contaminated with PFAS, according to the Environmental Working Group's analysis of EPA UCMR 5 data. Connecticut's surcharge is one of the first visible signs that someone has to pay for the cleanup.
How Much Is This Actually Costing?
The numbers are large and growing. Here's where things stand as of April 2026:
| Utility | Customers | PFAS Treatment Cost | Settlement Money Received | Gap | |---------|-----------|-------------------|--------------------------|-----| | Connecticut Water | 110,000 across 60 towns | $241.7 million | $7.6 million | $234M+ | | Aquarion | Fairfield, New Haven, Litchfield counties | $150 million (estimated) | Pending | $150M+ |
Connecticut Water's $7.6 million in settlement money covers about 3% of its treatment costs. The rest comes from you.
What the Surcharge Means in Dollars
On a typical Connecticut household water bill of roughly $44 per month, 0.53% adds about $0.23. That's $2.80 per year. The number seems small. It is small, for now.
But the WQTA is designed to be recalculated. PURA can adjust the percentage every 12 months, and Connecticut Water has $241.7 million in projects across 35 water sources that are still being built. As more treatment systems come online and capital costs escalate, expect that 0.53% to climb. The surcharge is a ramp, not a plateau.
The national trajectory confirms this. The American Water Works Association projects that average household water bills will rise from $429 per year in 2025 to between $685 and $969 by 2050, driven largely by PFAS compliance and infrastructure replacement. Connecticut ratepayers are at the front of that curve.
Why Are Homeowners Paying for PFAS Cleanup?
The utilities did not create this problem. The contamination came from chemical manufacturers, 3M, DuPont, and dozens of others, who made and sold PFAS-containing products for decades while knowing about the health risks. Thirty-nine Connecticut public water systems have tested positive for PFAS. The EPA set its first-ever limits, 4 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS, in April 2024, and gave utilities until 2031 to comply.
Attorney General William Tong sued 28 of those manufacturers in January 2024. Nationally, the 3M and DuPont settlements exceed $13.6 billion. But lawsuits take years, sometimes a decade, to resolve. The utilities need to treat the water now, and the money has to come from somewhere.
The somewhere is your water bill.
This is the structure of environmental contamination in America: the companies that profit from the problem face lawsuits that take decades. The communities that suffer the problem pay to clean it up in the meantime. Sometimes the lawsuits succeed and some money comes back. Often it doesn't cover the full cost. The GAO's 2025 report on PFAS costs puts the national price tag in stark terms: the EPA estimates $1.55 billion per year in compliance costs, while the AWWA's estimate is nearly double that at $2.7 to $3.5 billion annually. Someone has to bridge the gap between those numbers. Right now, it's ratepayers.
What PFAS Compounds Are in Connecticut Water?
Connecticut regulates more PFAS compounds than the federal government does. The CT Department of Public Health has set action levels for 10 individual PFAS compounds. The EPA's final rule, by contrast, covers six, and the current administration intends to rescind four of them, leaving only PFOA and PFOS with enforceable federal limits.
Here is where those numbers stand, because the details matter:
| Compound | CT Action Level (ppt) | EPA MCL (ppt) | Status | |----------|----------------------|---------------|--------| | PFOS | 10 | 4 | EPA retained | | PFOA | 16 | 4 | EPA retained | | PFNA | 12 | 10 | EPA rescission intended | | GenX (HFPO-DA) | 19 | 10 | EPA rescission intended | | PFHxS | 49 | 10 | EPA rescission intended | | PFHxA | 240 | None | CT only | | PFBS | 760 | None | CT only | | PFBA | 1,800 | None | CT only | | 6:2 Cl-PFESA | 2 | None | CT only | | 8:2 Cl-PFESA | 5 | None | CT only |
Notice something counterintuitive. Connecticut's own action levels for PFOA (16 ppt) and PFOS (10 ppt) are less stringent than the EPA's maximums (4 ppt each). A water system that passes the state's test can still fail the federal one. Systems that have been "compliant" under Connecticut rules may need significant additional treatment to meet the stricter federal limits by 2031.
The five compounds Connecticut regulates that the EPA doesn't cover at all, PFHxA, PFBS, PFBA, and the two chlorinated compounds, provide an extra layer of protection. If the EPA rescinds its limits on PFNA, GenX, and PFHxS, Connecticut's action levels remain the only regulatory backstop for those chemicals. Whether those state action levels are strict enough is a different question. But they exist, which is more than most states can say.
Where Is the Worst Contamination in Connecticut?
The contamination isn't evenly distributed. Some places in Connecticut have PFAS levels that are difficult to comprehend.
Bradley Airport and the Farmington River
The Bradley Air National Guard Base in Windsor Locks is an EPA Superfund site (ID CT0572826873). Groundwater testing at the base detected PFAS at concentrations up to 10,580 parts per trillion, according to a CT DEEP memo. That is 2,645 times the EPA's maximum contaminant level of 4 ppt.
Two incidents made a bad situation dramatically worse. On June 8, 2019, approximately 50,000 gallons of AFFF firefighting foam were accidentally released, flowing into the Farmington River. Four months later, on October 2, 2019, a B-17 vintage bomber crashed on takeoff from Bradley, and roughly 25,000 gallons of AFFF were used to suppress the fire. Seventy-five thousand gallons of PFAS-laden foam in one year, at one site, flowing into one of Connecticut's major rivers.
The nearby Windsor Locks Army Aviation facility recorded PFAS at 4,588 ppt in groundwater. These are not trace detections. These are concentrations that overwhelm standard treatment methods and will require advanced remediation for decades.
How much of that contamination has migrated into the drinking water supply of downstream communities? That question doesn't have a full answer yet. But the Farmington River feeds into the Connecticut River watershed. It doesn't stay in Windsor Locks.
The Statewide Picture
The CT DPH PFAS portal documents 39 public water systems with PFAS detections. The EWG counts 9,728 PFAS-contaminated sites nationally. The USGS estimates a greater than 75% probability that groundwater in southwestern Connecticut contains PFAS. Fire departments in Killingworth, military bases in Groton, paper mills in New Milford. The sources are everywhere.
What the Surcharge Is Actually Paying For
The treatment technologies work. Carbon filters and membrane systems, reverse osmosis and nanofiltration, can remove PFAS to levels well below the EPA's new 4 ppt limits. The technology exists. It works. It's expensive.
Connecticut Water has $241.7 million in treatment projects spanning 35 water sources. A carbon filtration system for a mid-sized utility costs tens of millions of dollars to install and requires ongoing maintenance and media replacement. Nationally, the AWWA estimates between $37.1 billion and $48.3 billion in capital investment is needed over five years for more than 7,000 entry points across the country. The WQTA surcharge covers the operating costs of these systems, the actual expense of treating PFAS-contaminated water before it reaches your tap.
In a narrow sense, the surcharge is paying for something real: cleaner water. The water coming out of Connecticut Water's treatment plants after filtration is better than it was before.
The question is whether you should be paying for it, or whether the manufacturers who created the problem should. The answer, legally and morally, is the manufacturers. The practical reality is you.
How Does Connecticut Compare to Other States?
Connecticut's WQTA surcharge is relatively unusual in its design. It's legislatively authorized, PURA-reviewed, and resets annually. Most states are handling PFAS costs through traditional rate cases or fixed-fee line items. Here's how Connecticut's approach stacks up.
New Hampshire
The Merrimack Village District spent $14.5 million treating just four wells, and water rates jumped roughly 80%. New Hampshire also offers $5,000 to $10,000 in rebates for private well owners who need PFAS filtration. Saint-Gobain, the manufacturer responsible for much of the contamination, has paid $1.71 million for a water main extension. That's a fraction of the cleanup cost, and Merrimack's leaders are still fighting for a fair share of national settlement funds.
New Jersey
NJ American Water is seeking a $10 per month increase to fund over $1 billion in treatment projects. New Jersey was the first state in the country to set a PFAS maximum contaminant level, establishing a limit for PFNA in 2018, years before the EPA acted. New Jersey's MCLs are set at 14 ppt for PFOA and 13 ppt for PFOS, stricter than Connecticut's action levels but far less stringent than the EPA's 4 ppt.
Michigan
Michigan utilities have added fixed-fee line items labeled "PFAS Remediation" and "Lead Service Line Replacement" to their bills. The charges run $10 to $20 per month as flat infrastructure fees, regardless of usage. This is more transparent in one sense, you can see exactly what you're paying, but more blunt in another. You pay the same whether you use 1,000 gallons or 10,000.
Connecticut's percentage-based approach is tied to usage and reviewed annually by PURA. Whether that's better or worse than a flat fee depends on your perspective. What's clear is that every state with PFAS contamination is landing on the same conclusion: ratepayers pay first, lawsuit settlements follow later, and the gap between the two is substantial.
What the Surcharge Means for Well Owners
If you're on a private well, you are not a Connecticut Water or Aquarion customer. You don't pay the surcharge. You also don't get the treatment.
About 300,000 Connecticut residents, roughly 23% of the state, rely on private wells. Connecticut has no ongoing testing requirement for existing private wells. The USGS estimates a greater than 75% probability of PFAS in southwestern Connecticut groundwater. A private PFAS lab test costs $300 to $400 through CT DEEP-certified labs.
Private wells have no PFAS treatment unless the homeowner installs it. No utility is running your water through a carbon filter. If your well contains PFAS, the only option is a reverse osmosis system ($300 to $800 for under-sink, $1,500 to $4,000 whole-house) or a certified PFAS-reduction filter at your point of use. New Hampshire's rebate program for well owners is a model Connecticut hasn't adopted yet.
The surcharge story is ultimately about the gap between public water customers, who are being protected and billed, and private well owners, who are on their own. Meanwhile, the health effects of PFAS exposure, including thyroid disruption and hair loss, continue building in people who have been drinking contaminated water for years.
What You Can Do Right Now
Whether you're on public water or a private well, the gap between "utilities are working on it" and "your water is clean" is where home filtration lives. The WQTA surcharge means Connecticut Water is treating PFAS at the plant level. But treatment takes time, compliance isn't required until 2031, and private well owners get nothing.
The surcharge is $2.80 per year today. It will almost certainly be more next year, and more the year after that. The cost of a home reverse osmosis system, $300 to $800 under the sink, is a one-time expense that removes over 90% of PFAS from the water you actually drink. The math is straightforward: the surcharge funds cleanup at the source over years, home filtration protects you right now.
Find out what's in your water. Enter your ZIP code at CheckYourTap.com to see your tap water report, free, in 30 seconds.
Keep Reading
- Fairfield County Has a PFAS Problem and Your Water Bill Won't Fix It Until 2031
- The Navy Has Been Poisoning the Water in Groton for Decades. The People Who Live There Are Just Finding Out.
- The Connection Between Your Water, Your Thyroid, and Your Hair That Nobody Is Making
- Killingworth's Water Was Contaminated by the Town's Own Fire Department. This Is Happening Across Connecticut.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much is the PFAS surcharge on Connecticut water bills?
The WQTA adds 0.53% to your bill starting April 2026, authorized by the Connecticut General Assembly and approved by PURA. The dollar amount varies by household usage, but every Connecticut Water customer across 60 towns is paying it. The surcharge covers $241.7 million in PFAS treatment costs. Aquarion, which serves Fairfield County, is pursuing a similar rate mechanism for its own $150 million cleanup.
Do private well owners pay the PFAS surcharge?
No — and that's the problem. About 300,000 Connecticut residents rely on private wells with no utility treatment and no state testing requirement. Well owners avoid the surcharge but are entirely responsible for their own PFAS filtration. A private PFAS lab test runs $300-$400, and a reverse osmosis system costs $300-$800 installed. The USGS estimates a greater than 75% probability of PFAS in southwestern Connecticut groundwater.
Will the PFAS lawsuit money reimburse Connecticut ratepayers?
Unlikely to cover the full cost. AG William Tong sued 28 manufacturers in 2024, and the 3M and DuPont settlements exceed $14 billion nationally. But Connecticut Water has received just $7.6 million so far — against $190 million or more in treatment costs. These cases take years to resolve, and settlement distributions rarely match what utilities have already spent. Ratepayers will keep funding the gap.
Sources: Hartford Business Journal, "CT Water Seeks Surcharge to Fund $241.7M in PFAS Treatment," March 9, 2026; Hartford Business Journal, "CT Water Receives $7.6M in PFAS Settlements," 2026; CT Attorney General PFAS Lawsuit, January 2024; CT DPH PFAS Portal; CT Water PFAS Treatment; CT General Assembly HB 6777, Public Act 25-142; EPA PFAS NPDWR; EPA Retains PFOA/PFOS MCLs; EWG, 176M Exposed, March 2026; CT DEEP Bradley AFFF Memo; NH Bulletin, Merrimack Costs; GAO PFAS Costs Report, GAO-25-107897; CT Public, "Rural CT Towns Not Testing Well Water," July 2024; CT News Junkie / USGS, "PFAS Likely in Large Swaths of State," November 2024; PURA.