More than $12.5 billion in PFAS settlement funds are available to public water systems across the United States. Yet many eligible municipalities haven’t filed a claim. Some don’t know the settlement exists. Others assume they don’t qualify. And a significant number are simply unsure how the PFAS settlement claims process works.
The settlements are real, court-approved, and actively distributing funds. Phase 1 payments began in 2024. But Phase 2 water systems face a hard deadline: claims must be submitted by July 2026. Miss it, and your municipality forfeits its right to these funds permanently.
Here’s what you need to know about the process, the timeline, and what’s actually required to file.
How the PFAS Settlement Came to Be
The PFAS settlements stem from the Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) Multi-District Litigation, one of the largest environmental class actions in U.S. history. Public water systems across the country brought claims against major PFAS manufacturers, alleging contamination of drinking water sources.
In 2023 and 2024, several manufacturers agreed to settle. The largest settlements include:
- 3M Settlement: $10.5 to $12.5 billion, paid out over 13 years (2024-2036)
- DuPont Settlement: $1.185 billion
- BASF Settlement: $316.5 million
- Additional settlements from Tyco and other defendants
These aren’t proposed or pending. They received final court approval in 2024. The money is there. The only question is whether eligible water systems will claim their share.
“The settlements have received final court approval and Phase 1 payments are already being distributed,” says Marcus Chen, Recovery Director at ERCZilla. “This isn’t speculative. The funds exist for water systems that file claims before the deadline.”
Understanding the PFAS Settlement Claims Process
The claims process involves several steps, each with its own requirements and deadlines. Understanding this sequence is essential for any municipality considering participation.
Step 1: Determine Eligibility
Most public water systems are eligible to participate. The key criteria include:
- Public water systems serving 3,300 or more people
- Systems required to test for PFAS under EPA’s Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR-5)
- Systems that have detected PFAS at any level in source water
- Systems that haven’t tested yet (testing costs are reimbursable through the settlement)
Eligibility is based on system classification, not contamination status. A municipality with clean drinking water can still be eligible if it meets the other criteria.
“Over 7,000 water systems are eligible for these settlements,” explains Sarah Mitchell, Municipal Partnerships Lead at ERCZilla. “Most municipalities we speak with assume they don’t qualify. The majority of them are wrong.”
Step 2: Complete Source Water Testing
Testing must be conducted at each individual wellhead or surface water intake. This is different from EPA’s UCMR-5 testing, which tests treated drinking water at the point of distribution. The settlement requires testing at the source, before treatment.
Systems that haven’t completed this testing can still participate. Testing costs are reimbursable through the settlement, but the testing cost reimbursement claim has its own deadline: January 1, 2026.
Step 3: Submit Test Results
Once testing is complete, results must be submitted within 45 calendar days, but no later than July 1, 2026. This tight window is one reason municipalities shouldn’t wait until 2026 to begin the process.
Step 4: File Action Fund Claims
The Action Fund is the primary source of settlement payments. Claims are due by:
- June 30, 2026 for DuPont Action Fund claims
- July 31, 2026 for 3M Action Fund claims
The amount allocated to each system depends on PFAS levels detected and the size of the water source.
Step 5: File Special Needs Claims (If Applicable)
Municipalities that have already incurred PFAS-related expenses may qualify for additional compensation through the Special Needs Fund. This covers costs like taking wells offline, building treatment systems, purchasing replacement water, or drilling new wells.
Special Needs claims are due by August 1, 2026, and require documentation of expenses incurred before that date.
Why Testing Doesn’t Mean Admitting Contamination
One of the most common concerns we hear from municipal officials involves the perception that participating in the settlement is an admission that their water is unsafe.
“The most common concern we hear is whether participating means admitting the water is contaminated. It doesn’t,” notes David Park, PFAS Claims Specialist at ERCZilla. “Testing is performed on source water before treatment, not on what comes out of the tap.”
Many municipalities with clean drinking water are participating in the settlement. The testing determines eligibility for funds, not the safety of treated water delivered to residents. A positive PFAS detection in source water doesn’t mean the drinking water is unsafe, especially if the system uses treatment that removes PFAS before distribution.
Participation in the settlement is about recovering funds your municipality may be entitled to. It’s not a public statement about water quality.
The Deadline Problem: Why July 2026 Matters
Phase 2 municipalities have until July 2026 to submit their claims. That sounds like plenty of time. It isn’t.
The process requires coordination with testing laboratories, document gathering, claims preparation, and submission across multiple deadlines. Most municipalities underestimate how long this takes.
“The July 2026 deadline isn’t flexible. Municipalities that miss it forfeit their right to these funds permanently,” advises Chen. “Starting the process in early 2025 gives adequate time for testing and documentation.”
Here’s the timeline municipal officials need to understand:
| Deadline | Action Required |
| January 1, 2026 | Testing cost reimbursement claims due |
| Within 45 days of testing | Submit test results (no later than July 1, 2026) |
| June 30, 2026 | DuPont Action Fund claims due |
| July 31, 2026 | 3M Action Fund claims due |
| August 1, 2026 | Special Needs Fund claims due |
Missing any of these deadlines can reduce or eliminate a municipality’s recovery. The claims forms aren’t complicated, but the coordination required to meet multiple deadlines is substantial.
What ERCZilla Handles vs. What the Municipality Provides
ERCZilla’s PFAS settlement recovery services (LINK: homepage) operate on a contingency basis. Municipalities pay nothing upfront and nothing unless funds are recovered.
“We handle everything from coordinating the testing to submitting the final claim. The municipality provides access and approval. We do the work,” explains Mitchell.
Here’s how the process typically works:
What ERCZilla handles:
- Eligibility verification
- Coordination with testing laboratories
- Testing cost coverage during the process
- Document preparation and claims submission
- Deadline tracking across all settlement components
- Communication with settlement administrators
What the municipality provides:
- Basic information about the water system
- Authorization to act on the municipality’s behalf
- Access to water sources for testing
The claims process is designed to require minimal time from municipal staff. Most of the work happens on the ERCZilla side.
Verifying Legitimacy
Municipal officials are right to be skeptical of unsolicited offers that sound too good to be true. The PFAS settlement is real, but there are firms making claims about it that may not be accurate.
The settlement resulted from the AFFF Multi-District Litigation overseen by the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. It’s a matter of public record. ERCZilla has processed over 1,000 claims and recovered more than $350 million for clients through similar recovery programs. The firm now applies that expertise to PFAS settlement recovery.
“Municipalities can and should verify everything we tell them,” Park says. “The settlement is publicly documented. Our track record is verifiable. Skepticism is healthy, but inaction has consequences when deadlines are involved.”
The Cost of Waiting
Municipalities that haven’t filed claims aren’t losing money today. But when the July 2026 deadline passes, they’ll have permanently forfeited their right to funds they were entitled to receive.
The average recovery for eligible municipalities is approximately $2.5 million, though actual amounts vary based on PFAS detection levels and water system size. For systems with multiple independent water sources, each source can potentially qualify separately.
“The municipalities that capture these funds aren’t different from those that don’t. They just learned about the opportunity and took action before the deadline,” observes Park.
Next Steps for Municipal Officials
If your municipality operates a public water system, the first step is confirming eligibility. This takes a few minutes and costs nothing.
Schedule a brief eligibility review with ERCZilla. We’ll verify whether your system qualifies, explain what the process involves, and answer questions about the settlement. There’s no obligation, and you’ll know exactly where your municipality stands.
You can also review our frequently asked questions for more details on eligibility and deadlines. The deadline is fixed. The funds are available. The question is whether your municipality will claim its share.
