Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Val Verde County reports PFAS in two Escondido Estates wells after county sampling
Summary
County-funded samples from Escondido Estates found PFAS above the EPA safety threshold in two of seven domestic wells; one well measured 4.5 parts per trillion and another showed multiple PFAS compounds at substantially higher levels. Officials will notify landowners and pursue grants but no remediation plan was approved at the meeting.
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Val Verde County officials reported that county-funded testing found per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) above federal guidance levels in two wells sampled around the base and Escondido Estates. The court said it collected 10 samples — seven private water wells and three runoff/draw samples — and that two wells returned PFAS detections above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 4 parts per trillion (ppt) benchmark.
“At least two wells we tested came back higher than what the federal government requires to be safe,” the Judge said, reporting that one well measured 4.5 ppt for a PFAS compound and another returned multiple PFAS compounds at much higher concentrations. The Judge said the county would notify affected landowners and provide copies of the results.
Why it matters: PFAS are frequently described as “forever chemicals” because they persist in soil and water. Commissioners stressed concern for livestock and local water uses. The Judge warned that if livestock drink contaminated water it could affect reproduction and enter the food chain, and said residents who live near the samples would be contacted with guidance.
What the county said it did: The court set aside funds to conduct sampling after concerns about firefighter‑training foam at the nearby base. Officials said they sampled wells and draws after recent rain to capture runoff. The Judge acknowledged that the county did not have a remediation program in place and said the immediate plan is notification and assistance in seeking grant funding or water‑line extensions where feasible.
What residents were told to do: County staff said they will post contact information and sample results on the county website and offer a point of contact for questions. Commissioners advised residents to avoid using confirmed contaminated wells and to limit livestock access to natural draws when rainwater runoff may concentrate PFAS.
Next steps: The court did not approve a specific remediation program during the meeting. Commissioners directed staff to notify affected landowners, explore grant options to extend potable water where possible, and provide clearer guidance through the county website and direct outreach.
The court took no formal vote on remediation during the meeting; the PFAS testing report was presented for information and follow‑up.

