THE TRUTH ABOUT PFAS, HOUSE BILL 211, AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR NORTHWEST GEORGIA
- Andrea Nicole
- Nov 15, 2025
- 5 min read
A community health crisis, an economic crisis, and a real-estate crisis — all quietly unfolding in our own backyard.
Northwest Georgia is known for its strong communities, beautiful land, and its powerhouse carpet and flooring industry. But behind that economic success lies a long history of chemical use and disposal that has quietly shaped the health of our land, our water, and our families.
Over the past few years, a word many had never heard before — PFAS — has become one of the most important issues facing our region. And now, a proposed law in Georgia, House Bill 211, threatens to make accountability even harder for the people who have already suffered the consequences of decades-long contamination.
This blog breaks down what PFAS is, how contamination happened, what HB 211 really does, and why this matters deeply for families, farmers, businesses, landowners, and real-estate professionals across Northwest Georgia.
What Are PFAS (“Forever Chemicals”)?
PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) are man-made chemicals created by companies like 3M and DuPont. They resist heat, water, and oil — but they also do not break down, accumulating in soil, water, livestock, crops, and the human body.
How PFAS Entered Northwest Georgia’s Environment
According to PFAS Georgia:
Carpet manufacturers purchased PFAS by the railcar for decades.
These chemicals were used in multiple manufacturing processes.
PFAS-laden wastewater was released into factory sewer drains.
Local wastewater plants, not built to filter PFAS, discharged contaminated water into rivers, streams, ponds, and lakes.
Concentrated PFAS sludge (“biosolids”) was then spread on farmland as fertilizer across Northwest Georgia.
The result? PFAS is now in:
agricultural land
private wells and groundwater
livestock
crops
commercial properties
residential areas
our drinking water sources
This contamination happened quietly, for decades, before the public was ever informed.
What News Outlets Are Reporting
AJC: “Georgia Republicans Seek to Shield Carpet Industry, Cities from PFAS Lawsuits”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that House Bill 211 would give broad legal immunity to:
carpet manufacturers
municipalities
wastewater processors
This immunity would protect them from lawsuits related to PFAS contamination unless they manufactured the chemicals themselves.
This comes as Northwest Georgia’s carpet industry faces multiple lawsuits alleging contamination of local drinking water with chemicals linked to:
fertility issues
immune system problems
developmental impacts
certain cancers
HB 211 would shield key players in this chain from accountability.
WDEF News 12: “Bill Would Shield Georgia Carpet Industry from PFAS Lawsuits”
WDEF reported that HB 211:
classifies carpet mills and cities as “PFAS receivers”
grants them immunity from PFAS-related claims
does not protect chemical manufacturers
does protect the entities that discharged or distributed PFAS within Georgia
This means families, farmers, and landowners harmed by PFAS could lose the ability to seek restitution.
Legislative Concerns from Rep. Mary Margaret Oliver
In her 2025 Crossover Day update, Rep. Mary Margaret Oliver identified HB 211 as a “highly controversial bill”, noting:
It shields those involved in discharging PFAS.
It limits accountability for contamination.
It places industry protection above community protection.
Her concerns are shared by environmental groups, PFAS researchers, and impacted families.
Case Study: Rome, Georgia — A Hard-Fought Victory for Clean Water
In a landmark case, the City of Rome recently secured a $280 million settlement to remove PFAS from its drinking water.This settlement came after:
Over 150 depositions
Millions of pages of evidence
Years of litigation led by the PFC Litigation Group
How PFAS Reached Rome’s Drinking Water
Wastewater streams carrying PFAS from carpet manufacturing flowed into the Oostanaula River, which supplies Rome’s drinking water.
The settlement funds will be used to build a reverse-osmosis water treatment plant capable of removing 99.9% of PFAS — protecting Rome families and businesses for generations.
This is one of the largest PFAS water settlements in U.S. history.
Who Is the PFC Litigation Group?
The PFC Litigation Group is a coalition of top environmental attorneys specializing in PFAS contamination and water-system lawsuits.
They represent:
municipalities
water authorities
farmers
landowners
individuals harmed by PFAS
Their expertise was critical in helping Rome win one of the largest drinking-water settlements in America.
Who Paid the $280 Million Settlement to Rome?
The settlement was paid by multiple defendants, including:
PFAS Manufacturers
3M
DuPont
Chemours
Corteva
Carpet & Flooring Industry Companies
According to lawsuits filed by the City of Rome and other Northwest Georgia communities, carpet and flooring manufacturers — including Shaw Industries, Mohawk Industries (and its affiliate Aladdin), along with other mills in the Dalton region — purchased PFAS in bulk, in some cases by the railcar, and used these chemicals extensively in their manufacturing processes.
Legal filings allege that PFAS-contaminated wastewater from these facilities was discharged into the municipal sewer system operated by Dalton Utilities, a system not designed to remove these chemicals. This discharge pathway is identified in multiple lawsuits as a significant contributor to the widespread PFAS contamination affecting rivers, farmland, groundwater, and drinking-water systems throughout Northwest Georgia.
The companies named in these lawsuits typically deny wrongdoing, but several have participated in settlements without admitting liability
Waste Disposal & Biosolid Handlers
Entities involved in transporting or applying PFAS-contaminated biosolids.
Why This Matters
Rome could only secure this settlement because they were allowed to sue everyone responsible.
If HB 211 passes, similar lawsuits may no longer be possible.
Why HB 211 Is Dangerous for Northwest Georgia
HB 211 — the PFAS Receiver Shield Act — would grant immunity to:
carpet companies
municipalities
wastewater processors
agricultural users of PFAS-laden materials
It would prevent families, farmers, landowners, and even cities from recovering damages for PFAS contamination.
*In plain terms: HB 211 protects the polluters — not the people!!
Why Real-Estate & Development Professionals Must Pay Attention:
As a Commercial Real Estate Agent, I see firsthand how PFAS impacts:
Property Values
Contaminated land loses substantial market value.
Lending & Financing
Banks increasingly require PFAS environmental testing.
Phase I & Phase II Environmental Reports
PFAS is now a standard red-flag item.
Development Feasibility
Some land may require:
soil removal
capping
monitoring wells
usage limitations
Long-Term Liability
If HB 211 passes, buyers and sellers could be stuck with PFAS liability and no legal recourse.
Municipal Water Considerations
Developers rely on clean, stable water systems — and contamination threatens entire growth corridors.
PFAS is now a major real-estate issue, not just an environmental one.
Accountability Matters: Companies, Municipalities, and Elected Officials
The PFAS crisis shows us what happens when:
companies hide risks
municipalities avoid responsibility
elected leaders do not prioritize health and safety
We must demand accountability from:
PFAS manufacturers
carpet companies
cities and wastewater processors
elected officials who pass industry-protection bills
Our region cannot move forward without truth and accountability.

Where We Go From Here
I am honored to be recognized by PFAS Georgia for community advocacy — but our work is just beginning.
We must:
oppose HB 211
demand transparency
protect families and landowners
insist on accountability
elect leaders who prioritize public health
continue educating neighbors and businesses
For more information or to connect with PFAS Georgia, visit:
To read HB211, visit:
Together, we can protect Northwest Georgia’s land, water, families, and future.




Comments