Cities with the Most Drinking Water Violations
These cities have the highest number of EPA Safe Drinking Water Act violations on record. Cities with more water systems or larger populations often appear higher, but some smaller cities also rank due to persistent compliance challenges.
| # | City | State | Violations | Health Viol. | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Houston | TX | 13,053 | 745 | 5,913,001 |
| 2 | Austin | TX | 12,912 | 1,147 | 1,788,805 |
| 3 | Des Peres | TX | 12,153 | 1,817 | 30,946 |
| 4 | Moscow | PA | 10,318 | 54 | 2,311 |
| 5 | Collinsville | TX | 10,266 | 22 | 4,824 |
| 6 | Anchorage | AK | 6,388 | 382 | 249,201 |
| 7 | Cypress | TX | 5,741 | 873 | 75,711 |
| 8 | Tuttle | OK | 5,700 | 40 | 4,732 |
| 9 | Norristown | PA | 5,674 | 3 | 99,147 |
| 10 | Northport | WA | 5,604 | 3 | 384 |
| 11 | Tucson | AZ | 5,285 | 195 | 899,456 |
| 12 | Edmond | OK | 4,849 | 64 | 90,064 |
| 13 | Wolfforth | TX | 4,690 | 477 | 9,789 |
| 14 | Shallowater | TX | 4,335 | 512 | 3,241 |
| 15 | Mcloud | OK | 4,285 | 13 | 3,079 |
| 16 | Lubbock | TX | 3,957 | 1,353 | 276,842 |
| 17 | Cary | NC | 3,297 | 173 | 439,492 |
| 18 | Port Orchard | WA | 3,175 | 180 | 94,050 |
| 19 | Des Peres | AZ | 3,091 | 508 | 14,744 |
| 20 | Lake Ariel | PA | 3,048 | 61 | 6,852 |
| 21 | Huntington | TX | 3,010 | 710 | 9,721 |
| 22 | Bullhead City | AZ | 2,972 | 52 | 47,183 |
| 23 | Phoenix | AZ | 2,811 | 167 | 2,288,453 |
| 24 | Weatherford | TX | 2,778 | 137 | 35,629 |
| 25 | El Mirage | AZ | 2,702 | 215 | 335,830 |
| 26 | Texarkana | TX | 2,527 | 9 | 49,773 |
| 27 | Monroe | NY | 2,436 | 92 | 62,333 |
| 28 | Hunt | TX | 2,402 | 146 | 1,823 |
| 29 | Fort Ashby | WV | 2,360 | 10 | 7,809 |
| 30 | Albuquerque | NM | 2,293 | 334 | 630,436 |
| 31 | Morgantown | PA | 2,264 | 121 | 14,065 |
| 32 | Tunkhannock | PA | 2,255 | 29 | 6,458 |
| 33 | Durham | PA | 2,251 | 31 | 1,730 |
| 34 | Grayling | AK | 2,197 | 113 | 207 |
| 35 | Pearland | TX | 2,185 | 6 | 132,991 |
| 36 | Coupeville | WA | 2,170 | 224 | 25,056 |
| 37 | Yuma | AZ | 2,135 | 246 | 160,263 |
| 38 | Joliet | IL | 2,132 | 11 | 166,002 |
| 39 | Barker | TX | 2,080 | 85 | 347 |
| 40 | Maricopa | AZ | 2,061 | 498 | 117,033 |
| 41 | Yakima | WA | 2,052 | 12 | 173,902 |
| 42 | Colorado Springs | CO | 2,017 | 110 | 567,087 |
| 43 | Effort | PA | 2,004 | 9 | 279 |
| 44 | Prue | OK | 1,967 | 10 | 429 |
| 45 | Savannah | GA | 1,946 | 79 | 141,370 |
| 46 | Rexburg | ID | 1,890 | 85 | 41,645 |
| 47 | Welch | WV | 1,869 | 98 | 11,446 |
| 48 | Sedona | AZ | 1,831 | 131 | 10,728 |
| 49 | Las Vegas | NV | 1,821 | 219 | 1,573,138 |
| 50 | Spring Mills | PA | 1,820 | 16 | 834 |
Key Takeaways
- Larger cities serving more people through multiple water systems tend to accumulate more violations over time.
- Some cities appear due to specific water systems with long histories of non-compliance.
- Violation counts reflect historical records and may include resolved issues.
Methodology
Data is sourced from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) via the Envirofacts API. Rankings include community water systems serving 100 or more people. Violation counts reflect historical records in the SDWIS database and include both resolved and unresolved violations. Health-based violations include Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) violations and Treatment Technique violations. Per-capita calculations use the total population served by tracked water systems in each state.