About WaterSafeCheck
Our mission, the team, and how we work
Who We Are
Marcus J. Webb
Marcus J. Webb
Environmental Data Analyst & Founder
I've spent the last ten years working at the intersection of public health data and environmental policy. Before starting WaterSafeCheck, I worked as a compliance analyst tracking EPA violations for municipal water systems across the Midwest. I've read thousands of Consumer Confidence Reports, sat through EPA public hearings, and watched families in Flint, Newark, and smaller towns across America struggle to get straight answers about whether their tap water was safe.
That experience is why I built this site. The EPA collects excellent data — it's all public record. But it's buried in spreadsheets and government databases that require technical knowledge to use. Most people don't have time to dig through SDWIS or cross-reference ECHO violation records. They just want to know: is my water safe?
WaterSafeCheck is my attempt to answer that question for every household in America — for free, with no sign-up required.
10+
Years in EPA compliance research
41K+
ZIP codes analyzed
5M+
EPA records processed
Our Commitment to Accuracy
Every data point on WaterSafeCheck comes directly from official EPA databases — we don't estimate, extrapolate, or guess. When EPA data is missing or incomplete for a ZIP code, we say so clearly rather than filling in gaps with assumptions.
We update our database whenever the EPA releases new SDWIS, ECHO, or UCMR data. Our safety scoring methodology is publicly documented on this page so anyone can verify our work.
Our Mission
Water safety information in America has a transparency problem. The EPA requires water utilities to test for hundreds of contaminants and publish annual reports — but those reports are often buried on utility websites, written in technical language, or mailed to addresses where tenants never see them.
Renters are especially underserved. A landlord is legally required to pass along the Consumer Confidence Report, but enforcement is weak and many tenants have never seen one. If you're renting a home built in the 1960s in an area with aging water infrastructure, you deserve to know that — especially if you have young children.
WaterSafeCheck is not affiliated with any water utility, government agency, or filter manufacturer. We don't sell water filters, we don't have affiliate deals, and we don't get paid to rank certain utilities better or worse. Our only product is information — and it's free.
Our Data Sources
All data on WaterSafeCheck comes directly from official U.S. government sources. We do not conduct independent water testing, and we do not use third-party estimates.
EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) ↗
Primary SourceThe core EPA database tracking compliance for over 150,000 public water systems nationwide. SDWIS contains every reported violation, enforcement action, and monitoring record going back decades. This is the backbone of our violation data, system identification, and population served numbers.
EPA ECHO — Enforcement and Compliance History Online ↗
Enforcement DataECHO adds enforcement context to SDWIS — it shows whether violations resulted in formal enforcement actions, penalties, or consent orders. A system with 5 violations and 5 enforcement actions tells a very different story than one with 5 violations and no follow-up. We use ECHO to calculate our compliance risk ratings.
The most comprehensive PFAS screening of U.S. water systems ever conducted. UCMR5 required large water systems to test for 29 PFAS chemicals between 2023 and 2025, including PFOA and PFOS — the two PFAS compounds the EPA set new federal MCLs for in 2024. We use this data to flag systems with detected PFAS.
Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) ↗
Annual ReportsWater utilities are legally required to publish annual Consumer Confidence Reports by July 1 each year. CCRs contain the actual measured levels of regulated contaminants — not just whether violations occurred. We pull CCR data where available to add lead 90th percentile measurements, copper levels, and top detected contaminants to each ZIP code report.
How We Calculate Safety Scores
Each ZIP code receives a composite safety score from 0 to 100, which maps to a letter grade from A to F. Here's exactly how we calculate it — nothing is hidden:
Health-Based Violations (5 years)
The number and severity of violations where a water system exceeded an EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). More recent violations are weighted more heavily than older ones. A single health violation in the past year hurts the score more than one from four years ago.
Unresolved Violations
Violations that remain open in EPA records — meaning the water system has not yet formally corrected the issue. An unresolved violation is more serious than a resolved one of the same type.
Lead Exposure Probability
An EPA-modeled estimate of lead exposure risk based on housing age, infrastructure age, and service line material data. ZIP codes with high concentrations of pre-1986 housing score lower on this factor.
Enforcement Actions
Formal EPA or state enforcement orders and penalties. A system that gets an enforcement action for a violation is scored lower than one that self-corrects proactively. High enforcement counts indicate systemic compliance failures.
Infrastructure Risk Indicators
A composite of secondary risk factors: boil water advisory history, energy burden percentage (a proxy for aging housing and infrastructure), and annual flood risk cost (flooding can compromise water system integrity).
Score ≥85 = A | 70–84 = B | 55–69 = C | 40–54 = D | below 40 = F. Scores are updated when new EPA data is released, typically quarterly.
What We Can't Tell You
Transparency means being honest about our limitations, not just our strengths.
We do not test water ourselves. All data is from EPA records, not independent testing.
Our data reflects what utilities reported to the EPA — not necessarily what they actually tested for. Some contaminants go unmonitored.
Private well users are not covered by SDWIS. If you're on a private well, you'll need to test independently.
Some ZIP codes are served by multiple water systems or by regional systems that cross ZIP code boundaries. Data may reflect the dominant system in the area.
Our database represents a point-in-time snapshot. Water quality can change quickly — always check your utility's current advisories.
Grading reflects compliance history, not real-time water quality. A Grade A system could theoretically have an issue today that isn't in our data yet.
Credentials & Background
🎓 Education & Training
Environmental science background with specialized training in EPA regulatory compliance, water quality monitoring protocols, and public health data analysis. Certified in EPA Safe Drinking Water Act compliance procedures.
🔬 Areas of Expertise
- • EPA SDWIS database analysis
- • Lead and Copper Rule compliance
- • PFAS contamination assessment
- • Small water system technical assistance
- • Consumer Confidence Report interpretation
📊 Work History
10+ years analyzing EPA compliance data across hundreds of public water systems in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic. Previously worked with state primacy agencies on enforcement case preparation and small system technical assistance programs.
🏛 Data Sources Used
All data on WaterSafeCheck comes exclusively from official U.S. government sources: EPA SDWIS, EPA ECHO enforcement database, UCMR5 PFAS monitoring data, and Consumer Confidence Reports. No estimates or third-party data.
⚠️ Important Note on Independence
WaterSafeCheck is entirely independent. We have no financial relationship with any water utility, filter manufacturer, bottled water company, or government agency. Our only revenue comes from Google AdSense advertising. Our data grades and rankings are based purely on EPA compliance records — no utility can pay to improve their rating, and none ever has.
Get in Touch
Found an error in the data? Have a question about methodology? Working on a news story about water quality? I read every email personally.