Tap Water Results

Union County Water System water quality

Monroe, NC · serves 169,685 people (66,805 connections) · Surface water · Local government · EPA ID NC0190413

Data: U.S. EPA · How we read the data · How we check it

Buys water from Lancaster County Water & Sewer District, City of Monroe, Charlotte Water, Anson County Water System, Catawba River Wsp Water System. Treated water bought from another system can carry that system's contaminants.

Summary

No federal limits exceeded in EPA data.

PFAS
Detected, below limit5 of 29 PFAS found at least once. All averages below the federal limits.
Lead
Below action level0 ppb (parts per billion) at the 90th percentile: 9 in 10 homes sampled were at or below it. Action level 15 ppb, falling to 10 ppb in Nov 2027. Monitoring period ending Dec 2025. Your home's pipes can make yours higher.
Violations
Resolved2 health-based violations since 2016, most recently Mar 2020. One required an urgent public notice within 24 hours (the kind behind boil-water notices), most recently Mar 2020. What to do if you get a notice.
What you can do

PFAS (“forever chemicals”)

EPA UCMR 5: 2 entry points tested Jan 2023 to Oct 2023. "Average" is the highest entry-point average (non-detects counted as zero), the way EPA compares UCMR 5 results to the limits. ppt = parts per trillion. These results do not determine compliance.

ContaminantHighest averageHighest resultLimitStatus
PFOA
One sample above limit
Limit 4 ppt
1.05 ppt
26% of the limit
4.2 ppt4 pptOne sample above limit
PFOS
One sample above limit
Limit 4 ppt
2.25 ppt
56% of the limit
4.9 ppt4 pptOne sample above limit
PFHxS
Not detected
Limit 10 ppt
––10 pptNot detected
PFNA
Not detected
Limit 10 ppt
––10 pptNot detected
HFPO-DA (GenX)
Not detected
Limit 10 ppt
––10 pptNot detected
Hazard Index (a combined score for PFHxS, PFNA, GenX and PFBS, where above 1 is over the limit)
Not detected
Limit 1
––1Not detected
PFBS
Not detected
Guideline 2,000 ppt
––2,000 ppt guidelineNot detected
PFBA
Detected, below limit
Guideline 6,000 ppt
1.63 ppt6.5 ppt6,000 ppt guidelineDetected, below limit
PFHxA
Detected, below limit
Guideline 3,000 ppt
6.2 ppt7.4 ppt3,000 ppt guidelineDetected, below limit
PFPeA
Detected, no limit
7.05 ppt10 pptnoneDetected, no limit

29 PFAS tested, 5 detected at least once. "Not detected" means below EPA's reporting limit (about 2 to 20 ppt depending on the chemical), not proven zero. PFAS not listed were not detected. The limits for PFHxS, PFNA, GenX and the Hazard Index were proposed for rescission in May 2026. That proposal is not final. Systems have until 2029 to meet the limits.

Lithium

Not detected in 8 samples (reporting limit 9 ppb). About lithium.

Lead and copper

Latest 90th percentile: 0 ppb lead (Jul 2025 – Dec 2025). Below action level

Highest since 2016: 6.4 ppb (Dec 2016).

Monitoring periodLead (90th pct.)
Jul 2025 – Dec 20250 ppb
Jan 2025 – Jun 20250 ppb
Jul 2024 – Dec 20240 ppb
Earlier results (9)
Jan 2024 – Jun 20240 ppb
Jan 2020 – Dec 20220 ppb
Jan 2017 – Dec 20190 ppb
Jan 2014 – Dec 20166.4 ppb
Jan 2011 – Dec 20134.5 ppb
Jan 2008 – Dec 20108.8 ppb
Jan 2005 – Dec 20070 ppb
Jul 2004 – Dec 20040 ppb
Jul 2001 – Dec 20015 ppb

Lead comes from pipes and fixtures, not the source water, so it varies home to home. The 90th percentile means 9 in 10 sampled homes were at or below it. More on lead.

Violations

2
Health-based since 2016
1
Monitoring/reporting since 2016
0
Health-based unresolved now
15
Total ever recorded, incl. paperwork
WhenWhat happenedStatus
Mar 2020E. coli was confirmed in the water. E. coli means the water may have been contaminated with sewage or animal waste.
Urgent public notice required What that means
EPA record: Revised Total Coliform Rule · Maximum Contaminant Level Violation, E. coli (RTCR)
Resolved
Resolved
Jul 2017The running annual average for Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) was above the legal limit.
EPA record: Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) · Maximum Contaminant Level Violation, Average · measured 0.066 mg/l (limit 0.060 mg/L)
Resolved
Resolved

Health-based violations mean a contaminant exceeded a limit or a required treatment step was missed. Monitoring and reporting violations mean required tests or reports were late or missing, so the water's quality during that time is unknown. The total includes every violation in EPA's records, most of them paperwork.

Earlier EPA testing (2013–2020)

ContaminantHighestGuidelineDetectedTested
Manganese9.4 ppb300 ppb7 of 8UCMR 4 (2021)
Chlorate526 ppb210 ppb16 of 16UCMR 3 (2014)
1,4-Dioxane0.27 ppb0.35 ppb8 of 8UCMR 3 (2014)
Vanadium1.3 ppb21 ppb14 of 16UCMR 3 (2014)
Strontium0.11 ppm1.5 ppm16 of 16UCMR 3 (2014)
Chromium-60.2 ppb–16 of 16UCMR 3 (2014)

Where it serves

Monroe

ZIP codes the system reported serving: 28079, 28103, 28104, 28108, 28110, 28111, 28112, 28173, 28174

Nearby utilities

Questions

Is Union County Water System water safe to drink?

Union County Water System had 2 health-based violations since 2016, all since resolved. EPA testing found no PFAS above the federal limits. Federal data can't tell you about your own pipes: lead comes from service lines and plumbing, so test your tap if your home was built before 1986. For the official word, read the utility's annual Consumer Confidence Report.

Does Union County Water System water have PFAS?

Yes. EPA's 2023–2025 testing of Union County Water System found 5 PFAS at least once. None of the averages were above the federal limits.

What is the lead level in Union County Water System water?

The most recent 90th-percentile lead result for Union County Water System is 0 ppb, for the period ending Dec 2025. The federal action level is 15 ppb, falling to 10 ppb in November 2027. The 90th percentile means 9 in 10 homes sampled were at or below this number. Individual homes can be higher.

Check these numbers yourself

Every figure on this page comes from public EPA records. You don't have to take our word for it:

Found something that doesn't match? Tell us and we'll check it against EPA's records. How we check our data.

Source: U.S. EPA drinking water records and PFAS testing (UCMR 5). How we read the data.