Tap WaterIndex

← North Dakota

Tap water quality report

Grand Forks Regional Wtp

EPA monitoring tested this supplier for 95 contaminants and detected 20. A detection doesn't automatically mean the water is unsafe — the level and EPA source for each is below.

95
contaminants tested
20
detected
57,339
people served
18
health-based violations
North Dakota rankingsLead in North DakotaPFAS in North Dakota
Water source
Surface water
Ownership
Local government
Counties served
Grand Forks

Compliance record

Formal violations the EPA has on file for this supplier. A health-based violation means a contaminant limit or a required treatment was breached; the rest are monitoring or reporting failures — still violations, but not a measured health risk.

18
health-based violations
21
violations on file
0
still open
ViolationTypeStatusPeriod
TT Health-based Archived 2003-06-01 → 2003-06-30
TT Health-based Archived 2003-06-01 → 2003-06-30
TT Health-based Archived 2003-06-01 → 2003-06-30
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-10-01 → 1989-12-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-10-01 → 1989-12-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-10-01 → 1989-12-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-10-01 → 1989-12-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-10-01 → 1989-12-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-09-01 → 1989-08-31
MCL Health-based Archived 1988-09-01 → 1989-08-31

PFAS detected

PFAS are industrial “forever chemicals”. These are the EPA's latest nationwide test results (2023–2025).
ContaminantMaxDetection ratePeriod
Pfba 0.0104 µg/L 4/4 2024

Other contaminants detected

Each bar shows the measured level as a share of the EPA limit: green is well under, amber is close to it, red is over. For lead and copper the limit applies to exactly the 90th-percentile figure shown, so red there means a real exceedance. For everything else the limit applies to a running annual average while the figure is the 95th percentile of this system's samples — over 100% is worth reading, but is not by itself a violation. Where a single sample came in higher than that percentile, it is noted under the bar. Formal violations are listed separately.
ContaminantLevel vs EPA limitDetection rateSourcePeriod
Bromodichloromethane
4.05 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 9.96 µg/L
244/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Chloroform
55.414 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 105.1 µg/L
244/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Dichloroacetic Acid
27.355 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 60 µg/L
244/244 SYR4 2012–2019
TTHM
58.0025 µg/L 73%
of the EPA limit 80 µg/L
worst single sample: 109 µg/L
244/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5)
33.5685 µg/L 56%
of the EPA limit 60 µg/L
worst single sample: 68.74 µg/L
244/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Trichloroacetic Acid
6.1695 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 9.81 µg/L
242/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Copper
93 µg/L 7.2%
of the EPA limit 1300 µg/L
worst single sample: 300 µg/L
55/65 SYR4 2014–2017
Monochloroacetic Acid
2.9195 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 3.18 µg/L
42/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Lead
13.8 µg/L 92%
of the EPA limit 15 µg/L
worst single sample: 28.2 µg/L
31/65 SYR4 2014–2017
Lead
0.0089 mg/L 59%
of the EPA limit 0.0150 mg/L
 19/19 LCR 2024
Nitrate-Nitrite
382 µg/L 3.8%
of the EPA limit 10000 µg/L
 16/16 SYR4 2012–2019
Dibromochloromethane
1.096 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 1.11 µg/L
8/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Lithium
21.3 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 4/4 UCMR-5 2024
Dibromoacetic Acid
17.256 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 18.1 µg/L
2/244 SYR4 2012–2019
Arsenic
1.09 µg/L 11%
of the EPA limit 10 µg/L
 1/2 SYR4 2014–2016
Barium
15.9 µg/L 0.8%
of the EPA limit 2000 µg/L
 1/1 SYR4 2017
Combined Radium (-226 And -228)
0.2900 pCi/L 5.8%
of the EPA limit 5 pCi/L
 1/2 SYR4 2015–2018
Fluoride
663 µg/L 17%
of the EPA limit 4000 µg/L
 1/1 SYR4 2017
Gross Alpha, Excl. Radon And U
1.1 pCi/L 7.3%
of the EPA limit 15 pCi/L
 1/2 SYR4 2015–2018
75 contaminants tested, none detected
1,1,1-Trichloroethane1,1,2-Trichloroethane1,1-Dichloroethylene1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene1,2-Dichloroethane1,2-Dichloropropane11Cl-PF3OUdS2,4,5-TP2,4-D4:2 Fts6:2 Fts8:2 Fts9Cl-PF3ONSAdonaAntimony, TotalAtrazineBhc-GammaBenzeneBeryllium, TotalBromoformChlorobenzeneCadmiumCarbon TetrachlorideChlordaneChromiumCombined UraniumDichloromethaneDalaponDinosebEndrinEthylbenzeneHfpo-DaHeptachlorHeptachlor EpoxideLassoMercuryMethoxychlorMonobromoacetic AcidNetfosaaNfdhaNmefosaaPFBSPfdaPfdoaPfeesaPfhpaPfhpsPfhxaPFHXSPfmbaPfmpaPFNAPFOAPFOSPfpeaPfpesPftaPftrdaPfunaPentachlorophenolPicloramSeleniumSimazineStyreneTetrachloroethyleneThallium, TotalTolueneToxapheneTrichloroethyleneVinyl ChlorideXylenes, Totalcis-1,2-DichloroethyleneO-DichlorobenzeneP-Dichlorobenzenetrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene

Utility contact

Contact
GOETZ, JOHN
Phone
701-746-2595
Email
[email protected]

Frequently asked questions about Grand Forks Regional Wtp

Is Grand Forks Regional Wtp tap water safe to drink?

EPA monitoring detected 20 contaminants in Grand Forks Regional Wtp's water. A detection isn't the same as a violation — most levels are within federal limits. See each level and source above, and the utility's annual Consumer Confidence Report for its official compliance status.

What contaminants were detected in Grand Forks Regional Wtp's water?

EPA monitoring detected Bromodichloromethane, Chloroform, Dichloroacetic Acid, TTHM, Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5), and others. The full list with the level and data source for each is above.

How many people does Grand Forks Regional Wtp serve?

Grand Forks Regional Wtp reports serving 57,339 people in North Dakota, per its EPA record.

Has Grand Forks Regional Wtp had any water quality violations?

The EPA has 21 violations on file for Grand Forks Regional Wtp, of which 18 are health-based (a contaminant limit or required treatment was breached) and 0 remain open. The rest are monitoring or reporting failures.

Where does this data come from?

Every figure is official EPA drinking-water monitoring — the Lead & Copper Rule, the UCMR-5 nationwide testing program, and the EPA Six-Year Review — not our own testing. Each number is labelled with its source and period.