Tap WaterIndex

← Oklahoma

Tap water quality report

Newcastle

EPA monitoring tested this supplier for 88 contaminants and detected 19. A detection doesn't automatically mean the water is unsafe — the level and EPA source for each is below.

88
contaminants tested
19
detected
7,900
people served
16
health-based violations
Oklahoma rankingsLead in OklahomaPFAS in Oklahoma
Water source
SWP
Ownership
Local government
Counties served
McClain

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.

16
health-based violations
90
violations on file
2
still open
ViolationTypeStatusPeriod
MCL Health-based Resolved 2012-07-01 → 2012-07-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2012-07-01 → 2012-07-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2012-07-01 → 2012-07-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2012-07-01 → 2012-07-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2007-05-01 → 2007-05-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2007-05-01 → 2007-05-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2007-05-01 → 2007-05-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2007-05-01 → 2007-05-31
MCL Health-based Resolved 2005-09-01 → 2005-09-30
MCL Health-based Resolved 2005-09-01 → 2005-09-30

PFAS detected

PFAS are industrial “forever chemicals”. These are the EPA's latest nationwide test results (2023–2025).
ContaminantMaxDetection ratePeriod
Pfba 0.0052 µg/L 1/6 2023

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
Copper
129.8 µg/L 10%
of the EPA limit 1300 µg/L
worst single sample: 678 µg/L
55/60 SYR4 2013–2019
Bromodichloromethane
16.2 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 29.7 µg/L
19/21 SYR4 2012–2019
Chloroform
46.03 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 49 µg/L
19/21 SYR4 2012–2019
Lead
0.0225 mg/L 150%
above the EPA limit of 0.0150 mg/L
 17/17 LCR 2026
Dibromochloromethane
10.075 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 16.9 µg/L
16/21 SYR4 2012–2019
Nitrate-Nitrite
300 µg/L 3%
of the EPA limit 10000 µg/L
 14/14 SYR4 2012–2019
Dichloroacetic Acid
17.46 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 21 µg/L
13/13 SYR4 2012–2019
TTHM
55.86 µg/L 70%
of the EPA limit 80 µg/L
worst single sample: 58.5 µg/L
13/15 SYR4 2012–2019
Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5)
35.67 µg/L 59%
of the EPA limit 60 µg/L
worst single sample: 37.2 µg/L
10/15 SYR4 2012–2019
Trichloroacetic Acid
15.215 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 16.7 µg/L
10/13 SYR4 2012–2019
Gross Beta Particle Activity
5.6925 pCi/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 6.03 pCi/L
4/4 SYR4 2015–2016
Bromoform
1.95 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 2 µg/L
3/21 SYR4 2012–2019
Dibromoacetic Acid
2.57 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 2.7 µg/L
3/13 SYR4 2012–2019
Lead
10.015 µg/L 67%
of the EPA limit 15 µg/L
worst single sample: 10.2 µg/L
2/60 SYR4 2013–2019
Monochloroacetic Acid
2.76 µg/L
No EPA limit set
worst single sample: 2.8 µg/L
2/13 SYR4 2012–2019
Barium
19 µg/L 1%
of the EPA limit 2000 µg/L
 1/1 SYR4 2017
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
0.0200 µg/L 0%
of the EPA limit 50 µg/L
 1/2 SYR4 2018
Lithium
40 µg/L
No EPA limit set
 1/6 UCMR-5 2024
69 contaminants tested, none detected
1,1,1-Trichloroethane1,1,2-Trichloroethane1,1-Dichloroethylene1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene1,2-Dichloroethane1,2-Dichloropropane11Cl-PF3OUdS4:2 Fts6:2 Fts8:2 Fts9Cl-PF3ONSAdonaAntimony, TotalArsenicBhc-GammaBenzeneBeryllium, TotalChlorobenzeneCadmiumCarbon TetrachlorideChromiumCombined Radium (-226 And -228)Combined UraniumDichloromethaneEndrinEthylbenzeneFluorideGross Alpha, Excl. Radon And UHexachlorobenzeneHfpo-DaHeptachlorHeptachlor EpoxideMercuryMethoxychlorMonobromoacetic AcidNetfosaaNfdhaNmefosaaPFBSPfdaPfdoaPfeesaPfhpaPfhpsPfhxaPFHXSPfmbaPfmpaPFNAPFOAPFOSPfpeaPfpesPftaPftrdaPfunaSeleniumStyreneTetrachloroethyleneThallium, TotalTolueneToxapheneTrichloroethyleneVinyl ChlorideXylenes, Totalcis-1,2-DichloroethyleneO-DichlorobenzeneP-Dichlorobenzenetrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene

Utility contact

Contact
NEWCASTLE
Phone
405-387-2690
Email
[email protected]

Frequently asked questions about Newcastle

Is Newcastle tap water safe to drink?

EPA monitoring detected 19 contaminants in Newcastle'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 Newcastle's water?

EPA monitoring detected Copper, Bromodichloromethane, Chloroform, Lead, Dibromochloromethane, and others. The full list with the level and data source for each is above.

How many people does Newcastle serve?

Newcastle reports serving 7,900 people in Oklahoma, per its EPA record.

Has Newcastle had any water quality violations?

The EPA has 90 violations on file for Newcastle, of which 16 are health-based (a contaminant limit or required treatment was breached) and 2 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.