Is Cape Royale Utility District Tap Water Safe? Quality Report

Water source: Ground water
Ownership: Local government
Counties served: San Jacinto

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.

health-based violations

violations on file

still open

Violation	Type	Status	Period
MCL	Health-based	Resolved	2019-07-01 → 2019-09-30
MCL	Health-based	Resolved	2019-07-01 → 2019-09-30
MCL	Health-based	Resolved	2019-07-01 → 2019-09-30
MCL	Health-based	Resolved	2019-07-01 → 2019-09-30
Other	Monitoring	Resolved	2025-07-01
Other	Monitoring	Resolved	2025-07-01
Other	Monitoring	Resolved	2022-03-21
Other	Monitoring	Resolved	2022-03-21
MR	Monitoring	Resolved	2021-01-01
MR	Monitoring	Resolved	2021-01-01

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.

Contaminant	Level vs EPA limit	Detection rate	Source	Period
Copper	1127.5 µg/L 87% of the EPA limit 1300 µg/L worst single sample: 1780 µg/L	54/54	SYR4	2012–2019
Lead	16.169 µg/L 108% of the EPA limit, at the 95th percentile of samples — 15 µg/L worst single sample: 40.2 µg/L	28/54	SYR4	2012–2019
Nitrate	77.5 µg/L 0.8% of the EPA limit 10000 µg/L worst single sample: 80 µg/L	26/32	SYR4	2012–2019
Bromoform	8.35 µg/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 11.1 µg/L	12/18	SYR4	2013–2019
Dibromochloromethane	6.84 µg/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 8.6 µg/L	12/18	SYR4	2013–2019
Combined Radium (-226 And -228)	5.34 pCi/L 107% of the EPA limit, at the 95th percentile of samples — 5 pCi/L worst single sample: 5.55 pCi/L	11/11	SYR4	2012–2019
Gross Beta Particle Activity	13.4 pCi/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 13.8 pCi/L	11/11	SYR4	2012–2019
Bromodichloromethane	2.495 µg/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 2.9 µg/L	10/18	SYR4	2013–2019
Lead	0.0 mg/L 0% of the EPA limit 0.0150 mg/L	10/10	LCR	2023
Arsenic	9.12 µg/L 91% of the EPA limit 10 µg/L worst single sample: 9.4 µg/L	9/11	SYR4	2012–2018
Gross Alpha, Excl. Radon And U	18.7 pCi/L 125% of the EPA limit, at the 95th percentile of samples — 15 pCi/L worst single sample: 19.3 pCi/L	9/9	SYR4	2015–2019
Dibromoacetic Acid	3.54 µg/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 3.9 µg/L	7/8	SYR4	2013–2019
TTHM	19.87 µg/L 25% of the EPA limit 80 µg/L worst single sample: 22.6 µg/L	7/8	SYR4	2013–2019
Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5)	4.98 µg/L 8.3% of the EPA limit 60 µg/L worst single sample: 5.4 µg/L	7/8	SYR4	2013–2019
Barium	257.25 µg/L 13% of the EPA limit 2000 µg/L worst single sample: 265 µg/L	6/6	SYR4	2012–2018
Fluoride	970 µg/L 24% of the EPA limit 4000 µg/L	6/6	SYR4	2012–2018
Nitrate-Nitrite	78 µg/L 0.8% of the EPA limit 10000 µg/L worst single sample: 80 µg/L	5/6	SYR4	2013–2019
Selenium	10.24 µg/L 20% of the EPA limit 50 µg/L worst single sample: 10.4 µg/L	3/6	SYR4	2012–2018
Dichloroacetic Acid	1.495 µg/L No EPA limit set worst single sample: 1.5 µg/L	2/8	SYR4	2013–2019

60 contaminants tested, none detected

1,1,1-Trichloroethane1,1,2-Trichloroethane1,1-Dichloroethylene1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene1,2-DIBROMO-3-CHLOROPROPANE1,2-Dichloroethane1,2-Dichloropropane2,4,5-TP2,4-DAntimony, TotalAsbestosAtrazineBhc-GammaBenzeneBenzo(A)PyreneBeryllium, TotalChlorobenzeneCyanideCadmiumCarbofuranCarbon TetrachlorideChlordaneChloroformChromiumCombined UraniumDichloromethaneDalaponDi(2-ethylhexyl) AdipateDi(2-ethylhexyl) PhthalateDinosebEthylene DibromideEndrinEthylbenzeneHexachlorobenzeneHeptachlorHeptachlor EpoxideHexachlorocyclopentadieneLassoMercuryMethoxychlorMonobromoacetic AcidMonochloroacetic AcidNitriteOxamylPentachlorophenolPicloramSimazineStyreneTetrachloroethyleneThallium, TotalTolueneToxapheneTrichloroacetic AcidTrichloroethyleneVinyl ChlorideXylenes, Totalcis-1,2-DichloroethyleneO-DichlorobenzeneP-Dichlorobenzenetrans-1,2-Dichloroethylene

Utility contact

Contact: TORONJO, DALE
Phone: 936-653-4861
Email: [email protected]

Frequently asked questions about Cape Royale Utility District

Is Cape Royale Utility District tap water safe to drink?

EPA monitoring detected 19 contaminants in Cape Royale Utility District'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 Cape Royale Utility District's water?

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

How many people does Cape Royale Utility District serve?

Cape Royale Utility District reports serving 2,154 people in Texas, per its EPA record.

Has Cape Royale Utility District had any water quality violations?

The EPA has 34 violations on file for Cape Royale Utility District, of which 4 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.