Not health advice. Contact your local water utility for concerns.
Data from EPA Water Quality Reports. For official information, contact your water utility or health department.
EPA records for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO • Updated September 2026
Grade C — based on EPA compliance records, lead testing and PFAS monitoring
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has a mixed record — read the reasons below; the deductions come from real EPA violations, lead results or PFAS detections, not from a template.
Maricopa's tap water grades C on EPA's records. GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has 1 health-based violation in the last five years. A certified filter matched to those issues is a sensible precaution.
Maricopa grades C. EPA records 1 health-based violation for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO in the last five years. The water is legal to drink, but a certified filter matched to these findings is a reasonable precaution.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO's most recent Lead and Copper Rule result (2022-01-01 to 2024-12-31) was 0 ppb at the 90th percentile, below EPA's 15 ppb action level. Because lead usually comes from service lines and household plumbing, homes built before 1986 should still test at the tap.
No. None of the 116 UCMR5 PFAS results for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO (2024-05-09 to 2024-11-07) were at or above the reporting limit of roughly 3–5 ppt.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has 77 violations on file since 2016: 1 health-based in the last five years and 14 monitoring or reporting violations in that window. Monitoring violations are paperwork lapses, not measured contamination.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO reports groundwater as its primary source and serves about 84,000 people (EPA PWSID AZ0411131).
We recommend one. Check which contaminant the violations involved (table above) and choose a filter certified for it.
Want to know what's really in your Maricopa tap water?
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has 1 health-based EPA violation in the last five years.
Tap Score certified lab · Amazon. We may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO · SDWIS records since 2016 · 5-year window starts 2021-09-07
EPA records 1 health-based violation for this system in the last five years, all of which are marked resolved or archived. Health-based violations mean a contaminant exceeded its Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) or a required treatment step was not met.
| Violation | Category | Compliance period | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum Contaminant Level Violation, E. coli (RTCR)Revised Total Coliform Rule | MCL exceeded | 2025-08-01 → 2025-08-31 | Resolvedreturned 2025-08-31 |
| Monitoring, Routine (RTCR)Revised Total Coliform Rule | Monitoring | 2025-11-01 → 2025-11-30 | Resolvedreturned 2025-11-30 |
| Monitoring and Reporting (DBP)Chlorine | Monitoring & reporting | 2025-11-01 → 2025-11-30 | Archived |
| Public Notification Violation for NPDWR ViolationPublic Notice | Other | 2025-07-19 | Resolvedreturned 2025-09-22 |
| Public Notification Violation for NPDWR ViolationPublic Notice | Other | 2025-07-19 | Resolvedreturned 2025-09-22 |
| Public Notification Violation for NPDWR ViolationPublic Notice | Other | 2025-07-19 | Resolvedreturned 2025-09-22 |
| Public Notification Violation for NPDWR ViolationPublic Notice | Other | 2025-07-19 | Resolvedreturned 2025-09-22 |
| Monitoring and Reporting (DBP)TTHM | Monitoring & reporting | 2024-04-01 → 2024-06-30 | Resolvedreturned 2024-06-30 |
| Monitoring and Reporting (DBP)Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) | Monitoring & reporting | 2024-04-01 → 2024-06-30 | Resolvedreturned 2024-06-30 |
| Monitoring, RegularGross Alpha, Excl. Radon and U | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-10-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularCombined Uranium | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-10-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularCombined Radium (-226 and -228) | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-10-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularRadium-226 | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-10-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularRadium-228 | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-10-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, Routine (RTCR)Revised Total Coliform Rule | Monitoring | 2023-09-01 → 2023-09-30 | Resolvedreturned 2023-09-30 |
| Monitoring, RegularRadium-228 | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-07-01 → 2023-09-30 | Resolvedreturned 2023-09-30 |
| Monitoring, RegularGross Alpha, Excl. Radon and U | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-07-01 → 2023-09-30 | Resolvedreturned 2023-09-30 |
| Monitoring, RegularCombined Radium (-226 and -228) | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-07-01 → 2023-09-30 | Resolvedreturned 2023-09-30 |
| Monitoring, RegularRadium-226 | Monitoring & reporting | 2023-07-01 → 2023-09-30 | Resolvedreturned 2023-09-30 |
| Monitoring and Reporting (DBP)TTHM | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-03-01 → 2021-05-31 | Resolvedreturned 2021-05-31 |
| Monitoring and Reporting (DBP)Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-03-01 → 2021-05-31 | Resolvedreturned 2021-05-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularArsenic | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-01-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularBarium | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-01-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularCadmium | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-01-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
| Monitoring, RegularCYANIDE | Monitoring & reporting | 2021-01-01 → 2023-12-31 | Resolvedreturned 2023-12-31 |
Showing 25 of 77 violations on file. Full record on EPA ECHO.
Source: ECHO SDWA bulk download (SDWA_VIOLATIONS_ENFORCEMENT.csv, SDWIS 2026Q2, file dated 2026-07-09, fetched 2026-09-06)
EPA Lead and Copper Rule 90th-percentile results reported by GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO
Well below the 15 ppb action level. In the most recent monitoring period on file (2022-01-01 to 2024-12-31), 90% of the homes GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO sampled had lead at or below 0 ppb.
EPA's action level is 15 ppb (dropping to 10 ppb under the 2024 Lead and Copper Rule Improvements). There is no safe level of lead; the 90th-percentile figure describes the system, not your tap — homes with lead service lines or pre-1986 plumbing can be higher.
| Monitoring period | Lead 90th percentile | vs 15 ppb action level |
|---|---|---|
| 2022-01-01 → 2024-12-31 | 0 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2021-01-01 → 2021-06-30 | 0 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2018-01-01 → 2020-12-31 | 1.1 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2020-07-01 → 2020-12-31 | 0.75 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2016-01-01 → 2018-12-31 | 1.1 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2015-01-01 → 2017-12-31 | 0 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2013-01-01 → 2015-12-31 | 0 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2012-01-01 → 2014-12-31 | 1.1 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2010-01-01 → 2012-12-31 | 1.1 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2009-01-01 → 2011-12-31 | 0 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2006-01-01 → 2008-12-31 | 2.2 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
| 2006-01-01 → 2008-12-31 | 3.1 ppb | Well below the 15 ppb action level |
Source: ECHO SDWA bulk download (SDWA_LCR_SAMPLES.csv, SDWIS 2026Q2, file dated 2026-07-09, fetched 2026-09-06)
EPA UCMR5 monitoring, 2024-05-09 to 2024-11-07 · 116 PFAS results at entry points to the distribution system
No PFAS detected. None of the 116 UCMR5 PFAS results for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO were at or above the method reporting limit. Reporting limits are about 3–5 ppt, so “not detected” means below that threshold — not proven zero.
| Compound | Detects / samples | Max (ppt) | Reporting limit | EPA MCL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PFOA | 0 / 4 | < 4 | 4 ppt | 4 ppt |
| PFOS | 0 / 4 | < 4 | 4 ppt | 4 ppt |
| PFHxS | 0 / 4 | < 3 | 3 ppt | 10 ppt |
| PFNA | 0 / 4 | < 4 | 4 ppt | 10 ppt |
| HFPO-DA | 0 / 4 | < 5 | 5 ppt | 10 ppt |
| PFBS | 0 / 4 | < 3 | 3 ppt | hazard index only |
“< 4 ppt” means below the laboratory reporting limit, not zero. ppt = parts per trillion (ng/L). Results are for finished water leaving the treatment plant.
Lithium (also monitored under UCMR5, not a PFAS): detected in 4 of 4 samples, max 263 µg/L. There is no federal limit for lithium.
What PFAS are and how to remove them →
Source: UCMR5 occurrence data, EPA Data Summary July 2026 (UCMR5_All.txt)
EPA Six-Year Review 4 compliance samples for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO · finished water only · dated data, released 2024
These are the regulated-contaminant samples GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO reported to its state between 2012 and 2019 — the most recent nationwide sample-level dataset EPA has published. Uranium (combined) is flagged below; the status column explains why. Treat this as history, not today's tap water.
| Contaminant | Samples | Average | Max | EPA limit | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arsenic | 129 | 7.31 µg/L | 9.6 µg/L | 10 µg/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Nitrate (as N) | 129128 detects | 5.271 mg/L | 7.7 mg/L | 10 mg/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Fluoride | 128127 detects | 1.427 mg/L | 2.2 mg/L | 4 mg/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Chromium (total) | 53 detects | 4.04 µg/L | 7 µg/L | 100 µg/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Uranium (combined) | 138136 detects | 12.773 µg/L | 31.29 µg/L | 30 µg/LMCL | 1 of 138 samples over MCL |
| Radium-226/228 | 174 detects | 0.176 pCi/L | 0.9 pCi/L | 5 pCi/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Gross alpha | 5 | 2.74 pCi/L | 3.4 pCi/L | 15 pCi/LMCL | Within MCL |
| Total trihalomethanes (TTHM) | 102101 detects | 18.474 µg/L | 54 µg/L | 80 µg/LMCL (LRAA) | Within MCL |
| Haloacetic acids (HAA5) | 106100 detects | 3.95 µg/L | 16 µg/L | 60 µg/LMCL (LRAA) | Within MCL |
| Lead (tap samples) | 9122 detects | 0.324 µg/L | 5.5 µg/L | 15 µg/Laction level (90th percentile) | Reported, not scored (compliance is on the 90th percentile) |
| Copper (tap samples) | 9189 detects | 41.377 µg/L | 280 µg/L | 1300 µg/Laction level (90th percentile) | Reported, not scored (compliance is on the 90th percentile) |
Averages count non-detects as zero. TTHM and HAA5 limits are locational running annual averages, so a single high sample is not a violation — we grade those on the average only. Lead and copper rows are individual tap samples and are shown for context; compliance (and our score) uses the 90th-percentile result above. LRAA = locational running annual average; ND = not detected.
Source: SYR4 Six-Year Review compliance monitoring data 2012–2019 (released 2024-03)
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO · 27,134 service lines inventoried · Q2 2026 snapshot
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO reports no lead or galvanized-requiring-replacement service lines and has classified 100% of its 27,134 lines as non-lead. Lead can still come from pre-1986 plumbing and fixtures inside a home.
Source: EPA SDWIS Service Line Inventory (Q2 2026) · PWS ID AZ0411131 · See all Arizona lead service lines. We may earn a commission from filters and test kits, at no extra cost to you.
Groundwater systems draw from wells; naturally occurring arsenic, nitrate, radium and uranium are the readings to watch, along with PFAS near industrial or military sites.
How to test your tap water and the treatment options that actually fit Maricopa homes
The most reliable way to know what is actually coming out of your tap is a certified mail-in lab test. City-wide EPA data (like the report above) reflects the water leaving the treatment plant, but contaminants such as lead and copper can be picked up from your own service line and household plumbing — so the water at your Maricopa faucet can differ from the system average. A state-certified lab measures dozens of contaminants at once with results you can trust; you can also find one near you through the EPA's certified-lab list at epa.gov/dwlabcert. Hardware-store test strips are cheaper and instant, but they only screen for a few basics (chlorine, hardness, pH, and a rough lead pass/fail) and are far less accurate — treat them as a first look, not a diagnosis.
Match the treatment to what your test finds. Reverse osmosis (RO) removes the widest range of contaminants — lead, arsenic, nitrate, PFAS, and dissolved solids — which makes an under-sink reverse osmosis system the most thorough choice for Maricopa households with heavy-metal or PFAS concerns. If your main issue is taste, odor, or chlorine, an activated carbon filter (pitcher, faucet, or under-sink) is simpler and cheaper and handles chlorine and many organic compounds well, though carbon alone does not remove arsenic, nitrate, or most PFAS. NSF-certified pitchers rated for lead reduction are the easiest way to start today while you decide on a permanent setup.
We may earn a commission from testing kits and filters purchased through these links, at no extra cost to you.
Maricopa ranks #23 of 37 graded Arizona cities.
Maricopa grades C. EPA records 1 health-based violation for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO in the last five years. The water is legal to drink, but a certified filter matched to these findings is a reasonable precaution.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO's most recent Lead and Copper Rule result (2022-01-01 to 2024-12-31) was 0 ppb at the 90th percentile, below EPA's 15 ppb action level. Because lead usually comes from service lines and household plumbing, homes built before 1986 should still test at the tap.
No. None of the 116 UCMR5 PFAS results for GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO (2024-05-09 to 2024-11-07) were at or above the reporting limit of roughly 3–5 ppt.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has 77 violations on file since 2016: 1 health-based in the last five years and 14 monitoring or reporting violations in that window. Monitoring violations are paperwork lapses, not measured contamination.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO reports groundwater as its primary source and serves about 84,000 people (EPA PWSID AZ0411131).
We recommend one. Check which contaminant the violations involved (table above) and choose a filter certified for it.
GW SANTA CRUZ WATER CO has 1 health-based EPA violation in the last five years.
Recommended for Your Water
No-install filter pitchers
Waterdrop pitcher collection · direct from the manufacturer
Several readings are elevated — a filter pitcher is the easiest starting point, with nothing to install.
Shop Filter Pitchers →Or a specific pick on Amazon
ZeroWater 10-Cup Pitcher
NSF 53 certified to reduce lead, chromium & dissolved solids — no install needed, the easiest place to start.
Check Price on Amazon →Not sure what filter you need?
Test your tap water first, so you filter for what's actually in it.
Shop Home Water Test Kits →We may earn a commission from Amazon and Waterdrop when you purchase through our links, at no extra cost to you.
Find the right filter for your Maricopa water quality needs:
Understand your water better with our in-depth guides on contaminants, filtration, and water safety.